Thank you to everyone who engaged in this discussion in the comment section 🥰🙏🏻 language, history and surrounding hypotheses are so interesting to me and im so grateful to be reading all these interesting comments! 🤓
They are not converging. If you look at the Old Japanese, there are more similarities in vocabulary with Turkic root words, not less. I think that most people who dismiss Altaic language theory are Westerners who don't speak any of these languages and have zero interest in them.
I BELIEVE IN THE ALTAIC THEORY . PLEASE READ the article written by Martine Robbeetz who has came up with the theory that these languages including Korean and Japanese have old root words that deal with the agriculture
Yeah I can hear the similarities. I spent some time in S. Korea and yesterday I attended a gathiering of Kyrgysz for their national holiday. Listening to them talk it sounds like Korean and Kyrgysz wrestling resembles sumo. This is a controversial subject but I am skeptical about what the experts say. The most obvious explanation is that Turkic speakers settled in the Korean peninsula in pre-history and blended their culture and language with that of the people already there.
Korean here, I was once into Altaic theory too, it was promising and gave me a sense of belonging too (that I belong to a bigger language family) but I stepped out of it, cuz honestly our basic pronouns don’t even match, and our basic words for things are not ‘consistently’ matching with one another, meaning that there is no sound change rules… So I now don’t really think Altaic language family existed, though I think we may have been a family nontheless (a sprachbund), because we still share a substantial amount of vocabulary (by borrowing), genetics, and historical / cultural heritage! So I think regardless of language, we can consider ourselves to be a family~~ Also about Robeets’s paper on Transeurasian, it did look promising but the amount of vocab listed was too small for me. Although I am convinced about the genetic data listed there. Turks, Mongols, Japanese, Koreans, etc were probably groups of people living with shared cultures who were first agriculturalists, and then diverged into pastoralism / further agriculture.
Well i am sure we are near relatives with the Japanese, the Mongolians and the Koreans. But hey besides that we all are the family of humankind right? Greets
They tell me that the Altaic Language Family is not real and Korean is unrelated to Japanese, YET I had the easiest time learning Japanese because the grammar is virtually identical to Korean. On the other hand, my Canadian brain cannot learn German for the life of me even though English is Germanic. Other than vocabularies, I see way more similarities between Korean and Japanese than English and German.
This is so true! I think many linguists understand language but they don't learn the language itself, instead they study language like a science. When we are learning languages, we become more aware of how similar languages can be to each other, which is why we claim some languages may be related. My exposure to Turkish and Korean culture made me realise both cultures are strikingly similar (behaviours, mouth movement, even sentence structure). I think human history is soooooo old that perhaps there is a lot of unrecorded history we do not know of, I wouldnt be surprised if the Altaic Language Family was even an Altaic lost civilisation...Even Turkish people look more Korean than they look Middle Eastern.
Japanese and Koreans do not share any native vocabulary and have completely separate origins. The similar vocabulary are Chinese loan words. Grammar alone doesn’t determine whether two languages are related. Japanese is more likely related to south East Asian languages
English: Hello my name is John German: Hallo mein name ist John Korean: annyeong nae ileum eun John Japanese: Konichiwa, watashi no namae wa John desu Core lexicon and phonology are completely different in Korean and Japanese. Just because the grammar is similar doesn’t make the two languages related. If that were the case then languages like Tamil and quechan would also be related to Japanese and Korean since all those languages have a similar typology
@Gang Gang I can see how English looks almost identical to German in the most basic example you have used. But, as anyone who studied German more than a few months can attest to, things are very different beyond the introductory "Hello World" example. And this is with one of English's closest cousin languages. If you look at languages like Russian, or even Hindi, which is still a distant linguistic relative of English, things are obviously completely different to my linguistically untrained eyes. The only similarities that you can pick out are usually loan words from Latin or Greek mostly, just as it is the case in Korean and Japanese with Chinese loan words. I can see how similar grammar doesn't necessarily mean sharing the same root if it were not the fact that Korean and Japanese both have one of the most complex grammar in any major languages. I can see this reasoning if it was Chinese for example, which has one of the least complex grammar. Then, yes, just because the word order is the same doesn't mean your language is related to Chinese. However, Korean and Japanese have extremely complex grammar that look identical to a certain extent, but have supposedly been developed in complete isolation without any evidence of being related, all the while being physically located right next door for 2000 years. Does that make sense to you? I'm not saying the Altaic language family is real, or Korean and Japanese are the close relatives of each other or anything like that. All I'm saying is that, at least to a linguistically untrained person like me, it's hard to accept that Korean and Japanese are language isolates when even English and Hindi are considered distant relatives based on a sliver of evidence that points to a few similar basic words.
