RE: Word Fight (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message


Lordandmaster -> RE: Word Fight (2/22/2006 7:16:28 AM)

OK, this explains the source of our disagreement. Except for certain borrowings (e.g., "nirvana," "suttee," etc.), no English words descend from Sanskrit. All native English words descend from Proto-Germanic, which itself descends from Proto-Indo-European (that's the PIE they're talking about). Sanskrit also descends from Proto-Indo-European, but it's not the ancestor of Germanic, and hence not the ancestor of English either. Sanskrit happens to be a particularly old and beautiful Indo-European language, but it's not the oldest available to us. (That honor goes to Hittite.)

The relationship is a little like the relationship between humans and gorillas. We're related in that we share a common ancestor, but we are not descended from gorillas and vice versa.

Incidentally, for people interested in Indo-European origins of English words, I recommend The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots, by Calvert Watkins, the god of Indo-European studies.

Lam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petruchio

BTW, the word descends from Sanskrit (as most of our words descend), not taken 'directly', if anything implied that.





Petruchio -> RE: Word Fight (2/22/2006 6:05:46 PM)

Hmm… I certainly would be out of my league with god of Indo-European studies and I thank you for the reference to the AHED of Indo-European Roots.

I do follow what you're saying about the common ancestor analogy. (And in my posting, I said the words shared a root and were derived from…)

For a couple of reasons, I am troubled by the sweeping statement "no English words descend from Sanskrit. All native English words descend from Proto-Germanic…".

In my language classes, they always taught that the majority of English words descended through Germanic/Teutonic sources, about 40% of American English from French, and both of those drew upon Latin and Greek. That does not include Celtic sources which fed Welsh and Gaelic languages. Whilst I do not have the advantage of the book(s) you mention, I do not conclude that that rules out Sanskrit roots (which i believe the etymology URL reference supports).

I don't have a dictionary searchable on etymology alone, but I have access to an interesting tool. I am responsible for a database of 45,000 unique names with etymological references. A quick search of Sanskirt+Hindi shows 1800 names, many, of course, cognates of one another, which would reduce the base words to 10% or less. Some of these include Amber, Opal, Candle, Chandler, Charity, Charlotte, Charming… including the word Asia, including the word India itself. I notice my computer dictionary credits many of these to Sanskirt, but others like amber, it doesn't go back farther than Arabic.

So, two points:

1. I respect that you are better-read in this than I which I acknowledge in the earliest posts.

2. I'm not sure that if you're saying that the buck stops at Germanic sources, or if you allow that etymology has (or even can) pass through Germanic sources.

I believe it can (and has), but then I am only Grasshopper, and as I said, I have not read Watkins.

Can you (this isn't a challenge but a genuine enquiry) lay out Watkins' reasoning for rejecting non-Germanic sources? Thanks.




yourMissTress -> RE: Word Fight (2/22/2006 8:47:25 PM)

while the current discussion on the board is fabulously educational and interesting...I have a question...is CUNT the current word? If not, what is the current word?

sorry for interrupting, boys, but I just joined the game a few days ago and I like it!!!!




Petruchio -> RE: Word Fight (2/22/2006 9:45:33 PM)

quote:

is CUNT the current word?


(laughing) It's always a word, MT!

L&M left us with psychopomp.

(I think it's the graduation march at a school of therapy.)




yourMissTress -> RE: Word Fight (2/22/2006 9:56:56 PM)

quote:

L&M left us with psychopomp.

(I think it's the graduation march at a school of therapy.)


lmao,

FANTABULOUS word!!!!

phychopomp tis a conductor of souls in or to the afterlife.

Next word: allosome




Lordandmaster -> RE: Word Fight (2/22/2006 11:26:53 PM)

Well, the English words that do not descend from Proto-Germanic fall into a few general categories:

1. They are borrowed from (Old) French after the Norman conquest ("beef," "mutton," etc. are good examples).

2. They are taken from Latin and Greek, or else they're invented on the basis of Latin and Greek roots, which every schoolboy was expected to know.

3. They are borrowed from other languages (e.g., "Schadenfreude," "ketchup," "tare").

English words derived from Sanskrit must fall into the third category. That's not to say that they aren't English, but they're borrowed, and those borrowings tend to be very late. A word like "cunt" can hardly be borrowed from Sanskrit for two reasons: it's well attested in other Germanic languages, which strongly suggests that it derives from a Proto-Germanic word, rather than being borrowed into English from Sanskrit; and it goes back at least to the thirteenth century (and earlier in other Germanic languages), which is a time long before borrowings from Sanskrit were very common. The second reason may not be strong enough to RULE OUT a borrowing from Sanskrit, though it does make it seem unlikely; but the first reason is a very very strong reason to rule it out. When an etymological dictionary cites a Sanskrit form, it's not (normally) saying that the English word DERIVES from the Sanskrit, but that the Sanskrit illustrates the same root as the English word.

As for "allosome": it's clearly a medical/biological word, and I'm weak in that area, but I can hazard a guess. The prefix "allo-" often indicates something that varies phenomenologically from another pattern, but with the same practical results (like "allophone," "allomorph"). The "-some" I assume comes from "chromosome." So I'd GUESS that an allosome is a gene that varies in some way from an ordinary gene, but functions in exactly the same way despite the variation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petruchio

For a couple of reasons, I am troubled by the sweeping statement "no English words descend from Sanskrit. All native English words descend from Proto-Germanic…".

