Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"tanorexic"
96 views
Skip to first unread message
anal...@hotmail.com
May 10, 2012, 7:34:21 PM5/10/12
to
This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
johnk
May 10, 2012, 10:14:43 PM5/10/12
to
JohnK
Peter T. Daniels
May 10, 2012, 11:42:05 PM5/10/12
to
On May 10, 10:14 pm, johnk <jhobartk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 10, 2012 6:34:21 PM UTC-5, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> It's usually referred to as 'blending' where two words or parts of words are put together into a new word:
Lewis Carroll called them "portmanteau words" 150 years ago. See
> On Thursday, May 10, 2012 6:34:21 PM UTC-5, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> It's usually referred to as 'blending' where two words or parts of words are put together into a new word:
Humpty Dumpty's explication of "Jabberwocky," w.r.t. "chortle" =
"chuckle + snort."
Franz Gnaedinger
May 12, 2012, 3:39:06 AM5/12/12
to
On May 11, 1:34 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
in Finnegan's Wake. The book and (exceptionally carefully
composed) first chapter begins with
O Anna Livia
an ode to the Liffey, a Dublin river in the guise of a woman,
Anna Livia. The address O is a picture of a source, while
the Roman name Livia refers to the old age of the river
that flew already in Roman times, and even long before
the Romans conquered the world. Liffey also reminds of
Life, and may be read as answer to the question To be
or not to be ... To be, to live, Ja, Livia ... Ja-mes Joy-ce
lived several years in my hometown of Zurich, where Ja
(pronounced ia) means Yes. His favorite place in Zurich
was the confluence of the rivers Limmat and Sihl (ninety
meters from where I live). A well known photograph shows
him standing there, by the railing, looking down on the water,
entertained by the perpetual movement and shifting that
is reflected in the enchanting prose of his masterwork.
James Joyce was a contemporary of Sigmund Freud
whose name means joy, (re)discoverer of the unconscious
and liberator of sexuality, a source of great joy in life,
and he witnessed the rise of quantum mechanics that
made the certainties of mechanistic determinism dissolve.
The literate physicist Murray Gell-Mann, in return, named
the quarks for a line he found in Finnegan's Wake:
"Three quarks for Muster Mark!"
wrote:
> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
James Joyce made a literary form of this kind of word play
> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
in Finnegan's Wake. The book and (exceptionally carefully
composed) first chapter begins with
O Anna Livia
an ode to the Liffey, a Dublin river in the guise of a woman,
Anna Livia. The address O is a picture of a source, while
the Roman name Livia refers to the old age of the river
that flew already in Roman times, and even long before
the Romans conquered the world. Liffey also reminds of
Life, and may be read as answer to the question To be
or not to be ... To be, to live, Ja, Livia ... Ja-mes Joy-ce
lived several years in my hometown of Zurich, where Ja
(pronounced ia) means Yes. His favorite place in Zurich
was the confluence of the rivers Limmat and Sihl (ninety
meters from where I live). A well known photograph shows
him standing there, by the railing, looking down on the water,
entertained by the perpetual movement and shifting that
is reflected in the enchanting prose of his masterwork.
James Joyce was a contemporary of Sigmund Freud
whose name means joy, (re)discoverer of the unconscious
and liberator of sexuality, a source of great joy in life,
and he witnessed the rise of quantum mechanics that
made the certainties of mechanistic determinism dissolve.
The literate physicist Murray Gell-Mann, in return, named
the quarks for a line he found in Finnegan's Wake:
"Three quarks for Muster Mark!"
Peter T. Daniels
May 12, 2012, 7:35:53 AM5/12/12
to
On May 12, 3:39 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> On May 11, 1:34 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> James Joyce made a literary form of this kind of word play
> in Finnegan's Wake. The book and (exceptionally carefully
> composed) first chapter begins with
>
> O Anna Livia
No, it does not. The beginning of *Finnegans Wake* is
> On May 11, 1:34 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> James Joyce made a literary form of this kind of word play
> in Finnegan's Wake. The book and (exceptionally carefully
> composed) first chapter begins with
>
> O Anna Livia
riverrun past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(and it happens to be the end of the sentence that begins at the end
of the book 400 pages later)
> an ode to the Liffey, a Dublin river in the guise of a woman,
> Anna Livia. The address O is a picture of a source, while
> the Roman name Livia refers to the old age of the river
> that flew
johnk
May 12, 2012, 9:12:06 AM5/12/12
to
anal...@hotmail.com
May 12, 2012, 10:52:23 AM5/12/12
to
On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
very modern and unknown outside of English.
"Bollywood" for the "the Hollywood of Bombay" is another and seems to
have become totally mainstream.
wrote:
> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
very modern and unknown outside of English.
"Bollywood" for the "the Hollywood of Bombay" is another and seems to
have become totally mainstream.
anal...@hotmail.com
May 12, 2012, 11:34:59 AM5/12/12
to
On May 12, 3:39 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
http://shakespeare-online.com/biography/wordsinvented.html
At the hands of the very best, language can become totally malleable.
I believe "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind" originated
from Bob Dylan.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
May 12, 2012, 4:40:41 PM5/12/12
to
On May 13, 3:34 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
Did what? Made innovations in the lexicon? Well, yes, and so did
thousands of others both before and after him -- where else do you
think all these words came from?
But what about the specific type of innovation you were asking about
(blending)? Did you find an example in Shakespeare?
(BTW please recall my cautionary remarks in at least two earlier
discussions of this "Shakespeare invented" tradition. Although the
present version has trimmed the number, "invented" is still a
misleading term.)
> At the hands of the very best, language can become totally malleable.
>
> I believe "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind" originated
> from Bob Dylan.
I'm sure it did, but what exactly is the linguistic innovation here?
thousands of others both before and after him -- where else do you
think all these words came from?
But what about the specific type of innovation you were asking about
(blending)? Did you find an example in Shakespeare?
(BTW please recall my cautionary remarks in at least two earlier
discussions of this "Shakespeare invented" tradition. Although the
present version has trimmed the number, "invented" is still a
misleading term.)
> At the hands of the very best, language can become totally malleable.
>
> I believe "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind" originated
> from Bob Dylan.
Peter T. Daniels
May 12, 2012, 7:23:29 PM5/12/12
to
On May 12, 10:52 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
(a) Did you overlook my note about Lewis Carroll?
(b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
(c) Compounding is, believe it or not, productive in German -- German
prose is filled with words that aren't in any dictionary -- so "-
freude" is not a blend/portmanteau.
> "Bollywood" for the "the Hollywood of Bombay" is another and seems to
> have become totally mainstream.
Why don't you say "Mollywood," as in "Mumbai"?
wrote:
> On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> very modern and unknown outside of English.
Good grief.
> wrote:
>
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> very modern and unknown outside of English.
(a) Did you overlook my note about Lewis Carroll?
(b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
(c) Compounding is, believe it or not, productive in German -- German
prose is filled with words that aren't in any dictionary -- so "-
freude" is not a blend/portmanteau.
> "Bollywood" for the "the Hollywood of Bombay" is another and seems to
> have become totally mainstream.
Franz Gnaedinger
May 13, 2012, 6:48:19 AM5/13/12
to
On May 12, 5:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
of his readers, but recently he confessed to reading Joyce.
Finnegans Wake is full of word plays of the kind you mention,
for example funferal, fun for all at a funeral - an Irish funeral,
that is, people drinking a lot, and then singing ... I can't
remember such a word play by Dylan, but of course his
language is malleable, as you say. Here a quote from an
early lovesong:
There's beauty in the silver singing river,
There's beauty in the sunrise in the sky,
But none of these and nothing else can match the beauty
That I remember in my true love's eyes”
The silver singing river appeals to me very much, you don't
know what it means and yet you know. Last year, upon
hearing the song again, I had this idea: young Bob sitting
on the bank of a river, gazing into the water and playing
to the silvery reflexes, accompanying the beautiful and ever
shifting patterns with melodies on his instrument, making
the silver of the lights and the singing of his guitar come
together, which then found perfect expression in the adjective
silver singing ... He got reprimanded by his English teacher,
apparently she could not enjoy his poetic vein.
wrote:
>
> At the hands of the very best, language can become totally malleable.
>
> I believe "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind" originated
> from Bob Dylan.
In earlier years, Dylan thought Joyce is pulling the leg
>
> I believe "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind" originated
> from Bob Dylan.
of his readers, but recently he confessed to reading Joyce.
Finnegans Wake is full of word plays of the kind you mention,
for example funferal, fun for all at a funeral - an Irish funeral,
that is, people drinking a lot, and then singing ... I can't
remember such a word play by Dylan, but of course his
language is malleable, as you say. Here a quote from an
early lovesong:
There's beauty in the silver singing river,
There's beauty in the sunrise in the sky,
But none of these and nothing else can match the beauty
That I remember in my true love's eyes”
The silver singing river appeals to me very much, you don't
know what it means and yet you know. Last year, upon
hearing the song again, I had this idea: young Bob sitting
on the bank of a river, gazing into the water and playing
to the silvery reflexes, accompanying the beautiful and ever
shifting patterns with melodies on his instrument, making
the silver of the lights and the singing of his guitar come
together, which then found perfect expression in the adjective
silver singing ... He got reprimanded by his English teacher,
apparently she could not enjoy his poetic vein.
johnk
May 13, 2012, 9:24:51 AM5/13/12
to
"Google looks at laws and getting permission as impediments to making the world a better place," Scott Cleland, an assiduous Google critic at the business consultancy Precursor, told me. Cleland labels the company's attitude "Goobris."
anal...@hotmail.com
May 13, 2012, 11:19:25 AM5/13/12
to
apply to the compound. But "tanorexic" strictly should apply to
someone addicted to both tanning and excessive weight loss and instead
has been coined as a "stunt word" using "anorexic" only for its sound.
Peter T. Daniels
May 13, 2012, 12:56:22 PM5/13/12
to
On May 13, 11:19 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
The cointer, not being a scholar of Greek, had no way of knowing
which, if any, part of the word "anorexic" referred to obsession or
excess. Oh, wait a moment, do you notice any similarity at all between
"-exic" and "excess"? It happens to be accidental, but accident is at
the core of folk etymology.
Back to your "-gate" nonsense: "-gate" words are no more "blends" than
are "beefburger" or "cheeseburger" -- which also, incidentally,
reflect unfamiliarity with the source language (where the division is
not "ham + burger" but "Hamburg + er").
