Philip Newton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 15:16, R A Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
>>> On 30 March 2010 23:03, Douglas Koller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>> It's interesting that I saw a lizard, monitor in form, but with a tongue
>>>> like a chameleon.
>>>> Me, I saw Greeks and/or Turks, which I suppose could be expanded to
>>>> "foreigner", "alien", "outsider", "barbarian"?
>>> While I can understand Turkish, and the Basque idea made sense, I can't
>>> understand thinking it could be Greek.
>> Nor could I.
> I interpreted Kou's comment as "When I saw the word 'egorigok', I
> thought it might mean 'Greeks' and/or 'Turks'" -- not that he thought
> it was a Greek or Turkish word.

Yes, on reflexion, I think you're probably right.  My 
apologies to Kou.

> Compare Charlie's "I saw a lizard" -- unless you also interpret his
> comment as "I thought that word was a word of lizard-language" rather
> than "I thought that word referred to a lizard"?
Well, you can never too certain on this list. It wouldn't 
surprise me that someone has constructed "intelligent lizard 
speak" - indeed, it would surprise more to find that no one 
had!  But I take your point; Charlie meant the word 
suggested to him some kind of lizard.

> And I can see how you could get from "egorigok" to "Greek" -- the
> consonants are all there. (I don't know how you would get "Turk" from
> it, though.)

I can't see the Turks either. It's interesting that Kou saw 
Greek_s_ or Turk_s_, i.e. he felt the word to be plural. 
Thinks: isn't -k a plural marker in Hungarian? Or have I 

Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.