# "bey" - Turkic



## Setwale_Charm

A while ago I asked about the way Azeris address men and was told that they say "Bey" just like Turks. Today I came across some piece of Turkmen where the word "ba"y" meant "rich" and "bayan" meaning "to become rich" or to "enrich". I wonder if there is any connection between the form of address and the meaning of this word?


----------



## übermönch

Don't know if it helps, but there's a stereotype that Azeris address people as "expensive one" when speaking Russian.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Rather: "dear". It is the same word as "expensive", "precious". It is not only Azeri but most people from the Caucasus.


----------



## Chazzwozzer

TDK suggests bey also means "rich" which was an archaic usage in Turkish. Also, check this out.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Thank you, Chazzwozzer.


----------



## Chazzwozzer

*Ajun begi çertilür *translated as into modern Turkish:* Dünya beyi yok olur.

*This line is taken from one of the oldest Turkish saga: Alp Er Tunga. Bey is seen as beg and a title for the ruler, Alp Er Tunga.


----------



## übermönch

Beg? Well, you should've told earlier, Chazz that's much more familiar! Öz Beg, Timur Beg, Ulu Beg, Beg Jigit; Babur refers to every second respected person as Beg! I never thought it was related to Bey. Cool


----------



## Chazzwozzer

It has different kind of usages in the history, but now it just means "sir" and comes after names in every day life. 

Just to add, *bey *cannot be used in official context any longer since Atatürk abolished titles and by-names in November 26, 1934, as a part of social reforms.


----------



## Boljon

Interestingly, in Manchurian (which is a language in Tunggus sub-family language), we also say "bei" (or "beile" or "bai") for the same meaning.


----------



## Chazzwozzer

Tungusic languages are belived to be linked with Turkic, Mongolic and Korean languages and since we can trace *bey *all the way back to our Central Asian history, it's quite possible that the Manchu used this word.

When you say it is used for the same meaning, do you actually mean *rich *or *the ruler title*?


----------



## Alijsh

*bey* must be contraction of *beyg* or *beyk*. Any idea?


----------



## sinclair001

Atabeg was a title for a governor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atabeg


----------



## sinclair001

Beg, or bey or beigh means chieftain or leader of a small tribal group.
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:5zRwgR9zJX0J:en.wikipedia.org/%3Ftitle%3DBey+beg+or+bey+origins&hl=es&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=co


----------



## OldAvatar

Interesting topic.
Romanians also use *băi - bă *to address to a fellow. The etymology is rather unknown. Some say it comes from Turkish *bey*, some others say it comes from indigenous word (probably of Germanic origin) *băiat *(meaning _boy _in English).


----------



## Chazzwozzer

Does anybody know whether a similar word exists in Mongolian?


----------



## Cepkah

in ottoman turkish, ''BEY'' is written as ''BEĞ'' with the letters of B(ba)-K(kef). The sound of ''E'' is not generally used for denoting the vowel in ottoman if this syllable isn't stressed


----------



## guanaco

Setwale_Charm said:


> Rather: "dear". It is the same word as "expensive", "precious". It is not only Azeri but most people from the Caucasus.


In Spanish: "caro" means querido as in "dear friend " = "querido amigo". but caro also means expensive and precios. The words caritativo in spanish and caritative in english comes from the same latin root


----------



## Alijsh

I just read somewhere that this word has Iranian origin. It belongs to Sogdian language. But I didn't find its Sogdian word.


----------



## Qcumber

I once saw an Egyptian Arabic text written between WWI and WWII. An Egyptian student read me a couple of sentences. If I remember well, the term of address "sir" was pronounced _bey_, but written _bik_ in Arabic characters.


----------



## Kurdistanish

Turkish “bey” is originally an Iranian loanword. Avestan *beĝe* “God, Lord (=who divides justly)” from Old Iranian *beĝe-* “to divide” < Sogdian *beĝ*e “God, Lord” < of which Old Turkic *beĝe/bege* is loaned. There are several variants for this Iranian loanword in Turkic Languages: *“beg, beyg, beyk, bek, bey*, bay”* that you can find them in many Turkic words. Here are some interesting examples:

*atabeg/atabek* <_ata_ (father) + _beg/bek_ (lord, master) “whose father is master, son of the master” (< *atabay* in Azerbaijani)

*özbeg/özbek* < _öz_ (self, own) + _beg/bek_ (lord, master) “Uzbek”, by my opinion the word *özbek* is based on a Bactrian logic resulting the word *xeodêo*  “lord, master” an equivalent to Greek *auto-krátôr*, from Old Iranian* xwetew* < _xwe-_ (self, own) +_tew-_ (ability, power) > Pahlavi *xweday*, Kurdish *xwedê*, *xûday*, *xwa*, Persian *xoda*, Talyshi *xida*, *xivo*, Tati *xivo*, *xo* all mean “God”. 

The most interesting word is *beyram* or *bayram* “holy days, celebration days” equal to Arabic *eyd*, Kurdish/Persian *jeþn*, Avestan *yesna-*, which is composed of two Iranian words _beĝ-_ “Lord, God” + _ram_ “happiness, joy”. This word is widely used in Azerbaijani e.g. *qurban beyrami* “Qurban celebration, an Islamic celebration”, *oruclûq beyrami* “an Islamic celebration after Ramadan” 

*beykuþ* ( < _bey_ “lord, master” + _kuþ_ “bird”) “owl”

* -ĝ- > -y- in Turkish e.g. Turkish *soðuk* > Azerbaijani *soyuq*.
 
[I have used Kurdish writing system in this article]


----------



## cynicmystic

Kurdistanish said:


> Turkish “bey” is originally an Iranian loanword. Avestan *beĝe* “God, Lord (=who divides justly)” from Old Iranian *beĝe-* “to divide” < Sogdian *beĝ*e “God, Lord” < of which Old Turkic *beĝe/bege* is loaned. There are several variants for this Iranian loanword in Turkic Languages: *“beg, beyg, beyk, bek, bey*, bay”* that you can find them in many Turkic words. Here are some interesting examples:
> 
> *atabeg/atabek* <_ata_ (father) + _beg/bek_ (lord, master) “whose father is master, son of the master” (< *atabay* in Azerbaijani)
> 
> *özbeg/özbek* < _öz_ (self, own) + _beg/bek_ (lord, master) “Uzbek”, by my opinion the word *özbek* is based on a Bactrian logic resulting the word *xeodêo* “lord, master” an equivalent to Greek *auto-krátôr*, from Old Iranian* xwetew* < _xwe-_ (self, own) +_tew-_ (ability, power) > Pahlavi *xweday*, Kurdish *xwedê*, *xûday*, *xwa*, Persian *xoda*, Talyshi *xida*, *xivo*, Tati *xivo*, *xo* all mean “God”.
> 
> The most interesting word is *beyram* or *bayram* “holy days, celebration days” equal to Arabic *eyd*, Kurdish/Persian *jeþn*, Avestan *yesna-*, which is composed of two Iranian words _beĝ-_ “Lord, God” + _ram_ “happiness, joy”. This word is widely used in Azerbaijani e.g. *qurban beyrami* “Qurban celebration, an Islamic celebration”, *oruclûq beyrami* “an Islamic celebration after Ramadan”
> 
> *beykuþ* ( < _bey_ “lord, master” + _kuþ_ “bird”) “owl”
> 
> * -ĝ- > -y- in Turkish e.g. Turkish *soðuk* > Azerbaijani *soyuq*.
> 
> [I have used Kurdish writing system in this article]


 
Very interesting...
I was wondering if you could provide some citation.