Conditions / Doğal koşullar ve şartlar. (akar-eser / eser-eker) EĞER-ISE = (EVEN-IF) (su AKAR- yel ESER) = water flows and wind blows İSE-EĞER = (IF-EVER) (yel ESER- ekin EĞER)= the wind blows and bows the crops EĞER-ISE ve İSE-EĞER yapıları "koşul" belirtmek için kullanılır ve çoğunlukla birbirinin yerine kullanılabilirler. İSE-EĞER: "If ever" anlamına gelir ve gerçekleşme olasılığı daha yüksek olan bir koşulu ifade eder. "If ever you need any help, just let me know." (Yardıma ihtiyacın olursa eğer, sadece haber ver.) or (Herhangi bir yardıma ihtiyaç duyarsan, bana haber vermen yeterli) “If I'm not tired, we’ll visit them in the evening.” = “Yorgun değilsem eğer akşamleyin onları ziyaret ederiz” EĞER-ISE: "Even if" anlamına gelir ve gerçekleşme olasılığı daha düşük olan bir koşulu ifade eder. "Even if it rains tomorrow, I will go for a walk." (Yarın yürüyüşe çıkacağım, eğer yağmur yağıyor olsa dahi ) or (Yarın yağmur yağsa bile yürüyüşe çıkacağım.) “Why should i go to work, (even) if I'm not getting my salary” = Eğer maaşımı alamıyorsam, neden işe gideyim ki.
If you open old japanese, korean and chinese vocabularies you can easily find words with Turkic roots. Turkic language is actually very old and developed in nowdays Mongolia. Do you know about Kok Turk script, the one of the most oldest scripts in the world? The script nowdays Magyar people uses (not as official). Altaic languages are all SOV. All of them shares vocabularies (words) with each other and all of them makes new words by attaching orher words, suffixes and prefixes to the main word. All of them shares similar sounds. I can pronounce every single japanese sounds because I'm uzbek and our language have them all and some more. I support Altaic language family theory because it makes sense and if you look at that map you can see that those languages have no natural borders to prevent them blending over time. Japonic people migrated from Korean peninsula and that means they were lived on mainland Euroasia once. The word for ramen (jp) and ramyeon (kr) is from Chinese word lamen and that word is from turkic word Lagʻmon. All of them means Noodles. Lagʻmon is the most popular noodle soup in Uyghuristan and Uzbekistan. ❤
Im chinese. It's truth. Turkie&Korie are same ethnic "Altye" . Also 🇨🇳🇷🇺 communist did ethniccleansing used their people. Imnot communist, think ethnic cleansing is bad. today Uyghur is yesterday Korean😢 I have no power, but pray for them.
Thank you, I never thought there were Chinese people who thought like that, in fact I did, but I never saw them. We as Türkiye Türks, we are sad, I wish the heads of our state were not Turkophobes. One day, we will save our people who suffering all around the world. Thanks again for thinking like that.
