# Etylomogy: börek boreq boereg burek brik



## Nikola

Turkey,Armenia,Serbia,Tunisia and other places in that part of the world eat this pastry. Does anyone know the origin of this word?


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

As far as I could go with my resources the word is borrowed from Turkish börek which is borrowed from Persian burek which means any meal made of dough. I don't know if the word is still used in Persian and is the word PIE origin or not.


----------



## MarcB

Wikipedia : Burek originated in Turkish cuisine (cf. Baklava) and is one of its most significant and, in fact, ancient elements, having been developed by the Turks of Central Asia before their westward migration to Anatolia.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolia


----------



## MarcB

On line Etymology: 
 Pirogi-1854, from Yiddish, from Rus. pl. of pirog "pie," perhaps borrowed from the Turkic language of the Kazan Tatars (cf. Turk. borek).


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

My source is from Slovenian Etymology Dictionary. How would the word from Tatars travel to Yiddish, it seems very odd, since Jews don't eat this kind of dish, maybe they do now, but I don't think back then they did. And also how did we get from borek to pirog, that too is weird. 
I don't think the words are related, perhaps I am wrong. 
Somehow I'm not satisfied with explanation. It just sounds odd.


----------



## MarcB

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> My source is from Slovenian Etymology Dictionary. How would the word from Tatars travel to Yiddish, it seems very odd, since Jews don't eat this kind of dish, maybe they do now, but I don't think back then they did. And also how did we get from borek to pirog, that too is weird.
> I don't think the words are related, perhaps I am wrong.
> Somehow I'm not satisfied with explanation. It just sounds odd.


It says pirogi comes from Rus. perhaps from Tatars via Russian. Jews eat pirogis (not with cheese and meat together)
In Israel they have bourekas. So we can see that probably Turkish was the source for the word in other languages since it existed even before the migration west. That does not mean that your Slovenian dictionary is wrong it may have come from Persian first then to Central Asia. Does your source say it with certainty or perhaps?


----------



## Nikola

Thanks guys. Can anyone confirm the Persian origin?


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

My source says with cetrainty it says it's Persian names the word and then the etymology stops. Like most of them do when the word is of Turkish origins.


----------



## Maroseika

MarcB said:


> On line Etymology:
> Pirogi-1854, from Yiddish, from Rus. pl. of pirog "pie," perhaps borrowed from the Turkic language of the Kazan Tatars (cf. Turk. borek).


Russian "pirog" (пирог) has nothing to do with any Turkish language, originating from Ancient-Slavic пыро < *pyro - grain plant (comp. Greek puros - wheat) < PIE *pu-ro (also Russian пырей -  couch-grass).


----------



## Maroseika

Nikola said:


> Thanks guys. Can anyone confirm the Persian origin?


 In my Etymological dict. of the Iraninan languages I failed to find anything similar to this word.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

Maroseika said:


> Russian "pirog" (пирог) has nothing to do with any Turkish language, originating from Ancient-Slavic пыро < *pyro - grain plant (comp. Greek puros - wheat) < PIE *pu-ro (also Russian пырей - couch-grass).


 
That's exactly what I was saying, it sruck me odd the Tatar region and the comparison between borek and pirog.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

Maroseika said:


> In my Etymological dict. of the Iraninan languages I failed to find anything similar to this word.


 
Try searching for the same word I mentioned burek but u has to have a macron above it. And the source is Škaljić about turcisms in Serbo-Croatian.


----------



## Maroseika

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> Try searching for the same word I mentioned burek but u has to have a macron above it. And the source is Škaljić about turcisms in Serbo-Croatian.


 I have checked the whole letter "b" - nothing about wheat or bread.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

I don't know if you can get access to it but try Petar Skok Etimološki rječnik or find Turkish etymology dictionary somewhere. Send a private message to Duya or Dudasd (I don't know which two), but some of them has one. I think you should try the thread where they talk about the etymology of the word Turk.


----------



## Maroseika

I've checked also Tuvinian etym. dict. - nothing.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

I'd like to wait for a native Persian speaker to confirm the word burek so we can go any further. It's interesting since you can't find his source (writer of the Slovene etymology dictionary).


