Is Mythology the turth disguised as a Tale? or a Tale to disguise a Turth?

[ancalimon]

”There is, however, no compelling archaeological evidence that they (Andronovo and Bactrian Margiana archaeological complexes ) had a common ancestor or that either is Indo-Iranian.” and ”Given the increasingly large number of divisions and subdivisions of the generic Andronovo culture(s), with evidence for ”no one group having undue prestige over the others,” there is neither reason nor evidence to believe that they all shared an Indo-Iranian language. From the common roots of the millennia-long Andronovo culture(s) [and before that the related Timber Grave culture(s)], processes of both convergence and divergence [archaeologically indicated by the eastward migrations of the Andronovo culture(s)] allow for the presence of not only the Indo-Iranian languages but for other language families as well, that is, Altaic and Uralic. Clearly, the convergence of cultures, that is, the assimilation of local populations by an in-coming peoples, is very poorly developed within the archaeological discipline.”

http://anthropology.fas.harvard.edu/people/cc-lamberg-karlovsky

What does this mean? Can you summarize it for me?

My liturgical IE language dominance theory is compatible with sane reasons.

Can you summarize your theory for me in it's entirety so I don't make any false assumptions about what you are trying to say?

People never started switched to Turkic language because nomadic Turks never had the means to force it neither in numbers, nor technology or social structure or culture... This is all a dream even a greater dream than mine!

Except we know that they did switch to a Turkic language during the Turkic expansion. The people of Anatolia spoke other languages long before they spoke Turkish. This is a historical fact. We have writings to prove it.

Do you believe there is a distinction Pre-Turkic languages and PIE? I am trying to understand your position.

It means that deciding which archeological finding belongs to which culture is very poorly developed because of nationalism and Indo-Europeanism.
It means kurgans don't have an Indo-Iranian speaking ancestor.
It means Altaic and Uralic languages (Altaic languages mean Turkic language in this case) traveled together with Indo-European language to Europe. That is how we have kurgans in Europe too.

The only other kurgan branch that may not be Turkic is last migration which is Bronze age Celtic branch from Anatolia. They are the closest cousins of Oghuz people including the Turkish people and Azerbaijani people.

My theory is based on a Turkic language origin for civilizations because of too many similarities between some European languages and Turkic languages.  When the ice age was nearling to its end, Turkic language started to spread through the newly invented horde (army) system which was utilized in order to hunt down mammoth. The definitive Turkic culture got established between these areas:

North of Black Sea, İtil river, Ural mountains. From there two branches of this culture appeared. one of them the army branch and the other one the elite philosopher branch. Most of the horde joined with the Nom: (the engineers) branch and the kam: (the thinkers) joined the army branch.  The nom and their small army was called the Aryans (the ones who seek something) because they wanted to search for easy to reach ore deposits. They reached India where there was already an established community. There they founded the first police originally called balıq. The word "pol" shows what they were trying to do. To find stable ground in order to settle in. We can find it inside Turkic mythology. The polyüs; the Northern star (the stable face). It's a pole driven trough the earth and because of that it's always stable. In time balıq became to give order to people and to police people. (which is related with bağlı which means to become dependent, to obey...  So a symbiosis was formed. These Tur people (Aryans) provided protection for the natives and the natives provided virgins and anything the Tur needed. The Aryan's developed a liturgical PIE language for their religion which they used to control people. They invented a way to control people through their curiosity and fears.

The first migration to Europe started with the Tur that stayed behind. Europe was soon colonized. The name was given by the ones that stayed or that did not wonder a lot. It's Avaroba meaning the encampment of those who wonder around the world. Names to places had always been given to serve a purpose. They were always realistic. So Europe actually does not mean "the child that was raped by the bull shooting arrows out of its ass". I'm serious that Europe's meaning is not this. I know it's hard to believe that your continent's name does not mean "the child that was raped by the lightning shooting bull". It simply means "the land (not child) that was colonized (not raped) by the arrow (not lightning) shooting settlers (not Zeus in bull form)".

Of course not everyone migrated and many simply expanded little by little these people were called OQ (arrow ~ extension ~ children) The ceramony included shooting an arrow a the sky on a windy day and the children started migrating on the direction the arrow landed. The parents told the leaving party the words OQLAN meaning "may who have children and helpers as well". This is the word "clan"..  There are the braches of OQ people. The Ogur (the r speaking Tur) and the Oghuz (The Z speaking Tur). The R speaking Tur are those that migrated to far away places like the Pol Ogur (Bulgar), Onogur (Hungar), Oy Ogur (Uyghur). These soon lost their way of life and descended into dreamy polytheism. Soon they were disliked by the Oghuz and an enmity started between them.