Turkic is a Northeast Asian language and culture, and its oldest written inscriptions are found in Mongolia and Yenisei River regions. Turkic homeland used to be in Mongolia and in Southern Siberia, particularly around Altai Mountains to Lake Baikal. Some of the Orkhon Inscriptions, which are the Gokturk (突厥) inscriptions, are recorded in two languages; Runic Turkic alphabet and in Classical Chinese. The content says Turkic clans were employed by the Sui and Tang Dynasties to invade present-day Manchuria against the 高句麗. (Sui and Tang ruling class descend from the Northern Wei dynasty and were Sinicized Xianbei Mongolic clans from modern-day Inner Mongolia.) Proto-Koreanic speakers migrated from Manchuria in ancient times and later mixed with Japonic speakers living Southern regions of Korean peninsula. Later they experienced heavy Sinicization from 6-7th century. Approximately 15-20% of Modern South Korean males carry Y-DNA Haplogroup C. They are descendants of the proto-Koreanic speakers, and this ratio increases in North Korea. Y-DNA Haplogroup C is common among Manchus, Mongols, Kazakhs, and Hazara of Afghanistan. (Hazara are descendants of the Turko-Mongol Army from 13-14th century.) There are old Chinese loanwords in Turkic language because Turkic clans historically dominated the Mongolian steppe and frequently raided/conquered Northern China. The most famous are the Xiongnu (匈奴) that competed with the Han Dynasty for centuries. Some of Turkic clans eventually migrated westward reaching all the way to modern-day Hungary and Romania by 5th and 6th centuries. In Europe they were recorded as Huns, Avars, Bulgars, Khazars, etc. The Old Bulgar language has survived and is known as Chuvash. It is a heavy mixture of Old Turkic and Old Uralic (This implies that westward migrating Turkic clans heavily mixed with indigenous populations along their migration route.) Various rulers of Northern China built massive forts and walls to defend themselves from various Turkic and Mongolic raiders and invaders. Northern Chinese history is mostly about invasion, occupation, new dynasty, and eventual Sinicization of the invading ruling class. The various conquest dynasties continued to built fortifications to protect themselves from other northern invaders and raiders. For that reason, Chinese historical texts are full of details on the various northern groups, i.e single biggest threat. There is an ancient stone inscriptions found in South Korea recording that the ruling family (and by extension the ruling class) of the 3rd dynasty of the Shilla (新羅) Kingdom used to be part of the Xiongnu (匈奴). Korean historical text (三国史記) records the first two dynasties of the Shilla region were Japonic or were from Japanese Isle. While there is much academic debate on the exact nature of the Xiongnu, if they were indeed a Turkic clan-based federation, that would imply that Turkic nomadic clans may have migrated all the way to southeastern regions of the Korean peninsula around 1,500-1,600 years ago. It goes without saying that Shilla language became the dominant "Korean" language in later centuries due to a series of historical events. Perhaps that is your connection between Turkic and Korean languages.
I think there are too many similarities between the languages to ignore the Altaic theory. SOV, agglutination, and strong hierarchical speech is common among the languages along with a credible shared history in the eurasians steppe. It makes not sense to me that Japanese and Korean are generally considered language isolates and yet their grammar is almost identical. The problem I think is that, unlike Indo-European languages, there is not enough historical phonetic writing for these languages to be able to definitively prove that these languages share a common ancestor.
Another astonishing theory is that of the relatedness of Berber and Basque. Now of course, Berber is an Afro-asiatic language while Basque is not considered one. I'm not sure whether convergence plays a role here, either there has been a convergence between Berber and Basque (originally unrelated) in a very ancient time where migrations and population mixing happened between the Iberian peninsula and North Africa (which genetics seem to prove) or the convergence between Berber and other afro-asiatic languages like Coptic and especially Semitic (in the forms of Phoenician/Punic, Arabic, Hebrew) which prevented the divergence that the Basque language (seen as originally Afro-asiatic) would have went through being isolated in Europe amongst Indo-European languages. Anyway, if you want to know why they might be related. There is an interesting article on it by Hector Iglesias (findable on the web); "La parenté de la langue berbère et du basque : nouvelle approche".
Omg I love such an interesting and engaging comment. I would never have thought those two languages would be related! 😮 apparently, how comparative linguists assess whether a language is "related" is based on consonant shifts and vowel shifts in the words. They put limited emphasis on grammar, and other aspects of the language. There are a few hypothesized language families and I'm definitely going to read the article and circle back! :)
@@zinevids4670 you're right, though in that article if I remember correctly he argues that they must be related, not because of ancient shared vocabulary (like we can see in afro-asiatic between arabic and berber for example) but because of fundamental linguistic structures. Maybe because the vocabulary wasn't very established anyway at the time of contact between the two languages. But even if we do consider that Berber as an afro-asiatic language separated from Afro-Asiatic when the Berbers migrated further west, the fact that the Berbers came into contact with Basques, if the latter were not Afro-Asiatic (which is not completely certain, I guess they could also have been separated from the rest of Afro-Asiatic but at an even earlier stage than Berber) it would still surely lead to common structures between their languages because (I'm guessing) language was still at a fluid stage at the time, and structures could be passed from one to the other, sort of like how English shares the structure "I have done" with French "J'ai fais" even though you can't fully explain it with just phonetic shift.
@@azwu okay so I read the article (30 PAGES? Come on...lol). So the theory that Berber and Basque are from the same family is very controversial. I looked it up on Quora and it's a huge debate because apparently, Basque is not related to any other language in history, and if it is, then the closest resemblance would indeed be of African root (Africanist theories). Thus, linguists made a few comparisons and the closest language is Berber (even if not same family, then at least multiple borrowed words and structures). I read through a few debates and it does seem impossible for Basque to be completely unrelated to any other spoken language today but for some reason, academic circles are not accepting the africanist approach because of the words are most likely borrowed, rather than originating from Berber.