You would look so much less of an idiot if you would only read an
introductory linguistics book, or even (heaven help us) enroll in an
elementary linguistics class.
wrote:
which, if any, part of the word "anorexic" referred to obsession or
excess. Oh, wait a moment, do you notice any similarity at all between
"-exic" and "excess"? It happens to be accidental, but accident is at
the core of folk etymology.
Back to your "-gate" nonsense: "-gate" words are no more "blends" than
are "beefburger" or "cheeseburger" -- which also, incidentally,
reflect unfamiliarity with the source language (where the division is
not "ham + burger" but "Hamburg + er").
You would look so much less of an idiot if you would only read an
introductory linguistics book, or even (heaven help us) enroll in an
elementary linguistics class.
anal...@hotmail.com
May 13, 2012, 2:19:23 PM5/13/12
to
On May 13, 12:56 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On May 13, 11:19 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 13, 9:24 am, johnk <jhobartk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 9:14:43 PM UTC-5, johnk wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 6:34:21 PM UTC-5, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > > > > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > > > > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > > > It's usually referred to as 'blending' where two words or parts of words are put together into a new word: slanguage, fantabulous, guesstimate, spork, smog, etc. Textbooks are filled with English examples but I know Spanish can do it also. I think there is a word which mixes 'bruja' and 'mujer' to form 'brujer'. It would be interesting to know what other languages can do this.
>
> > > > JohnK
>
> > > From an LA Times article on Google:
>
> > > "Google looks at laws and getting permission as impediments to making the world a better place," Scott Cleland, an assiduous Google critic at the business consultancy Precursor, told me. Cleland labels the company's attitude "Goobris."
>
> > That would be a true blend because both components are intended to
> > apply to the compound. But "tanorexic" strictly should apply to
> > someone addicted to both tanning and excessive weight loss and instead
> > has been coined as a "stunt word" using "anorexic" only for its sound.
>
> The cointer, not being a scholar of Greek, had no way of knowing
> which, if any, part of the word "anorexic" referred to obsession or
> excess.
Actually, none. "anorexia" is etymologically "lack of appetite".
> On May 13, 11:19 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 13, 9:24 am, johnk <jhobartk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 9:14:43 PM UTC-5, johnk wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 6:34:21 PM UTC-5, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > > > > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > > > > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > > > It's usually referred to as 'blending' where two words or parts of words are put together into a new word: slanguage, fantabulous, guesstimate, spork, smog, etc. Textbooks are filled with English examples but I know Spanish can do it also. I think there is a word which mixes 'bruja' and 'mujer' to form 'brujer'. It would be interesting to know what other languages can do this.
>
> > > > JohnK
>
> > > From an LA Times article on Google:
>
> > > "Google looks at laws and getting permission as impediments to making the world a better place," Scott Cleland, an assiduous Google critic at the business consultancy Precursor, told me. Cleland labels the company's attitude "Goobris."
>
> > That would be a true blend because both components are intended to
> > apply to the compound. But "tanorexic" strictly should apply to
> > someone addicted to both tanning and excessive weight loss and instead
> > has been coined as a "stunt word" using "anorexic" only for its sound.
>
> The cointer, not being a scholar of Greek, had no way of knowing
> which, if any, part of the word "anorexic" referred to obsession or
> excess.
Anybody who knows English, anyone? anyone? Bueller?
Luckily, a real linguist seems to have looked into this:
http://www.res-per-nomen.org/respernomen/pubs/ling/MORPH01Hamburger.doc
Apparently there is a whole taxonomy of blending as a source of new
words. In recent times there is in the media a frantic attempt to get
peoples' attention through gimmicky coinages, practically none of
which will survive.
Peter T. Daniels
May 13, 2012, 5:07:37 PM5/13/12
to
On May 13, 2:19 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> which will survive.-
So you just type stuff without ever looking at the responses to what
you type?
What part of "this is a very well known phenomenon" is too difficult
for you to grasp?
So you just type stuff without ever looking at the responses to what
you type?
What part of "this is a very well known phenomenon" is too difficult
for you to grasp?
anal...@hotmail.com
May 13, 2012, 6:16:06 PM5/13/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Actually the etymology of anorexia is a totally irrelevant misdrection
since '-aholic' is a better established "morpheme" and would attach
swimmingly to 'tan' to convey the meaning. It may be that some
fragment of "anorexic" will become a folk-morpheme one of these days -
but at least in this case it has been chosen only for how it sounds
and perhaps for it novelty-value.
Peter T. Daniels
May 14, 2012, 12:05:22 AM5/14/12
to
On May 13, 6:16 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> and perhaps for it novelty-value.-
So you've also never seen an advertisement?????
So you've also never seen an advertisement?????
johnk
May 14, 2012, 10:07:22 AM5/14/12
to
On Sunday, May 13, 2012 1:19:23 PM UTC-5, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Apparently there is a whole taxonomy of blending as a source of new
> words. In recent times there is in the media a frantic attempt to get
> peoples' attention through gimmicky coinages, practically none of
> which will survive.
Apparently you don't read earlier posts and have never opened a beginning linguistics textbook.
>
> Apparently there is a whole taxonomy of blending as a source of new
> words. In recent times there is in the media a frantic attempt to get
> peoples' attention through gimmicky coinages, practically none of
> which will survive.
JohnK
anal...@hotmail.com
May 14, 2012, 7:59:15 PM5/14/12
to
bubukle: mixture of ‘bubo’ and ‘carbuncle’ H5 III. vi. 111 (Fluellen's
speech).
rebuse. "Is there any man has rebus'd your worship ?"
Grumio, in Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew, I,
n, 7. From rebuke -}- abuse.
Hamlet
act 1, scene 5: ... stand on end, Like quills upon the fretful
porpentine: But this eternal blazon must not be
Custalorum, Shallow's form for Custos Rotulorum, keeper
of the Rolls. Shakespeare, Merry Wives, I, I, 7.
But on the whole this form of word-play is quite rare with
Shakespeare.
But on the hand, Franz's primordial language seems to depend a lot on
blending and the prolific evidence for this kind of word-formation in
English offers support to his theories.
> (BTW please recall my cautionary remarks in at least two earlier
> discussions of this "Shakespeare invented" tradition. Although the
> present version has trimmed the number, "invented" is still a
> misleading term.)
>
> > At the hands of the very best, language can become totally malleable.
>
> > I believe "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind" originated
> > from Bob Dylan.
>
johnk
May 14, 2012, 8:37:50 PM5/14/12
to
pauljk
May 15, 2012, 1:37:14 AM5/15/12
to
<anal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
>> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
>> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> very modern and unknown outside of English.
Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> wrote:
>> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
>> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
>> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> very modern and unknown outside of English.
unknown.
pjk
Franz Gnaedinger
May 15, 2012, 2:53:28 AM5/15/12
to
On May 15, 1:59 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
different words, or, again the other way round in a different
sense: I form synthetic words and look how many leaves grow
on my verbal branches. Looking at a tree from the outside
makes it often difficult to tell which leaves grow on which twig
or branch, but looking at the branches and leaves and twigs
from inside a tree, climbing the lower branches, makes it quite
easy. Every week I find new derivatives of some Magdalenian
words, like for example DhAG meaning able, good in the sense
of able, one of the most productive words, a branch of very many
twigs and leaves in my metaphor.
wrote:
>
> But on the hand, Franz's primordial language seems to depend a lot on
> blending and the prolific evidence for this kind of word-formation in
> English offers support to his theories.
The other way round, I look out for the common origin of
> But on the hand, Franz's primordial language seems to depend a lot on
> blending and the prolific evidence for this kind of word-formation in
> English offers support to his theories.
different words, or, again the other way round in a different
sense: I form synthetic words and look how many leaves grow
on my verbal branches. Looking at a tree from the outside
makes it often difficult to tell which leaves grow on which twig
or branch, but looking at the branches and leaves and twigs
from inside a tree, climbing the lower branches, makes it quite
easy. Every week I find new derivatives of some Magdalenian
words, like for example DhAG meaning able, good in the sense
of able, one of the most productive words, a branch of very many
twigs and leaves in my metaphor.
anal...@hotmail.com
May 15, 2012, 5:25:54 AM5/15/12
to
On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> > "Bollywood" for the "the Hollywood of Bombay" is another and seems to
> > have become totally mainstream.- Hide quoted text -
> <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> >> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> >> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> > very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> unknown.
>
> pjk
>
Name one in which it is even remotely as common as in Emglish.
> news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> >> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> >> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> > very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> unknown.
>
> pjk
>
>
>
> > "Bollywood" for the "the Hollywood of Bombay" is another and seems to
Peter T. Daniels
May 15, 2012, 8:28:59 AM5/15/12
to
On May 15, 5:25 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
together portmanteau words, compounding [often called "composition"],
and folk etymologies, if not still other phenomena.
wrote:
> On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> > <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > > On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > >> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > >> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > > second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> > > very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> > Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> > unknown.
>
> > <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > > On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > >> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > >> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > > second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> > > very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> > Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> > unknown.
>
> Name one in which it is even remotely as common as in Emglish.
Try clearly explaining what you're talking about. So far you've thrown
together portmanteau words, compounding [often called "composition"],
and folk etymologies, if not still other phenomena.
Christian Weisgerber
May 15, 2012, 8:04:10 AM5/15/12
to
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > second half of a compound indicating a scandal.
>
> > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > second half of a compound indicating a scandal.
>
> (c) Compounding is, believe it or not, productive in German -- German
> prose is filled with words that aren't in any dictionary -- so "-
> freude" is not a blend/portmanteau.
"Dimonfreude" is an English coinage and schadenfreude is morphologically
> prose is filled with words that aren't in any dictionary -- so "-
> freude" is not a blend/portmanteau.
opaque to English speakers, so German compounding is irrelevant
here.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Christian Weisgerber
May 15, 2012, 8:10:04 AM5/15/12
to
johnk <jhoba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's usually referred to as 'blending' where two words or parts of words
> are put together into a new word: slanguage, fantabulous, guesstimate,
> spork, smog, etc. Textbooks are filled with English examples but I know
> Spanish can do it also. I think there is a word which mixes 'bruja' and
> 'mujer' to form 'brujer'. It would be interesting to know what other
> languages can do this.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mot-valise
> It's usually referred to as 'blending' where two words or parts of words
> are put together into a new word: slanguage, fantabulous, guesstimate,
> spork, smog, etc. Textbooks are filled with English examples but I know
> Spanish can do it also. I think there is a word which mixes 'bruja' and
> 'mujer' to form 'brujer'. It would be interesting to know what other
> languages can do this.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kofferwort
French and German can do this, but it's more a form of word play
and few such coinages make it into the general language.