So Europe was Turkic and people had been living a semi sedentary life. Then the Aryans came with their great war machines and their huge religious army. They overwhelmed the people living there and and became elites over the natives of Europe. Their religion was different from the universal monotheism (which got turned into polytheism among many of the Ogur). They did not bury their dead, they did not accept reason to everything (Tengri) and they saw everybody as tools for their glory... This is the short story of Europe.

The most common myth between these people was the idea of "chain of command".

The one in command is the baba (the father) the word bağ (to connect, to be tied to, bond) comes from the root ba which is the original word invented by children to call their fathers.

Babies imitate their thoughts using their lips and mouth. You can observe this if you love observing babies. So before the Tur took charge, it was the babies that were in charge of creating human language. The grown ups learned language through their babies probably after they left Africa (if that theory is true after all we can always find another thing or the things could have got lost).

Anyway the baba assumed the role of religious leader among the Aryans. The Otuken originaly was the domain of the leader who received kut (the right to rule and auspiciousness) from Tengri.

The Huns much later went to Europe to take revenge from the Aryans. But something happened and they decided to stop destroying Europe. Which is still a mystery because the pope decided to not write anything about what was spoken between Attila and himself.

All of the above can change without warning in the future depending on what I learn. If the things I learn lead to me reaching the same conclusion as you guys, I will apologize and say it here.


And we have stone tablets from Sumerian to prove that Turks existed near before the Sumerians so what? We have laws.

Here are some of Osman Nedim Tuna's work he could not publish:

http://sumeryan.blogspot.com.tr/2010/06/turkic-sumerian-cognates-from-dr-osman.html

Here's another guy who claims that the Indo-European language was not created by the Aryan Turks but they simply got assimilated by the local population. (see conclusion)

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/MiddleAsianEthnogenesisEn.htm


In my opinion Europeans to not need to steal the history of other people in order to unify Europe. They can do solely with their culture as it is.

 

[Troll]

I would just like everyone to stop and appreciate for a moment the fact that people have been trying to argue with ancalimon over here for roughly six years by now. If nothing else, got to give the man credit for his dedication.

 

[Mage246]

Some of us realized early on that the cause was hopeless.

 

[Anarion]

I like how it gets us talking about linguistics and genetics though. Just a shame that we can't have a serious discussion about any of that anymore.

 

[Beny]

I would just like everyone to stop and appreciate for a moment the fact that people have been trying to argue with ancalimon over here for roughly six years by now. If nothing else, got to give the man credit for his dedication.

Empires rise and fall. People come and go. Love is found and love is lost.

But Ancalimon.

Is eternal.

 

[Lord Brutus]

Don't let Eternal hear you say that.

 

[Anarion]

I mean it's kind of obvious I grant you, but the remarkable similarity between modern Turkic languages makes it hard to believe that Turkic was widespread several thousand years ago. In that case there would be much greater divergence, linguistic uniformity is usually a sign of recent expansion.

 

[ancalimon]

I mean it's kind of obvious I grant you, but the remarkable similarity between modern Turkic languages makes it hard to believe that Turkic was widespread several thousand years ago. In that case there would be much greater divergence, linguistic uniformity is usually a sign of recent expansion.

Well first of all one should be aware of many different variables when a conclusion is to be made.

Turkic languages are different than Indo-European or Semitic languages.

They are agglutinate. Every single Turkic word has a root and this root is non-destructive unlike how they are in other languages.

So it's not possible for Turkic languages to change a lot and the roots stay the same.. Well.. They language itself changed a lot; I can only understand Azerbaijani Turkic without much effort. But their logic stayed the same. And maybe they were a large single confederation which led to the "minimal change" you suggest. Maybe there were trade roads there. Maybe they had mobility unlike people who spoke IE languages and they were contantly in contact. (They actually were) That's how their cultures was very similar.

From what we know regarding what was written on Sumerian tablets, they had Turkic loanwords. So this makes Turkic the oldest surviving language still spoken on earth. Of course this does not mean that there weren't other languages that are older than Turkic. The Sumerians simply loaned Turkic words. Maybe some other other place, French was being spoken before Turkic that's a different matter which can not be proven unless we find another language in which French words were loaned.