@@zinevids4670 yes I knew it was controversial, I myself had thought it fanciful at best when I first heard the idea, until I read that article and realised there must be some truth behind it. I would not say they have a common origin but they must have at least converged at some point in history. Just like the relationship between Turkish and Korean I suppose. Though I think it's better to look at academic sources rather than a website like Quora because of how emotional internet know-it-alls can be (though nowadays a big number of unreliable academic articles do exist, especially when it relates to emotional societal subjects). Anyway, linguistics is very fun and I'm surprised most people don't care about it. P.S.: Sorry, I did not realise the article was 30 pages! I had read it all in one go in summer because it was fascinating (for a complete amateur like me).
Benim dilim Türkiye Türkçesi Yahu kardeşim bu dillerin yapıları sözdizimi aynı diye akraba mı olmuş oluyor hayır..Ben Korece Japonca Moğolca Mançu Tunguzca anlamıyorum ama Kazakça Uygurca Kırgızca Özbekçe Tatarca anlıyorum çünkü bizim dillerimiz aynı ve biz birbirimizle anlaşabiliyoruz ama diğer dillerle anlaşma oranımız “sıfır “
That is not really evidence, those evidences look very general/vague and if we think those are evidences then almost every language in the world would be part of the same family. With all respect ❤😊
i believe it, it comes up the tonality or pitch of koreans is different but its tough cuz i don't see the geographic continuity theres also the jewish ancestry of japanese, that would make koreans musim my theory is the muslims chased out the jews to the end of the earth lol
@@zinevids4670 It can be said that the Altai theory is one of the most ambiguous theories and is actually considered an abandoned theory. Read the contents of Sir Gerard Clawson Gerhard Duffer Mikhailovich Serbak Dr. Perlstweilig conducted a special study on this in 2011 which concluded that these languages are not related to each other So everything you mentioned Altai is wrong
@@Tanhu-g3r I didnt read the texts you mentioned, can you link them? Also, I know that it is an abandoned theory :) I just see so many similarities, even in terms of both languages (especially the spoken version!) but you could be right, that's also okay :)
@@zinevids4670 Asya Pereltsvaig (2012) Languages of the World, An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. Pages 211-216 Gerard Clauson (1956). "The case against the Altaic theory". Central Asiatic Journal volume 2, pages 181-187 Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, Bd. I: Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, pages 51-105. Franz Steiner, Wiesbaden Asya Pereltsvaig (2011): "The Altaic family controversy". Languages of the World website, published on 2011-02-16. Accessed on 2017-02-14. These are some of the sources that I think you can see by searching
@@Tanhu-g3r the researches done by people who is not from groups which is in altaic family groups is misconcluded.coz you cant realize real relatedness between turkic languages and mongol or korean as you dont truely know every cou ted languages.E.g.English turkolog i dont remember now said that turkic and mongloic isnt related at all coz 30 basic verbs and nouns arent related.But in fact these word are related in some way.For example,the word g'ari(hand)in mongol remained qari(ch)in yurkic languages.There is so many exaples.Also,tuz in turkic languages suqun(sand of water)in korean,ota(father)-ato in japanese and many more examples so not every time look on western materials bro.
Thank you to everyone who engaged in this discussion in the comment section 🥰🙏🏻 language, history and surrounding hypotheses are so interesting to me and im so grateful to be reading all these interesting comments! 🤓
They are not converging. If you look at the Old Japanese, there are more similarities in vocabulary with Turkic root words, not less. I think that most people who dismiss Altaic language theory are Westerners who don't speak any of these languages and have zero interest in them.
