mr OnurAccording to Gamkrelidze&Ivanonv “eker” and “ketshi” are indo-european/semitic common words.You know that auucirltgre and animal domestication was “discovered” in the fertile crescent area (and also metallurgy first appeared in Anatolia)and thus the words connected with auucirltgre, metal and husbandry diffused to central Asia either by demic or/and by cultural diffusion as wandeworts.The words “ek,ekmek,eker”=to sow are connected with proto Semitic “akar” (field) proto Indo-European “agr” (field) and also Sumerian “agar” (field)=>indirect loanwords ie wanderworts.Same the word “ketshi” also do descend (still according to Gamkrelidze&Ivanonv) from proto indo-european “ghaid” which itself is a “loanword” from proto Afro-Asiatic “gayd”(goat, kid)I know that “din” is an Arabic “loanword” I spoke about old Persian “dena” (religion) which is not explainable by iranic etymology but has Semitic etymology and connected derivative words such as “dayna, daynu, dayn” from ps “dyn”=rule, justice.Turkish “kam” cames from indo-iranian “shrama”=self hurt (Sogdian “shaman”, Sanskrit “shraman”)As for Turkish “tshelik” (the other words for metals in Turkish are also “loanwords” like “kalay”, “kurshun”, “bakir”,”guemuesh” and that’s normal cause metallurgy “urheimat” is Anatolia and not eastern Siberia…) I think that here too we should look for an Anatolian origined “wanderwort” and an etymology from a language of that area (ie Anatolia, Caucasus and Western Asia as a whole) for the obvious reasons I explained (ie eastern Siberia recieved metallurgy from Anatolia) and the Turkic etymology does not look convincing (ie from “tshel”=to hit)+the Turkish words that start with “tsh” many times end up being “loanwords” as if proto Turkic forms could not start with “tsh”.So I have a (personal) speculation/proposition that it’s connected with Persian “tshiling”(an iron tool) or Arabic “silk” (wire) [the "tsh" form could be explained by a loan from Aramaic]mr Aaron:That blue (if it’s the same dark blue showed in Behar’s study)is too old (its genesis is very old) to fit with bronze age proto indo-europeans who have a language that contained words for both auucirltgre&metallurgy while the dark blue appears as a very old component that had its genesis by paleolithic times and thus it should be a primitive basic language consisting of some hundred of monosyllabic onomatopeic sounds and that’s why this language was completly submerged by the advancing anatolian farmers (light blue component=>languages such as khattic, pelasgian, vasco-aquitano-iberian…) and then by the bronze age indo-european “warriors”And according to some linguists (I forget his name but it could be Kalevi Wiik?) traces of this very old language could only be found in some substrate words amongst some isolated Saami groups.