The shadow effect
Imagine the shepherd standing one afternoon in a sunny pasture. There is a shadow visible beside him.
If the shepherd walks further, this shadow moves with him. This will be repeated with each step that he takes and the shadow always originates from his foot. If he moves around, so does the shadow and we can be sure that this shadow is his and not that belonging to a sheep, a tree, a dog or anything else. Without the shepherd there is no shadow. We could even say that the shepherd and his shadow are one and the same.
Our analysis method to prove our thesis is based on this idea and I have therefore named it the “shadow effect”.
We handle the Hungarian-foreign word-pair as a shepherd-shadow pair. Furthermore, we regard any change in the Hungarian word as a movement of the shepherd and the change which then happens to the foreign word, we call a movement of its shadow. This way we only have to watch whether they move together or not. If yes, we are dealing with the same word or words.
The shadow effect (the moving together) can be examined the following way:
1. Let’s take a Hungarian word and put a foreign word beside it. Supposedly, the word-roots of both are identical in form and meaning.
2. We register this and then we randomly change one sound of the root. (the shepherd takes a step). Let’s check again whether there are identical word pairs.
3. Then let’s change another sound in the word-root and see if the identity of the root in the other language’s word still prevails and so forth.
We experience a “shadow-effect” if we receive a positive result. The two languages have a close relation: the examined words of both vocabularies were taken from the same language. Let’s start with the word ‘kap’, which we analyzed deeply previously:
(We write every Latin sound which is pronounced as ‘k’ with a ‘k’ rather than with a ‘c’ to simplify the comparison)
|kap <> kap|
|kapio||kap (elkap, kepeszt) kopó||(catches, craves for, hounds)|
|kaptio||a. kapocs <kapoch>, kapás|
b. kópéság <kopeshaag>, fortély
|(clamp, hoed, hoer)|
|kaptor||kapdos <kapdosh>, kapkod||(snap up)|
|kapabilis||kaposó <kaposho), fogékony||(susceptible)|
|a. képes <kepεsh>|
b. (képesség) ügyes <uedjεsh>
|(ready to receive a bequest)|
|kapitalis||kopja (built from kap-la)||(wooden headboard)|
|kaptatio||kapkodás (vm. után)||(the snapping up for sg.)|
|kaptivatio||elkapás <εlkapaash>||(becoming captivated)|
|kaptatéla||felkap, magára kap (ruhát)||(dressing oneself hastily)|
Let’s change the ‘a’ in the Latin kap to an ‘o’:
|kop <> kap|
|kopula||kapocs <kapoch>, (madzag)||(clamp, line, lead)|
|kopulor||összekap, kapcsol (egybe)||(connect, join)|
We put an ‘u’ instead of ‘o’ into the Latin word:
|kup <> kap|
|kupiens||(k)epedő (valami után)||(yearning for sg.)|
|kupidineus||kapós (szeretni való)||(bellowed, dear)|
|kupitor||kapós||(much in request)|
Now we change the ‘k’ of kap to an ‘r’ = rap. The Hungarian dialectical variants are: rip, rép, rab.
|rap <> rab, rip|
|rapax||elragadó, elrabló||(ravishing, charming)|
|raptus||rablás, ragadás||(carrying away, abduction)|
|rapulum||kis retek, –répa||(little carrot)|
|rapum||répa, retek, (gyökér)||(radish-root)|
|rabanillo||(hónapos) retek||(monthly radish)|
From rap after a p<k change and with a double vowel to rauk
We change the ‘p’ of rap to a ‘d’, which is in Hungarian often a soft gy <dj>
|radiation||ragyogás <radjogaash>||(radiance, glamour)|
|radiosus||ragyogó, sugárzó<radjogo>||(shining, radiating)|
|radio||ragyog, sugárzik <shugarzik>||(radiates)|
|radix||(e)redet, gyökér <djœker>||(root, origin)|
|radius||rudacska <rudacska>, sugár||(drawing stick, radius, beam)|
|rhagades||ragya, ragadás <radja, ragadaash>||(pock-mark, sticking)|
Change the ‘a’ of rad to a ‘u’ and we get rud
|rudis||rúd, bot, pálca||(rod, stick, sceptre)|
|rudicula||rudacska <rudachka>||(small stick, roll)|
|rudius||durva||after metathesis of rud (rude, rough)|
|ruidus pilum||repülő rúd (mozsártörő)||(pounder, pestle)|
|ridica||támasztó rúd (szöllőben)||(supporting pole)|
The metathesis of rud is dur (Spain rudo=durva)
|dureo||durva, kemény||(rough, hard)|
|durus||durva tapintású||(rough to the touch)|
Now we change the ‘d’ in dur to a ‘g’ and get rug.
