Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/kümüĺ. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/kümüĺ, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/kümüĺ in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/kümüĺ you have here. The definition of the word Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/kümüĺ will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofReconstruction:Proto-Turkic/kümüĺ, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
According to traditional sources, ultimately of Chinese origin, most likely Early Middle Chinese金(kˠiɪm), possibly from an unattested Chinese nominal compound *金鐐 (kˠiɪmleu). However, this hypothetic compound would yield Proto-Turkic *kemle or *kümlü rather than *kümül, and would also mean "wealth", and not "silver" in Classical Chinese, which prompts Antonov and Jacques (2011) to reject this hypothesis and instead connect the word to Proto-Palaungic*kmuul, modern Khmu(kmuːl). They also connect it to a large number of cognates in Sino-Tibetan languages, such as Tibetanདངུལ(dngul).
Antonov-Jacques (2011) find Turkic traditional internal or external explanations for *kümüš unlikely, and add, quoted verbatim: "We have no way to determine which of these three hypotheses (referring to internal, external and Wanderwort hypotheses) is the correct one, though the first one seems considerably less likely. The etymon for 'silver' is not derivable in a straightforward manner from any known verbal or nominal root in either Turkic, Sino-Tibetan or Austroasiatic." They also add: "Since no internal etymology for the word 'silver' is available in either borrowing scenarios are equally possible, as is the possibility of both and Turkic having borrowed the word from an unknown language."
An internal Turkic etymology featuring a nominal derivation from Proto-Turkic *kün(“day, sun”) with a subsequent shift of the intevocalic /n/ to /m/ has been proposed too; compare the semantic extension in Proto-Indo-European *h₂r̥ǵn̥tóm(“silver”), derived from *h₂erǵ-(“white; glittering”), although Antonov-Jacques also refuse this explanation based on their findings, as summarized above.
1) Originally used only in pronominal declension. 2) The original instrumental, equative, similative, and comitative cases have fallen into disuse in many modern Turkic languages. 3) Plurality in Proto-Turkic is disputed. See also the notes on the Proto-Turkic/Locative-ablative case and plurality page on Wikibooks.
^ Antonov, Anton, Jacques, Guillaume (2011) “Turkic kümüš ’silver’ and the lambdaism vs sigmatism debate”, in Turkic languages, volume 15, number 2, page 5 of 151-170
↑ 2.02.12.2Antonov, A. & Jacques, G., 2011. Turkic kümüš 'silver' and the lambdaism vs sigmatism debate.
^ Bonmann, Svenja, Fries, Simon (2025) “Linguistic Evidence Suggests That Xiōng-nú and Huns Spoke the Same Paleo-Siberian Language”, in Transactions of the Philological Society, volume 0, →DOI, page 9, 11-12 of 1-24
^ Joki, Aulis J. 1952. Die Lehnworter des Sajan-Samojedischen. nº 103 Dans Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne. Helsinki: Suomalais-ugrilainen Seur, page 2010
^ Räsänen, Martti (1969) Versuch eines etymologischen Wörterbuchs der Türksprachen (in German), Helsinki: Suomalais-ugrilainen seura, page 308b
^ Cincius, V. I. & Bugaeva T. G. 1979. K etimologii nazvanij metallov i ix splavov v altajskix jazykax. Issledovanija v oblasti etimologii altajskix jazykov. Leningrad:Nauka.
^ Dybo, A. V. 2007. Lingvističeskije kontakty rannix tjurkov: leksičeskij fond: pratjurkskij period. RAN, Institut jazykoznanija, Moskva
^ Antonov, Anton, Jacques, Guillaume (2011) “Turkic kümüš ’silver’ and the lambdaism vs sigmatism debate”, in Turkic languages, volume 15, number 2, page 21 of 151-170
^ Volker, Rybatzki (1994) “Bemerkungen zur turkischen und mongolischen Metallterminologie”, in Dans Studia Orientalia, volume 73, pages 193-251