What do Turks think of Byzantines?

[ASQ-1918]

Watch this (Uzbek of Afghanistan).

 

[Alienoz_TR]

In Azerbaijani Turkish:

"Yağı" instead of "Düşman" ("Düşman" also exists and are commonly used), "Od" instead of "Ateş", "Düyü" instead of "Pirinç", "Başçı" instead of "Reis". Also "Yaraq" instead of "Silah" ("Silah" also exists and are commonly used), although it's meaning has been altered to "penis" in modern-day Turkish.

Both yaghi and yarag were used by early Anatolian Turks. Yunus Emre used yaghi often in his Divan.

Desht i Kypchak Tatars call pirinç "düğü". So far I remember

Watch this (Uzbek of Afghanistan).

Looks like Uzbeks dropped Kypchak language, adopted Chagatai.

 

[mehmeTcc]

lol, yaraq has a different definition in Turkish.

 

[Targon]

The modern meaning of Yarak is coming from the old meaning, which means it was used with original meaning in Anatolian Turkish before, Yarak originally means weapon, equipment, so our ancestors connected it their own weapons the etymologic dictionary I checked says its meaning altered to this in 18th-19th century

Its all because of Ottoman language, constant borrowings from Persian and Arabic slowly made many of the original Turkic words which is retained in the people's language for long times disappear, efforts in republic period to make language closer to people's dialects were not enough, because it was not simple to simply change to use words from rural language, while there was equivalents to many words they were looking for, they choose to invent new absurd words or continued to use foreign words.

 

[Surenas]

I probably should not be commenting on this matter but I think Persians had way more influence on the Turks than the Byzantines did. Just my 2c.

Persians, by far. Even more than Arab culture had. Seljuks, Ghaznavids, Timurids, etc. we're all Persianized.

 

[Targon]

Please stay away from that thread.

 

[Surenas]

Please stay away from that thread.

Which thread?

 

[Targon]

This thread.

 

[mehmeTcc]

Persians, by far. Even more than Arab culture had. Seljuks, Ghaznavids, Timurids, etc. we're all Persianized.

There is no Persianization.

This is coming from "Persianized" Timur:

Ey Firdevsi! Sen Şehname'nde milletinin, Türkler üzerine kazandığı galebelerle övündün. Kalk gör, bugün İran topraklarıyla beraber, mezarın Türk kahramanlarının ayağı altındadır.

PS: Google Translate is your friend.

 

[Ir.Tab.]

Europe in Medieval age has had very controversial cultural power in order to have a great influence on other cultures. There are little to talk positively about Europe in Medieval age.

 

[Targon]

mehmetcCc I doubt about its authenticity, but indeed Timur was seeing himself as a Central Asian warlord.

Seljuk dynasty, as well as Karakhanid dynasty, claimed themselves to be descendants of Afrasiyab/Alp Er Tunga.

 

[T-Bortecine]

There is no Persianization.

This is coming from "Persianized" Timur:

PS: Google Translate is your friend.

Mehmet leave them let's not answer them. Did you see what Timur said about Turks (himself)

 

[Silverblaze]

Well the other question is what do the descendants of the Byzantine Empire think of the Turks or the Ottomons.

Not good. The reason is that many countries previously under the Ottomons blame their backwardness on the Ottomons. ( especially the balkans)

The western Europeans joined the chorus and referred to the Ottomons as uncivilized.

Ottomons were demonized and shadow of it is still visible as they do not allow EU membership for Turkey.

 

[Ir.Tab.]

The western Europeans joined the chorus and referred to the Ottomons as uncivilized.

For Europeans the word Turk has negative associations. A fear of Turks was impressed on western minds during the long period when the Turks governed a large part of Europe and seemed to threaten the existence of Christianity.

In the beginning of October 2005, a number of Turkish and Swedish academics, diplomats and journalist gathered in Swedish Consulate-General in Istanbul for a round-table discussion on "Turkey, Sweden and the EU. Expectations and Experiences". The contributions to this conference is published in this report.

In section THE TURK AS A THREAT AND EUROPE’S “OTHER” you can find the statement:

"In the period 1480 to 1610, twice as many books were published about the Turkish threat as about the discovery of the continent of America."

 

[amalakas]

Well the other question is what do the descendants of the Byzantine Empire think of the Turks or the Ottomons.

Not good. The reason is that many countries previously under the Ottomons blame their backwardness on the Ottomons. ( especially the balkans)

The western Europeans joined the chorus and referred to the Ottomons as uncivilized.

Ottomons were demonized and shadow of it is still visible as they do not allow EU membership for Turkey.

I am Greek and I wouldn't say that. I I would definitely not call all Ottomans or Turks uncivilized. But civilization and culture have different meanings in different parts of the world. The devil is always in the details.

One has to question their own attributes before questioning others.

It is a typical that someone mentioned about the Greeks in the Ottoman empire in this thread that "it was a shame we didn't convert them to Islam, they were so few anyway" ..

that is where the game was lost, and all this time later, that particular dude, still doesn't get it.. details ...