António Marques
May 15, 2012, 9:23:00 AM5/15/12
to
johnk wrote (12-05-2012 14:12):
> On Saturday, May 12, 2012 2:39:06 AM UTC-5, Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
>> (...)
> On Saturday, May 12, 2012 2:39:06 AM UTC-5, Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
>
> This has nothing to do with the topic. You claimed that Joyce used
> blending in his works. What examples are you giving from Joyce where he
> blended words together? This is just your usual self centered
> flow-of-consciousness.
'Consciousness'???
> This has nothing to do with the topic. You claimed that Joyce used
> blending in his works. What examples are you giving from Joyce where he
> blended words together? This is just your usual self centered
> flow-of-consciousness.
Peter T. Daniels
May 15, 2012, 11:42:25 AM5/15/12
to
On May 15, 8:04 am, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
instantly comprehended in English; but once it sinks in, it's seen to
be another folk etymology based on a miscut -- since if the morphemes
were known, it would indicate happiness at Dimon's situation.
> Peter T. Daniels <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > > second half of a compound indicating a scandal.
>
> > (c) Compounding is, believe it or not, productive in German -- German
> > prose is filled with words that aren't in any dictionary -- so "-
> > freude" is not a blend/portmanteau.
>
> "Dimonfreude" is an English coinage and schadenfreude is morphologically
> opaque to English speakers, so German compounding is irrelevant
> here.
It didn't say that was an English coinage -- I doubt it would be
>
> > > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > > second half of a compound indicating a scandal.
>
> > (c) Compounding is, believe it or not, productive in German -- German
> > prose is filled with words that aren't in any dictionary -- so "-
> > freude" is not a blend/portmanteau.
>
> "Dimonfreude" is an English coinage and schadenfreude is morphologically
> opaque to English speakers, so German compounding is irrelevant
> here.
instantly comprehended in English; but once it sinks in, it's seen to
be another folk etymology based on a miscut -- since if the morphemes
were known, it would indicate happiness at Dimon's situation.
Peter T. Daniels
May 15, 2012, 11:46:05 AM5/15/12
to
António Marques
May 15, 2012, 5:17:06 PM5/15/12
to
photo of a man with the text "I am Kaz" next to it. Could this be Franz's
alter ego, or even aego? (cf 'CAS')
The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
May 15, 2012, 7:23:55 PM5/15/12
to
provide arguments for such a daring allegation.
The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
May 15, 2012, 7:32:41 PM5/15/12
to
On 15 Maj, 12:25, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
way of deriving words, previously unknown, is emerging in English and
that it is unknown to other languages. This is a very strong
suggestion. In linguistics, we usually see present as a key to past,
i.e. what is possible and thinkable in language (in languages in
general) today is possible and thinkable in language in the past. If
you really suggest that this is an entire novelty previously unknown
to languages in general, you definitely need to prove it, because it
flies in the face of all linguistic methodology.
How many languages other than English do you have a comprehensive
command of? Ah, I know: zero, zilch, none, nada. And still you have
the sheer cheek and chutzpah to pronounce weightily upon the languages
of the world.
wrote:
> On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > >> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > >> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > > second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> > > very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> > Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> > unknown.
>
> > pjk
>
> Name one in which it is even remotely as common as in Emglish.
No, it is you who must provide proof. You are suggesting that a new
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > >> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > >> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> > > Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> > > Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> > > prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> > > second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> > > very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> > Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
> > unknown.
>
> > pjk
>
> Name one in which it is even remotely as common as in Emglish.
way of deriving words, previously unknown, is emerging in English and
that it is unknown to other languages. This is a very strong
suggestion. In linguistics, we usually see present as a key to past,
i.e. what is possible and thinkable in language (in languages in
general) today is possible and thinkable in language in the past. If
you really suggest that this is an entire novelty previously unknown
to languages in general, you definitely need to prove it, because it
flies in the face of all linguistic methodology.
How many languages other than English do you have a comprehensive
command of? Ah, I know: zero, zilch, none, nada. And still you have
the sheer cheek and chutzpah to pronounce weightily upon the languages
of the world.
Franz Gnaedinger
May 16, 2012, 3:59:34 AM5/16/12
to
in Finnegans Wake by James Joyce, then horizontal gene
transfer achieved by bacteria and viruses, the latter of
much more importance than hitherto assumed, viruses
enable life, and are in the most variants a great benefit,
only a few variants are harmful. The 'tree of life' and even
the 'bush of bacteria life' (Gould) are wrong metaphors,
leaving out horizontal gene transfer.
anal...@hotmail.com
May 16, 2012, 7:35:59 AM5/16/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well one could start with compounds that were known to the ancient
> - Show quoted text -
classical IE languages such as Tatpurusha and Bahuvrihi. If modern
English shows more or less of these than its contemporaries that means
nothing and may just reflect the natural ebb and flow of innovations
and words going out of style. Then we have to identify newer types of
compounds/blends that now exist and see if English shows them in much
greater profusion than other languages, IE or not. A check of dates
of attestation might also reveal if the limited extent that French,
German etc. show these compounds was modeled on English.
Peter T. Daniels
May 16, 2012, 8:12:39 AM5/16/12
to
On May 16, 7:35 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
Is there any way to discover whether your "If" conjecture is true or
not?
> modern
> English shows more or less of these than its contemporaries that means
> nothing and may just reflect the natural ebb and flow of innovations
> and words going out of style. Then we have to identify newer types of
> compounds/blends
For instance?
> that now exist and see if English shows them in much
> greater profusion than other languages, IE or not. A check of dates
> of attestation might also reveal if the limited extent that French,
> German etc. show these compounds was modeled on English.-
Let us know when you've "checked the dates."
not?
> modern
> English shows more or less of these than its contemporaries that means
> nothing and may just reflect the natural ebb and flow of innovations
> and words going out of style. Then we have to identify newer types of
> compounds/blends
> that now exist and see if English shows them in much
> greater profusion than other languages, IE or not. A check of dates
> of attestation might also reveal if the limited extent that French,
Let us know when you've "checked the dates."
Adam Funk
May 16, 2012, 9:16:26 AM5/16/12
to
On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On May 12, 10:52 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
a portmanteau the first few times?
--
Civilization is a race between catastrophe and education.
[H G Wells]
> On May 12, 10:52 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
>> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
>> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
>> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
>> very modern and unknown outside of English.
...
>> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
>> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
>> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
>> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
>> very modern and unknown outside of English.
> (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
a portmanteau the first few times?
--
Civilization is a race between catastrophe and education.
[H G Wells]
Peter T. Daniels
May 16, 2012, 1:18:49 PM5/16/12
to
On May 16, 9:16 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 12, 10:52 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> >> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> >> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> >> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> >> very modern and unknown outside of English.
> ...
> > (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
>
> Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
> a portmanteau the first few times?
The original scandal was Watergate, which is named for the hotel/
> On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 12, 10:52 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
> >> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
> >> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
> >> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
> >> very modern and unknown outside of English.
> ...
> > (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
>
> Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
> a portmanteau the first few times?
office complex on the shore of the Potomac, literally a gate to the
water. That probably isn't known to most people, who haven't studied
the DC street map.
If anything, it became a cranberry morph: the recognizable part,
"water," was discarded, and the remainder, "-gate," became the marker
for scandals.
Where do you see portmanteauing?
Harlan Messinger
May 16, 2012, 7:56:00 PM5/16/12
to
On 5/15/2012 5:25 AM, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk"<paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>> <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com"<analys...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
>>>> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
>>>> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>>
>>> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
>>> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
>>> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
>>> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
>>> very modern and unknown outside of English.
Do you go around in your everyday life making up random things to
> On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk"<paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>> <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:f602da39-f11a-4ceb...@e18g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> On May 10, 7:34 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com"<analys...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
>>>> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
>>>> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>>
>>> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of Jamie
>>> Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think the
>>> prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate" as the
>>> second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect this is
>>> very modern and unknown outside of English.
"suspect" and challenging people around you to prove otherwise, or do
you reserve this behavior for sci.lang?
What would you do if someone you lived with kept making up things he or
she had no basis for believing and then demanded that you disprove them
and taunted you if you didn't feel like playing along?
>>
>> Would you please name three European languages in which it is indeed
>> unknown.
>>
>> pjk
>>
>
> Name one in which it is even remotely as common as in Emglish.
from someone who has no way of knowing WHETHER OR NOT there is one?
What's especially ridiculous about it is--if this WERE restricted to
English, then ... so what? At the most, you'd have an observation that
could be made about a unique feature of English. So what?
António Marques
May 16, 2012, 9:26:57 PM5/16/12
to
Peter T. Daniels
May 16, 2012, 11:27:42 PM5/16/12
to
On May 16, 9:26 pm, António Marques <antonio...@sapo.pt> wrote:
> Harlan Messinger wrote (17-05-2012 00:56):
> Harlan Messinger wrote (17-05-2012 00:56):
Because you have very bizarre "feelings."
How does "degenerate" apply to languages?
Peter T. Daniels
May 16, 2012, 11:28:53 PM5/16/12
to
Oy! All this time, "analys..." has been Antonio in disguise!
Odysseus
May 17, 2012, 4:35:14 AM5/17/12
to
In article
<bc5a0a07-eae2-4f7f...@m24g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
"anal...@hotmail.com" <anal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[a woman addicted to tanning]
> Actually the etymology of anorexia is a totally irrelevant misdrection
> since '-aholic' is a better established "morpheme" and would attach
> swimmingly to 'tan' to convey the meaning. [...]
I disagree with your premise, because "-aholic" lacks a connotation
most likely intended by the coiner, of distorted or unhealthy
body-images among women, and would therefore fail to convey a fair
portion of the meaning.
--
Odysseus
<bc5a0a07-eae2-4f7f...@m24g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
"anal...@hotmail.com" <anal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[a woman addicted to tanning]
> Actually the etymology of anorexia is a totally irrelevant misdrection
> since '-aholic' is a better established "morpheme" and would attach
I disagree with your premise, because "-aholic" lacks a connotation
most likely intended by the coiner, of distorted or unhealthy
body-images among women, and would therefore fail to convey a fair
portion of the meaning.
