Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Row over Danish cartoons depicting Muhammad with bomb

Religion Islam Cartoons of Muhammad

  • Please log in to reply
267 replies to this topic

#241 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 03:05 PM

Linguistic and cultural categories encompassing more than one specific language or culture are sometimes named after one of the examples within the category, with an "ic" attached at the end. For example, the category including German is Germanic, and it also includes other Germanic languages/cultures that aren't German, like Swedish, Danish, Dutch, and English. And the languages and cultures of today that come from the ancient Roman are called "Roman" with an "ic" (and also a "t"): "Romantic". And the Spanish/Portuguese-derived ones in particular are named for Rome's name for Spain and Portugal: "Hispan-ic". And the ancient Greeks, whose name for themselves was something like "Hella" or "Hellen", were a member of the category called "Hellenic", which also included Macedonia, Minos, Crete, and such. And "Slavic" includes the people called "Slavs" and some others who aren't Slavs, like the Russians.

It doesn't always work that way. In ancient times, the Romans were just one member of a family now called "Italic", which also included the Etruscans who dominated the Romans for a while, but there doesn't seem to have been an "Ital" tribe. And "Galic" applies to Celts in general even though there wasn't one group called "Gal" and not others. Nearly ALL Celtic people and locations occupied by Celts in the ancient world were called by a name based on "Gal", not just one particular subgroup or place.

Anyway, Jews are Semites, so the cultural/linguistic category including them is Semitic and includes non-Jews. Most Semitic languages and dialects are/were actually found in Ethiopia or Egypt. So you could see "anti-Semitic" as referring to somebody who hates the whole category, not just the Jews. But there's another way you could describe where that word comes from. Someone who hates Jews is an anti-Semite. There's no "ic", so it's not the category we're talking about here, but just the Semites alone, the Jews. But then what do you do if you want to make an adjective out of "anti-Semite"? You get "anti-Semitic". So there are two ways you could get to the same word, and each would carry a different meaning.

Those who say that the usual way "anti-Semitic" is used is wrong are seeing it as based on "Semitic" rather than "anti-Semite". But I say they're wrong because that's not where the word "anti-Semitic" really came from or how it was derived... or how it's used... and the definition they're insisting is "right", hatred of all Semitic people rather than just the Semites, describes something that doesn't exist so there's no need for such a word. What they're basicly doing is getting stuck on a superficial coincidence, that the adjective form of "anti-Semite" happens to resemble the categorical term "Semitic" despite being unrelated to it in derivation or use.

Edited by Delvo, 16 February 2006 - 10:28 PM.


#242 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 03:12 PM

Interesting.  I just read that Moscow cancelled its first ever Gay Pride Parade, in large part because

Quote

The Chief Mufti of Russia's Central Spiritual Governance for Muslims, Talgat Tajuddin, promised massive, violent protests if gays and lesbians marched in Moscow.

“Muslims’ protests can be even worse than these notorious rallies abroad over the scandalous cartoons,” Tajuddin said Tuesday. If they still come out into the streets, then they should be bashed.

Edited by _ph, 16 February 2006 - 03:14 PM.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#243 Schmokie_Dragon

Schmokie_Dragon

    Crazy Fish Lady

  • Islander
  • 1,226 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 03:44 PM

MHO on the "fundamentalist vs Islam" debate:

Islam is both moderate and radical. In the Qur'an it is both for killing and against. Therefore people who cry for blood are just as much following Islam as those who do not. Its all dependant on interpretation and access.

And yes, the problem is with those fundamentalists who chose to disregard to peaceful aspects of Islam and follow a violent religion. But as _ph said, it is the duty of the moderates to either shout louder than the radicals or bring them down a peg or two. If they refuse to do so, then they are just as much responsible for the radicalisation of the religion as the radicals themselves. I would not watch someone who was a part of my 'family' preach death and destruction without having a word. Same goes for those within Islam.

And is the religion the original intention or the current practice. Both. But the problem we have is with current interpretation and practice. I think it is slightly missing the point (that there is a problem with modern practice in some areas) to start getting lost in 'is it practice or origin' debates. Just MHO.

But yes, the biggest problem is more then radicals of the religion. It is those radicals seeking power over holiness. Those who use their religion in the political sphere, making it less of a choice and more of a law. This may just be my modern wester opinion but I dont feel a religion is valid unless people truly believe it through education and choice, rather than coercion, be it within the family or politicaly.
Posted Image

#244 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 04:21 PM

View Postveganmom, on Feb 16 2006, 02:16 PM, said:

And, sorry for the DUH moment  :blush: , QT, but can you clarify "antisemitism" vs. "antiJewishism?" My DUH moment, not yours. I could look it up, but I like your opinions better!!! Does it have to do with anti-Zionism?