|rugo||rugo rogyó <rodjó>, ráncol <raanczol>||(dropping, shrivelling)|
|rugosus||rogyós <rodjósh>, redős <rεdœsh>||(furrowed)|
|rugositas||rúgózódás, ráncosság||(crinkliness, rugosity)|
Change ‘g’ in rug to the ‘m’ and we receive the word ‘rum’.
|rumpo||rombol (utat tör)||(ravages, breaks through)|
|rhompaea||romboló fa (hosszú dárda)||(long lance)|
By changing ‘m’ to ‘n’ we find ran,ron and run.
|runcatio||ráncigálás <raancigaalaash, gyomlálás||(weeding)|
|runco||ráncigál, gyomlál < djomlaal>||(he is weeding)|
|rancide||roncs <ronch>, romlott||(rancid)|
|rancidus||roncsos, ráncos, romlott||rancidus roncsos, ráncos, romlott (nauseating, loathsome)|
Let’s change ‘r’ to an ‘l’, resulting in the words len, lan.
len <> lany, eny
|lenio||lanyhit, lágyít <laadjit>||(softens, makes stagnant)|
|lenio||lanyha, loosing ‘l’: enyhe <εnjhε>||(lenient, tepid, mild)|
|lenitas||enyheség <εnyhεsheg>, lágyítás||lágyítás (softness)|
|leniter||enyhén, lanyhán||(leniently, gently)|
adding a ‘g’ or ‘k’ to it:
|langue-facio||lankaszt||(makes languid, withers)|
|languor||lankadtság <lankadtshaag>||(languidness, flagging)|
From here came lanka and English land (=lent=below, beneath), its word-root is ‘le’.
We won’t continue the presentation. The most important picture is clear: it does not matter where we push the word on the sound-scale, its shadow follows it precisely. Changing the word created in Hungarian led to one in the Latin with an identical root and meaning. Even the fine-tuning, the internal thought-modifications in the word-cluster of the roots followed every step (runc-ránc-ráncigál, len-lanyha and lanka-lenge).
Therefore, the “shadow effect” is working.
The conclusive strength of the shadow effect tells us that the Latin language, at a very early point in its development, stood very close to the early Hungarian language. This almost certainly happened in Italy (where the Etruscans dominated the culture for several hundreds of years). The same happened to the Old-Greek language in Greece or to the Old Egyptian language in Egypt. It proves that the Hungarian language as a living dinosaur preserved the most of the so called “proto-nostratic” language, the language of the Stone Age. It is the living language of the Stone Age, the well preserved main branch of the old Scythian language.
To clear up the historical background of our statement is not the subject of this book. However, we can show that Europe’s languages contain two layers of this proto-(Hungarian) language:
1) There is an old archaic common layer only loosely connecting the different languages (Latin included). This layer must be the remnant of the common proto-language everybody spoke in Europe. It is however not easily separable from the Celtic layer, which proves that they also spoke the proto-language.
2) Europe’s languages contain a second, Latin, layer – understandably a relatively unified take-over. Even a large part of this originates from the proto-language (Hungarian), but has a strong Latin style and is easily separable from the rest.
Let’s see now just a flash of the Old-Greek-Hungarian shadow effect, .
Take the word kellemes <kεllεmεsh> (pleasant).
Its base is kellem (charm, gracefulness) derived from kell. It is a variant of kel with a double ‘l’. For example: elkel or elkél (to be sold). Everything sold – elkelt – that was kell (necessary), it was kellemes, kelendő (was and is wanted, like a bride). The bride kelleti magát (displays oneself), she should kelljen (be wanted), elkeljen (be taken). Only the later, modified form with the double ‘l’ – kell – was taken into Old Greek.
The words kellemes and szép (beautiful) have in Hungarian almost identical meaning. In Old-Greek kellemes is used with the meaning of beautiful also. This doesn’t happen randomly.
