Because of the hypotheses ig

Turkic people and mongols share many linguistic similarities. It’s hard for non-speaker of those both languages to figure out them.

Tungusics were nomadics

@@muhammadjonzokirov8369 benzerlikleri ödünçlemeden kaynaklı. daha fazla benzerliği dravidan dilleriyle ve sannskritçe ile de bulursun. latinceyle de bulursun. çünkü Etrüskçe latinceyi etkiledi. yine hindistana giden Kuşanla Yeuçiler gibi Türkler sanskritçeyi ve dravidan dillerini etkiledi.

Fascinating! Thank you for sharing!

Explaining this to an altaist is like trying to explain to an ant how the Internet works

@@MYHONESTREACTION400 Most people believing in this are exterme Pan-Turkist and Pan-Turanist nationalists who even think Sumerians were Proto-Turkic.

@@MYHONESTREACTION400Why do Altaists even exist 😭 they’re kinda like the flat-Earthers of linguistics

I think that’s what the question marks are for

No one would've cared if this was just a linguistic issue, but the debunked Altaic hypothesis is like a holy thing to Pan-Turkists and Pan-Turanist for some reason and those guys are often nasty.

​@@Ali-bu6lo For the Pan-Turanists, Altaism serves the political purpose for expansionism. It gives them a legitimacy that they can claim everything what's similar to their Pan-Turanist Altaic ideology 😏😌

@@Ali-bu6lo Thanks to the Turanists and Turkish nationalists this theory is so overhated.

​@@MYHONESTREACTION400niye nolduda nefret ettin sana naptılar?!

@@melisay12 ?

Nanai is Tungusic

​@josephkim689 but it's not an independent country

​@@josephkim689it's part of Russia

Great Qing. The strongest Tungusic-speaking country

Korean is Proto Tungusic

Numbers do not prove the similarity between languages. For example some numbers are the same in Turkish and Arabic but they are completely different languages

@@fenerlitilki6086 Yeah, that's what I am saying, but usually if a lot of the numbers are similar, they are related, not just one or two. I can't think of any languages with clearly similar numbers (like 8 out of 10) that are not related.

We are not talking about this. The Turkic family looks like each other because they separated later, but other countries separated from each other before and their language started to change every day. But still, they will all end up in the same place in the end.

@@YtubeShrts. "But still, they will all end up in the same place in the end." What do you mean?

@@aitokoojii1462 i used translate

I GET IT, IT CREEPS ME OUT- 😭 ✋

I mean, Altaic theory itself is unserious

​@@johanngaiusisinwingazuluah2116no it isn't

This is probably because of the construction of the sentence. The Japanese and Koreans have a SOV formation like the Turks and Mongols.

Yes but still it's too few to consider them as "altaic". As long as I know Japanese and Korean are considered isolated languages, can anyone confirm?

@@A-au-i-gaya The evidence is not enough, for example, Chinese and English are also SVO formation...

@@tizgerard_9816 I'm not an expert, But I can easily see that Korean and Japanese are different from the other three languages.

​@@A-au-i-gaya In very casual speech, Japanese and Korean are very similar to the other Altaic languages mainly because of the often agglutination and SOV order

Korean Y dna is 50 percent O3, which is obviously sino-Tibetan. Japanese Y dna is 50 percent D. Halogroup C of korean people is less than 20 percent. And most of them are not C2c as which 50 percent Mongolian people have. Mongolian people have a lot west Eurasia genetic heritage, which cannot be detected in Korean people. I can’t see a lot paternal heritage korean and Mongolian people have. Maybe you mean the maternal side heritage?

@@zhangshujian7762 Eurasian from Eastern Iranic peoples who migrated into Mongolia before the Xiongnu era

Koreans are NOT genetically similar to Mongols. Chinese are more closer to Mongols genetically, this could have been due to 100 years of Mongol rule called the Yuan Dynasty. But linguistically Mongolian is very different from Chinese and more similar to Korean.

@@CrabTastingMan genetically Koreans, Manchus, and Mongols are cousins. Much more closely related to each other than any Chinese ethnic group. Stay mad.

are you an Altai ?