--
Odysseus
anal...@hotmail.com
May 17, 2012, 6:40:28 AM5/17/12
to
On May 17, 4:35 am, Odysseus <odysseus1479...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
> In article
> <bc5a0a07-eae2-4f7f-b676-d8070e4d1...@m24g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
meaning - in addition to addictiveness and unheathiness - achieving
the opposite of the intended aesthetic result (I remember reading
about someone looking like a radioactive carrot after excessive
tanning).
> In article
> <bc5a0a07-eae2-4f7f-b676-d8070e4d1...@m24g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> [a woman addicted to tanning]
>
> > Actually the etymology of anorexia is a totally irrelevant misdrection
> > since '-aholic' is a better established "morpheme" and would attach
> > swimmingly to 'tan' to convey the meaning. [...]
>
> I disagree with your premise, because "-aholic" lacks a connotation
> most likely intended by the coiner, of distorted or unhealthy
> body-images among women, and would therefore fail to convey a fair
> portion of the meaning.
>
> --
> Odysseus
Yes - that makes sense. "orexic" does convey that additional shade of
> "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> [a woman addicted to tanning]
>
> > Actually the etymology of anorexia is a totally irrelevant misdrection
> > since '-aholic' is a better established "morpheme" and would attach
> > swimmingly to 'tan' to convey the meaning. [...]
>
> I disagree with your premise, because "-aholic" lacks a connotation
> most likely intended by the coiner, of distorted or unhealthy
> body-images among women, and would therefore fail to convey a fair
> portion of the meaning.
>
> --
> Odysseus
meaning - in addition to addictiveness and unheathiness - achieving
the opposite of the intended aesthetic result (I remember reading
about someone looking like a radioactive carrot after excessive
tanning).
Toni Keskitalo
May 17, 2012, 6:19:43 AM5/17/12
to
Harlan Messinger <h.re...@gavelcade.com> writes:
> On 5/15/2012 5:25 AM, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk"<paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>>> <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> On 5/15/2012 5:25 AM, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On May 15, 1:37 am, "pauljk"<paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>>> <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> Here's another one 'Dimonfreude" (taking joy at the downfall of
>>>> Jamie Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think
>>>> the prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate"
>>>> as the second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect
>>>> this is very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> Do you go around in your everyday life making up random things to
> "suspect" and challenging people around you to prove otherwise, or do
> you reserve this behavior for sci.lang?
>
> What would you do if someone you lived with kept making up things he
> or she had no basis for believing and then demanded that you disprove
> them and taunted you if you didn't feel like playing along?
One data point: -gate is used in Finnish. It was made known -- at least
>>>> Jamie Dimon the chief of JP Morgan that just lost $2b). I think
>>>> the prototype for these kinds of words is "gate" from "Watergate"
>>>> as the second half of a compound indicating a scandal. I suspect
>>>> this is very modern and unknown outside of English.
>
> Do you go around in your everyday life making up random things to
> "suspect" and challenging people around you to prove otherwise, or do
> you reserve this behavior for sci.lang?
>
> What would you do if someone you lived with kept making up things he
> or she had no basis for believing and then demanded that you disprove
> them and taunted you if you didn't feel like playing along?
in my lifetime -- during Irangate in Reagan's time. It was applied to
Finnish politics with "Irak-gate" in 2003. It had something to do with
the upcoming war in Iraq and what Finland was going to say about it.
Lately it's been applied to blunders of politicians, it seems. The
prime minister of Finland slipped and got some plasters to his forehead,
this was called "lakeeripohjakenkä-gate" (reference to slippery soles
made of patent leather (?)) in tabloids. I've seen "persugate" on the
net, and that means political blunders of the True Finns party (a
populistic party). They got a great number of people to the parliament,
and most of them are very inexperienced. They provide lots of facepalm
moments and amusement from their shouts from the opposition. Ok, it's
scary if they get more power, but that's perhaps unlikely now.
Toni
Peter T. Daniels
May 17, 2012, 7:56:06 AM5/17/12
to
On May 17, 6:19 am, Toni Keskitalo <toni...@jippii.invalid> wrote:
> Harlan Messinger <h.rem...@gavelcade.com> writes:
Spelled <gate> ?
Ha! Finnish orthography is no longer purely phonemic -- and the world
has not come to an end!
It's not unlike "burger" entering English, having nothing to do with
its meaning in the originating language, except that it uses the
English transferred meaning.
> Harlan Messinger <h.rem...@gavelcade.com> writes:
Ha! Finnish orthography is no longer purely phonemic -- and the world
has not come to an end!
It's not unlike "burger" entering English, having nothing to do with
its meaning in the originating language, except that it uses the
English transferred meaning.
Adam Funk
May 17, 2012, 9:19:19 AM5/17/12
to
On 2012-05-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On May 16, 9:16 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> > (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
>>
>> Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
>> a portmanteau the first few times?
>
> The original scandal was Watergate, which is named for the hotel/
> office complex
I think that much is still fairly commonly known.
> On May 16, 9:16 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> > (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
>>
>> Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
>> a portmanteau the first few times?
>
> The original scandal was Watergate, which is named for the hotel/
> office complex
> on the shore of the Potomac, literally a gate to the
> water. That probably isn't known to most people, who haven't studied
> the DC street map.
> If anything, it became a cranberry morph: the recognizable part,
> "water," was discarded, and the remainder, "-gate," became the marker
> for scandals.
>
> Where do you see portmanteauing?
portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
sound reasonable?
However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
association".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_with_%22-gate%22_suffix
--
No right of private conversation was enumerated in the Constitution.
I don't suppose it occurred to anyone at the time that it could be
prevented. [Whitfield Diffie]
Adam Funk
May 17, 2012, 9:28:48 AM5/17/12
to
with borrowings.
> It's not unlike "burger" entering English, having nothing to do with
> its meaning in the originating language, except that it uses the
> English transferred meaning.
English.
--
"Gonzo, is that the contract from the devil?"
"No, Kermit, it's worse than that. This is the bill from special
effects."
Christian Weisgerber
May 17, 2012, 9:58:06 AM5/17/12
to
Toni Keskitalo <ton...@jippii.invalid> wrote:
> One data point: -gate is used in Finnish.
Also in German (e.g. Guttengate), French (e.g. Angolagate), Russian
> One data point: -gate is used in Finnish.
(e.g. Kuchmageyt), ...
Peter T. Daniels
May 17, 2012, 11:44:48 AM5/17/12
to
On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > On May 16, 9:16 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> > (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
>
> >> Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
> >> a portmanteau the first few times?
>
> > The original scandal was Watergate, which is named for the hotel/
> > office complex
>
> I think that much is still fairly commonly known.
>
> > on the shore of the Potomac, literally a gate to the
> > water. That probably isn't known to most people, who haven't studied
> > the DC street map.
>
> True, most people don't know that.
>
> > If anything, it became a cranberry morph: the recognizable part,
> > "water," was discarded, and the remainder, "-gate," became the marker
> > for scandals.
>
> > Where do you see portmanteauing?
>
> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
> sound reasonable?
Portmanteau of what? Remember, the index specimen is "chortle" =
> On 2012-05-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > On May 16, 9:16 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> On 2012-05-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> > (b) "-gate" is not an example of blending/portmanteauing.
>
> >> Because it's so widely used now that you consider it a suffix? Was it
> >> a portmanteau the first few times?
>
> > The original scandal was Watergate, which is named for the hotel/
> > office complex
>
> I think that much is still fairly commonly known.
>
> > on the shore of the Potomac, literally a gate to the
> > water. That probably isn't known to most people, who haven't studied
> > the DC street map.
>
> True, most people don't know that.
>
> > If anything, it became a cranberry morph: the recognizable part,
> > "water," was discarded, and the remainder, "-gate," became the marker
> > for scandals.
>
> > Where do you see portmanteauing?
>
> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
> sound reasonable?
chuckle + snort.
> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
> association".
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_with_%22-gate%22_suffix
Safire was the least worst of the "language mavens," because he
consulted actual linguists -- not, however, _before_ publlishing this-
or-that prescriptivist nonsense. Jim McCawley had a complete set of
signed presentation copies of his books, being perhaps his prime
correspondent.
His successor, Ben Zimmer, an actual linguist, who had been his
assistant, was recently fired by the NYT and is now, IIRC, at the
Boston Globe.
Nathan Sanders
May 17, 2012, 3:19:41 PM5/17/12
to
In article <nfaf89x...@news.ducksburg.com>,
original components are fully part of the combined meaning. "Brunch"
isn't perceived to have a "br-" prefix or a "-unch" suffix, and the
meaning of "brunch" includes the full meanings of both "breakfast" and
"lunch".
But for back-formation, speakers do perceive a morpheme, which carries
only a portion of the meaning of the original: the suffix "-gate" when
used in a new coinage doesn't mean 'Watergate' or 'Watergate scandal';
it just means 'scandal'. "Nipplegate" was a scandal involving a
nipple; it did not take place at the Watergate complex or have any
relationship at all to the Watergate scandal, except for the fact that
it was a scandal.
Nathan
--
Department of Linguistics
Swarthmore College
http://sanders.phonologist.org/
Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > Where do you see portmanteauing?
>
> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
> sound reasonable?
In a blend, there is no perceived morpheme, and the meanings of the
> On 2012-05-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > Where do you see portmanteauing?
>
> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
> sound reasonable?
original components are fully part of the combined meaning. "Brunch"
isn't perceived to have a "br-" prefix or a "-unch" suffix, and the
meaning of "brunch" includes the full meanings of both "breakfast" and
"lunch".
But for back-formation, speakers do perceive a morpheme, which carries
only a portion of the meaning of the original: the suffix "-gate" when
used in a new coinage doesn't mean 'Watergate' or 'Watergate scandal';
it just means 'scandal'. "Nipplegate" was a scandal involving a
nipple; it did not take place at the Watergate complex or have any
relationship at all to the Watergate scandal, except for the fact that
it was a scandal.
Nathan
--
Department of Linguistics
Swarthmore College
http://sanders.phonologist.org/
Peter T. Daniels
May 17, 2012, 3:48:59 PM5/17/12
to
On May 17, 3:19 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <nfaf89x1md....@news.ducksburg.com>,
Why are you calling it "back-formation," which refers to things like
*"back-formated" instead of "back-formed"?