We write the Greek words with Latin letters also. (For readers not being familiar with the Greek alphabet)
Kall <> kell
|kallióo||kellemessé tesz (does)||(it makes pleasant)|
|kalliphonos||kellemes hangú||(has a pleasant voice)|
|kalloné||kellem, szépség||(charm, beauty)|
|kalligrafia||kellemes, szép írás||(neat writing)|
|kallilampos||kellemes világító||(good lighting)|
|kalliteksnés||kellemesen tákoló (dolgozó)||(well working)|
Now change the double ‘ll’ to a ‘m’ sound receiving kam:
|kampé||kampó, forduló||(hook, turn around)|
We put a ‘t’ instead of the ‘m’ and we get kat:
|katagogé||kiköt <kikœt>||(ties, fastens, stipulates)|
|katadokéo||másként (más=két=ket=köt)||(differently, ribbon-bow)|
|katadzonnümai||körülköt (magán valamit)||(passes a rope round)|
|katakremannümi||felköt <fεlkœt>||(ties up, strings up)|
|katartáó||felköt, felakaszt||(hangs up)|
|katálogos||katonaköteles||(is obliged to serve in the army)|
|katapleko||kötözget, fon, bonyolít||(spins, complicates, plots)|
|katekho||megköt, visszatart||(retains, detains)|
|katalüsis||kikötöz, felold||(dissolves, unties)|
Let’s now look at some more complicated words: change the ‘k’ to a ‘p’, thus we get pat:
(Remember the earlier-analyzed broad word-cluster of the root pat=pacs=tap=csap. See the frequently occurring change of t-p-cs and the metathesis of the root)
pat <> pat
|patageo||patakzik, zúg (patak)||(flows in torrents, rumbling, brook)|
|patagos||pattogás, csattogás||(crackling, clashing)|
|patasso||megcsap, pacskol||(strikes, flaps, pats)|
|pateo||tapos (see pat-tap root)||(treads on, steps on)|
|patos||taposott út, ösvény||(path, trail)|
|patasma||csapás ([t<cs]||(stroke, slap)|
|pathema||patália, esemény||(event, barney)|
|pathesis||passzivitás, tapadás||(adhering, passivity)|
Now let’s go into a deeper, more complicated but beautiful example:
Change the ‘t’ in pat to a ‘g’ and we receive pag:
However, the ‘p’ changes often to an ‘f’, thus the Ancient Greek pag corresponds to the Hungarian fag-, -fog. Furthermore, in Hungarian the ‘g’ often softens to a ‘gy’ <dj>. Thus, the Hungarian fog = fagy <fadj> is supposedly the shadow of the ancient Greek fag.
|págos||fagy, zuzmara, jég||(frost, rime, ice)|
|págos||szikla, szirt||(rock, cliff)|
|pagis||fogó = csapda||(pliers, trap)|
|pagios||fagyott, szilárd halmazállapotú||(frozen, solid state)|
|pagkalos||nagyon jó, szép||(very good, beautiful)|
|pagkákos||nagyon rossz, csúnya||(very bad, ugly)|
|págonros||tarisznyarák||(king crab, land crab)|
|pagkhalépos||nagyon nehezen (kal=strong, hits)||(hard to do)|
It’s hard to see a good match at first glance. Looking closer at this word sample, however, a world opens for us. We can look into an archaic condition of our language and recognize why it is still alive today, what is hiding in the examples above.
There is no error. The ancient Greek ‘pag’ can be fog, fagy and jég (gripping, freezes and ice). In Hungarian we say “a tél fogós = fagyos” <fadjosh> (the winter is gripping = icy). “Fogós a széklete” <fogosh a seklεtε> (his faeces are gripping, constipated) “Az. … megfogja a székletét” (It grips his stool), it makes hard. Now we understand, why pagos can even mean a rock.
We must take note here that the word fog, according to the above, may signify fog (grips), fagy <fadj> (freezing), kemény <kεmenj> (hard), fogós <fogosh> (caching) and csapda <chapda> (trap), (Fogas = fogós) It can also happen that “tarisznyarák” means “fogó” (catcher) as well. The claws of the crab are a fogó (catcher). At the same time, we can find the szikla (rock)-meaning of fog (pag) in Hungarian as well: it is the ‘fok’ the “hegy foka” (mountain-peak). As we can see, the same slight differences appear in Ancient Greek as well, but there is no difference in basic thinking.