There are still some people here who refuse that the Turkic words recorded on Sumerian tablets are not really Turkic words. They fail to see the laws which show how Turkic words changed when they entered Sumerian and I don't know how to make them think logically. This alone shows the prejudice of some of the people who want to believe that Turkic can not be older than IE languages. When I discussed this with a British linguist, he said that to be related with Sumerian is a great prestige for a language and Turkic definitely can not be that prestigious. This is the general idea. They see the laws and how they are legit, but they refuse to accept that Turkic can be old.

 

[Anarion]

I can grant you that agglutinative languages change less than others. For words that were borrowed into Finnish from an early form of Germanic it's sometimes been likened to "putting them in an ice box" because they change so little. That explanation can only get you so far though. 12,000 years is really a stretch to put it mildly.
(By the way, the Uralic languages form a group of agglutinative languages that diverged much more recently than that and are markedly different.)

I'm not against the idea of Turkic loan words in Sumerian, and presented with good evidence I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. I'm not against the possibility that Turkic might be very old either. The problem is that frankly you're a very poor linguist and given to making up questionable etymologies. Just because you can find a word that looks the same and has a similar meaning doesn't mean it's a cognate.

 

[ancalimon]

I can grant you that agglutinative languages change less than others. For words that were borrowed into Finnish from an early form of Germanic it's sometimes been likened to "putting them in an ice box" because they change so little. That explanation can only get you so far though. 12,000 years is really a stretch to put it mildly.
(By the way, the Uralic languages form a group of agglutinative languages that diverged much more recently than that and are markedly different.)

I'm not against the idea of Turkic loan words in Sumerian, and presented with good evidence I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. I'm not against the possibility that Turkic might be very old either. The problem is that frankly you're a very poor linguist and given to making up questionable etymologies. Just because you can find a word that looks the same and has a similar meaning doesn't mean it's a cognate.

Yes. I'm not a linguist but based on my theory about the spread of the liturgical IE languages, I like to find meaningful similarities between IE languages and Turkic. I do not have a model and I haven't yet formatted how Turkic words change when they were modified in IE languages. But I have tens of thousands of words from IE languages that can be explained using Turkic sentences.  Especially mythological concepts and the story underlying them makes it very interesting.

...That's because people who speak Uralic languages also came under the influence of the PIE clergy which is known as Christianity today.

I have countless times explained how there are Turkic words in Sumerian here and shown the laws created by Osman Nedim Tuna.

 

[Anarion]

...That's because people who speak Uralic languages also came under the influence of the PIE clergy which is known as Christianity today.

That just shows that you probably don't think Jesus lived in Ca. 0 AD or that he never existed, which is why debating you is so pointless; you believe in conspiracy theories. 

I have countless times explained how there are Turkic words in Sumerian here and shown the laws created by Osman Nedim Tuna.

Your sources are invariably in Turkish, so we can't access them and judge for ourselves. Here's a quote from you:

For example  Sumerian Tur: to be  |  Turkic Türe: to come into existence
For example  Sumerian URU: city, town, village, district  |  Turkic YÖRE:  city town, village, district
For example  Sumerian USU: skill, strength  |  Turkic US: the ability to use intelligence  USTA: skillful, expert, master
For example  Sumerian ùšu:  thirty  |  Turkic OTUZ: thirty

They're superficially similar, but can you account for the differences? Was there a process by which š changed to t? Did it always turn out that way?

 

[Wellenbrecher]

You can't use his linguistic examples. He admitted multiple times that none of his linguistic exploits follow any science beyond "oh they look similar and they could mean this or that".
Using them, even as a counter argument, is like FoxNews using their own opinion pieces from half an hour ago as a "source" for the report that's currently on.

 

[Moose!]

Relevant.

 

[Mage246]

Plus, even if they look similar, do they sound similar? He provides no pronunciation guide (assuming pronunciation is even available for Sumerian words).

And even if they look and sound the same, this can only prove that they are linked in some way. Is this because Turkic language spawned Sumerian? Possibly. Or is it because Sumerian language spawned Turkic? Also possible. Or is it because a descendant language of Sumerian ended up contributing some words to Turkic languages? Also entirely possible.

So even assuming he is right and there is a link, it doesn't necessarily mean that he is anything more than the tinfoil conspiracy nutter that we know him to be. It doesn't mean he isn't still completely wrong.