----------



## Kurdistanish

About Avestan, Azerbaijani, Kurdish, Pahlavi, Persian and Turkish words you can refer to the current dictionaries. 

For Bactrian one : A.Millet, <<Notes Iraniennes>>, MSL 17, 1911, pp. 107-112.

For etymology of “beyram” : Majaleye Irânshenasi, Sâle Haftom, 154-155.


----------



## Kriviq

OldAvatar said:


> Interesting topic.
> Romanians also use *băi - bă *to address to a fellow. The etymology is rather unknown. Some say it comes from Turkish *bey*, some others say it comes from indigenous word (probably of Germanic origin) *băiat *(meaning _boy _in English).



In Bulgarian *бай/bai* is a form of address, indicating the seniority of the collocutor. The etymology of the word is believed to be Iranian.


----------



## cynicmystic

Here is an alternative etymology for the Turkic word Bey offered by a Russian researcher named Zakiev:

"Let's first turn the attention to the ethnonyms formed from the Türkic primary ethnonym _bi_ (phonetic variations: _pi, pey, bey, bay, bèk_) "rich, noble". In the process of growing and resettlements to various regions the _Bi _tribes acquired features peculiar to them, and the terms for these features started to serve as a definition of the basic ethnonym _Bi_. So, the _Bies_ living in the mountains (_kas_), began to be called _Kaspi_. The ethnonym of this people became the name of the sea (_Caspian Sea_).
The ancient Greek historians, including Herodotus, list the people _Kaspi_ together with Horasmians, Parthys (Parthians), Sogdys and Sakas, point to their settlement region near the Caspian Sea. Strabo (beginning of the 1st c. AD) notes that the name of the Caspian Sea comes from the name of the tribes living by its coast, and adds that these _Kaspi_ had already dissolved among other tribes, they do not exist in pure state [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 196]."



Kurdistanish said:


> About Avestan, Azerbaijani, Kurdish, Pahlavi, Persian and Turkish words you can refer to the current dictionaries.
> 
> For Bactrian one : A.Millet, <<Notes Iraniennes>>, MSL 17, 1911, pp. 107-112.
> 
> For etymology of “beyram” : Majaleye Irânshenasi, Sâle Haftom, 154-155.


----------



## cynicmystic

Another point that is worthy of mention here regarding a Turkic origin for the word 'Bey' is the etymology of the Lake Baikal.

As the root bai/bay/bey/beg etc has the archaic meaning of 'rich', Lake Baikal would break down as Bai+Kal = Bay+Gol.

Gol/Kal = Lake
Bai/Bay = Rich

Just as in Costa Rica...

In my opinion, it more likely that this root belongs to an extinct proto language from which both languages may have borrowed or retained. In fact, I think that a lot of the shared vocab between Persian & Altaic tongues predate both languages and come from a common source.


----------



## Kurdistanish

[cynicmystic :”Here is an alternative etymology for the Turkic word Bey offered by a Russian researcher named Zakiev:”]​ 
If your ‘Russian researcher named Zakiev’ means Mirfatykh Z. Zakiev the Tatar writer I must say I’m really sorry! Let’s see a brief aspect of this Tatar writer’s skills in linguistics: 
“Now consider some Herodotus etymology of the Scythian words, which do not find confirmation in the Iranian languages. For example, Herodotus informs that Scythians call Amazons by the name _eorpata_, which in Hellenic means ‘husband killers’: Scythian _eor_ means ‘husband’, and _pata_ means ‘to kill’. Here is observed a rather transparent Türkic etymology: _eor~ir~er_ ‘husband’, _pata~eata~wata_ ‘breaks, beats, kills ‘. As a whole, _eorpata_ in this sense coincides with Türkic _ervata_ ‘kills husband’.
Herodotus informs that Scythian word _enarei_ means ‘womanlike man’. And the Greek doctor Hippocrates (5 c. BC) explains, that ‘between Scythians there are many eunuchs, they are engaged in female works and speak like women; such men are called _enarei_’. V.I.Abaev gives this word an Iranian etymology: Iran. _a_ ‘not, without’, _nar_ ‘man’, and _a-nar-ia_ ‘not a man, halfman’. This word almost coincides with Türkish _ineir-anair_, that is translated, as in Herodotus, ‘womanlike man’.
Per Herodotus, the Scythian word _arimaspi_ means ‘one eyed people’. Scythian _arima_ ‘one’, and _spu_ ‘eye’. Assuming that one eyed people meant half closed eyes, then _arima_ can be determined as Türkic _iarym_ ‘half, semi’, and _spu~sepi_’ slightly open eye’. Thus, Scythian _arimaspi_ and Türkic _iarymsepi_ ‘half blind, half open, half sighted’ almost coincide.”*
*Ethnic Roots of the Tatar People, Mirfatykh Z. Zakiev, Collection of articles on problems of lingohistory, revival and development of the Tatar nation; Kazan, 1995. Pp.12-37
This funny Tatar writer at first invites us to consider the Scythian words which don’t match confirmation in Iranian Languages. The words like “oirpata” (not “eorpata”) or “arimaspoi” (not “arimaspi”, our Tatar writer even was mistaken in writing the Scythian words!! or maybe this mistakes are done in order to bring his delusional beliefs near to reality!). But immediately indicates the ‘Herodotus Iranian etymology’ of the above words after mentioning them!! Scythian “oior” akin to Avestan “vira” both mean “1.man, husband 2.hero”. Then “pata” a Scythian verb that means “to kill”. Scythian “e-“ (< Iranian “a-“a prefix equal to English none-, un-) “narei” from Iranian “nara” and “naira” means “man, masculine”. Scythian “arima” that means “one” ( ~ Avestan airima- “quite”, Ossetic ârmâst “only”) and “spu” (<probably sharing same root with Avestan spas- “to predict”, P.I.E spu-* “to see”) meaning “eye”. The above facts and comparisons are based on the scientific fact that Scythian is an Indo-European language and belongs to the Iranian languages family. The scientific fact which it is caused by couple of scientific processes: morphological, lexical, grammatical, etc (God! I juts feel I’m trying to explain 2 + 2 = 4!!). Here are the only alternatives about mentioned Scythian words: 
The Scythian verb pata “to kill” > probably is akin to Avestan “paiti-“lord” (> common Iranian pâdshâh “king, lord” > famous Turkish title “paþa”). Also could share same root with Ossetian (~closest alive language to Scythian) fâdyn “to cleave” (~ Persian oftâdan “to fell”, Sanskrit pâtayati “to fell” P.I.E. peth- “fall”)
Also another alternative considers Herodotus to be entirely mistaken and suggests Iranian aiwa- “one” + warah “breast” regarding to famous ancient folklore about Amazons: a- (privative) + mazos “breast” > “without breast” (Greek etymology).
Herodotus considers one-eyed Arimaspoi tribe’s name to be composed of Scythian words arima “one” + spu “eye”. Beside connections of these two words with other Iranian and Indo-European words that I mentioned above, another belief talks about Iranian arjat- “rich” + aspa- “horse” ( > further Iranian famous mythical king “Arjâsp”). Totally “-aspoi” in this word is more likely to be derived from Iranian “aspe-“ as so many various ancient Iranian names contain this word too. No need to talk more about the realities of the Scythian language (being an Iranian ~Indo-European language). Let’s compare some other Scythian words:
arvant “fast, quick”, Old Iranian “radant”*, Kurdish “raw” (raw + ant Old Iranian suffix) “fast, quick” > change of meaning > “1.hunt 2.run”. aspa “horse”, Old Iranian aspa-, “asp” (Kur. “esp”) in Azeri (Tati), Gilaki, Kurdish, Persian, Mazandarani, etc. atar “fire”, Old Iranian “âtara-“, Avestan “âthra-“, Parthian “adur”, Zoroastrian Pahlavi “âtaxsh”, “âsro-“, Gilaki “tash”, Kurdish “ayir”, “ard”, “agir”, Persian “âtish” ( Archaic “âtash” > “ateþ” a famous Persian loanword in Turkish), Mazandarani “tash”. Also the word “Azerbaijan” is arabized form of Iranian “Adurbâygân” (< “Aturpâtgân”: place of –holy- fire, one of the important Zoroastrian regions before Muslims invasion to Iran. carma “leather”, Old Iranian “carma-“, “carm” (Kur. “çerm”) in Gilaki, Kurdish, Persian, Talyshi, etc. gausa “ear”, Old Iranian “gausha-”, Kurdish “gwêþ”, “goþ”, Persian “gûsh”. hapta “seven”, Old Iranian “hapta-“, Kurdish “heft/hewt”, Persian “haft”. 