I BELIEVE IN THE ALTAIC THEORY . PLEASE READ the article written by Martine Robbeetz who has came up with the theory that these languages including Korean and Japanese have old root words that deal with the agriculture
Yeah I can hear the similarities. I spent some time in S. Korea and yesterday I attended a gathiering of Kyrgysz for their national holiday. Listening to them talk it sounds like Korean and Kyrgysz wrestling resembles sumo. This is a controversial subject but I am skeptical about what the experts say. The most obvious explanation is that Turkic speakers settled in the Korean peninsula in pre-history and blended their culture and language with that of the people already there.
those saying it is not altaic. did korean just come to appear by its own? like people just started speaking korean
those ignorants think so I believe. total blindness
Korean schools, sanctioned by the government, teaches their students that the Korean language belongs to the Altaic language group. Mic dropped
Turkiye Korea blood brother country therefore language would be similar 👍
Korean here, I was once into Altaic theory too, it was promising and gave me a sense of belonging too (that I belong to a bigger language family) but I stepped out of it, cuz honestly our basic pronouns don’t even match, and our basic words for things are not ‘consistently’ matching with one another, meaning that there is no sound change rules… So I now don’t really think Altaic language family existed, though I think we may have been a family nontheless (a sprachbund), because we still share a substantial amount of vocabulary (by borrowing), genetics, and historical / cultural heritage! So I think regardless of language, we can consider ourselves to be a family~~
Also about Robeets’s paper on Transeurasian, it did look promising but the amount of vocab listed was too small for me. Although I am convinced about the genetic data listed there. Turks, Mongols, Japanese, Koreans, etc were probably groups of people living with shared cultures who were first agriculturalists, and then diverged into pastoralism / further agriculture.
Well i am sure we are near relatives with the Japanese, the Mongolians and the Koreans. But hey besides that we all are the family of humankind right? Greets
They tell me that the Altaic Language Family is not real and Korean is unrelated to Japanese, YET I had the easiest time learning Japanese because the grammar is virtually identical to Korean. On the other hand, my Canadian brain cannot learn German for the life of me even though English is Germanic. Other than vocabularies, I see way more similarities between Korean and Japanese than English and German.
This is so true! I think many linguists understand language but they don't learn the language itself, instead they study language like a science. When we are learning languages, we become more aware of how similar languages can be to each other, which is why we claim some languages may be related. My exposure to Turkish and Korean culture made me realise both cultures are strikingly similar (behaviours, mouth movement, even sentence structure). I think human history is soooooo old that perhaps there is a lot of unrecorded history we do not know of, I wouldnt be surprised if the Altaic Language Family was even an Altaic lost civilisation...Even Turkish people look more Korean than they look Middle Eastern.
Japanese and Koreans do not share any native vocabulary and have completely separate origins. The similar vocabulary are Chinese loan words. Grammar alone doesn’t determine whether two languages are related. Japanese is more likely related to south East Asian languages
English: Hello my name is John
German: Hallo mein name ist John
Korean: annyeong nae ileum eun John
Japanese: Konichiwa, watashi no namae wa John desu
Core lexicon and phonology are completely different in Korean and Japanese. Just because the grammar is similar doesn’t make the two languages related. If that were the case then languages like Tamil and quechan would also be related to Japanese and Korean since all those languages have a similar typology
@Gang Gang
I can see how English looks almost identical to German in the most basic example you have used. But, as anyone who studied German more than a few months can attest to, things are very different beyond the introductory "Hello World" example. And this is with one of English's closest cousin languages.
If you look at languages like Russian, or even Hindi, which is still a distant linguistic relative of English, things are obviously completely different to my linguistically untrained eyes. The only similarities that you can pick out are usually loan words from Latin or Greek mostly, just as it is the case in Korean and Japanese with Chinese loan words.
I can see how similar grammar doesn't necessarily mean sharing the same root if it were not the fact that Korean and Japanese both have one of the most complex grammar in any major languages. I can see this reasoning if it was Chinese for example, which has one of the least complex grammar. Then, yes, just because the word order is the same doesn't mean your language is related to Chinese.
However, Korean and Japanese have extremely complex grammar that look identical to a certain extent, but have supposedly been developed in complete isolation without any evidence of being related, all the while being physically located right next door for 2000 years.
Does that make sense to you?
I'm not saying the Altaic language family is real, or Korean and Japanese are the close relatives of each other or anything like that.
All I'm saying is that, at least to a linguistically untrained person like me, it's hard to accept that Korean and Japanese are language isolates when even English and Hindi are considered distant relatives based on a sliver of evidence that points to a few similar basic words.
Conditions / Doğal koşullar ve şartlar.
(akar-eser / eser-eker)
EĞER-ISE = (EVEN-IF)
(su AKAR- yel ESER) = water flows and wind blows
İSE-EĞER = (IF-EVER)
(yel ESER- ekin EĞER)= the wind blows and bows the crops
EĞER-ISE ve İSE-EĞER yapıları "koşul" belirtmek için kullanılır ve çoğunlukla birbirinin yerine kullanılabilirler.
İSE-EĞER: "If ever" anlamına gelir ve gerçekleşme olasılığı daha yüksek olan bir koşulu ifade eder.
"If ever you need any help, just let me know." (Yardıma ihtiyacın olursa eğer, sadece haber ver.) or (Herhangi bir yardıma ihtiyaç duyarsan, bana haber vermen yeterli)
“If I'm not tired, we’ll visit them in the evening.” = “Yorgun değilsem eğer akşamleyin onları ziyaret ederiz”
EĞER-ISE: "Even if" anlamına gelir ve gerçekleşme olasılığı daha düşük olan bir koşulu ifade eder.
"Even if it rains tomorrow, I will go for a walk." (Yarın yürüyüşe çıkacağım, eğer yağmur yağıyor olsa dahi ) or (Yarın yağmur yağsa bile yürüyüşe çıkacağım.)
“Why should i go to work, (even) if I'm not getting my salary” = Eğer maaşımı alamıyorsam, neden işe gideyim ki.
If you open old japanese, korean and chinese vocabularies you can easily find words with Turkic roots. Turkic language is actually very old and developed in nowdays Mongolia. Do you know about Kok Turk script, the one of the most oldest scripts in the world? The script nowdays Magyar people uses (not as official). Altaic languages are all SOV. All of them shares vocabularies (words) with each other and all of them makes new words by attaching orher words, suffixes and prefixes to the main word. All of them shares similar sounds. I can pronounce every single japanese sounds because I'm uzbek and our language have them all and some more. I support Altaic language family theory because it makes sense and if you look at that map you can see that those languages have no natural borders to prevent them blending over time. Japonic people migrated from Korean peninsula and that means they were lived on mainland Euroasia once.
The word for ramen (jp) and ramyeon (kr) is from Chinese word lamen and that word is from turkic word Lagʻmon. All of them means Noodles. Lagʻmon is the most popular noodle soup in Uyghuristan and Uzbekistan. ❤
@@hansibinuz wow this is such an interesting take! Really appreciate you sharing :)
This is why Turkey is our brother countries :)
you forgot we manchu 😢
@@Henrycus5321무써 이 만주!
@@llilllliiwhat did you say?
@@Henrycus5321 무서이 만주(muse i manju, meaning : our manju) This script line is a famous Manchurian sentence from a Korean movie ‘The Final Weapon, Bow’
@@llillllii I will go and see this movie
Im chinese. It's truth.
Turkie&Korie are same ethnic "Altye" .
Also 🇨🇳🇷🇺 communist did ethniccleansing used their people.
Imnot communist, think ethnic cleansing is bad.
today Uyghur is yesterday Korean😢
I have no power, but pray for them.
Thank you, I never thought there were Chinese people who thought like that, in fact I did, but I never saw them. We as Türkiye Türks, we are sad, I wish the heads of our state were not Turkophobes. One day, we will save our people who suffering all around the world. Thanks again for thinking like that.
Знайомі котрі з Турції казали що для них корейська схожа з турецькою.
🇹🇷❣️🇰🇷
Turkic is a Northeast Asian language and culture, and its oldest written inscriptions are found in Mongolia and Yenisei River regions. Turkic homeland used to be in Mongolia and in Southern Siberia, particularly around Altai Mountains to Lake Baikal. Some of the Orkhon Inscriptions, which are the Gokturk (突厥) inscriptions, are recorded in two languages; Runic Turkic alphabet and in Classical Chinese. The content says Turkic clans were employed by the Sui and Tang Dynasties to invade present-day Manchuria against the 高句麗. (Sui and Tang ruling class descend from the Northern Wei dynasty and were Sinicized Xianbei Mongolic clans from modern-day Inner Mongolia.)
Proto-Koreanic speakers migrated from Manchuria in ancient times and later mixed with Japonic speakers living Southern regions of Korean peninsula. Later they experienced heavy Sinicization from 6-7th century. Approximately 15-20% of Modern South Korean males carry Y-DNA Haplogroup C. They are descendants of the proto-Koreanic speakers, and this ratio increases in North Korea. Y-DNA Haplogroup C is common among Manchus, Mongols, Kazakhs, and Hazara of Afghanistan. (Hazara are descendants of the Turko-Mongol Army from 13-14th century.)
