A deep understanding of Dummheit
Dušan Vukotić
tupost" (Cz. hloupost/tupost dumbness, bluntness; Russ. глупость,
тупость, тупоумие; OSlav. тѫпъ). English stupidity (from Latin
stupidus -a -um) seems as if it is a s- prefixed form of the Slavic
word tup (blunt, stupid); cf. Serb. za-tupeti (to become dull or
stupid), is-tupljen (blunt).
Nevertheless, all the above-mentioned words are derived from the Gon-
Bel-Gon basis (according to HSF) or from the PIE roots *glebh- , *nebh-
or *dheub- (in reality, these three roots are derived from the same
Gon-Bel-Gon basis, which represents any form of "roundness").
What is the reason that we have similarities among Slavic words
glubina and dubina (deepness) and the words that denote glupost and
tupost (stupidity)?
Serbian gluv (deaf) is related to glup (stupid) in the same way as
deaf (Ger. taub) is related to deep (Ger. tief).
I suppose, you have spotted that German tief (deep) is phonetically
closer to English deaf than deep, while German taub (deaf) is closer
to English deep.
Is there anyone whose mental sharpness is preserved enough to
understand the "simplicity" of the processes of language formation?
DV
Peter T. Daniels
> "Mental numbness" can be translated to Serbian as "mentalna
Can be translated from what? It ain't an English expression.
Harlan Messinger
No, just people whose mental sharpness is preserved enough that they can
see for themselves from centuries of written evidence that you've never
looked at and deeper reasoning than you've shown yourself impervious to
who know that your theories are bogus.
Dušan Vukotić
> On Dec 7, 3:10 am, Du¹an Vukotiæ <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Mental numbness" can be translated to Serbian as "mentalna
>
> Can be translated from what? It ain't an English expression.
If you say "mental numbness" in English it could be translated to
Serbian as "mentalna tupost" or "mentalna nemost". English numb and
Serbian nem (mute, numb); both words are probably related to German
nehmen (take; Goth. niman; Gr. νέμω to deal out) and Serbian
naimanje/najam (tenure, tenancy) and najmiti (to lease, retain; cf.
Serb. zajmiti, uzimati take). An antonym to numb is nimble, and this
nimble is akin to jovial, Serbian živ-ahan (jovial, quick) and English
quick...
After all these "instructions" I hope you will be able to comprehend
the relation (kinship) between Serbo-Slavic životinja (animal) and
Latin animal.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
No Harlan, my HSF theory is is infallible, correct, and perfect.
Unlike you, I know exactly what I'm talking about.
DV
Harlan Messinger
ROFL!
> Unlike you, I know exactly what I'm talking about.
Since much of what you say contradicts the evidence, it follows
infallibly that this is not the case.
Dušan Vukotić
Would you mind pointing out a single one "contradiction" you have
observed in my above analysis?
DV
Peter T. Daniels
> On Dec 7, 3:10 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Dec 7, 3:10 am, Du¹an Vukotiæ <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Mental numbness" can be translated to Serbian as "mentalna
>
> > Can be translated from what? It ain't an English expression.
>
> If you say "mental numbness" in English it could be translated to
But NO ONE SAYS THAT in English.
Craoi...@gmail.com
My theory says, that by nailing electrodes through Dushan Vukovich's
testicles and administering a gradually increasing voltage, all the
problems of the word will be healed and cured. This theory is
infallible, correct, and perfect, fully scientific, and cannot be
falsified.
Dušan Vukotić
> On Dec 7, 10:09 am, Duðan Vukotiã <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 7, 3:10 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > "Mental numbness" can be translated to Serbian as "mentalna
>
> > > Can be translated from what? It ain't an English expression.
>
> > If you say "mental numbness" in English it could be translated to
>
> But NO ONE SAYS THAT in English.
If someone 'accidentally' says...
DV
Harlan Messinger
Every single one that I've already told you about. If your memory is so
bad that this is news to you, there isn't any point in discussing it.
Dušan Vukotić
I said "in my above analysis"; can't you read?
And you are not telling the truth when you say that you have ever
discussed (pointed out) anything concrete about any of my previous
posts.
All I hear from you are a priori (arbitrarily taken) rejections of
whatever I say.
DV
Craoi...@gmail.com
It is not an "analysis". It is a concoction of chaotic suggestions and
things that "appear" to you.
Dušan Vukotić
Hog Loony,
Beware of wolfs in postmodern sado-masoch-psychiatric clothing!
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Hog Loony,
Have you lost your muzzle again?
DV
Harlan Messinger
I had been responding to your remark "Unlike you, I know exactly what
I'm talking about", not to your analysis, so can't YOU read?
>
> And you are not telling the truth when you say that you have ever
> discussed (pointed out) anything concrete about any of my previous
> posts.
ROFL! Google Groups stands witness, and you are going to sit there and
pretend it has never happened.
> All I hear from you are a priori (arbitrarily taken) rejections of
> whatever I say.
The details of the transition from "hlaford" to "lord", to take one
example out of many, which are heavily documented over centuries of
writing, are "a priori"?
Dušan Vukotić
<hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net>
> >>> Would you mind pointing out a single one "contradiction" you have
> >>> observed in my above analysis?
> >> Every single one that I've already told you about. If your memory is so
> >> bad that this is news to you, there isn't any point in discussing it.
>
> > I said "in my above analysis"; can't you read?
>
> I had been responding to your remark "Unlike you, I know exactly what
> I'm talking about", not to your analysis, so can't YOU read?
You are not telling the truth again. Look at the above lines. Try to
reread it if you can.
> > And you are not telling the truth when you say that you have ever
> > discussed (pointed out) anything concrete about any of my previous
> > posts.
>
> ROFL! Google Groups stands witness, and you are going to sit there and
> pretend it has never happened.
Why wouldn't you provide the links... or just a single one if you may
find any?
> > All I hear from you are a priori (arbitrarily taken) rejections of
> > whatever I say.
>
> The details of the transition from "hlaford" to "lord", to take one
> example out of many, which are heavily documented over centuries of
> writing, are "a priori"?
Wouldn't you mind to present an "excerpt" from your "heavy
documentation"?
DV
Harlan Messinger
I'm not going to repeat conversations we've already had for your
entertainment.
Craoi...@gmail.com
I bow and kowtow to your superb scientific argumentation, Oh Master.
Craoi...@gmail.com
As we see, you couldn't falsify my superb, fully scientific theory.
Dušan Vukotić
Don't you see that you are repeating yourself again and again by
telling nothing but lies?
DV