And how many different words do we have to have to define hatred of a particular people? It's like Eskimos and snow.  :crazy:

NOT NOT saying you're not right to make the distinction. Just being dumb.

No, Cardie has the right of it.  The term Semite includes the palestinians who also lived in the region - so the phrase is slightly inaccurate.  Of course, that's in dispute now, so stay tuned... ;)

View PostCardie, on Feb 16 2006, 02:48 PM, said:

^^Although "antisemitism" has long been the accepted term for those who are prejudiced against Jews, Arabs (but not all Muslims) are just as much Semites as were the original Hebrews who lived in the biblical land of Israel.  Given how much non-Semitic DNA has drifted into the contemporary Jewish gene pool, the whole reference to antisemitism ought to be retired, but it hasn't been.

Cardie

Yep.  That's what I wanted to say.  The discrimination is against people who are Jewish, including European Jews.  

View PostDelvo, on Feb 16 2006, 03:05 PM, said:

Anyway, Jews are Semites, so the cultural/linguistic category including them is Semitic and includes non-Jews. Most Semitic languages and dialects are/were actually found in Ethiopia or Egypt. So you could see "anti-Semitic" as referring to somebody who hates the whole category, not just the Jews. But there's another way you could describe where that word comes from. Someone who hates Jews is an anti-Semite. There's no "ic", so it's not the category we're talking about here, but just the Semites alone, the Jews. But then what do you do if you want to make an adjective out of "anti-Semite"? You get "anti-Semitic". So there are two ways you could get to the same word, and each would carry a different meaning.

Those who say that the usual way "anti-Semitic" is used is wrong are seeing it as based on "Semitic" rather than "anti-Semite". But I say they're wrong because that's not where the word "anti-Semitic" really came from or how it was derived... or how it's used... and the definition they're insisting is "right", hatred of all Semitic people rather than just the Semites, describes something that doesn't exist so there's no need for such a word. What they're basicly doing is getting stuck on a superficial coincidence, that the adjective form of "anti-Semite" happens to resemble the categorical term "Semitic" despite being unrelated to it in derivation or use.

Well - I don't think that's what I meant at all.  I know there are many who speak  semitic languages, but that doesn't mean they are 'semites.'  II knew that Ethiopian language is also Semitic, but I never thought of Ethiopians as Semites.  However, it was always my understanding that the people indigenous to the Palestinian region are all semites, including the jews, christians, and muslims who all live there. Is that understanding faulty?

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#245 Rivergirl

Rivergirl
  • Islander
  • 63 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 05:42 PM

View PostSchmokie_Dragon, on Feb 16 2006, 08:44 PM, said:

MHO on the "fundamentalist vs Islam" debate:

Islam is both moderate and radical. In the Qur'an it is both for killing and against. Therefore people who cry for blood are just as much following Islam as those who do not. Its all dependant on interpretation and access.

I've missed several pages of this discussion, so if I'm repeating what's been said earlier... sorry.  Of course, at my age, I'm beginning to repeat what I've said earlier, but we won't go into that.

Anyway, Schmokie Dragon is right.  The Qur'an was basically written in two sections -- the Meccan and the Medinan.  The earlier one from the beginning of the faith is more tolerant towards Jews and Christians.  The later one, written after Muhammad and his followers had been forced to flee to the second city is much more violent and less tolerant.

So both peace and violence are in the Qur'an and people tend to focus on one or the other depending on their worldview.  And neither side is 'wrong'.

But, as QT mentioned previously, the Islamic worldview is, in theory at least, political.  It's not a matter of hijacking faith for political means.  There is no concept of separation of mosque and state.  It is seen as right and normal for the mosque to direct the state.  Except that...

The majority opinion here in Beirut is that the recent riot was a political hijacking of a legitimate religious protest.  The Lebanese seem to be saying that the imams called for a vocal but non-violent protest, however Syrian agents (and their allies) wanted to de-stabilize Lebanon and therefore tried to turn factions against each other.  Hence the attack on the church.

I have to say that the tv pictures of the attack on the church showed Sunni imams trying to get the rioters to stop.  And the Sunni Grand Mufti immediately condemned the attack and went to the Maronite Patricarch to apologize.  Muslim clerics attended a mass at the Maronite church a few days later.