 

[Almalexia]

Wow, I never knew I'm actually descended from proto-Brabants. Thanks for letting me know, Moose!

 

[ancalimon]

...That's because people who speak Uralic languages also came under the influence of the PIE clergy which is known as Christianity today.

That just shows that you probably don't think Jesus lived in Ca. 0 AD or that he never existed, which is why debating you is so pointless; you believe in conspiracy theories. 

I have countless times explained how there are Turkic words in Sumerian here and shown the laws created by Osman Nedim Tuna.

Your sources are invariably in Turkish, so we can't access them and judge for ourselves. Here's a quote from you:

For example  Sumerian Tur: to be  |  Turkic Türe: to come into existence
For example  Sumerian URU: city, town, village, district  |  Turkic YÖRE:  city town, village, district
For example  Sumerian USU: skill, strength  |  Turkic US: the ability to use intelligence  USTA: skillful, expert, master
For example  Sumerian ùšu:  thirty  |  Turkic OTUZ: thirty

They're superficially similar, but can you account for the differences? Was there a process by which š changed to t? Did it always turn out that way?

Jesus lived around 0 that's correct. Or at least Christianity appeared around that time. But the Christianity today is a mishmash of the religion of the Tur and every other people on Earth that are related with them one way or another. That's how Christianity spread. People saw a modified version of their dull way of life turned into the wonder of Christianity. Turks converted to this religion in masses the last ones being the most established ones. (like the Onogurs (known as Hungar by their close relatives) who ere called Turks even during Byzantine times. They later assimilated into into Magyars)

Yes there was a process by which a letter changed into another letter. It's always the case for only words that were loaned into Sumerian from Proto-Tigris meaning the Sumerians only loaned Turkic words from Proto-Tigris people.

You can find all of the laws starting from page 9 here:  https://www.scribd.com/doc/64297815/Osman-Nedim-Tuna-Sumer-ve-Turk-Dillerinin-Tarihi-%C4%B0lgisi

Here are some laws:

Sumerian = Turkic = English

g- = Ø-

gud        = ud      = cattle
gig          = ig        = sick, sickness, ill
gişig      = eşik    = door, entrance, corridor
gid        = ıd-        = to release, to send
gaz        = ez        = to break, to crash, to squeeze
gur        = or        = to cut, to hit, crop, to harvest

Sumerian = Turkic = English

d-/t-  =  y

dar          = yar      = to split, to cleave
dib          = yip      = rope
tab          = yap      = to cover, to close
tir            = yir        = Earth, earth
tu            = yu-        = to wash

After find a couple of laws, Osman Nedim Tuna went on to find 32 such laws. Only 16 could be evaluated and not found wrong because of his death.

"Regular Sound Correspondence" is a tool used to prove that similar words in two different languages meaning the same things is not actually a coincidence. We need three similar sound changes and according to some experts, four sound changes to prove that two different languages share culture and it's not a coincidence.

There are more regular sound correspondences found by Tuna but he died before he could present it to experts. As a result they could not evaluate those together as far as we know.

Here are those:  http://sumeryan.blogspot.com.tr/2010/06/turkic-sumerian-cognates-from-dr-osman.html

(Because of Dr. Tuna’s recent tragic death, he was unable to complete the next (and English)
version of the book which was published originally in Turkish. Because of the importance of the
work, I am presenting it in electronic form for the Internet. H.M. Hubey)

These are proofs that Turkic is the oldest known surviving language on Earth and they were in Anatolia before any Indo-European speaking person stepped foot spoke there. (There is no evidence of anyone speaking an Indo-European language anywhere in the world back then meaning even if we accepted the kurgan = IE speaking bull****, it would have meant that the dating of kurgans is wrong and Indo-European speaking people entered bronze age only recently).  The only remaining thing to do is to determine which name the Sumerians used to call them.

My fringe theory suggests that they were once again the Onogur who are very close relatives of Hungarians and Bulgarians. But they called them Annunaki.  These people in my opinion are the ancestors of British people, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Anatolian Turks, Azerbaijani Turks, Thracians, Trojans, Armenians (not the ones living in Armenia today) and Etruscans.

