Talk:Hunnic language

"Runic inscription from Syria"

@Mnkhprre: - why are you adding this here? There's nothing to suggest that a Runic inscription from Syria has anything to do with the language spoken by Attila's Huns. This is probably WP:SYNTH and WP:OR, not to mention WP:FRINGE.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

look, this inscription includes a commander name called "Κουρσίχ" in Greek. he was one of commander of Attila's eastern campaign. also it is a western branch of Siberian turkic language.

also look at;

https://medium.com/@ReporterOf/earliest-known-written-traces-of-the-western-hun-empire-in-syria-uncovered-during-excavations-by-192bb1fa98bd

https://www.academia.edu/39251975/Sura_Runic_Inscription Mnkhprre (talk) 15:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Neither of those are WP:RS.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

You're relying on someone who is a medical doctor .--Ermenrich (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Moreover, the actual RS you tried to add says nothing about Huns in the abstract and also dates the inscription to "between the 6th and 9th centuries". Kursich lived around 395. Attila died in 453. This inscription clearly has nothing to do with the Huns.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Hunnic Script? Türkic Script?

https://www.khm.at/en/artworks/bueste-der-armenischen-prinzessin-warazadukta-58352-1 under this link you can see a ring with 2 writing systems. One Latin the other one runic. The runic one is very probably Türk Script (Orkhun Runes). I have already deciphered it under: https://uzunbacakadem.blogspot.com/2020/01/romanseal-with-turkishrunes.html ~UzunbacakAdem Uzunbacak Adem 2003:F6:9740:72AB:B831:8896:AF7B:6422 (talk) 14:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

There are no examples of “Hunnic script.” This is WP:OR.—-Ermenrich (talk) 15:41, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Hunnic names in Maenchen-Helfen

@Ermenrich

Regarding my previous edit, I understand your point about the article being about the Hunnic language as opposed to the variety of languages that the Huns spoke. Because of that, the edit I made regarding Hyun Jun Kim's comments do not belong on the article. However, I think that what the article says about Maenchen-Helfen's The World of the Huns is inaccurate. Page 441 of The World of the Huns reads, "To judge by the tribal names, a great part of the Huns must have spoken a Turkish language...The personal names give a different picture." The author then lists a number of personal names used by the Huns, of varying origins, many Turkish, but a few also Germanic and Iranian.

The article in its current state makes the much stronger claim that "many tribal and proper names among the Huns appear to have originated in Turkic languages, indicating that the language was Turkic", which I don't explicitly see in Maenchen-Helfen. The pages cited there, 392-411, list a number of names which Maenchen-Helfen say are Hunnic names of Turkic origin, of which there are many. That does not, however, carry the much weightier claim that the Hunnic language was Turkic. In fact, the author is at least reluctant to posit that Hunnic names were largely Turkic. From page 405: "The number of Hun names which are certainly or most probably Turkish is small. But in view of the wild speculations and irresponsible etymologies still being expounded, to lay a narrow but firm basis for studying all the names seems preferable to dreamily wandering through dictionaries."

I can see how the claim that many Hunnic names were Turkic can be attributed to Maenchen-Helfen, but I can't see the much stronger claim that the Hunnic language was Turkic. If it is there, it would help to see a specific quote saying this. Could the article be changed to remove "indicating that the language was Turkic"? I'd also argue that the claim about names should be restricted to tribal names only. Truthnope (talk) 00:28, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Give me a little time to look through the book. I’m pretty certain M-H was in favor of Hunnic being Turkic though.—Ermenrich (talk) 11:50, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

I see you've already quoted the quote I was looking for. I think that's the important thing: To judge by the tribal names, a great part of the Huns must have spoken a Turkish language.... Later on, he states that The distribution of the Iranian and German or Germanized names is very instructive. No Germanic names occur among the non-Attilanic Huns. In any case, he seems to agree with a Turkic language as the original language.

I think the section could some rewriting for consistency and flow, but I don't think we should get caught up on individual name etymologies. Any thoughts?--Ermenrich (talk) 15:18, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Ah, okay, so you're saying that that part is about the Hunnic language as opposed to saying that the Huns spoke some other language that was Turkic. I see your point. Truthnope (talk) 16:52, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

KIMIZ

"The words medos, a beverage akin to mead, kamos, a barley drink,..." KIMIZ is a Türkic drink and corresponds 100% with kamos. ~UzunbacakAdem Uzunbacak Adem UzunbacakAdem (talk) 12:54, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

Kamos is made of barley, not mares milk. Furthermore, the ending -os on Kamos is a Greek grammatical ending - the root of the Hunnish word is just “kam-“. WP:RS do not connect the words.—-Ermenrich (talk) 13:30, 1 November 2025 (UTC)