So, Islam could be political if a Muslim wanted it to be, but in Lebanon's multi-confessional culture, it doesn't have to be.

Frankly, my discussions with my Muslim neighbours has been more on the lines of how their weddings differ from ours and what or what not to cook when they come to dinner.

Edited by Rivergirl, 16 February 2006 - 06:12 PM.

Faith is like radar that sees through the fog -- the reality of things at a distance that the human eye cannot see.

Corrie Ten Boom

#246 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 06:03 PM

View PostQueenTiye, on Feb 16 2006, 04:21 PM, said:

I know there are many who speak  semitic languages, but that doesn't mean they are 'semites.' I knew that Ethiopian language is also Semitic, but I never thought of Ethiopians as Semites.
That's exactly the point: Semitic, but not Semites... just as you wrote that post in a Germanic language, but not in German. The "ic" changes the meaning; it widens the scale. The one without an "ic" is just a representative fraction of the whole category that is named with the "ic".

The catch for "anti-Semitic" is that you could look at it as the "anti" of "Semitic", or as an adjective form of "anti-Semite" (anti-Jew) that just uses the "ic" as a common English suffix to make the noun an adjective instead of being a case of the linguistic/anthropological formal use of "ic".

#247 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 06:04 PM

Wait... that didn't answer the question...

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#248 Cardie

Cardie

    I'm a very *good* tailor

  • Administrator
  • 22,651 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 07:34 PM

From the dictionary:

Quote

Sem·ite    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (smt)
n.

   1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
   2. A Jew.
   3. Bible. A descendant of Shem.


[Back-formation from Semitic.]

The original meaning of Semite was formed from "Semitic" and meant any member of the ethnic groups that spoke Semitic languages.  Subsequently it got applied only to Jews.

A second dictionary I consulted only included definition #1.  So Delvo is not right that Semite was always only an appellation for Jews.

Cardie
Nothing succeeds like excess.

#249 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 09:57 PM

Thanks, Cardie!  Actually - I had definition 1 and 3 conflated.  And - I've never understood the word Semite to be synonymous with the word "Jew" which is why I always get tongue tied when forced to speak about anti-semitism between Arabs and Israelies.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#250 Zwolf

Zwolf
  • Islander
  • 3,683 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 11:06 AM

Well, it looks like some cleric's offered a million dollar bounty on the cartoonist now.  Welcome to Salman Rushdie's world, fella.  What idiots.  "You have implied that we are violent, so now we must kill you!"

A million dollars for this cartoonist, and nobody's offering anything for the guy who draws "B.C."   I'd consider whacking that guy for $9.95.  Cavemen endlessly talking about Jesus.  Does no one else get the irony of that?  The name of the strip is "B.C." fer ain't-born-yet's sakes!  It's annoyin'!  At least change the name of the strip to "A.D." or something, and quit drawing freakin' cavemen if you're gonna knock evolution all the time.

Cheers,

Zwolf

P.S. I'll throw in the Family Circusguy for an additional t'ree-fitty.  When they ask who did it, I'll just say "Ida know, not me!"   Besides, I think it would please my dead grandpa.  We love you, dead grandpa!  *    *
"I've moved on and I'm feeling fine
And I'll feel even better
When your life has nothing to do with mine."
-Pittbull, "No Love Lost"

"There are things that I'd like to say
But I'm never talking to you again
There's things I'd like to phrase some way
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'd put you down where you belong
But I'm never talking to you again
I'd show you everywhere you're wrong
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you."
- Husker Du, "Never Talking To You Again"

#251 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 12:04 PM

Quote

Well, it looks like some cleric's offered a million dollar bounty on the cartoonist now.

Damn these clerics sure have a lot of scratch at their disposal. I think before I made the hit I'd wanna see the cash up front though. Last time they paid me off with a few virgins and a bootleg dvd of Fahrenheit 9/11. And even THAT was a rip off.(if Naa'irah was a "virgin", I'm the President of Jupiter :angry: )

-scherzo
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#252 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 11:29 AM

View PostDelvo, on Feb 16 2006, 12:05 PM, said:

Linguistic and cultural categories encompassing more than one specific language or culture are sometimes named after one of the examples within the category, with an "ic" attached at the end. For example, the category including German is Germanic, and it also includes other Germanic languages/cultures that aren't German, like Swedish, Danish, Dutch, and English.
No, languages are catagorized by genetic relationship.  German, Swedish, Danish, Dutch and English are some of the languages of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European family of languages.  The "ic" is an '-ic' and is an affix, not an attachment.  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#253 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 12:00 PM

View Postscherzo, on Feb 17 2006, 09:04 AM, said:

Quote

Well, it looks like some cleric's offered a million dollar bounty on the cartoonist now.