There are old Chinese loanwords in Turkic language because Turkic clans historically dominated the Mongolian steppe and frequently raided/conquered Northern China. The most famous are the Xiongnu (匈奴) that competed with the Han Dynasty for centuries. Some of Turkic clans eventually migrated westward reaching all the way to modern-day Hungary and Romania by 5th and 6th centuries. In Europe they were recorded as Huns, Avars, Bulgars, Khazars, etc. The Old Bulgar language has survived and is known as Chuvash. It is a heavy mixture of Old Turkic and Old Uralic (This implies that westward migrating Turkic clans heavily mixed with indigenous populations along their migration route.)
Various rulers of Northern China built massive forts and walls to defend themselves from various Turkic and Mongolic raiders and invaders. Northern Chinese history is mostly about invasion, occupation, new dynasty, and eventual Sinicization of the invading ruling class. The various conquest dynasties continued to built fortifications to protect themselves from other northern invaders and raiders. For that reason, Chinese historical texts are full of details on the various northern groups, i.e single biggest threat.
There is an ancient stone inscriptions found in South Korea recording that the ruling family (and by extension the ruling class) of the 3rd dynasty of the Shilla (新羅) Kingdom used to be part of the Xiongnu (匈奴). Korean historical text (三国史記) records the first two dynasties of the Shilla region were Japonic or were from Japanese Isle. While there is much academic debate on the exact nature of the Xiongnu, if they were indeed a Turkic clan-based federation, that would imply that Turkic nomadic clans may have migrated all the way to southeastern regions of the Korean peninsula around 1,500-1,600 years ago. It goes without saying that Shilla language became the dominant "Korean" language in later centuries due to a series of historical events. Perhaps that is your connection between Turkic and Korean languages.
I think there are too many similarities between the languages to ignore the Altaic theory. SOV, agglutination, and strong hierarchical speech is common among the languages along with a credible shared history in the eurasians steppe. It makes not sense to me that Japanese and Korean are generally considered language isolates and yet their grammar is almost identical.
The problem I think is that, unlike Indo-European languages, there is not enough historical phonetic writing for these languages to be able to definitively prove that these languages share a common ancestor.
Another astonishing theory is that of the relatedness of Berber and Basque. Now of course, Berber is an Afro-asiatic language while Basque is not considered one. I'm not sure whether convergence plays a role here, either there has been a convergence between Berber and Basque (originally unrelated) in a very ancient time where migrations and population mixing happened between the Iberian peninsula and North Africa (which genetics seem to prove) or the convergence between Berber and other afro-asiatic languages like Coptic and especially Semitic (in the forms of Phoenician/Punic, Arabic, Hebrew) which prevented the divergence that the Basque language (seen as originally Afro-asiatic) would have went through being isolated in Europe amongst Indo-European languages. Anyway, if you want to know why they might be related. There is an interesting article on it by Hector Iglesias (findable on the web); "La parenté de la langue berbère et du basque : nouvelle approche".
Omg I love such an interesting and engaging comment. I would never have thought those two languages would be related! 😮 apparently, how comparative linguists assess whether a language is "related" is based on consonant shifts and vowel shifts in the words. They put limited emphasis on grammar, and other aspects of the language. There are a few hypothesized language families and I'm definitely going to read the article and circle back! :)
@@zinevids4670 you're right, though in that article if I remember correctly he argues that they must be related, not because of ancient shared vocabulary (like we can see in afro-asiatic between arabic and berber for example) but because of fundamental linguistic structures. Maybe because the vocabulary wasn't very established anyway at the time of contact between the two languages. But even if we do consider that Berber as an afro-asiatic language separated from Afro-Asiatic when the Berbers migrated further west, the fact that the Berbers came into contact with Basques, if the latter were not Afro-Asiatic (which is not completely certain, I guess they could also have been separated from the rest of Afro-Asiatic but at an even earlier stage than Berber) it would still surely lead to common structures between their languages because (I'm guessing) language was still at a fluid stage at the time, and structures could be passed from one to the other, sort of like how English shares the structure "I have done" with French "J'ai fais" even though you can't fully explain it with just phonetic shift.
@@azwu okay so I read the article (30 PAGES? Come on...lol). So the theory that Berber and Basque are from the same family is very controversial. I looked it up on Quora and it's a huge debate because apparently, Basque is not related to any other language in history, and if it is, then the closest resemblance would indeed be of African root (Africanist theories). Thus, linguists made a few comparisons and the closest language is Berber (even if not same family, then at least multiple borrowed words and structures). I read through a few debates and it does seem impossible for Basque to be completely unrelated to any other spoken language today but for some reason, academic circles are not accepting the africanist approach because of the words are most likely borrowed, rather than originating from Berber.
