Talk:Khazar language

message: OKHQURÜM, "I read (this or it)" (Modern Turkish: OKURUM)
Modern Turkish is: OKUDUM not OKURUM
R may be an Oghur version of Oghuz D  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.150.65.237 (talk) 20:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: mistake

message: From what I've heard, when the Khazars converted to Judaism, they adopted Jewish Hebrew. (Not all varieties of Hebrew are Jewish. There is also Samaritan Hebrew.) 
This brings up several questions:
Did Jewish Hebrew (or at least Jewish Hebrew as spoken by Khazars) absorb any Khazar words?
After the Khazars adopted Jewish Hebrew, was their Jewish Hebrew different that that of other Jews? (see above question)
IF Jewish Hebrew of any type absorbed any Khazar words, is there ANY way of knowing whether or not those words came from the Khazar language? In other words: could there be commonly known and used words in Jewish Hebrew that came from the Khazar language, without it being known they were originally Khazar words?
I suspect A LOT of people are wondering the same things.
Gringo300 01:59, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not a linguist but I have never heard of any scholar suggesting that Turkic or Khazar words appear in Hebrew. It is true that some Khazar documents from the post-conversion period are written in Hebrew. See Khazar Correspondence, Schechter Letter, Kievian Letter. The extent to which Hebrew words may have entered the Khazar language in everyday speach is impossible to determine, given how little we know about the language. However, it's interesting to note that the word for Saturday in the Kipchak language is "Shabbat Kun"; whether they got Shabbat from the Khazars is impossible to determine. --Briangotts 02:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions

message: So far, it has been incredibly frustrating...
Gringo300 00:31, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Attempting to do research on Khazar language

message: I'm removing this article from the GA/self nom list because:
*No sections, implying that there is no clear-cut lead
*Article is too short, and comprehensiveness needs to be worked on
*Lack of inline citations (not a reason for removal, just a note)
*Image does not have copyright tag
AndyZ 00:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The image is a copy of a thousand-year old text. It is ineligible for copyright Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 03:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has been expanded somewhat but won't be any longer because there is not much more to say given the paucity of information on the subject. However, the article is of the utmost importance to both linguistics and Judaism. Best, Eklir (talk) 02:19, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: Based on the researches carried out in Hungary in the last decades, the Hungarian science obtained some interesting results. Since most of the publications in Hungarian, these results are not well-known. I recommend to visit the following pages:
*Alsószentmihály Rovas inscription - this is the relic of a Khazarian leader, whose religion was Karaite,
*Khazarian Rovas script - this is a comprehensive overview of the Khazarian Rovas script, albeit it is very short.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rovasscript (talk • contribs) 13:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Vékony is an academic indeed (he was an archaeologist officially, but well read in history and also in historical linguistics). However, the cited 2004 book is a postumous edition of his unpublished manuscripts he was working on. The quality of the *editorial* work is miserable, the contents and Vékony's research are inspiring though. Therefore I'd remove the "dubious" tag from the *citation* itself. Conserning the "Khazarian" script, however, there is no widely accepted reading. Both Russian scientists did some readings (Kyzlasov), and also Vékony has kontributed, but I would not call the reading definitive or solved, and would consider the script as undeciphered, by large. Szabi (talk) 11:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Khazarian Rovas]] script 

message: Substituted at 21:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Strange and perhaps even somewhat creepy sentence: "According to anthropological data, it was ruled by Inner Asian Mongoloid (with some Europoid somatic elements) core tribes."--98.111.164.239 (talk) 09:16, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are "Europoid somatic elements"?