Damn these clerics sure have a lot of scratch at their disposal. I think before I made the hit I'd wanna see the cash up front though. Last time they paid me off with a few virgins and a bootleg dvd of Fahrenheit 9/11. And even THAT was a rip off.(if Naa'irah was a "virgin", I'm the President of Jupiter :angry: )

-scherzo


ROTFLOL! :D  :D

View PostNonny, on Feb 18 2006, 08:29 AM, said:

View PostDelvo, on Feb 16 2006, 12:05 PM, said:

Linguistic and cultural categories encompassing more than one specific language or culture are sometimes named after one of the examples within the category, with an "ic" attached at the end. For example, the category including German is Germanic, and it also includes other Germanic languages/cultures that aren't German, like Swedish, Danish, Dutch, and English.
No, languages are catagorized by genetic relationship. German, Swedish, Danish, Dutch and English are some of the languages of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European family of languages. The "ic" is an '-ic' and is an affix, not an attachment.

Nonny


Here's are the Indo-European language tree:

-Germanic: Old English to Frisian/Flemish/Dutch/German and Icelandic/Norwegian/Swedish/Danish (the Frisian grouping is one family, the Icelandic the other)
-Celtic:Breton/Manx/Scots Gaelic/Irish Gaelic/Welsh
-Italic: Latin to  Romanian/French/Portugese/Italian/Spanish
-Hellenic: Classical Greek to Modern Greek
-Balto-Slavonic: Lithuanian/Russian/Serbo-Croat/Polish/Czech
-Indo-Iranian: Hindi/Punjabi/Bengali/Romany/Sanskrit


Nonny is right - the -ic is just a suffix. And nobody knows the origins of the Celtic languages. They bear no relationship to the other Indo-European languages at all.

Modern English isn't on the tree at all, because it's a blend of French and Old English.

Edited by Rhea, 18 February 2006 - 12:10 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#254 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 03:08 PM

Sure it is, Rhea, on the one on the inside back cover of the American Heritage.  Modern English is classified as a Germanic language because of its structure.  The Latin words that came to Middle English by way of Old French enriched the lexicon, but the language itself remained Germanic.  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#255 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 03:21 PM

Quote

Nonny is right - the -ic is just a suffix. And nobody knows the origins of the Celtic languages. They bear no relationship to the other Indo-European languages at all.

Modern English isn't on the tree at all, because it's a blend of French and Old English.

Rhea, I'm sorry, but that first statement's just not true.  Celtic is as integrated into the Indo-European family as any other member language, with cognates in both Italic and Germanic languages and clear lines of derivation.  Eg.:

Lat. frater--Ger. broder--Cel. brathair

Lat. rex--Cel. rix/rig/ri--

Lat. pater--Ger. fader--Cel. athair  (and, for the folks who profess to see relationships between Native American languages and European ones, Lakota ate--which is a coincidence.  They do happen.)

Just some quick, off the top of my head examples.  There are literally hundreds more.  

Middle and Modern English actually have three parents--Anglo-Saxon, Norman French and Latin, with a few Norse words tossed in from the times of the Viking/Danish occupation.

Edited to add:  The term "Semitic" comes from the name of Shem, one of the three sons of Noah.  Supposedly his descendents--the Shemites--settled much of the Middle East, and both the people and the language group were given his name.  Ham, the one who came upon the old man drunk and naked after an apparent act of autoeroticism and was therefore "cursed" with dark skin, became the ancestor the African peoples, the Hamites, speakers of the Hamitic languages.  Japheth, the third son, supposedly fathered the European peoples, but someone wisely gave up before labeling same "Japhethites" and their languages "Japhethic."

Edited by waterpanther, 18 February 2006 - 03:34 PM.

Posted Image

#256 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 05:28 PM

The morphology of Old Celtic is still considered to be uncertain.  Yes, it's an Indo-European language - there are some words that were adopted from other languages as people from other countries hit Ireland.