Just look at Zakiev’s etymology which has nothing to do with the fact at all. This Tatar writer’s whole articles on Iranian and Indo-European tribes of Eurasia and Caucasus, from linguistic aspect, are nothing but a group of delusional beliefs which he childishly tries to link them with the reality in the skies. You can find same writers whom articles are registered to ‘Turkic World’ more and more. Some magical (Hungarian, Turkish, Azerbaijani, Tatar, etc.) scholars, historians, linguists, etc. that have broken all the scientific principles, have figured out obscure issues of the whole world history and eventually have obtained these amazing facts until now: Sumerians are Hungarian-Turkic, Native Americans (from northern parts of Canada to southern tips of South America) are Hungarian-Turkic, Dravidians are Hungarian-Turkic, Parthian are Hungarian-Turkic, Medes are Hungarian-Turkic, Babylonians are Hungarian-Turkic, Japanese are Hungarian-Turkic, Basques are Hungarian-Turkic, Armenians might be Hungarian-Turkic, There is no connection between Finn and Ugric, Hungarians and Turkic people were the masters of the world in ancient times and civilization is one of their gifts to the mankind (Mongolians, Tatars, Huns, Turkmen, Oghuz, Uzbeks, Ottomans and other Turkic invaders, who attacked on Iranian, Chinese, Indian, Russian, Caucasian, Greek, Balkan, Slavic, etc. civilizations, are some of the evident examples of their granted civilization). Anyway the simple fact is that such opinions which don’t own any scientific support behind themselves have nothing to do with the fact. Dear Turkish partner, cynicmystic, next time care about your sources if you care your esteem.


----------



## Kurdistanish

cynicmystic said:
			
		

> Another point that is worthy of mention here regarding a Turkic origin for the word 'Bey' is the etymology of the Lake Baikal.
> As the root bai/bay/bey/beg etc has the archaic meaning of 'rich', Lake Baikal would break down as Bai+Kal = Bay+Gol.
> Gol/Kal = Lake
> Bai/Bay = Rich
> 
> Just as in Costa Rica...
> 
> In my opinion, it more likely that this root belongs to an extinct proto language from which both languages may have borrowed or retained. In fact, I think that a lot of the shared vocab between Persian & Altaic tongues predate both languages and come from a common source.


 
Well I really cannot understand what is worthy of mention in order to prove the Turkic origin of “bey”! You just decomposed “Baikal” into two words, bai+kal, therefore concluded the word “bey” is of Turkic origin just as in Costa Rica!!! What do you exactly mean?!! May you mean if the second part of the word “-kal” is Turkic hence the “bey” must be Turkic too!! Is this your worthy of mention point?!! So you were better to use my mentioned words “atabek”, “özbek”, and “baykuº” to reach a better substantiation! We are not here to make fool of ourselves. What linguistics tells us is that Old Iranian “bege-“, > Avestan “beĝe-“/”bege-“, is a pure Iranian word which is just loaned by Turkic languages and has became a structural part of some words in these languages and can never be parted from them. Large amount of such Iranian words (let alone Arabic and Chinese words) I can mention (e.g. Sogdian tem > Turkic tum “hell”, from Old Iranian teme- “dark, darkness, foggy”, which is replaced by Persian “dozaq” and Arabic “cehennem” in Uigur and Modern Turkish respectively). I must not say, you should be aware of this yourself, that if you want to claim any etymological root or fact about any word, your state should comprise scientific linguistic facts (e.g. historical comparison, morphological development, etc.) so that reach scientific eternality!


----------



## cynicmystic

I sense a clear dislike of all things Turkish or Turkic from the way you refer to someone as "THIS TATAR WRITER". Would you approve it if someone referred to you as "this Kurdish writer"? I am sure you wouldn't. Hence, please try to contain the venom that is burning inside when you reply. You will sound more credible.