----------



## Alijsh

It's *burak* in Persian (entry in Dehkhoda dictionary). However, only one type of it called *sanbuse* is generally known these days. The typical ingredients are red meat, potato, fragrant herbs like mint, red pepper and other seasonings; but they can vary as per one's taste and in its modern form, it can even have those of a pizza (cheese, sausage, etc.). It's wrapped anyway triangularly and is quite greasy (it's fried). Sanbuse is a generic name for anything triangular e.g. in tailoring it is used for triangular shapes of clothes (e.g. fichu). This dish originates in south of Iran (Ababdan) and in Iran it's known as a "southern" dish.

As for the meaning of burak it can be from *bur* of *buridan* (to cut, to slice) and the diminutive suffix *-ak* but I'm not sure and it's just a guess!


----------



## J.F. de TROYES

Wikipedia (burek ) gives the root *bur-* 'to twist' as Turkik , but wasn't it borrowed from Persian. Is the etymology of Persian *burak *known ?


----------



## Rajki

In Israel today, the dish is very popular, sold everywhere on street corners. It is called bourekas - obviously the Greek name of the Turkish pastry called börek.

As to the etymology of the Turkish word, what about bürk (meaning fur cap in Old Turkic)? Assuming the form of the pastry seemed similar to that of a fur cap ...


----------



## Awwal12

Maroseika said:


> I've checked also Tuvinian etym. dict. - nothing.


Some linguists (G.J.Ramstedt, A.M.Räsänen) really supposed that the word "pirog" was loaned from Turkic languages, but the majority doesn't agree with them.


----------



## Rajki

In my large Persian dictionary (Junker / Alavi 1986) no traces of any *burek. In modern Iran this kind of pastry exists, but it is called _sambuse_.


----------



## ShaCa87

It appears it comes from persian yet the resource i looked into tells that it might have come into persian from one of the ancient Turkish languages. Therefore its roots can be tracked to only persian. So it cant be russian or israeli or greek. Absolutely. Anyway %99 food names in greek comes from Turkish since all of those foods are originally Turkish. Being aggresive here or not, i dont mind but most of their names are same with Turkish with Turkish roots. Btw, Tatars are considered as dominantly Turkish and partly Mongols. They are rooted from genghis khan times.


----------



## Gi_Marie_gi

Hi, Nikola,  turkish borek and jewish buracas refered to filo thin dough pastry, which is traditional greek dish. They were described by greek historical books in 1 century and called Placenta cakes. The term is borrowed by turks from Armenian language, armenian word "barak" բարակ, meaning is "thin"


----------



## RealityCheck4you

Gi_Marie_gi said:


> Hi, Nikola,  turkish borek and jewish buracas refered to filo thin dough pastry, which is traditional greek dish. They were described by greek historical books in 1 century and called Placenta cakes. The term is borrowed by turks from Armenian language, armenian word "barak" բարակ, meaning is "thin"


Wrong. The word comes from Turkish. Armenians and Greeks took the word and food from Turkish (as usual).


----------



## berndf

RealityCheck4you said:


> Wrong. The word comes from Turkish. Armenians and Greeks took the word and food from Turkish (as usual).


It is still possible that the word is not Turkish in origin but was borrowed from Persian. Nişanyan thinks it is Persian and Tietze (I only found an indirect reference online here to _Tietze, Türkisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, Band I, Ankara/Wien_) thinks it is Turkic. The dish itself is probably a blend of different traditions, Turkic ones and older local traditions before Turkic peoples arrived in the area.


----------



## apmoy70

RealityCheck4you said:


> Wrong. The word comes from Turkish. Armenians and Greeks took the word and food from Turkish (as usual).


Right, because the Turkic nomads that arrived in Anatolia in the 11th c. CE had advanced cooking techniques and created exquisite dishes (including the super thin phyllo pastry for baklava) on their horsebacks or in their yurt, and they also had advanced microtonal music...in written form.
Other than yogurt, which is truly Turkic (well the Bulgarians think differently), "Ottoman" music in reality is a fusion of Arabo-Persian maqams with Byzantine modal music, and "Ottoman" cuisine is a fusion of Levantine-Persian-Balkan-Armenian dishes. Even the names are 90% Armenian or Persian.

*Moderator note: Discussion about baklava split off:* Baklava


----------



## Awwal12

apmoy70 said:


> Even the names are 90% Armenian or Persian.


Persian names make sense (after all, Persian was the main language of high culture in the Ottoman Empire). Names of ultimately Armenian origin do demand a good list of examples, though. A quick search indicates just Persian, Arabic or even various European etymons. Some basic names of Turkic origin do exist as well, of course.