In my language classes, they always taught that the majority of English words descended through Germanic/Teutonic sources, about 40% of American English from French, and both of those drew upon Latin and Greek. That does not include Celtic sources which fed Welsh and Gaelic languages. Whilst I do not have the advantage of the book(s) you mention, I do not conclude that that rules out Sanskrit roots (which i believe the etymology URL reference supports).

I don't have a dictionary searchable on etymology alone, but I have access to an interesting tool. I am responsible for a database of 45,000 unique names with etymological references. A quick search of Sanskirt+Hindi shows 1800 names, many, of course, cognates of one another, which would reduce the base words to 10% or less. Some of these include Amber, Opal, Candle, Chandler, Charity, Charlotte, Charming… including the word Asia, including the word India itself. I notice my computer dictionary credits many of these to Sanskirt, but others like amber, it doesn't go back farther than Arabic.





BitaTruble -> RE: Word Fight (2/23/2006 1:11:14 AM)

quote:

L&M left us with psychopomp.
]

When it's 3:10 AM and you've only had 5 hours of sleep from the night before, that word gets read as psychopimp and it's time for bed.

::faints:: zzzzzzzzzzzz





Petruchio -> RE: Word Fight (2/23/2006 5:14:08 PM)

Thanks, L&M.




Thanatosian -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 9:16:19 AM)

an allosome is a chromosome that determines the sex of the organism


new word - esurient (amazing what one can learn watching Monty Python's Flying Circus)




Lordandmaster -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 11:37:24 AM)

"Esurient" means edacious.

We might as well use "edacious" for the next word.




yourMissTress -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 12:32:33 PM)

quote:

"edacious"


rapacious

and I think we will use that as the next word as well.




Lordandmaster -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 12:38:38 PM)

Prehensile!




yourMissTress -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 12:42:50 PM)

Why thank you Lam! what a lovely compliment...




Petruchio -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 5:22:57 PM)

esurient… edacious…

Only if we're rapacious and it's esculent!

But prehensile? Let me smooth my tail with my phalanges and think about that.




mnottertail -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 5:30:59 PM)

I am counting on my fingers and gotta tell you that I am lost if any of the words were defined.............

but I believe the word was phalanges........

isn't that an etruscan unit of fighting? much like the proto-germanic phalanx?

I am absolutely metatarsaled here......

Prestadigitizingly,
Ron




mnottertail -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 5:34:36 PM)

By the bye,

I don't know if I could enunciate psychopimp, but I know one when I see one.........

Snoop Dawg or Huggy bear, i.e.

Side note to candy......

and you think I need a scribe and translator? and you vociferously engaged in a word fight?

LOL,
Ron




Lordandmaster -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 6:01:32 PM)

Anyone know the reason why you have to say "phalanges" instead of "phalanxes" when you're talking about fingers and toes? I don't.

OK, new word: "hypnagogic"

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

but I believe the word was phalanges........

isn't that an etruscan unit of fighting? much like the proto-germanic phalanx?




mnottertail -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 6:09:27 PM)

gAWD DAMN!

LaM--

I really don't know the word meaning but wanna take a stab at it.....

hypna........like hypno or whatever I suspect is to mesmerize or draw unquavering attention to.....
gogic.........smacks of master of the science of or some such...

is this a word that means how a womans eyes draw together and focus in almost cross-eyed fashion as they draw intimately near to give head?

That's my overview, it is perhaps wrong; but then maybe that's what the word should mean........

LOL,
Ron




sylphgossamer -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 6:15:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Anyone know the reason why you have to say "phalanges" instead of "phalanxes" when you're talking about fingers and toes? I don't.

OK, new word: "hypnagogic"

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

but I believe the word was phalanges........

isn't that an etruscan unit of fighting? much like the proto-germanic phalanx?



stranger still the world of medicine, when phalanx and phalanges are intertwined; it's a distal or proximal phalanx but the joints are interphalangeal; the mind reels and the thumbs twiddle.

this is all making me feel almost narcoleptic, such are the desires of the body upon the mind
.




mnottertail -> RE: Word Fight (2/24/2006 6:35:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sylphgossamer

stranger still the world of medicine, when phalanx and phalanges are intertwined; it's a distal or proximal phalanx but the joints are interphalangeal; the mind reels and the thumbs twiddle.

this is all making me feel almost narcoleptic, such are the desires of the body upon the mind
.


couple of things quickly; this whole thread chokes me up, and having a numbness in my arm due to carpal tunnel, I am going to take some narcotics and later fall asleep with my arm.

LaM in addition, I don't know what books you read and where this proto-germanic asswipe comes from, but I double-goddam guarentee you that the Huns couldn't talk any intelligible language until we taught them old norse and old english......

Mene, Mene Tekel Pahrsin (from the sanskritt)

The finger of language; having writ on.....no longer is based one whit in what is writ..........

LOLOL, (christ, this is even beyond my kenning (also Irish for wailing as in sitting shiva))

what an intelligent and good looking group of people tho.

Ron




Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.078125E-02