In the southern regions of the Bi-fluvial between the rivers Tiger and Euphrates in the 5th-3rd millenniums BC was located the country of Shumers/Sumers (see map). By the I.M.Diyakonov's data [BSE, 3 rev., vol. 29, 517], the country before the end of the 3rd millennium up BC was settled mostly by the Sumerians and to a lesser degree, by eastern Semites-Akkadians who managed to take control in their hands, and from the middle of the 3rd millennium BC country began to be called "Sumer and Akkad". In the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC there emerged the state Babylonia, which preserved its independence unill the 6th century BC. The Babylonians had to repulse repeatedly the attacks of the Kassites, Assyrians and Elamites, who nevertheless mixed up with the local Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians. In that boiling pot the Sumerian language, apparently, had assimilated. But the samples of the original language remained in their cuneiform texts. The cuneiform writing of the Sumerians was then accepted and developed by the Akkadians, Elamites, Hurrites, Hetto-Luvians and Urartians.
The Sumerian system of the cuneiform writing was deciphered by a number of the scientists at the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th centuries. And precisely this deciphered from the cuneiform writings Sumer language turned out to be rich with the Türkic lexicon.
With the a hope to reveal their ancient ancestors the Sumerian language initially was studied by the Indo-Europeans, who searched for parallels and similarities to their languages. Among them was F.Hommel who in the Sumerian texts found 200 words coinciding with Türkic words [Hommel F. , 1915], for which he was laughed at and satirized.
A Russian scientist I.M.Diyakonov has devoted a lot of time to the study and decoding of the Sumerian texts. He could not even imagine an idea about any affinity of the Sumerian language with Türkic. Comparing the Sumerian words with the Indo-European, he does not find a single case of coincidence and comes to a conclusion, that the poor Sumerian language was isolated from the others [Diyakonov I.M., 1954, 84]. Generally, this conclusion is strange from the scientists viewpoint, for on the globe there are no and can not be isolated languages.
In the book of I.M.Diyakonov, who happened to have no clue about the affinity of the Sumerian and Türkic languages, Olyas Suleymenov observed 60 Sumerian words similar to the Türkic words: ada "father", ama "mother", tu "to give birth", ere "man", "soldier", ugu "arrow", tag "fasten", zag "side", bilga "wise, ancestor", me "I", ze "you", ane "here, now", gud "bull", gash "bird", kir "dirt, soil", ush "three", u "ten", ken "wide", uzuk "long", tush "descend", ud "fire", udun "tree, firewood", dingir "god, sky", tengir "god, sky", etc. O.Suleymenov [Suleymenov О., 1975, 230-242] subjects each word to research, proves the Sumero-Türkic concurrences and comes to a conclusion that:
a) convergences are systematic, so they are real;
b) Sumerian and Türkic languages influenced each other for many years ;
c) These languages are not related genetically, but as a result of the cultural influences.
Turkish scientist Osman Nedim Tuna consistently studied Sumero-Türkic parallels since 1947. n the international congresses, The results of his research he presented in international congresses, he repeatedly consulted with many experts, and only after that has decided in 1990 to publish a special book, where he attempts to define the age of the Türkic language, based on the Sumero-Türkic parallels. In this book O.N.Tuna relays the comparative-historical study of the 168 Sumerian words, locating their roots in the Ancient Türkic language, he studies the phonetic and grammatical features of both languages. The scientist comes to a conclusion that so far the sufficient proofs are absent to state a genetic relationship between Sumerian and Türkic languages, the found material up untill now only proves that these languages for a long time mutually influenced each other very strongly [Tuna O.N., 1990, 49].
O.N.Tuna suggests that the Türkic language 5,500 years b.p. already had a logically developed by its carriers phonetical set and grammatic system. Allowing another 5500 years before that for the development of this system, the age of the Türkic language appears to be 11 thousand years. As to time of the recording of the Türkic language in writing (Sumerian cuneiform writing), it was 8,000-8,500 years ago [Tuna O.N., 1990, 49].
In the scientists literature remain so far without the answers the questions about where the Sumerians received the strong influence of the Türks: before their arrival in the Mesopotamia, or there next to them lived Türkic tribes, maybe Sumerians were once Türks, but in the 4th-3rd millenniums BC they experienced a period of assimilation among the Semite-speaking Akkadians.

I have seen a couple of semi-intelligent ideas about these laws. Some popele told me that Turks did not live in Anatolia back then... Well... These prove the opposite. Come again.

Then I have heard about why not many people are aware of these laws. Maybe they don't want others to learn that they spent their lives for nothing. I don't know. Maybe they have a secret hatred against Turks and they don't want Turkic to become a prestigious language? How can I know?