Still, RealityCheck4you has some point, since a lot of the names which are ultimately Persian or Arabic have come into the languages of the region through Ottoman Turkish.


----------



## RealityCheck4you

Awwal12 said:


> Persian names make sense (after all, Persian was the main language of high culture in the Ottoman Empire). Names of ultimately Armenian origin do demand a good list of examples, though. A quick search indicates just Persian, Arabic or even various European etymons. Some basic names of Turkic origin do exist as well, of course.
> 
> Still, RealityCheck4you has some point, since a lot of the names which are ultimately Persian or Arabic have come into the languages of the region through Ottoman Turkish.


Names of Armenian origin? There aren't really any. Especially not in food. There are however Turkish names of foods in Armenian, Persian and Greek. Sarma, Dolma, Baklava, Tulumba etc. Are all Turkish originating words and foods that were adapted by the Greeks, Armenians, and Persians.


----------



## berndf

Abaye said:


> But it seems that baklava is not of Turkish origin, it was adopted by Ottoman Turkish from some other language.
> Luckily for us, Hebrew speakers, there's no doubt: we borrowed baklawa from Arabic.


Nişanyan agrees.

The major difficulty with Turkish etymology is that there is very little attested about Turkic languages before they came into contact with the Arab-Persian culture of the Abbasid Empire and early Turkish realms in the region quickly adopted Persian as its prestige language. It is therefore difficult to establish the ultimate origin of words.

There were prior contacts of Turkic peoples with European and Middle Eastern civilizations but the knowledge of their languages remains limited.


----------



## PersoLatin

Not sure if this is the same food but burak/بورک according to Dehkhoda dictionary is a soup made with yogurt as an ingredient, I can't see any meaningful references to its origin/etymology.

In the same section there's are a few lines of poetry in Persian which mentions burak/بورک, they are by a poet, from Shiraz from 600 year ago, by the name of Abu-Eshāq A-Qa'mé (ابواسحاق اطعمه), the second part of the name was given to him due to his interest in foods/recipes/ingredients, one example:
بامدادان که بود از شب مستیم خمار/in the morning when I am hung-over from my night's drunkenness
پیش من جز *قدح بورک* پرسیر مباد/I don't wish to have anything before me but for bowl of Burak.

Also "جام بورک/jāme burak", a related word is mentioned, it means "bowl of Burek", for this word it references بغرا which means, male pig/wild boar.


----------



## RealityCheck4you

berndf said:


> There is very little to support this claim (concerning the word; the dish is a different matter).


There is no support to your claim at all. A simple Google search says otherwise. The word and food are both Turkish.


----------



## RealityCheck4you

PersoLatin said:


> Not sure if this is the same food but burak/بورک according to Dehkhoda dictionary is a soup made with yogurt as an ingredient, I can't see any meaningful references to its origin/etymology.
> 
> In the same section there's are a few lines of poetry in Persian which mentions burak/بورک, they are by a poet, from Shiraz from 600 year ago, by the name of Abu-Eshāq A-Qa'mé (ابواسحاق اطعمه), the second part of the name was given to him due to his interest in foods/recipes/ingredients, one example:
> بامدادان که بود از شب مستیم خمار/in the morning when I am hung-over from my night's drunkenness
> پیش من جز *قدح بورک* پرسیر مباد/I don't wish to have anything before me but for bowl of Burak.
> 
> Also "جام بورک/jāme burak", related word is mentioned, it means "bowl of Burek", for this word it reference بغرا which means , male pig/wild boar.


Except "Burek" isn't a soup. It's a pastry. A pastry that Turkic peoples have been making for millennia before they even moved Westward. Also, yogurt is a Turkic creation itself.


----------



## berndf

RealityCheck4you said:


> A simple Google search says otherwise.


That is hardly a meaningful etymological source. The dish as we know it today is certainly a developed in the Ottoman Empire but that says very little about the root of the word. Turkish has very heavily borrowed from Persian and via Persian indirectly from Arabic and Aramaic very early history of Turic presence in the region. The assumption that the names of popular Ottoman dishes (and effectively the dishes themselves) are based on Persian and other local roots is very plausible.