My point is simple. The word bey and its variants follow a trail all the way up to Lake Baikal and further north in various forms. Are you really suggesting that the only possibility for the origin of the word bey is Persian? According to your theory, Turks must have first borrowed the word from Iranians, and then, must have named the lake Baikal. That doesn't really follow.


----------



## Kurdistanish

[cynicmystic: My point is simple. The word bey and its variants follow a trail all the way up to Lake Baikal and further north in various forms. Are you really suggesting that the only possibility for the origin of the word bey is Persian? According to your theory, Turks must have first borrowed the word from Iranians, and then, must have named the lake Baikal. That doesn't really follow.]

“The word ‘bey’ and its variants follow a trail the way up to Lake Baikal and further north in various forms’’. In addition to your geographical interpretation I should honestly say you can follow the traces of original ‘beĝ’ (~bagh) and its whole variants and relatives from Balkan (Bulgarian speaking areas, e.g. Bulgarian ‘žimi boga’* ~ ‘my God’) to Anatolia (Turkish speaking areas), Azerbaijan (Azerbaijani Turkish speaking areas), Northern Afghanistan (Uzbek and Turkmen speaking areas), and Ancient Khotan (locating in modern Turkistan, autonomous district, eastern China). But these facts merely don’t end to the answer of our question: “the origin of “bey”. According to the scientific evidences the only possible origin of this word is Old Iranian ‘bagha-‘ meant ‘lord, dignitary, God’ > Old Persian ‘baga-‘, originally from ‘bag-‘ that means ‘to divide, to share’ ~ also Sanskrit ‘bhága-‘ in meaning of ‘lord, divider (~ of fortune)’ from Sanskrit bhag- ‘to divide, to share’ < all from Proto Indo-European ‘bhago-‘* < ‘bhag-* ‘to divide, to part’; Parthian ‘bagh’ > Archaic Persian ‘bagh’, Zoroastrian (Middle) Persian ‘bay’, Sogdian ‘βγ’ > Archaic Persian (particularly in epics of Ferdôsi) ‘fagh’/’fûgh’ all in meaning of ‘lord, idol, God’, also appeared in several Old Persian names e.g. Bagabuxsha, Bâgayadi, also the Iranian ‘bâj’ meant ‘tribute, tax, levy’ is of the same root < Zoroastrian Pahlavi ‘bâj’/’bâz’*< Parthian Pahlavi ‘bâj’ from Avestan ‘bag-‘ > Uigur ‘bac’ another Iranian loanword in Turkic languages. The oldest variant of this Iranian loanword in Turkic records is ‘beĝ’ (~’bagh’) which clarifies that it’s borrowed from Old Iranian (Avestan) ‘bagha-‘. But the Bulgarian (dialect of Okhrid) ‘boga’, its phonetic nearness to Sogdian ‘fugh’, explains the possibility of borrowing from another ancient Iranian language, Scythian, the close relative of Sogdian. Thus we are just sure that the Turkic ‘beĝ’ (pronounced ‘bagh’ > beg, bek, bey, bay) is borrowed from Old Iranian ‘bagha-‘and the Bulgarian one is more likely of Scythian origin (regarding the contact of ancestors of today’s Bulgarians with Iranian speaking Scythians). 
[cynicmystic: Are you really suggesting that the only possibility for the origin of the word bey is Persian?] where did I claim ‘bey’ is borrowed or originated from Persian? Why you just fall in misunderstanding? I called Avestan/Old Iranian language to be the origin of Turkic ‘beĝ’ (> beg, bek, bey, etc.). It seems you cannot distinguish Avestan, Persian, etc.!! If you don’t know anything about Iranian languages or linguistic principles, I just wish you read my texts ‘correctly’ while I argue with you about subjects concerning Iranian languages. [cynicmystic: According to your theory, Turks must have first borrowed the word from Iranians, and then, must have named the lake Baikal. That doesn't really follow.] I cannot understand, I just explained in my first post that even the word Özbek ‘Uzbek’ itself is based on Iranian origin! An important and numerous Turkic ethnic group has named itself –based- on an Iranian loanword then you bring out ‘that doesn’t really follow”?!! This Iranian loanword, ‘beĝ’ (> beg, bek, bey, bay, etc.), and the further compound words based on it (e.g. atabek, baykuş, bayram, özbek, etc.) is another ray of Iranian glory in Turkic languages. Also if it’s improbable to you to believe how come Iranian (and totally Indo-Iranian) loanwords have gone as far as Lake Baikal (territory of Mongolian language) I must introduce you with some interesting Iranian and Sanskrit loanwords in Mongolian language: Iranian, Mongolian, English; pûlâwad/pûlâd, bolod, steel; almâs, almas, diamond; zindân, gindan, prison; zinjir, ginzi*, chain; and Sanskrit, Mongolian, English; abhyasa, avyas, talent; adya, adya, Sunday/sun; graham, garig, planet; jâtaka, tsadig, tale/story; padaka, badag. strophe; rashayana, arshan, mineral water/nectar; shloka, shuleg, poem/verse; sansâra, sansar, space; somya, sumya, Moonday/moon; plus some famous Mongolian names of Sanskrit origin: Sanskrit/Mongolian, Arditya/Adya, Arya/Arya, Chandra/Zandra, Dharma/Darma, Ratna/Radna, Utpala/Udval, Vajravali/Ochribal, etc. It’s worthy of mention that the Sanskrit loanwords are mainly borrowed from two Iranian languages, Khotanese and Sogdian, through Uigur writing. Back to the topic, if you really claim another origin for the word ‘beĝ’ (~’bagh’) please issue in a scientific process, according to the linguistic principles (I hope it would be the last time I notice you to be scientific) and let us know some more about your linguistic talents.

--------------------------------------------------------
A Manual of Old Iranian Languages, Part 2: Grammar and Lexicon, M. Abol-Ghassemi Ph.D. p. 118.

Bailey, H.W.: Languages of the Saka, in: Handbuch der Orientalistik, Abt 1, Bd. 4, Abs. 1, Leiden 1958, pp. 131-154.

Bartholome, Ch.: Altiranisches Wörterbuch, Berline 1961.

Boyce, M.: A Word List of Manichean Persian and Parthian, Lieden 1977.

Burrow, T.: The Sanskrit Language, London 1955.

Comparison of Turkish and Mongolian, Hugjiltu, Inner Mongolia University

Jostârhâyi dar Zabânhây-e Irâni-ye Miyâne-ye Sharqi, Dr. Zohre Zarshenâs, p. 81-83. 

MacDonell, A.A.: A Sanskrit Grammar, London 1959.