Here are a couple of references:

http://www.celt.dias...s/cat/d/d1.html  (The School of Celtic Studies)

Quote

THE etymological groundwork in the Celtic languages has already been done; the laws of phonological correspondences between Indo-European and the several Celtic languages can be stated with a high degree of precision, indeed a fair measure of historical certainty. Yet a brief inspection of the relevant portions of the classical works of Thurneysen, Pedersen, or Lewis-Pedersen is sufficient to convince one that the historical morphology of the Celtic languages remains strikingly obscure; with the exception of the nominal declension, the inflexional categories have never been systematically accounted for in comparative Celtic grammar. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the verb. This formal obscurity, coupled with certain peculiar syntactical traits of the Celtic verb, have led certain scholars, such as J. Pokorny, E. Lewy, H. Hartmann, and H. Wagner, to a variety of hypotheses of the presence of sundry ill-defined non-Indo-European substrata in Celtic, particularly on the shadowy elfin-populated Emerald Isle.

From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia....eltic_languages

Quote

Scholarly handling of the Celtic languages has been rather argumentative owing to lack of primary source data. Some scholars distinguish Continental and Insular Celtic, arguing that the differences between the Goidelic and Brythonic languages arose after these split off from the Continental Celtic languages. Other scholars distinguish P-Celtic from Q-Celtic, putting most of the Continental Celtic languages in the former group (except for Celtiberian, which is Q-Celtic).

http://www.yorksj.ac...ct/celtlang.htm

There just are no written exemplars of Old Gaelic, unlike Old English. And that's probably because they relied on an oral tradition.


Edited by Rhea, 18 February 2006 - 05:29 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#257 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 06:30 PM

But Rhea, this:

Quote

the historical morphology of the Celtic languages remains strikingly obscure;


does not mean this:

Quote

And nobody knows the origins of the Celtic languages. They bear no relationship to the other Indo-European languages at all.

The first quote merely means that we don't know how such grammatical elements  as noun case endings and verbal inflections were formed before the various Celtic languages were written down.  Now, what is in dispute are the origins and  languages of some of the British tribes, especially the Picts.  There's been a terrible amount of inkshed on that particular subject, though there seems to be a growing consensus that they were just as Celtic as the Scots and their neighbors in what is now England and Wales.  

The split into P and Q Celtic has nothing to do with the language's origin, either, but with its division into two subfamilies.  Now, what's really interesting is the possibility that Tocharian, an I-E language found in Central Asia, may be fairly closely related to Celtic.  If so, there may be an argument to be made that the Celtic languages are closest in time and possibly syntax to the original Protlo-Indo-European language, and that its speakers were, so to speak, the first out of the gate when the populations began to radiate both east and west out of the Khazakh-Khirghiz steppe.
Posted Image

#258 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 19 February 2006 - 08:27 AM

More fun.

Following in the finest of American traditions, Iranian bakers have renamed danish pastries as 'Roses of the Prophet' because 'Danish' is a dirty word nowadays :rolleyes:

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#259 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 19 February 2006 - 10:16 AM

View Postwaterpanther, on Feb 18 2006, 03:30 PM, said:

But Rhea, this:

Quote

the historical morphology of the Celtic languages remains strikingly obscure;


does not mean this:

Quote

And nobody knows the origins of the Celtic languages. They bear no relationship to the other Indo-European languages at all.

The split into P and Q Celtic has nothing to do with the language's origin, either, but with its division into two subfamilies. Now, what's really interesting is the possibility that Tocharian, an I-E language found in Central Asia, may be fairly closely related to Celtic. If so, there may be an argument to be made that the Celtic languages are closest in time and possibly syntax to the original Protlo-Indo-European language, and that its speakers were, so to speak, the first out of the gate when the populations began to radiate both east and west out of the Khazakh-Khirghiz steppe.


I'd go for that. Thinking has changed many times since I took my first linguistics class 30 years ago.  Gaelic is a very old language with no written history, and the argument over origin has been going on ever since I can remember.

Points to you and demerits to me for not being more specific the first time around. ;) Although one could still argue that the origins of the structure of language are obscure because the origins of the language are obscure.

Edited by Rhea, 19 February 2006 - 10:18 AM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#260 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 19 February 2006 - 11:33 AM

View PostGodeskian, on Feb 19 2006, 05:27 AM, said:

More fun.

Following in the finest of American traditions, Iranian bakers have renamed danish pastries as 'Roses of the Prophet' because 'Danish' is a dirty word nowadays :rolleyes:
Hmmmm, croissant, anyone?  :p  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Religion, Islam, Cartoons of Muhammad

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users