Viking runes come from Turkic runes?

[Proto-Shaman]

So you believe that even reconstruction of those European languages are nonsenses?

Most of these reconstructions are also found in Basque and Turkic. Celtics, Germanics, Basques, Turkics, Finno-Ugrics and Burusho share their actual common ancestor. Romanics, Slavics, Indo-Iranics, Semitics share their common ancestor. Bernard Sergent tried to solve this riddle several years ago by stating that IE's were very close to Hamito-Semitics in every manner, 10.000 years ago.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Most of these reconstructions are also found in Basque and Turkic.

So what are similarities (in phonology, lexicon or even morphology) of some IE language with Turkic, or Basque?

Romanics, Slavics, Indo-Iranics, Semitics share their common ancestor.

Romanics share their common ancestor with Germanic and Celtic. They're grouped in Centum group. While Baltic, Slavic, Albanian, Indo-Iranian form Satem. But it doesn't disprove the existence of proto-IE language (culture) in any direction.

[Proto-Shaman]

So what are similarities (in phonology, lexicon or even morphology) of some IE language with Turkic, or Basque?

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/ar.../t-138677.html

According to Russian linguists, phonostatistically Basque is most closest to Turkic, Kazakh being 1st.

Romanics share their common ancestor with Germanic and Celtic. They're grouped in Centum group. While Baltic, Slavic, Albanian, Indo-Iranian form Satem. But it doesn't disprove the existence of proto-IE language (culture) in any direction.

Celtic can't be regarded as IE, since it is agglutinative and very close to Turkic. It has undergone a strong IE influence over millennia. Germanic substrate theory suggest that 40% of Germanic lexica is of non-Indo-European origin. Satem and Centum also doesn't make sense if you include Turkic, because Turkic has both forms. Romanics are basically IE'ized Celto-Germanics and Scythians/Huns.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/ar.../t-138677.html

According to Russian linguists, phonostatistically Basque is most closest to Turkic, Kazakh being 1st.

Yes, there are such theories. But there are IE languages that doesn't show any non-IE characteristics. For example, proto-Balto-Slavic, or if you want modern, look at modern Lithuanian (Latvian have Finno-Ugric influence), since ancestors of Lithuanians were on the outskirts of Europe and preserved archaic characteristics, while Slavic is more innovative, and have some Iranic (from Sarmatians), Turkic (from Avars) and Germanic (from Goths) loanwords. I understand that Celtic didn't have "recent" loanwords from Turkic, and that it's native to Celts, but indeed, the reconstruction of Celtic is leading us to proto IE, although the language is agglutinative indeed.

[Proto-Shaman]

Yes, there are such theories. But there are IE languages that doesn't show any non-IE characteristics. For example, proto-Balto-Slavic, or if you want modern, look at modern Lithuanian (Latvian have Finno-Ugric influence), since ancestors of Lithuanians were on the outskirts of Europe and preserved archaic characteristics, while Slavic is more innovative, and have some Iranic (from Sarmatians), Turkic (from Avars) and Germanic (from Goths) loanwords.

At least Baltic has a Turkic substratum as well: http://twesco.org/en/news/byli_li_latyshi_tyurkami_/

I understand that Celtic didn't have "recent" loanwords from Turkic, and that it's native to Celts, but indeed, the reconstruction of Celtic is leading us to proto IE, although the language is agglutinative indeed.

Celtic may have belonged originally to the Turanian branch: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index...cle/view/40945

Another interesting study concerning Basque and Celtic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...f/pq010244.pdf

"Bodmer (32) suggested that the Celtic populations of Britain trace their origins to an early settlement of the British Isles by Paleolithic Europeans, rather than by a later migration associated with the spread of the Celtic culture from central Europe in the first millennium B.C. (27). The results given here support this view, with the British sample grouping closely with the Basque—a presumed remnant of the pre-Neolithic European population (33); both populations show similarly high frequencies of the M173 haplotype."