Introduction

Herewith I present the fourth and last part of my "Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian" (EDH), three parts of which with over 1000 pages have already been published in the last months. In the following, I will deal with the genetical relationship of Sumerian-Hungarian with the Indo-European (IE) languages. As it was already proved in EDH-1 to EDH-3, Sumerian survived not only in Hungarian, but in a few dozens of language families with several languages all around the world. Therefore, it is to assume that Sumerian is still present also in the IE languages. In order not to confuse more than necessary the sound-equations, I will give basically examples of Sanskrit, Old Greek, Latin and, instead of Gothic, German and English words that are related to Sumerian-Hungarian words. Since Linus Brunner had already proved in 1969 that at least 1030 roots are common in the IE and the Semitic languages, I will also show word equations from Akkadian, Hebrew, Arabic, and other languages in order to show the genetical relationship between Sumerian, IE and Semitic, that includes, of course, the relationship of the Finno-Ugric languages (FU), too.

The Hungarian-Latin examples are taken from the book by Szabédi, who has given extensive soundlaws to prove that, according to him, the FU languages belong to the IE language family. Later attempts to prove the genetical relationship between FU and IE languages include works of Björn Collinder and Jochem Schindler, who did not, however, refer to Szabédi's thorough study. Here, I will show, that this relationship elaborated by Szabédi is only due to the bigger relationship of FU, IE (and Semitic) with Sumerian. I would like to remember that the Sumerian-Hungarian language relationship has already been proved by Gostony (1975) and in EDH-1, chapter 5. Since Szabédi has no word list, I have given all references to his book. Because Szabédi deals amongst the IE languages only with Latin, I have given from Walde and Hofmann (1938-56), Hofmann (1950) and Kluge (2000) all Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, German and English cognates. The Semitic examples are taken from Brunner (1969). I would like to point out again, that all these reference works are based strictly on sound-laws. And like in the former chapters of EDH, I compare here not two, but always more than two languages with one another, since the intersection set of common cognates of several languages excludes change much more than the intersection set of only two languages.