@@ruuu58 No, I'm Korean 🙂

Koreans are also altai and love from hazaristan🔵⚪🟡🤝🇰🇷​@@sooyonkang

@@33y852 why? Here in this video Andy selected the most spoken language in each family

​​@@AsylumDaemonPoint is this, Turkish language mostly influenced by Arabic and Persian.For that reason,most of the words can't match with others

It is plausible (but still unproven) that the Austronesian and Tai-Kadai languages are distantly related.

And finally, Borean gets somehow linked magically to Amerind, Papuan & Khoisan, and we have the Sapiens hyperfamily. Just eyeopening. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

we tibetans are related to ainu's but somehow our language is in the same group as chinese 😂

@here2250 I'm personally not super well versed in linguistics, but if you look at pronouns, numbers, and other core vocabulary in Tibetan and Chinese languages, it is clear that they share many cognates, which makes sense because the Tibetan and Chinese languages split off a long time ago from common ancestors. But I'm not sure why you think Tibetan and Ainu are related? They don't share any cognates, grammatical features, or even history.

@@vincentxiao1836 The Ainu and Tibetan languages do not seem to be related, but DNA studies have found some common ancestry between Ainu and Tibetan people.

Before ..it was time of Gök Turks to dominate the region

similar words doesnt mean anything. 80% of vietnamese vocabulary is chinese, but they're not related languages. its commonplace for languages that were spoken in the same area for a long time to share words, that's why english has so many french words.

Batyr- persian word, you say “baba” only in Anatolia, han doesn’t mean the same for Korean, it’s “suv” in Turkish and “sui” in Chinese, there is no evidence that “dört” is the old or the original way to say it. Take the most important words: fire, soul, child, eye, sky. They are not even close in those languagez

Words like Baba (dad) , duniya (world) , bazaar (market), adalat (court), jung (war) are also shared between Urdu 🇵🇰 and Turkish 🇹🇷 with this argument you can't call Turkish altaic and Pakistani indo Aryan languages as same.

@@Nagvanshieus bazar, adalat, jund are indo european words. But baba is turkic word. The word "baba" is used in old turkic scripts

@@honsuaman8743 i know. I just give a little example. And the word baba is also used in other languages. For example it used in kazakh, uzbek, kyryz languages. Even chinese use it with meaning "father".

Yes

​@@user-ch1pl4ef3v yanlış anladınız sanırım. Kastettiğim bazı benzerliklerin var olduğu ama sayılara bakılarak anlaşılmadığını demek istedim. Ayrıca Hint-Avrupa ile uzaktan yakından bir ilişkisi yok.

Both the Japanese and Korean words for “human” are Sino-Xenic loanwords from Middle Chinese 人間 (Nyin kean|keanH). Languages that are close to each other eventually influence each other, that’s called a Sprachbund.

Eski çağlarda birbirine yakın olan dillerin benzeşmesi gibi daha olağan bişi olamaz İkincisi ise tümüyle tesadüf

​@@duyguerden6886evet bu yüzden çok eksik bi dil

Sadece ödünç almış kelimerden bahis ediyorson , Swadesh listesinde yakınlık 2,6% çıkyor yani Moğolcanın bir ilgisi yoktur Türkçe ile

Hepsi birbirinden alakasız,lakin avrupa dilleri birbirine çok daha benzer,bu yüzden altay dili teorisinin kesinlikle doğru olmadığını düşünüyorum,Türkçenin dil ailesi Türk dilleridir.

@@SmokeyMountain0 Evet, bu konuda size katılıyorum. Türkçe'nin varlığı birçok Altay dilinin iki katı daha fazla süredir var.

@@33y852 Türkçenin dil ailesi Türk dilleri değil de ne Kürtçe mi? Ne saçmalıyorsun?

​@@ayg6694yapmayın tükçeden bahsediyoruz bu dediğiniz mantıklı değil

Yes. But Xibe is very close to Manchu and is the most spoken Tungusic language.

Manchu isnt spoken anymore as far as I know

​@@rvat2003Sibe and Manchu come from the same language(Jurchen)

manchu is nearly extinct

No similarities at all

Sorry altaic doesn't exist

​@@MYHONESTREACTION400Çekemiyorsan git! Bizi kıskanma!

