A Portugese Question

A. G. Maisey · 26th July 2006, 08:25 AM

In a recent thread we were talking about a particular type of Indonesian dagger.

I supplied the name by which I knew it:- sangkuh

Then Pak Boedhi mentioned that sangkuh reminded him of sangkur, which means bayonet.

Checks revealed that sangkur and sangkuh mean the same thing.

My memory tells me that "sangue" is Portugese for "blood".

Early European contact in the Indonesian Archipelago was with the Portugese.

Does anybody have access to knowledge of Portugese as spoken in the 16th-17th centuries?

It would not surprise me if we have a "sang---" word in there somewhere that is the root of our sangkuh and sangkur.

Or maybe we`ve just got a corruption of a Portugese word.

fernando · 26th July 2006, 08:50 PM

That is a very long shot.
Sangue is indeed Portuguese for blood, a Latin based term, and the pattern one ever used. But what made you think Sangkur is a Portuguese influenced term ? Would then the "Kur" or "Kuh" be a malay sufix or the like ? I dont see it fitting on the Portuguese style, even if old or corrupted, i would advance. However checking the Web on the Malay sources it seems like Sangkur, malay for dagger or the like ( bayonet is later galicism ) is a "noun", a propper name for the object, and apparently not derived from a "borrowed
or "composed" term.
Have you some starting track on a different direction ? If so please tell, and i will double check on the Portuguese corruption possibility.
... if nobody more schooled on the subject pops out.
fernando

A. G. Maisey · 26th July 2006, 11:25 PM

Thanks for your response, Fernando.

Indonesian, which is a form of Malay, is my second language, and I can also handle Javanese passably.

"Sang" is not a root word in either Malay or Javanese. Certainly there are words in both languages that use "sang" as a part of the word; "sang" by itself is an honorific; "kur" and "kuh" are neither suffixes nor prefixes in either language.

Since the Portugese were the first Europeans into the region, it is possible that Javanese first encountered bayonets in the hands of Portugese people.

The Indonesian and Javanese words "sangkur" and "sangkuh" both mean "bayonet".

Sangkur, sangkuh, or any similar word does not occur in Old Javanese, which means it has been added to the Javanese language since about 1600.

In Portugese "sang" is a root word that is used to generate other words.This root word denotes some association with blood.

Bayonets by their very nature draw blood.

Yes, certainly I am drawing a long bow, and at the moment I am not of the opinion that "sangkuh" is Portugese generated , however logic seems to indicate that it could be a possibility, and without checking, we will never know.

If you have access to sources that will provide knowledge of 16th-17th century Portugese language usage, I would appreciate it if you could do a little checking. If you cannot do this fairly easily, don`t worry about it, I`ll go another route.

Incidentally, I`m not looking for corruption of a Portugese word, by Portugese, but rather a word that was in current usage in 16th-17th century Portugese, that could form the basis for a Javanese or Malay corruption.

Rick · 27th July 2006, 12:49 AM

Possibly we might look at the phonetic pronunciation .
If in the Portuguese pronunciation it is one syllable 'sang' there may be an argument for no relation; if on the other hand if the pronunciation is two syllables then there is good argument for the Portuguese root .

RSWORD · 27th July 2006, 03:12 AM

Of possibly interesting correlation is that in India there is a type of bayonet referred to as Sangin.

A. G. Maisey · 27th July 2006, 03:50 AM

Yes, this is true.

There is also the sang, a lance; the sanger, a spear; the sangu, a spear. These all from India, and an Indian connection was suggested earlier.

The Iban have a spear called a sangkoh.

However, in Italy one of the names for the cinquedea is "sangdede".

Certainly we cannot rule out some sort of Indian connection, but bearing in mind that this particular weapon is associated with firearms, it falls within a different period of influence within Jawa than those earlier weapons which can clearly be associated with contact from the sub-continent.

This question of the name is still open, and one possibility, although admittedly remote, is a Portugese connection.