 

[Areze]

Plus, even if they look similar, do they sound similar? He provides no pronunciation guide (assuming pronunciation is even available for Sumerian words).

And even if they look and sound the same, this can only prove that they are linked in some way. Is this because Turkic language spawned Sumerian? Possibly. Or is it because Sumerian language spawned Turkic? Also possible. Or is it because a descendant language of Sumerian ended up contributing some words to Turkic languages? Also entirely possible.

So even assuming he is right and there is a link, it doesn't necessarily mean that he is anything more than the tinfoil conspiracy nutter that we know him to be. It doesn't mean he isn't still completely wrong.

something something stopped clocks

 

[Anarion]

Tuna's explanations are all over the place, they just lack any consistency. According to him, word initial y or Ø became Sumerian d in some cases, g in others and n or s in yet others! Apparently the Sumerians liked to switch around the consonants when they were borrowing Turkic words just for the fun of it.

And they all appear in similar environments, between all kinds of vowels and with different consonants. It's like that for all the examples. The laws ought to look like this:"X>Y if N", but they look like this: "X>Y" with no further explanation. Looks like he just took words that looked kind of similar and made "laws" around that without testing them.

Relevant.

There was also a Swede, Andreas Kempe, who less than seriously proposed that God spoke Swedish in paradise while Adam spoke Danish. Satan of course spoke French in order to seduce Eve.

 

[Mage246]

Do not pretend that this halfwit's theories present even the appearance of internal consistency. They are entirely base on the cherry-picking of isolated evidence. As though simple coincidence had the force of law.

 

[ancalimon]

Tuna's explanations are all over the place, they just lack any consistency. According to him, word initial y or Ø became Sumerian d in some cases, g in others and n or s in yet others! Apparently the Sumerians liked to switch around the consonants when they were borrowing Turkic words just for the fun of it.

And they all appear in similar environments, between all kinds of vowels and with different consonants. It's like that for all the examples. The laws ought to look like this:"X>Y if N", but they look like this: "X>Y" with no further explanation. Looks like he just took words that looked kind of similar and made "laws" around that without testing them.

Relevant.

There was also a Swede, Andreas Kempe, who less than seriously proposed that God spoke Swedish in paradise while Adam spoke Danish. Satan of course spoke French in order to seduce Eve.

They are accepted as impeccable. Linguistically they are consistent. The words he chose are loan words into Sumerian that are not like the other Sumerian words. That's how linguists concluded that Sanskrit is related with most of the languages spoken in Europe. The only difference is that there are much more regular sound correspondence laws between Sumerian and Turkic. (more than 3 or 4). So if this model is wrong, than there is also no Indo European languages theory as well.

It's not understandable why you are making such a fuss about this. Why must he be wrong? Did he use regular sound correspondence method to determine that God spoke Swedish? What is the logic which led to you comparing Osman Nedim Tuna's work with that Swede? Can you show us his method?

About different letters becoming different letters when words are taken into another language...  That is what actually happens.

When station, stop and scala are loaned into Turkish, they gain an initial "i" making them istasyon and istop and iskele. Sometimes words starting with L gained an initial i. ilimon (although limon is more widely used).

For example there are some between Hungarian Finnish.

In case of Sum - Tur here are all of the accepted laws: (I'm not writing down the laws that weren't accepted yet but I'm sure they would have been accepted since Tuna's first work was found impeccable. He was very fond of his work)

Sum D  - Tur y, Ø
Sum g  - Tur Ø, y
Sum M  - Tur K
Sum n  - Tur y
Sum S  - Tur y, Ø
Sum Ş  - Tur ç
Sum u  - Tur kV, a
Sum d/  - Tur d/
Sum d/, - Tur d/,
Sum VmV - Tur VKV
Sum r/ - Tur z/
Sum ş/ - Tur l/
Sum ae - Tur An
Sum g - Tur n
Sum m - Tur K
Sum CVr/z - Tur Cr/çV

Let's assume that what you claim is meaningful and there shouldn't be instance of a letter becoming x in one example and y in another example.  So let's mark in red and remove them to see if there are at least 3 or 4 correspondences. As a rule if there are 3 or 4 correspondences, those 2 languages are at least aware of each other.

It looks like we have a winner.  there are at least 4 correspondences even after we implemented the "Urgrevling's fun law of Sumerian preferences" into the regular sound correspondence method. Congratulations for your contribution to our knowledge about Sumerian entertainment.