> In article <nfaf89x1md....@news.ducksburg.com>,
*"back-formated" instead of "back-formed"?
Adam Funk
May 17, 2012, 3:57:19 PM5/17/12
to
On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
>> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
>> sound reasonable?
>
> Portmanteau of what? Remember, the index specimen is "chortle" =
> chuckle + snort.
Fowler quotes "slithy" as the example.
> On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
>> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
>> sound reasonable?
>
> Portmanteau of what? Remember, the index specimen is "chortle" =
> chuckle + snort.
>> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
>> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
>> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
>> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
>> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
>> association".
>
> One wonders who made the allegation.
which has this footnote:
Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
Magazine: p. 13.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_with_%22-gate%22_suffix
>
> Safire was the least worst of the "language mavens," because he
> consulted actual linguists -- not, however, _before_ publlishing this-
> or-that prescriptivist nonsense.
--
When Elaine turned 11, her mother sent her to train under
Donald Knuth in his mountain hideaway. [XKCD 342]
Peter T. Daniels
May 17, 2012, 5:51:31 PM5/17/12
to
On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
> >> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
> >> sound reasonable?
>
> > Portmanteau of what? Remember, the index specimen is "chortle" =
> > chuckle + snort.
>
> Fowler quotes "slithy" as the example.
Well I quoted Humpty Dumpty, who has priority.
> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> I was speculating that the first few times it was used were
> >> portmanteaux, and it gradually became a suffix as such. Does that
> >> sound reasonable?
>
> > Portmanteau of what? Remember, the index specimen is "chortle" =
> > chuckle + snort.
>
> Fowler quotes "slithy" as the example.
> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
> >> association".
>
> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>
> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
> which has this footnote:
>
> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
> Magazine: p. 13.
What is Noam Cohen's authority for psychoanalyzing William Safire?
Nathan Sanders
May 17, 2012, 6:14:52 PM5/17/12
to
In article
<c65fe8ee-e9f6-4b89...@s9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
Back-formation is identifying some substring of a longer word as being
a morpheme that it isn't.
"Back-formation" is most commonly used for referring to the creation
of a new stem/root (as with your example of the root "back-formate"),
but I've also seen it used more broadly to cover new affixes, too
(e.g., Pavey 2010:35-36).
Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
Szymanek (2005:435-436) uses "secretion" to refer to the creation of
new affixes like "-gate", "-aholic", "-teria", and "-athon".
<c65fe8ee-e9f6-4b89...@s9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
a morpheme that it isn't.
"Back-formation" is most commonly used for referring to the creation
of a new stem/root (as with your example of the root "back-formate"),
but I've also seen it used more broadly to cover new affixes, too
(e.g., Pavey 2010:35-36).
Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
Szymanek (2005:435-436) uses "secretion" to refer to the creation of
new affixes like "-gate", "-aholic", "-teria", and "-athon".
Peter T. Daniels
May 17, 2012, 11:41:38 PM5/17/12
to
> <c65fe8ee-e9f6-4b89-b6d0-c0bc085b9...@s9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
Yet once again, a fine old term is perverted by a modern.
> Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
> blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
> Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
There's probably more than one linguist called Campbell. That doesn't
seem like something Lyle Campbell would be dealing with. But whoever
this Campbell is, s/he too has committed terminology perversion.
> Szymanek (2005:435-436) uses "secretion" to refer to the creation of
> new affixes like "-gate", "-aholic", "-teria", and "-athon".
Not a perversion of existing terminology, but an extremely unpleasant
choice. There's some gland that secretes suffixes? Maybe just a
failure to ponder for even a moment the introduction of a new term --
like "autosegmental," which is not about self-segmentation, but is a
miscut of "autonomous."
> Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
> blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
> Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
seem like something Lyle Campbell would be dealing with. But whoever
this Campbell is, s/he too has committed terminology perversion.
> Szymanek (2005:435-436) uses "secretion" to refer to the creation of
> new affixes like "-gate", "-aholic", "-teria", and "-athon".
choice. There's some gland that secretes suffixes? Maybe just a
failure to ponder for even a moment the introduction of a new term --
like "autosegmental," which is not about self-segmentation, but is a
miscut of "autonomous."
Nathan Sanders
May 18, 2012, 12:30:55 AM5/18/12
to
In article
<b301813c-9048-49e8...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
I have no idea when it was first used with this meaning. I'm certain
it was not Pavey 2010, since I've known about it for at least 15 years.
> > Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
> > blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
> > Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
>
> There's probably more than one linguist called Campbell. That doesn't
> seem like something Lyle Campbell would be dealing with. But whoever
> this Campbell is, s/he too has committed terminology perversion.
Yes, it's Lyle Campbell. Why wouldn't a historical linguist be
dealing with lexical change, especially in an introductory textbook on
historical linguistics?
> > Szymanek (2005:435-436) uses "secretion" to refer to the creation of
> > new affixes like "-gate", "-aholic", "-teria", and "-athon".
>
> Not a perversion of existing terminology, but an extremely unpleasant
> choice.
Yeah, I don't particularly care for that one either.
I would prefer to have a separate term for back-formation of stems
versus back-formation of affixes, that also keeps both distinct from
blending. But other than "secretion", I don't know of one. Do you?
(As far as I can tell, Crowley doesn't give a specialized word for
back-formation of affixes, and just lumps it together with all
morphological reanalysis.)
Until one comes to light that is better then "secretion", since this
way of forming affixes seems much more like back-formation of stems
than like blending, I prefer Pavey to Campbell on this point of
terminology.
<b301813c-9048-49e8...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
it was not Pavey 2010, since I've known about it for at least 15 years.
> > Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
> > blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
> > Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
>
> There's probably more than one linguist called Campbell. That doesn't
> seem like something Lyle Campbell would be dealing with. But whoever
> this Campbell is, s/he too has committed terminology perversion.
dealing with lexical change, especially in an introductory textbook on
historical linguistics?
> > Szymanek (2005:435-436) uses "secretion" to refer to the creation of
> > new affixes like "-gate", "-aholic", "-teria", and "-athon".
>
> Not a perversion of existing terminology, but an extremely unpleasant
> choice.
I would prefer to have a separate term for back-formation of stems
versus back-formation of affixes, that also keeps both distinct from
blending. But other than "secretion", I don't know of one. Do you?
(As far as I can tell, Crowley doesn't give a specialized word for
back-formation of affixes, and just lumps it together with all
morphological reanalysis.)
Until one comes to light that is better then "secretion", since this
way of forming affixes seems much more like back-formation of stems
than like blending, I prefer Pavey to Campbell on this point of
terminology.
Nathan Sanders
May 18, 2012, 1:08:58 AM5/18/12
to
In article <sanders-CB1BDA...@free.teranews.com>,
Linguistics_ (2003:1) agrees with Campbell, classifying the use of
"-aholic" as blending, further vindicating Adam calling the similar
use of "-gate" a blend.
Brinton's _The Structure of Modern English: A Linguistic Introduction_
says more hedgingly that "these might be analyzed as blends", but
notes that "one scholar" (she doesn't say who) calls them "splinters"
(2000:89). I like that better than "secretion"!
But Beard says in _The Handbook of Morphology_ that "[c]lipping
(telephone: phone), blends (smoke + fog = smog), acronymization
(aids), and analogical formation (workaholic) all conform to the
description of back formation in significant ways" (2001:56), thus
treating "-aholic" and the like not as blends, but as a type of back
formation.
Grzega also disagrees with Campbell, Alego, and Brinton, but doesn't
provide an alternative term: "[-aholic's] occurrence in words such as
workaholic and sexaholic cannot simply be explained as the result of a
blending with alcoholic" (2002:16)
So there is quite a bit of disagreement on what to call this
phenomenon!
Nathan Sanders <san...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article
> <b301813c-9048-49e8...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 6:14 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
> > > blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
> > > Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
> >
> > There's probably more than one linguist called Campbell. That doesn't
> > seem like something Lyle Campbell would be dealing with. But whoever
> > this Campbell is, s/he too has committed terminology perversion.
>
> Yes, it's Lyle Campbell. Why wouldn't a historical linguist be
> dealing with lexical change, especially in an introductory textbook on
> historical linguistics?
Algeo's entry for ABBREVIATION in the _International Encyclopedia of
> In article
> <b301813c-9048-49e8...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 6:14 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Campbell (2000:104) lists uses of both "-gate" and "-aholic" under
> > > blending (what you have been calling "portamanteauing"), which means
> > > Adam was justified in identifying "-gate" forms as blends.
> >
> > There's probably more than one linguist called Campbell. That doesn't
> > seem like something Lyle Campbell would be dealing with. But whoever
> > this Campbell is, s/he too has committed terminology perversion.
>
> Yes, it's Lyle Campbell. Why wouldn't a historical linguist be
> dealing with lexical change, especially in an introductory textbook on
> historical linguistics?
Linguistics_ (2003:1) agrees with Campbell, classifying the use of
"-aholic" as blending, further vindicating Adam calling the similar
use of "-gate" a blend.
Brinton's _The Structure of Modern English: A Linguistic Introduction_
says more hedgingly that "these might be analyzed as blends", but
notes that "one scholar" (she doesn't say who) calls them "splinters"
(2000:89). I like that better than "secretion"!
But Beard says in _The Handbook of Morphology_ that "[c]lipping
(telephone: phone), blends (smoke + fog = smog), acronymization
(aids), and analogical formation (workaholic) all conform to the
description of back formation in significant ways" (2001:56), thus
treating "-aholic" and the like not as blends, but as a type of back
formation.
Grzega also disagrees with Campbell, Alego, and Brinton, but doesn't
provide an alternative term: "[-aholic's] occurrence in words such as
workaholic and sexaholic cannot simply be explained as the result of a
blending with alcoholic" (2002:16)
So there is quite a bit of disagreement on what to call this
phenomenon!
Harlan Messinger
May 18, 2012, 6:36:17 AM5/18/12
to
On 5/16/2012 11:27 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Antonio was expressing his feeling about what analyst's reply would be.
Do you disagree with him?
Do you disagree with him?