Mowlai, Ch. Ph.D. A Manual of Old Persian (Grammar, Texts, Lexicon), p. 206-207.

R. Gauthiot, Quel Ques Termes Techniques Boddhiques et Manichéens, JA., 1911, II. p. 58

The Indo-Mongolian Relationship: A Retrospective Outlook on Buddhism, prof. Sh. Bira (Mongolia)

W. B. Henning <<sogdian Loan-words in new Persian>> BSOS, 10, pp.93-106


----------



## Kurdistanish

Ok I think I have got something to find out your proposal etymology for ‘Baikal’ regarding that it contains ‘bay’+”göl’. The most ancient name referring the Lake Baikal is ‘Lamu’ an Evenki (the language of the most ancient people inhabited the areas around Lake Baikal and still resumed living in the region) word meant ‘sea’. Another ancient words for the Lake Baikal is Chinese ‘Baihai’ later ‘Beitsziyaerhu’ (bey ‘shell, wealth, treasure, jewel’; tzsya ‘to add, to increase’; -er ‘a suffix’; hu ‘lake’ > ‘lake increasing wealth’). Another former word believed to refer the Lake Baikal is Mongolian ‘Tengis’ owning the translation of ‘inland sea, large sea’. This reference still is uncertain and doubtful. And eventually the word of which the current ‘Baikal’ is derived: ‘Baigal’ a Mongolian word which Russians adopted it from Buryat (a Mongolian speaking group living in the region) and used it to call this lake. The old and current belief explains the etymology of ‘Baigal’ as ‘the standing of fire’ in Buryat Mongolian. This etymology is first based on the translation of the word, bai ‘standing’ + gal ‘fire’, and later on the a Buryat legend called ‘Baigal’ ~ ‘Standing Fire’. The other etymological supposition talks about the possibility of being derived from Buryat ‘baikhaa’ that means ‘natural, of nature’, with respect to the varieties of Buryat ‘Baigal’ in Mongolian dialects and Yakut language: ‘baiakhal’, ‘baikhal’, ‘baiagal’, ‘baigal’. Also there exists a suggestion of which claims a Yakut (a Turkic language) root for this Buryat word but owns neither scientific nor academic proof. According to this the word ‘Baigal’ is build up of two Yakut words: bai ‘rich’+ kyol (kuyol) ‘lake’. I just want to clarify some facts about the proposed etymology before talking about the historical facts and other evidences proving the Mongolian origin of this word. This etymology plus the lack of resulting from scientific processes also doesn’t match the current facts of Yakut language. The first part ‘bai’ meant ‘rich’ exists as ‘bây’*/’boy’* in Yakut language. The second part ‘gal’ (or even ‘kyol’/’kuyol’) exactly doesn’t exist in Yakut, the correct form is ‘küöl’ (Turkic o/ö ~ Yakut uo/öü , e.g. yol ~ suol ‘way’, on ~ uon ‘ten’, kök/gök ~ küöq ‘sky’, köl ~ küöl ‘lake’, etc.). Even if we supposed this claim to be basically right, it seems to be impossible ‘küöl’ got changed into ‘gal/khal’. As far as I know not only Yakut but no other Turkic language has presented such development. Worthy of notice that the Yakut language is believed to remain unchanged (in term of developing its essential elements) since at least 300-400 years ago. How it’s possible they have named the Lake Baikal as ‘Bâyküöl’ then the word just developed into ‘Baigal’ or ‘Baiakhal’?! The wonderful part of story occurs when this mysteriously developed word of Yakut origin (!) slips into Buryat Mongolian and becomes the title of a well-known folklore legend of this ancient people, ‘Baigal’, which itself means ‘Standing Fire’ in Buryat language!! Beside such opinions of mock the fact is that the recent settled Yakuts use the Buryat word ‘baigal’/’baiakhal’ not only in order to refer Lake Baikal but also in meaning of ‘sea’ and ‘ocean’ just as like as their Mongolian neighbors. Also in various Mongolian documents, such as ‘Altan Tobchi’ ~ ‘Golden Story’, ‘Shara Tudzhi’ ~ ‘The Yellow History’, the Lake Baikal is recorded as ‘Baigal’ and all of the Russian records refer the word ‘Baigal’ (>‘Baikal’) as a Buryat word. Untold that ‘Baikal’ is Russianized form of original Buryat ‘Baigal’ which the Russians adopted it since 1740s. Also the name ‘Angarsk Sea’ (Lake Baikal) comes from Yakut epics < ‘angara’/’angkhara’ meant ‘transparent, clear’ which is more likely borrowed from Buryat ‘angai’/’angarkhai’ in meaning of ‘open’, ‘cleft’ (literally meant ‘the open mouth of a beast’) which also is given to a river in Baikal area named ‘Angara River’.​


----------



## cynicmystic

Dude, Mongolian or Turkic, what the hell are you talking about. This is not about the Buryats, or the Bashkurts, or the similarities and differences among the Altaic division namely Turkic, Mongolian and Tungusic. The issue that we have been discussing is that you seem to believe that Turks borrowed the term Bey from Persians, and I disagree. However, I certainly enjoy the folk etymology you have offered above. It really does hold water. The reason why the lake is referred to as seas in many dialects is simply because, before the great flood, both the Khazar Sea and the Baikal were inland seas. After the flood, they turned into lakes. 

I have to say that you have an exceptional abil;ity to divert the subject at hand with irrelevant data my friend. But, I certainly applaud the enthusiasm


----------



## Flaminius

Moderator Note:

Dear participants,
Lately the discussion has been unfolding as a mix of on-topic and off-topic remarks along with bursts of negative emotions.  This must be stopped.  May I remind you all that the topic of the current thread is the etymology of _bey_ in Turkic languages and that the topic should be pursued —in keeping with the WR rules and guidelines— with a serious, respectful, academic and cordial manner?

Here are two tips I'd like you all to observe in order to keep the thread organised:
1. Don't reciprocate abuse but report it.
2. If you find it necessary to discuss something other than the etymology of _bey _in order to support your arguments in the thread, open a new thread in the appropriate forum and provide a link in this thread.

I hope for your understanding and a pleasant stay around here.

Flaminius
in place of EHL modo


----------



## Tangriberdi

Chazzwozzer said:


> Does anybody know whether a similar word exists in Mongolian?


 Baagha, Baaghaan, Baaiaa, Baaiaan, Baaighaan, Baaighaaa.
These words are Mongolic versions of Turkic Bek, Beg, Bey.

That is why Bay Bey Bayan , all these words are somehow related. But I have no idea about the exact relation. It must be something Altaic.