----------



## SparkInTheDark

It looks like the overwhelming view is "börek" (and "baklava" as well) is not of Turkish/Turkic origin and the most probable candidate for the origin of the word is Persian/Iranian. Then, as it has already been stated that Persian once had had a big influence, and considering the fact that Persian has a long written tradition, can we find a proof for "börek" in these Persian (or even maybe foreign) written works so that we can settle the matter in favor of Persian?



berndf said:


> The dish as we know it today is certainly a developed in the Ottoman Empire but that says very little about the root of the word.



Are we looking for the source of the pastry itself or the name for it? I think they might be different from each other. I mean the word might have been borrowed from Persian but the "börek" itself might be a Turkish/Ottoman novelty.



berndf said:


> The dish itself is probably a blend of different traditions, Turkic ones and older local traditions before Turkic peoples arrived in the area.



I think we better stick with this view which will make everyone happy in some way.


----------



## SparkInTheDark

apmoy70 said:


> Right, because the Turkic nomads that arrived in Anatolia in the 11th c. CE had advanced cooking techniques and created exquisite dishes (including the super thin phyllo pastry for baklava) on their horsebacks or in their yurt, and they also had advanced microtonal music...in written form.
> Other than yogurt, which is truly Turkic (well the Bulgarians think differently), "Ottoman" music in reality is a fusion of Arabo-Persian maqams with Byzantine modal music, and "Ottoman" cuisine is a fusion of Levantine-Persian-Balkan-Armenian dishes. Even the names are 90% Armenian or Persian.



Is it really that irritating that Greek might have taken the word or even the pastry itself from Turkish? I do not see any point in belittling others. By the way, yes, I do not approve the tone and style of that post to which you wrote your post as a reply/reaction.


----------



## berndf

SparkInTheDark said:


> Are we looking for the source of the pastry itself or the name for it? I think they might be different from each other. I mean the word might have been borrowed from Persian but the "börek" itself might be a Turkish/Ottoman novelty.


We are looking for the word.

Though based on or at least inspired by older forms of puff pastry (like Roman _placenta_), the dish in its modern form is probably an Ottoman Turkish novelty. I agree.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

If the böreq is Persian in origin what would be the PIE root for it?


----------



## SparkInTheDark

berndf said:


> We are looking for the word.



Nişanyan Sözlük also states it is also probable that the Persian word might have been borrowed from a Turkic language, giving the Yakut equivalent "börüök" to compare with, a language which is not known to have been influenced by Persian.


----------



## rarabara

MarcB said:


> Wikipedia : Burek originated in Turkish cuisine (cf. Baklava) and is one of its most significant and, in fact, ancient elements, having been developed by the Turks of Central Asia before their westward migration to Anatolia.Anatolia - Wikipedia


if the original form of this word is "Burek" ,then I can perfectly say that this words should not be Turkish.
Other explanations: Boerek and Boreq are also not Turkish words


----------



## RealityCheck4you

SparkInTheDark said:


> It looks like the overwhelming view is "börek" (and "baklava" as well) is not of Turkish/Turkic origin and the most probable candidate for the origin of the word is Persian/Iranian. Then, as it has already been stated that Persian once had had a big influence, and considering the fact that Persian has a long written tradition, can we find a proof for "börek" in these Persian (or even maybe foreign) written works so that we can settle the matter in favor of Persian?
> 
> 
> 
> Are we looking for the source of the pastry itself or the name for it? I think they might be different from each other. I mean the word might have been borrowed from Persian but the "börek" itself might be a Turkish/Ottoman novelty.
> 
> 
> 
> I think we better stick with this view which will make everyone happy in some way.


No, the overwhelming view isn't that it's Persian/Iranian. The overwhelming view is that it is Turkish/Turkic. The word is already established to be Turkish in origin itself. Since this forum seems to keep bringing up Nisanyan, even Nisanyan says that the word is of Turkic origin. Gulsensoy also states its Turkic origin because "Bakla" does not have a meaning or origin in Persian but does in Turkic. The matter is settled in favor of Turkish. Persians just took the word and food from Turkish when they were under the Ottoman Turks.


----------



## RealityCheck4you

rarabara said:


> if the original form of this word is "Burek" ,then I can perfectly say that this words should not be Turkish.
> Other explanations: Boerek and Boreq are also not Turkish words


The original word isn't "Burek". The original word is *börek *which is a Turkish word.


----------



## rarabara

RealityCheck4you said:


> The original word isn't "Burek". The original word is *börek *which is a Turkish word.


Our some resources state that the word was etymologically originated persian. I found almost nothing that might be a reference to allege "börek" would be a  turkish word from official resources.


----------



## RealityCheck4you

rarabara said:


> Our some resources state that the word was etymologically originated persian. I found almost nothing that might be a reference to allege "börek" would be a  turkish word from official resources.


That's doubtful and the most likely answer is coincidental. "Burak" supposedly is a soup in Persian. Whereas börek is a pastry. Not only that but the sources (Tietze and Sevortyan) show that the word most likely comes from Turkic because "bur" in the Turkic languages means "to twist" which is what does happen to the pastry. You can't twist "burak" soup.


----------



## berndf

RealityCheck4you said:


> Since this forum seems to keep bringing up Nisanyan, even Nisanyan says that the word is of Turkic origin.


No, he says the Persian word itself *might* be a loan from another Turkic language. That might well be. The problem again is the scarcity of sources.



RealityCheck4you said:


> No, the overwhelming view isn't that it's Persian/Iranian. The overwhelming view is that it is Turkish/Turkic.


I don't think there is such a thing as an "overwhelming view". Tietze and Nişanyan both provide alternative possible etymons and that shows that both offer more hypotheses than established etymologies.



RealityCheck4you said:


> "bur" in the Turkic languages means "to twist" which is what does happen to the pastry. You can't twist "burak" soup.


That argument is circular because it presupposes what you are trying to prove, namely that _börek _is from _bur=to twist_.


----------



## rarabara

Ki


RealityCheck4you said:


> That's doubtful and the most likely answer is coincidental. "Burak" supposedly is a soup in Persian. Whereas börek is a pastry. Not only that but the sources (Tietze and Sevortyan) show that the word most likely comes from Turkic because "bur" in the Turkic languages means "to twist" which is what does happen to the pastry. You can't twist "burak" soup.


I can say that although I am not specialized in the area, I am well educated. Beside, I believe I am highly intellectual.
Anyway, general speaking; whenever I see a word to check whether it was Turkish or not, the first generalized thing I do is that I check whether it complies Great and Little wovel harmony.This is required but not a sufficient criterion. However, Türk Dil Kurumu announces here :Küçük Ünlü Uyumu – Türk Dil Kurumu that there were some examples which do not follow/comply the little wovel harmony, but I would like to say that some  of those words or all of those words that this association examplifies are not naturally in the explained forms.

for instance, avurt's natural form is in fact avırt. çamur's natural form çamır. (if you / anyone doubt,then could you correct me please ,I remember so)

Burak , I do not recognize this word as a soup name. This name is perfectly used amongst Turkish people (as a private name)
However, if you suggest a word like "Burek" ,this will incomply to great wovel harmony. (So,most probably not considered as Turkish word)

Turk Dil Kurumu again annouunces some Turkish word forms that do not follow great wovel harmony ,but I would once again add that those words are not in their natural forms.

anne --> ana
kardeş --> kardaş/karındaş  ( Büyük Ünlü Uyumu – Türk Dil Kurumu )

Türk Dil Kurumu is deemed to be reliable or the most reliable association in Turkey which researches for Turkish language & its relations.

Some another criteria are :

Any Turkish word should not contain two wovels side beside (For instance boerek,saat are not  Turkish words.  )


----------



## RealityCheck4you

rarabara said:


> Ki
> 
> I can say that although I am not specialized in the area, I am well educated. Beside, I believe I am highly intellectual.
> Anyway, general speaking; whenever I see a word to check whether it was Turkish or not, the first generalized thing I do is that I check whether it complies Great and Little wovel harmony.This is required but not a sufficient criterion. However, Türk Dil Kurumu announces here :Küçük Ünlü Uyumu – Türk Dil Kurumu that there were some examples which do not follow/comply the little wovel harmony, but I would like to say that some  of those words or all of those words that this association examplifies are not naturally in the explained forms.
> 
> for instance, avurt's natural form is in fact avırt. çamur's natural form çamır. (if you / anyone doubt,then could you correct me please ,I remember so)
> 
> Burak , I do not recognize this word as a soup name. This name is perfectly used amongst Turkish people (as a private name)
> However, if you suggest a word like "Burek" ,this will incomply to great wovel harmony. (So,most probably not considered as Turkish word)
> 
> Turk Dil Kurumu again annouunces some Turkish word forms that do not follow great wovel harmony ,but I would once again add that those words are not in their natural forms.
> 
> anne --> ana
> kardeş --> kardaş/karındaş  ( Büyük Ünlü Uyumu – Türk Dil Kurumu )
> 
> Türk Dil Kurumu is deemed to be reliable or the most reliable association in Turkey which researches for Turkish language & its relations.
> 
> Some another criteria are :
> 
> Any Turkish word should not contain two wovels side beside (For instance boerek,saat are not  Turkish words.  )


Boerek is not a Turkish word. Borek is.


----------



## rarabara

RealityCheck4you said:


> Boerek is not a Turkish word. Borek is.


This word:"Borek" does not comply great wowel harmony (i.e. not a Turkish word)
find the rules here in Turkish please: Büyük Ünlü Uyumu – Türk Dil Kurumu and here:Büyük ünlü uyumu - Vikipedi
find the rule here in English please : Turkish Grammar Guide - Vowel Harmony

 a correction: I wrote "great/little" wovel harmony but the source marks it with "Major/minor ",I serve this to the attention.


----------



## SparkInTheDark

rarabara said:


> if the original form of this word is "Burek" ,then I can perfectly say that this words should not be Turkish.
> Other explanations: Boerek and Boreq are also not Turkish words


I would like to remind you of the fact that you can not simply look at the written form of a word and arrive at a decisive conclusion about it.



rarabara said:


> Our some resources state that the word was etymologically originated persian. I found almost nothing that might be a reference to allege "börek" would be a  turkish word from official resources.


It does not have any importance what a source claims unless it provides any "reasonable" explanation to support that claim.

Even just a simple search gives some sources, like A history of Börek. You might want to read it all but here is a just one sentence for which you were unable to find: _But recent ethnographic research suggests that it is more likely to have been invented by the nomadic Turks of Central Asia at some point before the seventh century._

By the way what do you mean by "official source"?

Besides, even the Nişanyan Sözlük, as stated above, writes that the Persian word might have been borrowed from a Turkic language (if the Persian word is really the source of the Turkish word).



rarabara said:


> Turk Dil Kurumu again annouunces some Turkish word forms that do not follow great wovel harmony ,but I would once again add that those words are not in their natural forms.


Even though I did not understand what you really meant with your post, once again, would like to ask what you mean by "natural form"?


----------



## SparkInTheDark

RealityCheck4you said:


> No, the overwhelming view isn't that it's Persian/Iranian. The overwhelming view is that it is Turkish/Turkic. The word is already established to be Turkish in origin itself. Since this forum seems to keep bringing up Nisanyan, even Nisanyan says that the word is of Turkic origin. Gulsensoy also states its Turkic origin because "Bakla" does not have a meaning or origin in Persian but does in Turkic. The matter is settled in favor of Turkish. Persians just took the word and food from Turkish when they were under the Ottoman Turks.


Until a linguist/turcologist proves that the word "börek" is of Turkish origin and the others agree with him/her, or at least can not refute that claim, we can not say that it is an established fact. But I see your point, it has not been established that the word is of Persian origin, either.

This forum, like many others, keeps bringing up Nişanyan Sözlük, because unfortunately there is no reliable etymological dictionary of Turkish around which people can use. And as far as I know, Tietze did not have the chance to complete his work. I do not know how reliable Nişanyan Sözlük is but that is the case until somebody has published a reliable etymological dictionary for people out there.



berndf said:


> No, he says the Persian word itself *might* be a loan from another Turkic language. That might well be. The problem again is the scarcity of sources.


Agree! I think this problem should always be borne in mind, I mean the scarcity of sources. Otherwise, say in cases like this one, at least some people would be trying so hard to find another language as the source of the word, etc in question.


----------



## rarabara

@SparkInTheDark
I am afraid, the bulk of your comment is invalid.
(if requested,(just for the sake of reality) I have many linguist friends specialised in Turkish Language And Literature,I can contact one of them)


----------



## berndf

rarabara said:


> I am afraid, the bulk of your comment is invalid.


Please be more specific as to what you find invalid and why.


----------



## SparkInTheDark

rarabara said:


> I am afraid, the bulk of your comment is invalid.
> (if requested,(just for the sake of reality) I have many linguist friends specialised in Turkish Language And Literature,I can contact one of them)


I did not even make a single claim so I really wonder what kind of invalid stuff you have found in (the bulk of) my post. But, please do ask your friends and inform us about the reality. I will be impatiently waiting for your reply about the truth.


