Is the fact that Finnish, Hungarian, and similar languages ​​belong to the Ural-Altaic language family a scientific explanation, or a political or emotional one?

By sheer luck, our universe is deterministic.

However, at the quantum level, or when the fundamental assumptions of physics converge to zero or infinity, the principle of determinism becomes blurred. But this is not a problem for our subject.

All the genes, races, and rock formations that exist in your time have a predecessor.

And those also have a predecessor. There is a continuity that you can trace backward.

You can make this generalization for every physical object that exists today.

Obviously, while it is possible to trace the common ancestors of humankind, the oldest mother, the oldest father, back to a specific region of Africa, it is not natural to think that races and languages are separate from this.

Just as species have a phylogenetic family tree, it is possible to trace the historical family tree of races, languages, and many sociological events.

Of course, it is most natural to conduct this study through the similarities, differences, and chronologies of contemporary and historical data.

Many claim that certain nations and languages do not share a common ancestor, but are entirely local and autochthonous, either because they cannot trace their origins or because they are unwilling to conduct further research for emotional reasons.

The Basques and Etruscans are given as examples.

They are described as if they appeared there from absolute nothingness, without a prior existence, by divine powers.

You speak as if the Finns and their linguistic neighbors, like Estonians and Hungarians, have no common ancestor.

As if they suddenly appeared in the middle of Europe like mushrooms.

Yet you know that whether you are blonde or blueeyed, you are not separated from Lucy, your representative black mother who appeared in Africa.

And it is very clear that you think of your blondness, red hair, and colored eyes as a cultural heritage that needs to be preserved.

It is heartbreaking that you have racial, cultural, genetic, and linguistic similarities with these impure nations.

It is very clear that you are stretching and bending basic scientific data so desperately.

Yes, languages, just like genomes, sometimes become isolated, diverge, and differentiate over long periods, and sometimes, like diverging genomes, they mix and become similar.

We can liken the similarity of languages originating from different branches of the language tree, resulting from their longterm association, to CONVERGENT EVOLUTION in the evolution of species. I have no objection to that.

However, despite everything, we can only understand CONVERGENT EVOLUTION and the species whose similarities stem from it.

We would never place a dolphin in the same phylogenetic tree as a shark.

Or we dont think bats are related to birds simply because they fly.

Or, we dont think dolphins and fish belong in the same species tree simply because their body shapes are very similar.

The same applies to languages.

Simply word similarities are meaningless.

The rules of word derivation must also be similar.

The most basic words, those from the earliest times of humanity, must be similar.

Look, in Turkish, these words often consist of two or three letters.

These are the most basic, oldest root words.

Word similarities should be sought based on whether these words are derived from suffixes and according to vowel harmony rules (major and minor). Only then will these word similarities be meaningful.

Here is an example list of root words in Turkish:

Noun Roots: Turkish and English means

Ad: İsim. (Name.)

Ak: Beyaz. (White.)

Al: Kırmızı (veya almak fiil kökü). (Red (or the verb root to take).)

Ay: Gök cismi. (Celestial body.)

Az: Miktar belirteci. (Quantity indicator.)

El: Organ (veya yabancı anlamında). (Organ (or in the sense of foreign).)

En: Genişlik. (Width.)

Er: Erkek, asker. (Male, soldier.)

Eş: Benzer, partner. (Similar, partner.)

Ev: Barınak. (Shelter.)

İç: Dahili kısım (veya içmek fiil kökü). (Internal part (or the verb root to drink).)

İl: Şehir, memleket. (City, homeland.)

İp: Sicim. (String.)

İş: Eylem, çalışma. (Action, labor.)

İz: Belirti. (Indication.)

Ok: Silah. (Weapon.)

On: Sayı. (Number.)

Ot: Bitki. (Plant.)

Öç: İntikam. (Vengeance.)

Ön: Taraf. (Side.)

Öz: Kendi, asıl. (Self, original.)

Uç: Kenar, nihayet. (Edge, end.)

Un: Öğütülmüş tahıl. (Ground grain.)

Us: Akıl. (Intellect.)

Üç: Sayı. (Number.)

Ün: Şöhret, ses. (Reputation, reputation.)

Fiil Kökleri (Verb Roots)

Aç: Bir şeyi açık hale getirmek. (To make something clear.)

Ak: Sıvının hareketi. (Movement of liquid.)

Al: Bir şeyi yanına almak. (To take something with you.)