And to those who claim that Turkic Beg is a borrowing from Iranic. It is not. Mongolian also have it . Tunguzic languages also have it. Did these people also had contact with Iranics? I think not. Boga Baga/God or whatever, and Beg, Bek are similar words. But this is just a coincidence. 
Usually when Turks borrow a noun, it is kept just a borrowed word. It is not used to make a verb or adjective. All Turkic nouns have a Turkic verb stem. that is all Turkic nouns derive from a Turkic verb stem. 
So Beg is related to the stem be- to be, to grow, to get bigger. It is a word related to beyik, old Turkic form of büyük, big
So beyik be(-yi-)k means one that grew up. Physically, influentially, any kind.
So A Bek is a big (important) person.
And the word beg gave way to the word begenmek, to like. You should know that Turkic languages ususally do not use foreign stems to make verbs.


----------



## Babakexorramdin

In Iranian Azerbaijan the word used is Agha, just like in persian. This is a Mongolian word meaning lord. In the post-Soviet Azerbaijan they translate gentlemen as jenablar (cenablar) which also means lord. In Iran Jenab-e Agha is also used.

Bey is however from the Turkic Beyg. In the Persian alphabet the word Bey is still written as Beyg or Beyk, seemingly the G has dropped in the pronounciation. 
It was a title used very often in Iran untill the 20th century.


Also Bay is used in Iran but it is more archaic than Bey.


----------



## Babakexorramdin

Tangriberdi said:


> Baagha, Baaghaan, Baaiaa, Baaiaan, Baaighaan, Baaighaaa.
> These words are Mongolic versions of Turkic Bek, Beg, Bey.
> 
> That is why Bay Bey Bayan , all these words are somehow related. But I have no idea about the exact relation. It must be something Altaic.
> 
> 
> And to those who claim that Turkic Beg is a borrowing from Iranic. It is not. Mongolian also have it . Tunguzic languages also have it. Did these people also had contact with Iranics? I think not. Boga Baga/God or whatever, and Beg, Bek are similar words. But this is just a coincidence.
> Usually when Turks borrow a noun, it is kept just a borrowed word. It is not used to make a verb or adjective. All Turkic nouns have a Turkic verb stem. that is all Turkic nouns derive from a Turkic verb stem.
> So Beg is related to the stem be- to be, to grow, to get bigger. It is a word related to beyik, old Turkic form of büyük, big
> So beyik be(-yi-)k means one that grew up. Physically, influentially, any kind.
> So A Bek is a big (important) person.
> And the word beg gave way to the word begenmek, to like. You should know that Turkic languages ususally do not use foreign stems to make verbs.


 
Can the Mongolian word been a borrowing from Iranic too? Iranic Bag is undeniably related to the Slavic Bog, which could be explained by their anicient relations.  Could this usage been infilterated into Tocharian and Mongolian in ancient times?


----------



## Tangriberdi

Babakexorramdin said:


> Can the Mongolian word been a borrowing from Iranic too? Iranic Bag is undeniably related to the Slavic Bog, which could be explained by their anicient relations. Could this usage been infilterated into Tocharian and Mongolian in ancient times?


Exactly no. Because the related word has Turkic sound patterns during its transformation(evolution) from Bæk into Bey.
Bæk >Bek> Beg>Beğ>Bey(Bê). It keeps evolving in Anatolian Turkish. It tends to turn into Bi as seen in abi (ağabey).
That shows the proto word should be Baq* which seems to related to verb baqmaq, to see, to watch, to ward, to guard, to look after.
So a bek is somekind lord that guards and looks after his people.
It has definitely have Turkic connotations.

If the so called Iranic word borrowed by Tocahrian or infiltrated into Tocharian and into Turkish and then into Mongolian , it is required that Mongolian word show Turkic pattern of development. If oldest Turkic attestations show it in the form of Bæk it should be seen in Mongolian in a similar form .
A Tocahrian word cannot infiltrate into Mongolian skipping Turkic. Because Turkic has always been a buffer zone between Indo European and Mongolian. So Mongolian form Baaighaan shows Altaic sound features. And Turkic in its natural evolution follows the typical sound changes in Altaic without any deviation.


----------



## Babakexorramdin

Tangriberdi said:


> Exactly no. Because the related word has Turkic sound patterns during its transformation(evolution) from Bæk into Bey.
> Bæk >Bek> Beg>Beğ>Bey(Bê). It keeps evolving in Anatolian Turkish. It tends to turn into Bi as seen in abi (ağabey).
> That shows the proto word should be Baq* which seems to related to verb baqmaq, to see, to watch, to ward, to guard, to look after.
> So a bek is somekind lord that guards and looks after his people.
> It has definitely have Turkic connotations.
> 
> If the so called Iranic word borrowed by Tocahrian or infiltrated into Tocharian and into Turkish and then into Mongolian , it is required that Mongolian word show Turkic pattern of development. If oldest Turkic attestations show it in the form of Bæk it should be seen in Mongolian in a similar form .
> A Tocahrian word cannot infiltrate into Mongolian skipping Turkic. Because Turkic has always been a buffer zone between Indo European and Mongolian. So Mongolian form Baaighaan shows Altaic sound features. And Turkic in its natural evolution follows the typical sound changes in Altaic without any deviation.


 
What I am puzzled with is that the Bag(h) in Iranic and Bog in slavic predates the Mongolian invasion.
Look at Baghdad= God given it was from pre-islamic  Sasanid origin, a Sassanid Pahlevi word

exchange of words by Iranic and Turkic languages (especially the Oghuz and Qarluq branches) are evident, but no much evidences of these exchanges between Iranic (and Slavic for that matter) prior to Mongolian invasion.


----------



## cynicmystic

Congrats, and thanks, you pretty much concluded the discussion with your posts.



Tangriberdi said:


> Exactly no. Because the related word has Turkic sound patterns during its transformation(evolution) from Bæk into Bey.
> Bæk >Bek> Beg>Beğ>Bey(Bê). It keeps evolving in Anatolian Turkish. It tends to turn into Bi as seen in abi (ağabey).
> That shows the proto word should be Baq* which seems to related to verb baqmaq, to see, to watch, to ward, to guard, to look after.
> So a bek is somekind lord that guards and looks after his people.
> It has definitely have Turkic connotations.
> 
> If the so called Iranic word borrowed by Tocahrian or infiltrated into Tocharian and into Turkish and then into Mongolian , it is required that Mongolian word show Turkic pattern of development. If oldest Turkic attestations show it in the form of Bæk it should be seen in Mongolian in a similar form .
> A Tocahrian word cannot infiltrate into Mongolian skipping Turkic. Because Turkic has always been a buffer zone between Indo European and Mongolian. So Mongolian form Baaighaan shows Altaic sound features. And Turkic in its natural evolution follows the typical sound changes in Altaic without any deviation.