26th July 2006, 08:25 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,706	A Portugese Question In a recent thread we were talking about a particular type of Indonesian dagger. I supplied the name by which I knew it:- sangkuh Then Pak Boedhi mentioned that sangkuh reminded him of sangkur, which means bayonet. Checks revealed that sangkur and sangkuh mean the same thing. My memory tells me that "sangue" is Portugese for "blood". Early European contact in the Indonesian Archipelago was with the Portugese. Does anybody have access to knowledge of Portugese as spoken in the 16th-17th centuries? It would not surprise me if we have a "sang---" word in there somewhere that is the root of our sangkuh and sangkur. Or maybe we`ve just got a corruption of a Portugese word.

26th July 2006, 08:50 PM	#2
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	That is a very long shot. Sangue is indeed Portuguese for blood, a Latin based term, and the pattern one ever used. But what made you think Sangkur is a Portuguese influenced term ? Would then the "Kur" or "Kuh" be a malay sufix or the like ? I dont see it fitting on the Portuguese style, even if old or corrupted, i would advance. However checking the Web on the Malay sources it seems like Sangkur, malay for dagger or the like ( bayonet is later galicism ) is a "noun", a propper name for the object, and apparently not derived from a "borrowed or "composed" term. Have you some starting track on a different direction ? If so please tell, and i will double check on the Portuguese corruption possibility. ... if nobody more schooled on the subject pops out. fernando Last edited by fernando; 26th July 2006 at 10:42 PM.

26th July 2006, 11:25 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,706	Thanks for your response, Fernando. Indonesian, which is a form of Malay, is my second language, and I can also handle Javanese passably. "Sang" is not a root word in either Malay or Javanese. Certainly there are words in both languages that use "sang" as a part of the word; "sang" by itself is an honorific; "kur" and "kuh" are neither suffixes nor prefixes in either language. Since the Portugese were the first Europeans into the region, it is possible that Javanese first encountered bayonets in the hands of Portugese people. The Indonesian and Javanese words "sangkur" and "sangkuh" both mean "bayonet". Sangkur, sangkuh, or any similar word does not occur in Old Javanese, which means it has been added to the Javanese language since about 1600. In Portugese "sang" is a root word that is used to generate other words.This root word denotes some association with blood. Bayonets by their very nature draw blood. Yes, certainly I am drawing a long bow, and at the moment I am not of the opinion that "sangkuh" is Portugese generated , however logic seems to indicate that it could be a possibility, and without checking, we will never know. If you have access to sources that will provide knowledge of 16th-17th century Portugese language usage, I would appreciate it if you could do a little checking. If you cannot do this fairly easily, don`t worry about it, I`ll go another route. Incidentally, I`m not looking for corruption of a Portugese word, by Portugese, but rather a word that was in current usage in 16th-17th century Portugese, that could form the basis for a Javanese or Malay corruption.

27th July 2006, 12:49 AM	#4
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,263	Possibly we might look at the phonetic pronunciation . If in the Portuguese pronunciation it is one syllable 'sang' there may be an argument for no relation; if on the other hand if the pronunciation is two syllables then there is good argument for the Portuguese root .

27th July 2006, 03:12 AM	#5
RSWORD Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,083	Of possibly interesting correlation is that in India there is a type of bayonet referred to as Sangin.

27th July 2006, 03:50 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,706	Yes, this is true. There is also the sang, a lance; the sanger, a spear; the sangu, a spear. These all from India, and an Indian connection was suggested earlier. The Iban have a spear called a sangkoh. However, in Italy one of the names for the cinquedea is "sangdede". Certainly we cannot rule out some sort of Indian connection, but bearing in mind that this particular weapon is associated with firearms, it falls within a different period of influence within Jawa than those earlier weapons which can clearly be associated with contact from the sub-continent. This question of the name is still open, and one possibility, although admittedly remote, is a Portugese connection.