Harlan Messinger
May 18, 2012, 6:37:47 AM5/18/12
to
On 5/10/2012 7:34 PM, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
A paper on the topic (from Annual Review of the Faculty of Philosophy
> This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
for some reason):
http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/55567544/morfeme-burger-furter-holic-scape-i-gate-u-engleskom-jeziku-reinterpretirani-sufiksoidi
Harlan Messinger
May 18, 2012, 6:40:03 AM5/18/12
to
these lexical elements, their morphological status has not yet been
clearly defined, as to whether they belong to the class of final
combining forms or, as this paper argues, they constitute a new class of
formatives. An important issue discussed in this paper is whether these
lexical elements are free or bound, and whether it is at all possible to
classify them as belonging to one of the two groups."
"Two of the re-combined final combining forms analysed in this paper are
nowadays considered to have become free morphemes (burger and furter),
while -scape, -holic and, especially, -gate, are still treated as bound
morphemes, although they seem to be going through a transitional phase
from being bound to becoming free lexical elements. Thus, for example,
one can ask for a burger, but it is debatable whether he/she can call
their friend a holic. Applying the prototype-theory model to the class
of re-combined final combining forms, it could be concluded that burger
is the prototypical example and that all other formatives belonging to
the category deviate from this centre to a greater or less extent, both
in terms of their status as free or bound morphemes and the way the
non-specialist resegmentation of their one-time polymorphemic
superordinates took place. To conclude, re-combined final combining
forms are a new, highly frequent and heterogeneous class of lexical
elements whose strong semantic density and unique morphological
properties make them different from other classes of formatives."
Peter T. Daniels
May 18, 2012, 8:41:00 AM5/18/12
to
Did you go on to my message of one minute later, when I discovered the
reply was posted by Antonio and not by analys... ?
Peter T. Daniels
May 18, 2012, 8:44:58 AM5/18/12
to
On May 18, 6:37 am, Harlan Messinger <h.rem...@gavelcade.com> wrote:
> for some reason):
>
> http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/55567544/morfeme-burger-fu...
Access to the EBSCO database is highly restricted. Plus, you don't
mention that the article is in a rather unusual language (that perhaps
could only be identified when more than just its title is visible);
there is a lengthy abstract in English.
> On 5/10/2012 7:34 PM, analys...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> A paper on the topic (from Annual Review of the Faculty of Philosophy
of ... ?
>
> > This word has been coined to describe a woman addicted to tanning who
> > has beem in the news recently. Obviously its only passing fad - but
> > isn't this method of word-formation unusual?
>
> A paper on the topic (from Annual Review of the Faculty of Philosophy
> for some reason):
>
> http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/55567544/morfeme-burger-fu...
Access to the EBSCO database is highly restricted. Plus, you don't
mention that the article is in a rather unusual language (that perhaps
could only be identified when more than just its title is visible);
there is a lengthy abstract in English.
Adam Funk
May 18, 2012, 10:18:46 AM5/18/12
to
On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
>> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
>> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
>> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
>> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
>> >> association".
>>
>> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>>
>> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
>> which has this footnote:
>>
>> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
>> Magazine: p. 13.
>
> One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
> On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
>> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
>> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
>> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
>> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
>> >> association".
>>
>> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>>
>> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
>> which has this footnote:
>>
>> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
>> Magazine: p. 13.
>
> One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
--
Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results,
but that's not why we do it. [Richard Feynman]
Adam Funk
May 18, 2012, 10:19:44 AM5/18/12
to
Peter T. Daniels
May 18, 2012, 11:03:10 AM5/18/12
to
On May 18, 10:18 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
> >> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
> >> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
> >> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
> >> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
> >> >> association".
>
> >> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>
> >> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
> >> which has this footnote:
>
> >> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
> >> Magazine: p. 13.
>
> > One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
>
> One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
Being a wikipedia connoisseur is not exactly something to brag about.
> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
> >> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
> >> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
> >> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
> >> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
> >> >> association".
>
> >> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>
> >> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
> >> which has this footnote:
>
> >> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
> >> Magazine: p. 13.
>
> > One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
>
> One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
May 18, 2012, 5:36:58 PM5/18/12
to
benl...@ihug.co.nz
May 18, 2012, 5:35:42 PM5/18/12
to
Filozofskog Fakulteta u Novom Sadu/ Annual Review of the Faculty of
Philosophy of Novi Sad. From our point of view it seems odd not to
mention a larger institution of which the Faculty of Philosophy is a
part, but it is in fact part of the University of Novi Sad. I'm also
guessing that "Faculty of Philosophy" is roughly equivalent to
"Faculty of Arts" in institutions I'm more familiar with.
The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
May 18, 2012, 7:58:13 PM5/18/12
to
growing up.
The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
May 18, 2012, 8:01:02 PM5/18/12
to
On 17 Maj, 16:28, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 6:19 am, Toni Keskitalo <toni...@jippii.invalid> wrote:
> >> One data point: -gate is used in Finnish. It was made known -- at least
> >> in my lifetime -- during Irangate in Reagan's time. It was applied to
> >> Finnish politics with "Irak-gate" in 2003. It had something to do with
> >> the upcoming war in Iraq and what Finland was going to say about it.
>
> >> Lately it's been applied to blunders of politicians, it seems. The
> >> prime minister of Finland slipped and got some plasters to his forehead,
> >> this was called "lakeeripohjakenkä-gate" (reference to slippery soles
> >> made of patent leather (?)) in tabloids. I've seen "persugate" on the
> >> net, and that means political blunders of the True Finns party (a
> >> populistic party). They got a great number of people to the parliament,
> >> and most of them are very inexperienced. They provide lots of facepalm
> >> moments and amusement from their shouts from the opposition. Ok, it's
> >> scary if they get more power, but that's perhaps unlikely now.
>
> > Spelled <gate> ?
>
> > Ha! Finnish orthography is no longer purely phonemic -- and the world
> > has not come to an end!
>
> I'm rather saddened to see Finnish cave in to that route for dealing
> with borrowings.
Oh, it's because every stupid loser in this country fancies himself to
> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 6:19 am, Toni Keskitalo <toni...@jippii.invalid> wrote:
> >> One data point: -gate is used in Finnish. It was made known -- at least
> >> in my lifetime -- during Irangate in Reagan's time. It was applied to
> >> Finnish politics with "Irak-gate" in 2003. It had something to do with
> >> the upcoming war in Iraq and what Finland was going to say about it.
>
> >> Lately it's been applied to blunders of politicians, it seems. The
> >> prime minister of Finland slipped and got some plasters to his forehead,
> >> this was called "lakeeripohjakenkä-gate" (reference to slippery soles
> >> made of patent leather (?)) in tabloids. I've seen "persugate" on the
> >> net, and that means political blunders of the True Finns party (a
> >> populistic party). They got a great number of people to the parliament,
> >> and most of them are very inexperienced. They provide lots of facepalm
> >> moments and amusement from their shouts from the opposition. Ok, it's
> >> scary if they get more power, but that's perhaps unlikely now.
>
> > Spelled <gate> ?
>
> > Ha! Finnish orthography is no longer purely phonemic -- and the world
> > has not come to an end!
>
> I'm rather saddened to see Finnish cave in to that route for dealing
> with borrowings.
be part of a thrilling world of thrilling things such as sci-fi and
porn, as soon as he learns a lousy excuse of English, and once the
monkey learns it, he needs to flaunt it. Finnish was too sophisticated
a language for this race of monkeys. This is why it is dying.
The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
May 18, 2012, 8:03:37 PM5/18/12
to
knowledge of Slavic languages, you would immediately have recognized
the language as cultivated Shtokavian, i.e. Bosno-Croato-Serbian.
Peter T. Daniels
May 18, 2012, 8:57:36 PM5/18/12
to
If those are the two choices, then yes.
Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
it certainly suggests something is badly put.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
May 18, 2012, 10:31:32 PM5/18/12
to
On May 19, 12:57 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On May 18, 5:36 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 19, 3:03 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > On May 18, 10:18 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > > > > On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > > > >> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
> > > > >> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
> > > > >> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
> > > > >> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
> > > > >> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
> > > > >> >> association".
>
> > > > >> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>
> > > > >> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
> > > > >> which has this footnote:
>
> > > > >> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
> > > > >> Magazine: p. 13.
>
> > > > > One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
>
> > > > One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
>
> > > Being a wikipedia connoisseur is not exactly something to brag about.
>
> > And you think being ignorant of it is?-
>
> If those are the two choices, then yes.
Well, it was a good strategic choice to avoid admitting you were ill-
> On May 18, 5:36 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 19, 3:03 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > On May 18, 10:18 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > > > > On May 17, 3:57 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On 2012-05-17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > > > >> > On May 17, 9:19 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> However, Wikipedia has a 'List of scandals with "-gate" suffix'
> > > > >> >> article, but unfortunately most of them aren't dated there, so it
> > > > >> >> would take some word to plot its proliferation. Safire used it a lot,
> > > > >> >> allegedly in order to "rehabilitat[e] Nixon by relentlessly tarring
> > > > >> >> his successors with the same rhetorical brush – diminished guilt by
> > > > >> >> association".
>
> > > > >> > One wonders who made the allegation.
>
> > > > >> Well, one could look in the Wikipedia article I gave the URL for,
> > > > >> which has this footnote:
>
> > > > >> Cohen, Noam (5 February 1996). "The Smoking Lexicon". New York
> > > > >> Magazine: p. 13.
>
> > > > > One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
>
> > > > One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
>
> > > Being a wikipedia connoisseur is not exactly something to brag about.
>
> > And you think being ignorant of it is?-
>
> If those are the two choices, then yes.
informed about it. In a positive way, I suppose it shows that your
frequently expressed disdain for WP is reflected in your practice.
> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
not, but whether there are footnotes. The "one" who doesn't expect
there to be footnotes is "one" who doesn't know much about it.
Ruud Harmsen
May 19, 2012, 4:13:38 AM5/19/12
to
>> > One doesn't expect footnotes in wikipedia articles.
>>
>> One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> schreef/wrote:
>>
>> One who knows how Wikipedia works does expect them.
>Being a wikipedia connoisseur is not exactly something to brag about.
I brag about it: I am a Wikipedia connaisseur.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com/new
Peter T. Daniels
May 19, 2012, 7:25:33 AM5/19/12
to
On May 18, 1:08 am, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <sanders-CB1BDA.00305518052...@free.teranews.com>,
> Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
If someone has determined that several apparently disparate phenomena
are actually instances of some overarching phenomenon, they should not
have assigned the name of one of those phenomena (viz., "back-
formation") to the overarching phenomenon.