----------



## Tangriberdi

cynicmystic said:


> Congrats, and thanks, you pretty much concluded the discussion with your posts.


Thank you, but I should remind you that although  Bek is definitely a Turkic word , it is not certain whether it derived from the verb baq-  to watch, to guard or to be- to get bigger. This uncertainty still cause to confusion.
Only thing that guarantees its Turkicness the Mongolian counterpart which also sahres the same uncertainty as Turkish. 
Mongolian word Baaighaan is also not decided whether  it derived from baaiq- to watch, to observe for defence, or baaiaaq- to become bigger, to enlarge.

Proto Mongolian Baaiq- = Proto Turkic Baq-
Proto Mongolian Baaiaaq- =Proto Turkic Be-


----------



## Cepkah

Kriviq said:


> In Bulgarian *бай/bai* is a form of address, indicating the seniority of the collocutor. The etymology of the word is believed to be Iranian.


 
You claim that this word has a Prabulgarian root? Well, as I understand and speak Bulgarian, we use this word at the same meaning as in Bulgarian Turkish. (a bit different from official Turkish) so that's probably a Turkish loanword.


----------



## er targyn

Тhe word bay "rich, noble" is definitely of Turkic origin. It has derivatives like baytaq.
The title beg might be a borrowing. The pronoun men/ben derives from nostratic *me.


----------



## Tangriberdi

er targyn said:


> Тhe word bay "rich, noble" is definitely of Turkic origin. It has derivatives like baytaq.
> The title beg might be a borrowing. The pronoun men/ben derives from nostratic *me.


All the argument we brought forth is now ruined by your single sentence.
From the very beginning to the very end, No no no. Beg/Bey is not a borrowing. It is a Turkish word. Read carefully what was written before.
It is supposed that first singular pronoun in Proto Turkic was bi* in accordance with other so called Altaic languages, particularly Mongolian. Ben is obviously derives from proto accusative form of bi* ( I), Nominative bi proves to be replaced by accusative form ben*


----------



## er targyn

Hi. What arguments? Beg is a title. Titles were and are borrowed, because of interaction and borrowing of political systems. We know that Yuezhi (real name Tokhar), early Indo-European (Iranic) people came into contact with early Turkic people, who were living on northern borders of China. So it's not surprising that we have such borrowings. Here I have a try to proof that beg may be a borrowing from Chinese (in Russian): 





> *bẹk ‘титул’ начиная с рунич. орхон. (КТб 3, 6; Тон 40), др.-уйг.
> (Ырк Битиг) beg, як. bī. Чув pik- компонент имен собственных, pike ‘ба-
> рышня’ (второе, возможно, из татар.). TMN II 389–395; EDT 322–323;
> СИГТЯ 2000, 320. Возможно, зафиксировано в ср.-перс. памятнике VIII в.
> «Махр-намаг» в составе имени собственного (или титула?) xwd’y bg (о пер-
> вой части см. ниже); в сирийском ata-beki ‘princeps’ (Brockelmann 55; TMN
> II 8). К постклассическому древнекитайскому pēk Старостин 1989, 688: 伯
> совр. bo 2, ср.-кит. päik, др.-кит., ЗХ, ВХ prāk, РПДК pēk ‘быть старшим,
> старейшиной рода’ (Karlgren 0782 i). Датировка: Западная Хань и Восточ-
> ная Хань сохраняют инициаль pra-, таким образом, заимствование должно
> быть отнесено к постклассическому древнекитайскому, т.е. начиная с III
> века н.э.
> 
> А.В. ДЫБО  ЛИНГВИСТИЧЕСКИЕ КОНТАКТЫ РАННИХ ТЮРКОВ, ЛЕКСИЧЕСКИЙ ФОНД
> МОСКВА 2007


Should I translate?

P.S. I don't argue about Proto-Turkic *be or *bi because of Chuvash data.


----------



## ancalimon

I think "bey" is related to "pek: abundant, many, more, better-more than what people are used to,..."


----------



## mataripis

I read from one post that in turkish, Bek,Beg and bey is (master,lord,God) in English. I saw also in Aramaic the word "ben" is "Son" of Great One. And in Tagalog/Dumagat  that word is related to "Banal" and "Benal"= holy   and also to "Bana" and "Bena"  = a priest of ethnic tribe.(means  "Holy priest") .It is possible that the word "Bey"Beg"Bek" is a title of a divine master and has the role in publishing /revealing messages from Holy GOD.


----------



## Ben Jamin

OldAvatar said:


> Interesting topic.
> Romanians also use *băi - bă *to address to a fellow. The etymology is rather unknown. Some say it comes from Turkish *bey*, some others say it comes from indigenous word (probably of Germanic origin) *băiat *(meaning _boy _in English).


 How an indigenous word in Romanian can be of German origin?


----------



## Ben Jamin

mataripis said:


> I read from one post that in turkish, Bek,Beg and bey is (master,lord,God) in English. I saw also in Aramaic the word "ben" is "Son" of Great One. And in Tagalog/Dumagat that word is related to "Banal" and "Benal"= holy and also to "Bana" and "Bena" = a priest of ethnic tribe.(means "Holy priest") .It is possible that the word "Bey"Beg"Bek" is a title of a divine master and has the role in publishing /revealing messages from Holy GOD.


 You can not prove any common origin just only basing on the sound of words, you must also find an explanation how the word could have been borrowed, and how it changed in accordance with the phonetical rules in each language.

Some people believe that Aztec 'teo' is related to Greek 'theos' (both meaning 'god'), but this  is just an accident.


----------



## mataripis

Ben Jamin said:


> You can not prove any common origin just only basing on the sound of words, you must also find an explanation how the word could have been borrowed, and how it changed in accordance with the phonetical rules in each language.
> 
> Some people believe that Aztec 'teo' is related to Greek 'theos' (both meaning 'god'), but this  is just an accident.


The basis is not just the sound but also the quality called holiness and authority. Bey is Master,Lord,God while bena/bana= is a High priest.and "BEN" of Aramaic is the son of High.


----------



## berndf

mataripis said:


> The basis is not just the sound but also the quality called holiness and authority.


Do you have prove for that? I only know _bey=master, lord_. Where did you get_ bey=god_ from?


mataripis said:


> ...and "BEN" of Aramaic is the son of High.


No _ben _means just _son_ -- end; no _of high_. Plus _ben _is Hebrew and not Aramaic. The Aramaic word is _bar _or _bra _(Aramaic has many dialects).


----------



## ancalimon

berndf said:


> Do you have prove for that? I only know _bey=master, lord_. Where did you get_ bey=god_ from?