Let’s see now what the following ancient-Greek words will tell us.
we have seen that kal, kall are equivalent to the Hungarian kel and kell. If pag means kemény (hard, strong) than pagkal-os signals erősen kellő (very or strongly wanted or due), nagyon kellemes (very pleasant). This covers the meaning given in the dictionary: “very good”.
Kal means strong, beater, hammer,for instance:
Kallantyú is a ütődő – <uetœdœ> (knocking),
csapódó – <chapodó> (slamming),
kalló- malom(mill) milling oily kernels.
The nemez (felt) is made by hitting,
kalapálással (hammer) out of wool. The group of people doing it
together we call kaláka. The fine nemez (felt)
is called kelme and the people who sell it,
we call kalmár. A hat is made from fine kalapált (hammered) felt and
we call it kalap. The Etruscans kaltak (hammered) yearly a nail into the door-frame, so the kalendarium was born.
After all of the above, and seeing the meaning of pagkhalepos given in the dictionary: “nagyon nehezen” (very hard to do), we can simply say that pag=fog (grips, holds) and khalep= strongly or hardly holding, gripping is perfect, this is what we say today.
Pag = fog (gripping, holding, hard). Kaka means excrement. Thus “pagkakos” can only mean “kemény szar” (constipation). The dictionary tells us: “very bad, very evil”. Well, everybody who ever had a hard constipation will know what very bad means.
Pagkenthés: the dictionary tells us the meaning: “mindent elrejtő” (everything hiding).
However, we say it today rather as
elkendőz (cover with a kerchief) or
elken (glossing over).
Pagkration: pag = fog (grips, holds)
krat- = erős (strong), see akaratos <akaratosh> (wilful),
kratos = testi erő (muscular power). All together: “powerful grip” We could even say “fogkration” after our analysis, but today we call it pankracio (wrestling).
We could stop here and state that there is a vivid ‘shadow-effect’ between Hungarian and the ancient Greek language.
However the common Latin and ancient Greek words are not always the same. Most of them were inherited from the common proto-language belonging to the deep layer of inheritance. This explains why so many words and even word-roots are present in both and also in Hungarian.
What will it look like, if we would continue?
One example: the sound ‘ph’ in ancient Greek stands between ‘p’ an ‘f’. Looking for pag=fog, we find
phagedaina = fekély <fεkey> (ulcer)
phakelos = rőzsenyaláb <rœžεnjalaab> (faggot of brushwood)
We see in the first word rather the Hungarian ‘fakad’ (springs forth, bursts, opens) and in the second the word fáklya <faakya> (torch), which at that time was certainly made of a faggot of brushwood.
The lesson from the above is:
a) Taking one word out of its surroundings and examining it separately from the vocabulary, we can’t tell if a similarity or identity is random or not in every case.
b) However, taking more (preferably more than three) words, which correspond in meaning and sounding – one by one as pairs – than we don’t see a random occurrence anymore.
c) These conformities may be due to “occasional” takeovers such as: fandli, sparheit, spóról (pan, oven, spare on) received from Swabians (Germans) living in Hungary or from English: computer, software, and tractor. Such words do not have a broad word-cluster in the taking over language. Those stand alone there. But a careful analysis should be applied even to them. There are also several foreign words in Hungarian, which are in reality re-imported and based on roots of the proto-language.
d) Nevertheless, if the changes of the words in two languages follow each other like shadows as we have seen above, presenting the “shadow-effect”, then we can certainly speak of the two languages affecting each other strongly. These are not casual takeovers of words.
To reiterate: The previous word analysis did not present a theory. It rather strongly proved its correctness. If two persons are throwing dice while sitting at the same table, they can’t throw always the same number, unless one is the shadow of the other. This rule is the force and the basis of the “shadow-effect”.
Previously, we became convinced of the tight shadow-effect between the Latin, ancient Greek and Hungarian vocabularies. There is a close organic identity among them. The proto-language once spoken everywhere, the early “Hungarian”, had a strong effect on both languages. How do we know that it did not happen in the reverse direction? Well, Latin is a mixed language, Hungarian is not. Furthermore, although only snippets of Hungarian are found in Latin and in ancient Greek, the snippets in both together present a much bigger part of the Hungarian language than they do separately.
Turning our attention to the finesses, which show up in the shadow-effect, a marvellous world begins to open up for us. We start “hearing” our old language. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it may even be understandable to our ears.