> In article <sanders-CB1BDA.00305518052...@free.teranews.com>,
> Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
are actually instances of some overarching phenomenon, they should not
have assigned the name of one of those phenomena (viz., "back-
formation") to the overarching phenomenon.
DKleinecke
May 19, 2012, 9:25:32 PM5/19/12
to
separate word it is not compounded here. This is, I believe, a
blending where the entire first word was included.
António Marques
May 19, 2012, 10:16:25 PM5/19/12
to
Hans Aberg
May 20, 2012, 10:22:21 AM5/20/12
to
Greece, education or upbringing, also used to form 'encyclopedia',
meaning 'all-around education'. So WP is merely 'quick education',
though originally I think it is a contraction of 'wiki-wiki' and
'encyclopedia', referring to the quick editing method, rather than being
quick source of information.
Hans
Adam Funk
May 21, 2012, 9:17:32 AM5/21/12
to
On 2012-05-19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
You're qualified to correct it.
> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
--
When you look at a photograph of the earth you don't see any
borders. That realization is where our hope as a planet lies.
[Graham Nash]
pauljk
May 22, 2012, 4:12:33 AM5/22/12
to
"Adam Funk" <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in message
news:csrp89x...@news.ducksburg.com...
> On 2012-05-19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
>> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
>> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
>> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
Could the email be referring to/misinterpreting the text in your
>
>> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
>> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
>> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
>> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
article "Fundamentals of Grammatology" (page 728, Journal of the
American Oriental Society, 1990)?
<quote>
(6) Both the Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings are
alphabetic developments from a Semitic syllabary,
which, in tum, is a creation that follows the model of
the Egyptian syllabary. Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings
are not "a1phabets"; Northwest Semitic writing is not
a "syllabary." Only the theory itself makes it necessary
to apply these terms in this way,
It is useful to review the argument Gelb uses to
justify calling (West) Semitic writing (i.e., Phoenician,
etc.) a syllabary.
<unquote>
pjk
Peter T. Daniels
May 22, 2012, 8:45:43 AM5/22/12
to
On May 22, 4:12 am, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> "Adam Funk" <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in message
>
> news:csrp89x...@news.ducksburg.com...
>
> > On 2012-05-19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> >> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> >> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> >> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
>
> Could the email be referring to/misinterpreting the text in your
> article "Fundamentals of Grammatology" (page 728, Journal of the
> American Oriental Society, 1990)?
No, he said he learned about my work from the wikiipedia article and
> "Adam Funk" <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in message
>
> news:csrp89x...@news.ducksburg.com...
>
> > On 2012-05-19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> >> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> >> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> >> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
>
> Could the email be referring to/misinterpreting the text in your
> article "Fundamentals of Grammatology" (page 728, Journal of the
> American Oriental Society, 1990)?
from a person whose name I did not recognize.
> <quote>
> (6) Both the Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings are
> alphabetic developments from a Semitic syllabary,
> which, in tum, is a creation that follows the model of
> the Egyptian syllabary. Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings
> are not "a1phabets"; Northwest Semitic writing is not
> a "syllabary." Only the theory itself makes it necessary
> to apply these terms in this way,
which I refute in the article.
Arnaud Fournet
May 25, 2012, 3:25:34 AM5/25/12
to
Le mardi 22 mai 2012 14:45:43 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On May 22, 4:12 am, "pauljk"
> On May 22, 4:12 am, "pauljk"
> wrote:
> > "Adam Funk" <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:csrp89x...@news.ducksburg.com...
> >
> > > On 2012-05-19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >
> > >> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> > >> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> > >> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> > >> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
> >
> > Could the email be referring to/misinterpreting the text in your
> > article "Fundamentals of Grammatology" (page 728, Journal of the
> > American Oriental Society, 1990)?
>
> No, he said he learned about my work from the wikiipedia article and
> from a person whose name I did not recognize.
>
> > <quote>
> > (6) Both the Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings are
> > alphabetic developments from a Semitic syllabary,
> > which, in tum, is a creation that follows the model of
> > the Egyptian syllabary. Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings
> > are not "a1phabets"; Northwest Semitic writing is not
> > a "syllabary." Only the theory itself makes it necessary
> > to apply these terms in this way,
>
> That's either a direct quotation or a paraphrase of Gelb's claim,
> which I refute in the article.
>
***
> > "Adam Funk" <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:csrp89x...@news.ducksburg.com...
> >
> > > On 2012-05-19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >
> > >> Just yesterday, I had an email from someone who said that wiki in the
> > >> entry about me says that I discuss "whether the West Semitic scripts
> > >> are alphabets or syllabaries." I don't see where he got that from, but
> > >> it certainly suggests something is badly put.
> >
> > Could the email be referring to/misinterpreting the text in your
> > article "Fundamentals of Grammatology" (page 728, Journal of the
> > American Oriental Society, 1990)?
>
> No, he said he learned about my work from the wikiipedia article and
> from a person whose name I did not recognize.
>
> > <quote>
> > (6) Both the Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings are
> > alphabetic developments from a Semitic syllabary,
> > which, in tum, is a creation that follows the model of
> > the Egyptian syllabary. Ethiopie and Sanskrit writings
> > are not "a1phabets"; Northwest Semitic writing is not
> > a "syllabary." Only the theory itself makes it necessary
> > to apply these terms in this way,
>
> That's either a direct quotation or a paraphrase of Gelb's claim,
> which I refute in the article.
>
What claim do you refute?
A.
***
> > It is useful to review the argument Gelb uses to
> > justify calling (West) Semitic writing (i.e., Phoenician,
> > etc.) a syllabary.
> > <unquote>
Neither hieroglyphs nor the Semitic alphabet(s) are syllabaries.
I wonder how such an absurd conclusion can be reached.
A.
Peter T. Daniels
May 25, 2012, 8:06:25 AM5/25/12
to
Gelb's claim, but whoever posted it failed to note the bold type,
which reproduced Gelb's assertion from Encyclopaedia Britannica,
versus the plain type, which is my refutation. The first of the three
sentences is Gelb, the second and third sentences are me. Of course
it's not clear without (1)-(5) as well.
> ***
>
> What claim do you refute?
> > > It is useful to review the argument Gelb uses to
> > > justify calling (West) Semitic writing (i.e., Phoenician,
> > > etc.) a syllabary.
> > > <unquote>
>
> ***
>
> Neither hieroglyphs nor the Semitic alphabet(s) are syllabaries.
>
> I wonder how such an absurd conclusion can be reached.
His 1952/1963 book *A Study of Writing* was translated into many
languages, even French.
And his "absurd conclusion" was followed in many treatments for the
next 40 years.
Arnaud Fournet
May 25, 2012, 9:40:54 AM5/25/12
to
What is Gelb's claim?
A.
***
> > > > It is useful to review the argument Gelb uses to
> > > > justify calling (West) Semitic writing (i.e., Phoenician,
> > > > etc.) a syllabary.
> > > > <unquote>
> >
> > ***
> >
> > Neither hieroglyphs nor the Semitic alphabet(s) are syllabaries.
> >
> > I wonder how such an absurd conclusion can be reached.
>
> You've never heard of I. J. Gelb?
>
> His 1952/1963 book *A Study of Writing* was translated into many
> languages, even French.
>
> And his "absurd conclusion" was followed in many treatments for the
> next 40 years.
This does not make it less absurd in any way(s).
A.
Peter T. Daniels
May 25, 2012, 10:22:33 AM5/25/12
to
Start with "Principle of Unidirectional Development."
> > > > > It is useful to review the argument Gelb uses to
> > > > > justify calling (West) Semitic writing (i.e., Phoenician,
> > > > > etc.) a syllabary.
> > > > > <unquote>
>
> > > ***
>
> > > Neither hieroglyphs nor the Semitic alphabet(s) are syllabaries.
>
> > > I wonder how such an absurd conclusion can be reached.
>
> > You've never heard of I. J. Gelb?
>
> > His 1952/1963 book *A Study of Writing* was translated into many
> > languages, even French.
>
> > And his "absurd conclusion" was followed in many treatments for the
> > next 40 years.
>
> ***
>
> This does not make it less absurd in any way(s).
referenced above.
Arnaud Fournet
May 27, 2012, 8:34:02 AM5/27/12
to
Speaking thru riddles and puzzles is not a form of intelligence, fraud.
A.
Peter T. Daniels
May 27, 2012, 8:41:41 AM5/27/12
to
Further Hint: When you google the phrase in quotes above (use the
quotation mark), the first and IIRC third hits are links to pdf's of
that article of mine. (Of course that might be google being senstive
to my identity, but it means it wouldn't be hard to find it in
scholar.google.com, either.
Arnaud Fournet
May 27, 2012, 12:31:20 PM5/27/12
to
I still do not perceive what you actually stated and what you claim to have rejected or refuted.
A.
Peter T. Daniels
May 27, 2012, 1:27:58 PM5/27/12
to
Arnaud Fournet
May 27, 2012, 2:28:43 PM5/27/12
to
Can't access it,
If you mean that of 1990,
A.
Peter T. Daniels
May 27, 2012, 5:42:16 PM5/27/12
to
to two different sites with copies.
It's also freely available in JSTOR, Journal of the American Oriental
Society 1990 (probably no. 4, maybe no. 3).
If you still can't find it, the most recent full treatment is in the
Gene Gragg Festschrift
http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/saoc60.pdf
(Sorry, you can't download just one article.)
Arnaud Fournet
May 28, 2012, 2:35:05 AM5/28/12
to
Le dimanche 27 mai 2012 23:42:16 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On May 27, 2:28 pm, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > Le dimanche 27 mai 2012 19:27:58 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > On May 27, 12:31 pm, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > > Le dimanche 27 mai 2012 14:41:41 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > > > On May 27, 8:34 am, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > > > > Le vendredi 25 mai 2012 16:22:33 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> >
> > > > > > Speaking thru riddles and puzzles is not a form of intelligence, fraud.
> >
> > > > > What in the 1990 article do you find to be "riddling" or "puzzling"?
> >
> > > > > Further Hint: When you google the phrase in quotes above (use the
> > > > > quotation mark), the first and IIRC third hits are links to pdf's of
> > > > > that article of mine. (Of course that might be google being senstive
> > > > > to my identity, but it means it wouldn't be hard to find it in
> > > > > scholar.google.com, either.