Bay Ülgen: God Of Creation (actually not really a "God". Some kind of parallel for an idea)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bai-Ulgan



> *Bai-Ülgen* or *Ülgen* (pronounced /beɪˈʊlɡən/ in English; Old Turkic: *Bey Ülgen*; also spelled *Bai-Ulgen*, *Bai-Ülgen*, *Bay-Ulgan*, *Bay-Ulgen*, or *Bay-Ülgen*) is a Turkic and Mongolian creator-deity, usually distinct from Tengri but sometimes identified with him in the same manner as Helios and Apollo. His name is from Old Turkic _bey_, "rich", and _ülgen_, "magnificent". Ulgan is thought to be without a beginning and an end.



We also have the word "Beylik" meaning "realm". It was believed that "beys" received their "kut" (good luck, the right to rule) from God.


----------



## berndf

ancalimon said:


> Bay Ülgen: God Of Creation (actually not really a "God". Some kind of parallel for an idea)


Thank you.


ancalimon said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bai-UlganIt was believed that "beys" received their "kut" (good luck, the right to rule) from God.


But this doesn't make a _bey_ himself a deity, does it?


----------



## ancalimon

berndf said:


> Thank you.
> But this doesn't make a _bey_ himself a deity, does it?



Actually on the level of "empire building" a bey was the "will of Tengri". Thus whatever he wanted was what Tengri wanted. So a bey is actually like a deity with a supreme God over them.

We also have Turkic "boy" meaning "children", "descendents"



Chazzwozzer said:


> *Ajun begi çertilür *translated as into modern Turkish:* Dünya beyi yok olur.
> 
> *This line is taken from one of the oldest Turkish saga: Alp Er  Tunga. Bey is seen as beg and a title for the ruler, Alp Er  Tunga.



This shows us that that are more than one kind of "bey". *Dünya beyi yok olur :  "The bey of Earth perishes. (but the other bey lives forever?)"
*


----------



## mataripis

ancalimon said:


> Actually on the level of "empire building" a bey was the "will of Tengri". Thus whatever he wanted was what Tengri wanted. So a bey is actually like a deity with a supreme God over them.
> 
> We also have Turkic "boy" meaning "children", "descendents"
> 
> 
> 
> This shows us that that are more than one kind of "bey". *Dünya beyi yok olur :  "The bey of Earth perishes. (but the other bey lives forever?)"
> *


Then "Bena" and "Bey" are holy masters with specific tasks from The Creator."Maginon di on bena ey mages ni bey.Ide on pamunuoh a te kapamahalean inomapo de Makedepat"(Bena and Bey share the same title,they are the administrators of divine knowledge with authority from God)


----------



## Edguoglitigin

Kurdistanish said:


> The most interesting word is *beyram* or *bayram* “holy days, celebration days” equal to Arabic *eyd*, Kurdish/Persian *jeþn*, Avestan *yesna-*, which is composed of two Iranian words _beĝ-_ “Lord, God” + _ram_ “happiness, joy”. This word is widely used in Azerbaijani e.g. *qurban beyrami* “Qurban celebration, an Islamic celebration”, *oruclûq beyrami* “an Islamic celebration after Ramadan”



What you've missed is the historical evident for *bayram *which is quoted in th XIth century dictionary (_Diwanu Lughat Al-Turk_): *badhram*. Kashghari, the author, says that *bayram *is a word used by Oghuz tribes of Turks, however he also hears *badhram *among Persian people, so he adds that it might be a loan from Persian. 

Actually this phonetic pair of the same word rises a question about whether the essential root is *badh *or *bay*. But what you offer us never contains anything with *badh*- but just *bay*-, *bey*- and *baga*- or *bege*-. 

However, as for beg 'lord, master' you seem reasonable and I'd like to get further evidence about that.


----------



## fdb

Modern Turkish bey is from Old Turkish bég, which in turn is a loanword from Sogdian (Eastern Iranian) βγ “lord”, but also “god”.


----------



## ancalimon

There is also the Chinese word pek meaning "noble, commander".



fdb said:


> Modern Turkish bey is from Old Turkish bég, which in turn is a loanword from Sogdian (Eastern Iranian) βγ “lord”, but also “god”.



Maybe it's originally from Turkic used in Sanskrit or PIE. How can we be so sure about this? We also discussed it here: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2562131


----------



## fdb

You are right, we have discussed this all before.


----------



## aruniyan

Setwale_Charm said:


> A while ago I asked about the way Azeris address men and was told that they say "Bey" just like Turks. Today I came across some piece of Turkmen where the word "ba"y" meant "rich" and* "bayan" meaning "to become rich" or to "enrich". *I wonder if there is any connection between the form of address and the meaning of this word?



In Dravidian Tamil, _*Payan*_ means *Ben*efit  

About the Sanskrit word Bhagwan,
In Tamil there is _*pakal*_=Day time, _*pa*_ = _added up with(in multiple)_ + *ka*=gain and* l*=the place= _Gaining many things about the place._

so I think, Sanskrit Bhagwan =pakavan=  *One who is*_* multiple forms*_/names/avatars


----------



## Dib

ancalimon said:


> Maybe it's originally from Turkic used in Sanskrit or PIE. How can we be so sure about this?



Legitimate objection, it does throw up a question on the methodology itself. As far as I understand, as per the current methodology, if we see a bunch of "similar" sounding words in two "unrelated" contemporaneous languages, especially if they belong to some specific semantic field, borrowing in one direction or the other is postulated, along with tags like substrate, superstrate, etc. depending on the semantic field and/or grammatical categories. While, I believe, this method is statistically robust, i.e. a larger set of "postulated borrowings" does give a higher confidence in the existence of borrowing and thus language contact, no individual item can be proved to be a borrowing, except for some exceptional cases (e.g. direct documentation of the borrowing, native syllable-structure violation, etc.) I guess, the same principle applies here, i.e. borrowing cannot really be "proved" for the specific item "bég", even if the existence of a trend of borrowing from Iranian into Old/Proto-Turkic in the relevant semantic field is "proved" beyond reasonable doubt.

In any case, for a proposed borrowing into PIE, the donor language would have to be a pretty old ancestor of Proto-Turkic (let's say: Grand-Proto-Turkic, GPT just to avoid any terminology with already assigned connotations). This is, of course, possible, but an extremely murky area, given all the controversy around Altaic hypothesis, etc. and hence, I believe, such a hypothesis is untestable at this point of time. Oh, and it would also require that the form of the word coincided at least two times in history: once between PIE and GPT (as proposed by you), and again thousands of years later between Sogdian and Old-Turkic (as has been observed - I presume). Not impossible, but in absence of additional data, less probable than hypotheses that postulate coincidence only one time in history.


----------