Yok böyle bi pok vazgeçin bu hayaldan

@@Tokyo2905 seninki yok diye bizimkini de mi yok etmeye çalışıyorsun

@@Tokyo2905 niye senin hayalin gerçek olmadı diye bizimkini de mi hayal sandın?çok yazık çünkü bizimki gerçek hayal değil.

This is a myth we learn at school as if it is a fact. My teacher also told us this is a family in highschool

AHHAHAHHA LMAO

​​​​​@@Jote_09 Is that how the teacher teaches in Tukiye? * I live in Korea.

@@Jote_09 it's not just Turkey. In Korea and Russia, they list Altaic as a language family in books for middle/high school.

@@AnimatedTreasure and where are you from?

Yes it is still the mostly used alphabet

In Japanese, kara means "from" or "because"

It is because of ancient contact but that doesnt mean they're related

Black : in Korean Kaman. Keomun Black : in Goguryeo Kemer. Kamu Black : in Baekje Kamur.

@@becen6570 nerd.

​@@cheerful_crop_circleKara? means "where?" So, it may be Where? From ... Innit?

Not only this,but also 30% or more words are russian borrowings(Saying as a russian /Kazakh native speaker)

@@arthasmenetil3068 that's obviously going to be the case as the language is spoken in Russia and has a small number of speakers.

Japonca köklü sayıları kullanmış, günlük hayatta çinçe kökenli sayılar da kullanılıyor

@@Jote_09 ichi ni san shi go roku diye giden sayılar mı?

@@nitrogen1881 evet kantonca sayılara göz at hepsi çok benziyor

@@nitrogen1881 evet, kantonca sayılara göz at çok benziyor

Those are the original Japanese numbers before chinese influence

​@@AnimatedTreasure No

They are related to Old Sinitic people. Because their Ancestor origin is from Sinitic. Also, Japanese

@@cheerful_crop_circle no

Japanese is very obviously an Australian Aboriginal language @@cheerful_crop_circle

Influenced how? Turkish, Manchu and Japanese have roughly 0 (zero) cognate with each other. Fundamental sentence structure isn't something you "pick up" from a close-by language, either.

@@rockandyrollsson6159 They're not related, but yeah assuming a Sprachbund for their syntax is just as problematic

​@@cheerful_crop_circleaustro means south btw

Mind you, these language supergroups are entirely theoretical and not proven in any meaningful way.

@@GustafUNLaccording to Eurocentristics☕️☕️☕️

@@AltaicGigachad Okay mister delusional, what is your hard evidence of this proven theory then my guy? I don't see why you'd even want that to be the case, which you obviously do since you believe it despite there being no even remotely good evidence for it. And how is that even Eurocentric? It's not like anyone's saying all languages came from Europe, we're saying there's no good evidence for the Language family supergroup you propose, and if some modern families were related in such supergroups then the common ancestor existed so long ago that we have literally no way of knowing. What exactly is Eurocentric in that statement?

@@GustafUNL I’m not a linguist but Sergei Starostin, Anna V. Dybo, and Oleg A. Mudrak can tell you. Proto Turkic, proto Tungusic and Proto (Para) Mongolic are similar to each other.

Not to mention how the proposed Transeurasian Languages theory makes more use of evidence other than linguistic (e.g. archeological findings and genetic analysis), making it a more grounded theory compared to Altaic.

Wouldn't make a difference. Those Japanese numbers are from Old Japanaese and those Turkish numbers are from the original Turkic language. etc etc In fact it will be even more different from one another as we know from studies on the Altaic theory have shown they become more and more dissimilar in grammar and vocabulary as we go back in time, which is the opposite of a language family.

I wasn't arguing about Altaic though, just said that it would be interesting.

Not all members of the Altaic language family are Turkic. Mongolians (Khalkh, Buryat, etc) are all Mongolic, Koreans are Koreanic, Yamato Japanese and Ryukyuans are Japonic, etc.

@@Dom_om_nom My guy, the “Altaic language family” has been debunked numerous times. It’s just pseudo-linguistics at this point

@@goulven05 It has not been officially debunked lmao

+

Oceania? Have languages? I thought all of them is white people

@@SelainToken-sk1yn Wrong

Your source: It’s true, just trust me bro. My guy, Japanese is Japonic; it’s not related to any other language family at all. Stop spreading your pseudo-linguistic lies and read a book.

@@cocaineminor4420 Nope there’s natives too

4 😂. At least the grammar is similar

He chose the wrong words for Japanese.

@@cheerful_crop_circle Korean is a isolate language. Korean is unique as no language is similar to Korean.

No it doesn't.. at all.

Superficially, slightly yes but when you explore deeply into the language, you will notice that it is absolutely nothing like the Austronesian languages especially in grammar, syntax and the heavy use of "U" sounds like in words like "kuru" , "suru" , "musume" , "musuko" "waru" , "aku"............

​​@@xyptevmh Yeah, I might even believe that Japanese has more similarities with Greek than it does with any of the Austronesian languages

​@@cheerful_crop_circle This is because all Japanese verbs end in "u. And vowel harmony

@@user-bo7oi9dy7p So these features dont exist in the Austronesian or any indigenous/African/tribal language?

“Trans-Eurasian” doesn’t exist, it’s just pseudo-linguistic knowledge trying to group languages that aren’t related at all

Ancient Genome of Empress Ashina（she is the daughter of Muqan qagan ) reveals the royal family of Goktürk Khanate originated form Northeast Asia, very close to inner mongolia and Manchuria. Although ancient gokturk mongolian and Korean share close dna, their languages are completely different.

Turkic peoples are more caucasoid as a result of Iranic admixture.

Ne anlatıyon lan?? İlaçlarını al ya da yazma

really? wow - I diidnt know that only iranic people are caucasoid@@IranLur

I saw turkic culture, it's beautiful Although i didn't explore it extensively but one thing i like about it is their traditional hat tepilikli Fez(?) It looks beautiful to me and many many more but while exploring their culture i don't see any similarities with the Japanese and turkic. for example, turkic culture have braid culture while the Japanese don't, Japanese have rock art while the turkic don't but i think Japanese have little turkic connection through yayoi and yayoi came from korea where their origin is from China since China have turkic population like uyghurs, one of the few turkic connection they have is shinto because shinto is similar to tengrism but shinto is mixed and more influenced by austronesian spirituality like indigenious austronesian belief, anito and it's obvious because they have lots of similarities with austronesians from rock art, tattoo culture, even folklores and deities ❤️ Shinto is mixed with turkic shamanism (yayoi) and austronesian animism (jomon)

These languages are grouped in Altaic due to some similar features, which led some linguists to argue the relationship was genetic, though currently most linguists argue that the similarities came through contact.

Turkey people are not Turkic

@@dar_khan_ ☕️☕️

@@dar_khan_ 👁👄👁 DNA from a 2,000-year-old burial site in Mongolia has revealed new information about the Xiongnu, a nomadic tribe that once reigned in Central Asia. Researchers in France studied DNA from more than 62 skeletons to reconstruct the history and social organization of a long-forgotten culture. The researchers found that interbreeding between Europeans and Asians occurred much earlier than previously thought. They also found DNA sequences similar to those in present-day Turks, supporting the idea that some of the Turkish people originated in Mongolia. Skeletons from the most recent graves also contained DNA sequences similar to those in people from present-day Turkey. This supports other studies indicating that Turkish tribes originated at least in part in Mongolia at the end of the Xiongnu period. Keyser-Tracqui, C., et al. Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analysis of a 2,000-year-old necropolis in the Egyin Gol Valley of Mongolia. American Journal of Human Genetics73, 247-260 (August 2003).

@@dar_khan_ DNA from a 2,000-year-old burial site in Mongolia has revealed new information about the Xiongnu, a nomadic tribe that once reigned in Central Asia. Researchers in France studied DNA from more than 62 skeletons to reconstruct the history and social organization of a long-forgotten culture. The researchers found that interbreeding between Europeans and Asians occurred much earlier than previously thought. They also found DNA sequences similar to those in present-day Turks, supporting the idea that the Turkish people originated in Around Mongolia. Skeletons from the most recent graves also contained DNA sequences similar to those in people from present-day Turkey. This supports other studies indicating that Turkish tribes originated at least in part in Mongolia at the end of the Xiongnu period. Keyser-Tracqui, C., et al. Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analysis of a 2,000-year-old necropolis in the Egyin Gol Valley of Mongolia. American Journal of Human Genetics73, 247-260 (August 2003).

⁠@@dar_khan_Lol according to Keyser Xiongnu samples are similar to Anatolian Turkic people’s aswell 😂 Keep believing in myths 😂

The Altay family failed

Well put, kudos to you 👏👏👏

She seems to be a very educated person. what country are you from ?@@goulven05

​Ben Irak Türklerindenim, I am a philologist, I am interested in the Turkic languages. The Altaic family failed to pass the tests of the Swadesh list and the Leipzig-Jakarta list of least borrowed words, which are used to verify kinship between languages, and therefore it is not a linguistic family. Rather, it is a Sprachbund.​@@33y852

Mongolian cirilic should be added

@@FedericoDeBiaseCoppola It's just that I don't have a Mongolian keyboard

@@terremotoselegidos its not that

But you said that Mongolian Cyrillic

@@terremotoselegidos not u i want that mongolian cirilic should be in a video

Turanists be like:

Take your meds grandpa

lol. supertroll

@@alanay Taught ≠ Right.

Yeah

The languages especially Turkic are very young so no you are incorrect

@@IranLur connection could be older through now extinct language families

​@@SKITNICA95 If you keep going far back enough it will trace our entire lineage as Homo-sapien-sapien so whats the point?

@@IranLur not so far tho

Yalan söylemeyin lan

@@melisay12 Karşında bir dilbilmci Türkolog olduğunda sus kulaklarını aç, dinle ve öğren. Uzun konuşmayla kendinigözden salma Meliscik

@@YasharHDelir Karşımdaki "Türkolog ve dilbilimci" aklını ve mantığını kullanmak yerine özentiliği ve ona öğretildiği kadarıyla konuşuyorsa kulaklarımı açıp dinlerim ama ciddiye alıp inanacağımı söyleyemem. Sakın ortalık yerlerde de böyle söyleme de zaten cahil olan halka ekstra cahillik katma.

@@melisay12 Akıl ve mantık sandığın asıl cahilliğin ta kendisidir. Avrupalı sözde tarihci-dilbilimcilerin uydurduğu tarih ve dil ailelerine inanıp cahil halkı tam yanlış yöne sürüreklemek, "Mürekkep cehl"in tarifidir. Yalnızca cahill olduğuna cahil olan birisi hiç bir bilgisi olmadan, hiç araştırmadan, belgesiz boş sözlere istinaden başkasına yalan konuşma nisbetini verebilir. Senin inanıp inanmamanla gerçekler değişmez. Belgeler zaten dediğimi konuşuyor

Daha kötü saçmalanamazdı 😂

@@Seyfullahyuceloyunsver It means nothing, it's like say Japanese is a Romance language because Italians and Spanish can read it. If you aren't able to prove these ''similarities'' can be traced to a common ancestor then there's no genetic connection. To prove a genealogical relationship between two languages or language families, a handful-or even a bushelful-of "sufficiently plausible" evidence is not enough. Linguistic relationships are demonstrated by large bodies (as large as the existing sources allow) of systematic correspondences in sounds, lexicon, semantics, morphology, and syntax (Altaic has none of them) . At the absolute least, in sounds/words, but morphological evidence is very important where available. Moreover, you have to prove the further you go back in time, the more similar the languages are to one another because that's how EVERY linguistic family works.

I couldn't agree more with you! There is no really good video on KZfaq about the Tungusic bewilderment! But I have a link here for one: "(The Manchu language, casually spoken | Shihuan, Ronglu, and Shiyu speaking Manchu | Wikitongues)"

@@alanay Turks carry Amur ancestry which also Koreans and Japanese carry in small amounts, Han Chinese don't have it except for Manchurian Chinese, that's probably why Turks are closer to them, majority of Japanese and Korean ancestry comes from Yellow River which makes them closer to Chinese and Southeast Asians.

when you don't know nothing related to languages and cultures :

@@xyptevmh was I talking about language and culture ? 🤷

@@uglybepis3571 Sir you are on a video about languages, not genetics

@@xyptevmh still relevant, given that genetics also play a big role on the spread of languages.

?'i o yüzden koymuş, Altay dilleri kuramı 40-50 yıl önce çürütüldü haberin yok mu aga?

@@xyptevmh ya var zaten o yüzden söylüyorum Altay dil teorisi çöktü Türk dil ailesi var diğerleri izole

Yes

Dude It already was since hundreds of years LOL

I doubt its an actual nanai speaker

Even the numerical system is not necessarily a proof because speakers tend to adopt the numerical system of their superior neighbors at that time (example the Sino-Tibetan numbers adopted in neighboring language families). Morphology is more important 👍

@@amormir8280 They will still retain their native numbers. Of which we can see there is ZERO similarity.

@@IranLur What about the Samoyedic branch of Uralic family or all branches of AfroAsoatic family and so on?...

somehow this is correct. it only begs the question how many years does it take for the numbers to change too (which can happen sometimes...)

Actually, Korean and Japanese aren't really isolates, most linguists today argue that Jeju (Koreanic) and the Ryukyuan languages (Japonic) are seperate from Korean and Japanese.

No, to me Korean seems more similar to Mongolian than Japanese in terms of the overall phonology and structure

Nepalese and Spanish have way more cognates than Korean and Japanese, let alone Japanese and Turkish, so it's not a matter of time as you say, every attempt to link Japanese to altaic has been just a bunch of error-ridden pseudoscientific theories.

@@MYHONESTREACTION400 I think Korean is way way more likely to be Altaic compared to Japanese

@@cheerful_crop_circle Korean uses the famous "particles" just the same way japenese do, structure and even phonology, for me the Korean phonology is closer to japanese that to mongol, and their scripture Hangul is consequence of this just like Hiragana

@@tonialbert333 I disagree. Korean phonology is way more like the Mongolian phonology than Japanese phonology. The grammar between Japanese and Korean is very different too. The only similarity is that both languages are SOV

No, Chinese is from Southeast asia. Korean is from Manchuria

Well yes genetically Korean and Japanese are closer to Chinese but there's also admixture from Tungusic like population

northern china is actually belongs to Mongolian Manchu Koreans and Turks

@NurigaonGardara China is also Northeast Asia. Not only Southeast asia. And Koreanic,Japonic ancient ancestors related to Old Sinitic (Ancient Xia Chinese family )

Gojoseon King = Dangun Gojoseon = Yemaek people

They are included in Macro-Altaic/Transeurasian.

Her şeyi geçtim, tayvan niye orada

Turks trying to find somebody who likes them:

​@@saberspamofficialI am Turkish, but I do not believe in this failed language family!

Cringe

GDP per capita Japanese 33900 Korean 33290 = EU VS Turkey 12000 Kazakhstan 9000 Mongolia 5000 Kyrgyzstan 1500 Azerbaijan 3000 Turkmenistan 2000 Hungary 13000 = SEA

Taiwan is not

Ok so go back to them, and leave our area

Altay dil ailesinden Vezgeçildi kardeşim Turan diye bi şey yok! Bunlar hepsi Boş sloganlar! 1-"While 'Altaic' is repeated in encyclopedias and handbooks most specialists in these languages no longer believe that the three traditional supposed Altaic groups, Turkic, Mongolian and Tungusic, are related." Lyle Campbell & Mauricio J. Mixco, A Glossary of Historical Linguistics (2007, University of Utah Press), pg. 7. 2-"When cognates proved not to be valid, Altaic was abandoned, and the received view now is that Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungusic are unrelated." Johanna Nichols, Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time (1992, Chicago), pg. 4. 3- "Careful examination indicates that the established families, Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungusic, form a linguistic area (called Altaic)...Sufficient criteria have not been given that would justify talking of a genetic relationship here." R.M.W. Dixon, The Rise and Fall of Languages (1997, Cambridge), pg. 32. 4-"...[T]his selection of features does not provide good evidence for common descent" and "we can observe convergence rather than divergence between Turkic and Mongolic languages-a pattern than is easily explainable by borrowing and diffusion rather than common descent", Asya Pereltsvaig, Languages of the World, An Introduction (2012, Cambridge) has a good discussion of the Altaic hypothesis (pp. 211-216). 5-a non-existing language family" The End of altai controversy Alexander Vovin. 6- "When cognates proved not to be valid, Altaic was abandoned" -Nichols, Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time

Yok böyle bir dil ailesi, zaten Altay Ailesinden vezgeçildi

Cringe