> >
> > > > ***
> >
> > > > I still do not perceive what you actually stated and what you claim to have rejected or refuted.
> >
> > > Read the fucking article.
> >
> > ***
> >
> > Can't access it,
> > If you mean that of 1990,
>
> Why can't you? I didn't even google specifically for it and got links
> to two different sites with copies.
>
> It's also freely available in JSTOR, Journal of the American Oriental
> Society 1990 (probably no. 4, maybe no. 3).
***
> On May 27, 2:28 pm, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > Le dimanche 27 mai 2012 19:27:58 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > On May 27, 12:31 pm, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > > Le dimanche 27 mai 2012 14:41:41 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > > > On May 27, 8:34 am, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > > > > Le vendredi 25 mai 2012 16:22:33 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> >
> > > > > > Speaking thru riddles and puzzles is not a form of intelligence, fraud.
> >
> > > > > What in the 1990 article do you find to be "riddling" or "puzzling"?
> >
> > > > > Further Hint: When you google the phrase in quotes above (use the
> > > > > quotation mark), the first and IIRC third hits are links to pdf's of
> > > > > that article of mine. (Of course that might be google being senstive
> > > > > to my identity, but it means it wouldn't be hard to find it in
> > > > > scholar.google.com, either.
> >
> > > > ***
> >
> > > > I still do not perceive what you actually stated and what you claim to have rejected or refuted.
> >
> > > Read the fucking article.
> >
> > ***
> >
> > Can't access it,
> > If you mean that of 1990,
>
> Why can't you? I didn't even google specifically for it and got links
> to two different sites with copies.
>
> It's also freely available in JSTOR, Journal of the American Oriental
> Society 1990 (probably no. 4, maybe no. 3).
No it is *not* freely available;
A.
***
>
> If you still can't find it, the most recent full treatment is in the
> Gene Gragg Festschrift
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/saoc60.pdf
>
> (Sorry, you can't download just one article.)
Not really a problem.
I can read the other papers as well.
A.
Arnaud Fournet
May 28, 2012, 4:31:22 AM5/28/12
to
I've read your own paper.
My comments on that paper would be:
1. your own jargonery does not add any light on the issues.
2. punico-berber is strikingly absent from the picture.
You had nothing to paste from somebody else on that issue!?
3. your idea that Egyptian owes anything to Mesopotamia is nonsense.
Egyptian with its complex pluri-alphabetic signs was nearly 1000 years in advance of Mesopotamia, which reaches complete writing (words + plus case-marks) only at the end of the 3rd millenium BCE when Egyptian had already reached that stage at the end of the 4h millenium BCE.
It is also quite clear that hieroglyphs have Fayyumic dialectal features (r=l=n), a defect of the system that took 2000 years to be emended.
That system is autochthonous, with dialectal features.
On the whole this paper does little to remove my previous impression that you do not have a real knowledge of the issues and that most of your activity is about selling your jargonery, in a kind of hybristic pedantry.
Of course your rejection of Gelb's fancies is correct.
But thrashing an open door is not a proof of competence.
Another paper on presanalization is worth being read and re-read IMO.
Anyway thanks for reference.
A.
Peter T. Daniels
May 28, 2012, 8:21:36 AM5/28/12
to
with an institution that does.
> > If you still can't find it, the most recent full treatment is in the
> > Gene Gragg Festschrift
>
> >http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/saoc60.pdf
>
> > (Sorry, you can't download just one article.)
>
> ***
>
> Not really a problem.
>
> I can read the other papers as well.
Peter T. Daniels
May 28, 2012, 8:27:02 AM5/28/12
to
> My comments on that paper would be:
>
> 1. your own jargonery does not add any light on the issues.
with the 1990.
> 2. punico-berber is strikingly absent from the picture.
> You had nothing to paste from somebody else on that issue!?
> 3. your idea that Egyptian owes anything to Mesopotamia is nonsense.
explain this assertion that goes against 150 years of research.
> Egyptian with its complex pluri-alphabetic signs was nearly 1000 years in advance of Mesopotamia, which reaches complete writing (words + plus case-marks) only at the end of the 3rd millenium BCE when Egyptian had already reached that stage at the end of the 4h millenium BCE.
What's your explanation for what would be an utterly unique invention
of consonants-only writing _de novo_? What made Egyptian brains so
immensely different from all other human brains?
> It is also quite clear that hieroglyphs have Fayyumic dialectal features (r=l=n), a defect of the system that took 2000 years to be emended.
> That system is autochthonous, with dialectal features.
>
> On the whole this paper does little to remove my previous impression that you do not have a real knowledge of the issues and that most of your activity is about selling your jargonery, in a kind of hybristic pedantry.
> Of course your rejection of Gelb's fancies is correct.
> But thrashing an open door is not a proof of competence.
Are you really unaware that "Gelb's fancies" prevailed for some 40
years?
> Another paper on presanalization is worth being read and re-read IMO.
> Anyway thanks for reference.
Arnaud Fournet
May 28, 2012, 9:32:13 AM5/28/12
to
it's not freely available from right here where I'm currently sitting,
so it's not freely available. Period.
Got it, Mister fuss-about-lawyerese-details?
A.
***
>
> > > If you still can't find it, the most recent full treatment is in the
> > > Gene Gragg Festschrift
> >
> > >http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/saoc60.pdf
> >
> > > (Sorry, you can't download just one article.)
> >
> > ***
> >
> > Not really a problem.
> >
> > I can read the other papers as well.
>
> Which ones did you like best?
One of the worst papers is certainly the one by Hoberman about Gragg.
A huge outpour of scientific and historical idiocies and lies.
Among the good ones,
Prenasalization in Aramaic by Randall Garr is outstanding.
Militarëv's paper is good, and I've already cited it!
Pardee is also fairly good although defective at the same time.
Some papers are hyper-specialized so it's hard to assess what they may bring forth. The rest and that includes your contribution is (below) average blabla.
A.
Arnaud Fournet
May 28, 2012, 9:41:58 AM5/28/12
to
No Mr Hybristic Pedantesque Jargonizer,
It's not "too subtle for you".
It's just gibberish jargon, parading as an "improvement",
when it is not an "improvement" in any way.
A.
***
>
> > 2. punico-berber is strikingly absent from the picture.
> > You had nothing to paste from somebody else on that issue!?
>
> ? How is it different from any other script adaptation?
You failed to deal with it in your paper.
A.
***
>
> > 3. your idea that Egyptian owes anything to Mesopotamia is nonsense.
>
> If you had any visible credentials in Egyptology, I'd ask you to
> explain this assertion that goes against 150 years of research.
Who believes that crap but bigoted Assyriologists??
You believe your own asshole is the only place on earth where Truth can show up or down?
A.
***
>
> > Egyptian with its complex pluri-alphabetic signs was nearly 1000 years in advance of Mesopotamia, which reaches complete writing (words + plus case-marks) only at the end of the 3rd millenium BCE when Egyptian had already reached that stage at the end of the 4h millenium BCE.
>
> Ah, a teleologist. History doesn't work that way.
>
> What's your explanation for what would be an utterly unique invention
> of consonants-only writing _de novo_?
It's not consonants-only, fraud.
Egyptians have allways been able to write vowels but the fact is they did not write them most of time.
A.
***
What made Egyptian brains so
> immensely different from all other human brains?
This is irrelevant.
The historical observation is that they invented a different system from Mesopotamians, Chinese or Meso-American people.
I'm just observing what they did, not making crypto-racist statements about their brains or whatever idea of that kind Americans relish in.
A.
***
>
> > It is also quite clear that hieroglyphs have Fayyumic dialectal features (r=l=n), a defect of the system that took 2000 years to be emended.
> > That system is autochthonous, with dialectal features.
> >
> > On the whole this paper does little to remove my previous impression that you do not have a real knowledge of the issues and that most of your activity is about selling your jargonery, in a kind of hybristic pedantry.
>
> What "issues" would you identify?
>
> > Of course your rejection of Gelb's fancies is correct.
> > But thrashing an open door is not a proof of competence.
>
> That makes no sense.
>
> Are you really unaware that "Gelb's fancies" prevailed for some 40
> years?
This does not make them no "fancies".
A.
***
>
> > Another paper on presanalization is worth being read and re-read IMO.
>
> On _what_?
presanalization
A.
***
>
> > Anyway thanks for reference.
pauljk
May 28, 2012, 9:55:02 AM5/28/12
to
"Arnaud Fournet" <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:b2b7002b-b08e-458c...@googlegroups.com...
pjk
Arnaud Fournet
May 28, 2012, 9:59:20 AM5/28/12
to
Haaaah!
You are more intelligent than the fraud...
A.
***
Peter T. Daniels
May 28, 2012, 12:19:52 PM5/28/12
to
On May 28, 9:32 am, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Le lundi 28 mai 2012 14:21:36 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > Well, you do have to go to a library that subscribes, or be affiliated
> > with an institution that does.
>
> ***
>
> it's not freely available from right here where I'm currently sitting,
> so it's not freely available. Period.
> Got it, Mister fuss-about-lawyerese-details?
What a bizarrely egocentric world you inhabit.
> Le lundi 28 mai 2012 14:21:36 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > Well, you do have to go to a library that subscribes, or be affiliated
> > with an institution that does.
>
> ***
>
> it's not freely available from right here where I'm currently sitting,
> so it's not freely available. Period.
> Got it, Mister fuss-about-lawyerese-details?
> > > > If you still can't find it, the most recent full treatment is in the
> > > > Gene Gragg Festschrift
>
> > > >http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/saoc60.pdf
>
> > > > (Sorry, you can't download just one article.)
>
> > > ***
>
> > > Not really a problem.
>
> > > I can read the other papers as well.
>
> > Which ones did you like best?
>
> ***
>
> One of the worst papers is certainly the one by Hoberman about Gragg.
> A huge outpour of scientific and historical idiocies and lies.
> Among the good ones,
> Prenasalization in Aramaic by Randall Garr is outstanding.
>
> Militarëv's paper is good, and I've already cited it!
>
> Pardee is also fairly good although defective at the same time.
What is your background in Ugaritic studies?
> Some papers are hyper-specialized so it's hard to assess what they may bring forth. The rest and that includes your contribution is (below) average blabla.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages