From: Rick McCallister
Message: 58092
Date: 2008-04-26
> >1. <gyula> is not an Inherited Hungarian >Word.Perhaps some people don't get non-etylogical
>
> It is. The gyula was the second ruler of their
> society in the 10th century. At least then
> entered that word the Hungarian (better put:
> Magyar) language. Outside chroniclers con-
> firmed the title (Byzantine, Arab and Persian
> ones). Inside chroniclers confirmed it later
> on.
>
> The title gyula has nothing to do with the
> clan name of the Latin ruler Gaius Iulius
> Caesar. Gyula was only "adapted" to Latin
> after it became a person name (much the
> same way as many other names were adapted,
> e.g. Imre => Emmerich/Emmericus and even
> => Henricus, Bela => Adalbert(us), Jenö =>
> Eugen(ius) etc.)
>
> >If it would have been, it should have >cognates
> among the Hungarian sister languages
>
> Gyula is no Magyar word, it is a Turkic
> (Ogur Turkish) word (either gila or yula).
> Perhaps its original phonetics was similar
> to the name of one Petchenek tribe.
>
> >2. Regarding its SUPPOSED Turkic origin:
> >==> You need to quote a valid common noun
> ><gyula>
>
> No, not gyula (this is the writing form for
> the *modern* Magyar word; it has Magyar
> phonetic peculiarities. Especially the
> consonant that is written <gy>. There is
> no such consonant in the Turkic languages,
> as far as I know. For comparisons, we need
> forms of the word which looks more closer
> to possible or existent Turkic/Turkish
> words with the same signification. Variants
> of the old word, with approximate trans-
> scriptions of it, were provided by the
> relevant chroniclers (the primary sources).
>
> I gave you bibliographic data - with authors
> + titles of their works dealing with these
> things. In my latest posts I inserted an URL
> of a page with the main linguistic works
> titles and authors for the loanwords groups
> from Turkic, Slavic, Iranic, which are
> stated as references in the relevant pages
> of the Wikipedia.
>
> >as a Turkic word, you can choose
> >yourself what Turkic language you like, but >of
> course not Toponims and not Personal >Names.
>
> The most prominent name is that of the
> Petcheneg population called Yula, that
> occupied and controlled territories neigh-
> borint Transylvania at the time when emperor
> Constantin the 7th included in his De admi-
> nistrando imperii the paragraphs describing
> the lands etc. of "Patsinakia".
>
> >Only than the Turkic origin of this word >became
> credible
>
> There are way more than one primary sources
> mentioning the Hungarian rulers' titles in
> the 9th-10th centuries and an entire secon-
> dary literature (among its authors being
> such luminaries as Macartney, Toynbee, Sinor).
> Etc. How could I ignore and despise this
> whole, overwhelming, stuff? :-) Moreover,
> all this stuff and many other additional
> details has for a very long time prompted
> the world to realize that the ruling strata
> of the old Hungarian society was Turkic, and
> so were its incipient institutions. Various
> sources show us that at least in the 10th
> century Hungarians spoke both a Turkish
> dialect and the Ugrian idiom which was the
> then phase of tha Magyar language.
>
> So, where's the problem? (Your turn now to
> be asked: "Where's the beef?")
>
> >Till than everything you say will be pure
> >speculations
>
> Ludicrous.
> --
> George