----------



## rarabara

berndf said:


> Please be more specific as to what you find invalid and why.


To begin with, I should remind that I do not enjoy resaying something.
if anyone does not understand a point at its first time
that is their own problem , not mine.

Though,I have now got in touch with one of my friends who is specialised in Turkish Language and Literature.
she says;


> that it was originated in persian as I stated (i.e. it is persian).
> She also confrms that ,yes, any Turkish word should comply Major Wovel harmony and she did not emphasize Minor Wovel harmony



but I say! (Any word should also comply Minor Wovel harmony)


I also add her external share.


----------



## SparkInTheDark

rarabara said:


> if anyone does not understand a point at its first time
> that is their own problem , not mine.


Have you ever heard things like, let alone politeness, but _exchange of opinions, scientific turn of mind, brainstorming, etc._? Because what you are only trying to do is clearly insult us here. 

So, everybody has to believe what you say just because you contacted one of your friends who is specialized in Turkish language and literature and she ordained that it should be so? What a scientific attitude you have!!!

And what about your "natural forms" and "official sources" in linguistics? Just judging by your attitude, I wonder if you have ever really read a serious article on such issues.

Even in the explanation you presented is written that the Persian word itself might be a borrowing from an "Old Turkish word" (Old Turkic or Old (Anatolian) Turkish? Even this is ambugious)



rarabara said:


> but I say! (Any word should also comply Minor Wovel harmony)


By the way, you should really read more about vowel harmony in general and in Turkic languages together with its history.


----------



## rarabara

SparkInTheDark said:


> Even in the explanation you presented is written that the Persian word itself might be a borrowing from an "Old Turkish word" (Old Turkic or Old (Anatolian) Turkish? Even this is ambugious)


and you don't see what the difference between the modal verb "might be" and "may/can be" was.
Now at this time, I can be sure that even if whatever I say, you won't believe.
Therefore, I think I should leave this thread after this comment


SparkInTheDark said:


> What a scientific attitude you have!!!


apart from the discussion,I think that it would worth it to express:

we prefer Ibni sina (Avicenna)  (ابن سينا) ,rather than  Mevlana Celaleddini Rumi as a model for philosophy in doing science & implementations.
In other words,you should not use didactic tongue across our personality and in fact, we are self taught. 
So,we do not need anyone else to learn anything. We are free on which topic to select, to interfere and to contribute. Generally we do not touch any topic in which we do no  feel us sufficiently knowledgeable.

I can recommend the moderator to delete these last two posts ,because they are irrelevant.


----------



## SparkInTheDark

rarabara said:


> and you don't see what the difference between the modal verb "might be" and "may/can be" was.


Okay, then what is it? And what kind of a difference will it make in our case?



rarabara said:


> Now at this time, I can be sure that even if whatever I say, you won't believe.


There is nothing I/you/or any other person should believe here. We are speculating about what the etymology of a word is. A word should have only one etymology, right? Clearly, we will never be able to find it out here. So, what we can do is express reasonable opinions about it in a civilized manner, considering the facts we know/have or using the knowledge we have.



rarabara said:


> Therefore, I think I should leave this thread after this comment


I'd rather you held your (scientific) ground but  it is up to you, of course.



rarabara said:


> Generally we do not touch any topic in which we do no feel us sufficiently knowledgeable.


I hope you will stick to your own philosophy.


----------



## RealityCheck4you

rarabara said:


> To begin with, I should remind that I do not enjoy resaying something.
> if anyone does not understand a point at its first time
> that is their own problem , not mine.
> 
> Though,I have now got in touch with one of my friends who is specialised in Turkish Language and Literature.
> she says;
> 
> 
> but I say! (Any word should also comply Minor Wovel harmony)
> 
> 
> I also add her external share.


I'm not convinced. That attachment doesn't explain anything either. It looks like a screenshot from Wikipedia. "Bur" is believed to be of Proto-Turkic origin, yes the Turkish language went under reformations, however, many of its words are still derived from Proto-Turkic (which is what Turkish is, just reformed and modernized). Proto-Turkic is older than Persian anyway, so there is absolutely no reason not to assume the word isn't Turkish considering they were producing the pastry BEFORE they even migrated Westward or even came into contact with Persians and would have had the word for it. By the way, the very last sentence itself says that the word "borek" may be a very old Turkish word from Old Turkish, meaning it isn't confirmed that it could be Persian.


----------