@@zinevids4670 yes I knew it was controversial, I myself had thought it fanciful at best when I first heard the idea, until I read that article and realised there must be some truth behind it. I would not say they have a common origin but they must have at least converged at some point in history. Just like the relationship between Turkish and Korean I suppose. Though I think it's better to look at academic sources rather than a website like Quora because of how emotional internet know-it-alls can be (though nowadays a big number of unreliable academic articles do exist, especially when it relates to emotional societal subjects).
Anyway, linguistics is very fun and I'm surprised most people don't care about it.
P.S.: Sorry, I did not realise the article was 30 pages! I had read it all in one go in summer because it was fascinating (for a complete amateur like me).
its gonna be pre-western history
maybe outside the realm of the bible
I’m half Korean and my dna test came back with Turkish !
you hot af tho
Salam alaykum is not Turkic, it is outlandish borrowing from Arabic.
Benim dilim Türkiye Türkçesi Yahu kardeşim bu dillerin yapıları sözdizimi aynı diye akraba mı olmuş oluyor hayır..Ben Korece Japonca Moğolca Mançu Tunguzca anlamıyorum ama Kazakça Uygurca Kırgızca Özbekçe Tatarca anlıyorum çünkü bizim dillerimiz aynı ve biz birbirimizle anlaşabiliyoruz ama diğer dillerle anlaşma oranımız “sıfır “
That is not really evidence, those evidences look very general/vague and if we think those are evidences then almost every language in the world would be part of the same family. With all respect ❤😊
Many Mongolians live in Turkey
i believe it, it comes up
the tonality or pitch of koreans is different
but its tough cuz i don't see the geographic continuity
theres also the jewish ancestry of japanese, that would make koreans musim
my theory is the muslims chased out the jews to the end of the earth lol
turkish=Arabic+Persian
Selamu Aleyküm is not turkish btw guys!
Salam Alaykoum means peace be on you :) it's borrowed from Arabic into other languages, and it's a common Islamic greeting
@@zinevids4670 you are not even turkish, why are you talking about türkiye. You are arab
@@zinevids4670 Türkiye is not an islamic country. In turkish "Hello" means "Merhaba", why are you talking about Türkiye anyways? You are arab
@@zinevids4670 its not just islamic jews say that too its just arabic.
I think it's because of Genghis Khan. - WW
💀
it makes sense, they originate from the same ancient people.Iraniers 》 Idoeuropeans 》Hittites
what
Source: Wikipedia🤣🤣🤣🤣
Also my personal subjective opinion lol 😅
@@zinevids4670 It can be said that the Altai theory is one of the most ambiguous theories and is actually considered an abandoned theory.
Read the contents of Sir Gerard Clawson Gerhard Duffer Mikhailovich Serbak
Dr. Perlstweilig conducted a special study on this in 2011 which concluded that these languages are not related to each other
So everything you mentioned Altai is wrong
@@Tanhu-g3r I didnt read the texts you mentioned, can you link them? Also, I know that it is an abandoned theory :) I just see so many similarities, even in terms of both languages (especially the spoken version!) but you could be right, that's also okay :)
@@zinevids4670 Asya Pereltsvaig (2012) Languages of the World, An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. Pages 211-216
Gerard Clauson (1956). "The case against the Altaic theory". Central Asiatic Journal volume 2, pages 181-187
Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, Bd. I: Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, pages 51-105. Franz Steiner, Wiesbaden
Asya Pereltsvaig (2011): "The Altaic family controversy". Languages of the World website, published on 2011-02-16. Accessed on 2017-02-14.
These are some of the sources that I think you can see by searching
@@Tanhu-g3r the researches done by people who is not from groups which is in altaic family groups is misconcluded.coz you cant realize real relatedness between turkic languages and mongol or korean as you dont truely know every cou ted languages.E.g.English turkolog i dont remember now said that turkic and mongloic isnt related at all coz 30 basic verbs and nouns arent related.But in fact these word are related in some way.For example,the word g'ari(hand)in mongol remained qari(ch)in yurkic languages.There is so many exaples.Also,tuz in turkic languages suqun(sand of water)in korean,ota(father)-ato in japanese and many more examples so not every time look on western materials bro.