An: Hatırlamak. (To remember.)

As: Bir yere iliştirmek. (To attach to a place.)

Aş: Geçmek. (To pass.)

At: Fırlatmak. (To throw.)

Ek: Tohum serpmek. (To sow seeds.)

Er: Ulaşmak. (To reach.)

Es: Rüzgarın hareketi. (The movement of the wind.)

Et: Yapmak. (To make.)

İç: Sıvı tüketmek. (To consume liquid.)

İn: Aşağı gelmek. (To come down.)

İt: Güç uygulamak. (To apply force.)

Ol: Meydana gelmek. (To occur.)

Öl: Hayatın sona ermesi. (The end of life.)

Öp: Öpmek. (To kiss.)

Ör: Dokumak. (To weave.)

Uç: Havada ilerlemek. (To move in the air.)

Ur: Vurmak (Eski Türkçe). (To strike (Old Turkish).)

Uy: Mutabık kalmak. (To agree.)

Ür: Üflemek veya bağırmak. (To blow or shout.)

Üt: Yakmak veya oyunda kazanmak. (To burn or win in a game.)

Üz: Kederlendirmek. (To sadden.)

Zamirler ve Diğerleri (Pronouns and Others)

Bu / Şu / O: This/That İşaret zamirleri. (Demonstrative pronouns.)

Secondly, grammatical similarities should be investigated.

I have prepared a sample study for you.

Common Structural Features of Turkic Languages

The Turkic languages (Turkish, Azerbaijani, Turkmen, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, Uyghur, Tatar, and others) share a common linguistic heritage. Although they have diverged over centuries, they still retain many similarities in grammar, word formation, syntax, and core vocabulary.

1. Shared Grammatical Features

2. Shared Word Formation Patterns

Turkic languages are highly productive in creating new words through suffixation.

3. Shared Sentence Structure

The canonical sentence pattern across Turkic languages is:Subject + Object + Verb (SOV)

Unlike English, the verb normally appears at the end of the sentence.

4. Shared Pronouns

One notable feature is the absence of gender distinctions in thirdperson pronouns.

5. Numerals Comparison

Many of these numerals have remained recognizable since the ProtoTurkic period more than a millennium ago.

6. Shared Possessive System

Possession is expressed through suffixes attached directly to the noun rather than separate possessive words.

7. Typical Agglutinative Structure

A single Turkic word may contain several grammatical elements.

Example from Turkish:

Evlerinizden

— ev + ler + iniz + den*

Meaning: from your houses.

Equivalent constructions exist throughout the Turkic language family.

8. Why Turkic Languages Resemble One Another

Approximate Similarity to Modern Turkish

Summary

From a typological perspective, Turkic languages constitute one of the worlds most structurally coherent language families. Their shared agglutinative morphology, vowel harmony, SOV syntax, possessive systems, case marking, and substantial common vocabulary create a degree of similarity that often allows speakers of different Turkic languages to recognize grammatical patterns even when mutual intelligibility is limited.

Comparative Typology of Major Language Families

Important note: Linguistic similarity can be measured in two different ways:

1. Genetic relationship (languages descended from a common ancestor).

2. Typological similarity (languages sharing similar grammatical structures regardless of ancestry).

For example, English and Russian are genetically related (both are IndoEuropean), but they differ significantly in structure. Turkish and Japanese are not genetically related, yet they share several typological features.

1. Comparison of Major Language Families

2. Word Formation Strategies

The way languages create new words varies considerably.

Example: Teacher

3. Sentence Structure Comparison

Example sentence:

I read the book.

Dominant Word Orders

Flexible Slavic and some IndoEuropean branches

4. Morphological Types

Linguists commonly classify languages into four major morphological types.

Example: from our houses

5. Structural Similarity Clusters

When grouped by grammatical structure rather than ancestry:

6. Comparison with Turkic Languages

The following ranking reflects structural similarity, not genetic relationship.

7. Summary Table

Key Observation

From a purely typological perspective, Turkish shares more structural features with Japanese, Korean, Finnish, Hungarian, and Tamil than with English, Arabic, or Chinese, despite having no generally accepted close genetic relationship with those languages. The strongest shared features are:

— Agglutinative morphology

— Predominantly SOV word order

— Extensive suffixation

— Limited or absent grammatical gender

— Rich systems of case marking and verbal morphology

These features create remarkably similar grammatical logic across otherwise unrelated language families.