Sanskrit jan and English birth
Dušan Vukotić
English birth? Are these words derived from the same basis?
DV
phog...@abo.fi
> What is the relation between Sanskrit jan (give birth, be born) and
> English birth? Are these words derived from the same basis?
Of course they aren't. The English word bith is related to the
Sanskrit root bhr-, which means "to carry, to support". Cognates
include German gebären, Latin ferre, fero, and Irish beir-, breith.
phog...@abo.fi
More cognates: Swedish bära, [vittnes]börd, [yver]boren, German
Geburt, Icelandic bera.
Dušan Vukoti
Nice beginning! Can you try harder?
DV
Peter T. Daniels
Cognates within Gmc don't do anything to forestall whatever argument
DV may have up his sleeve. Do you have anything outside Gmc, II, and
Italo-Celtic?
phog...@abo.fi
Does _anything_ forestall his "arguments"?
phog...@abo.fi
I don't really see why I should.
Peter T. Daniels
Well, if you have something from Balto-Slavic (BS seems especially
appropriate here), it could obviate his search for something in
Serbian with a surface resemblance. Do any of the IE etymological
dictionaries fully incorporate the Anatolian data?
John Atkinson
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote...
>
> > >> What is the relation between Sanskrit jan (give birth, be born)
> > >> and
> > >> English birth? Are these words derived from the same basis?
>
> >> Of course they aren't. The English word bith is related to the
> >> Sanskrit root bhr-, which means "to carry, to support". Cognates
> >> include German gebären, Latin ferre, fero, and Irish beir-, breith.
>
> > More cognates: Swedish bära, [vittnes]börd, [yver]boren, German
> > Geburt, Icelandic bera.
> Cognates within Gmc don't do anything to forestall whatever argument
> DV may have up his sleeve. Do you have anything outside Gmc, II, and
> Italo-Celtic?
PIE * bhe're- > Greek phe'ro, Armenian berem, Toch A and B par, Old
Irish beirid, Sanskrit bha'rati, Avestan baraiti, all meaning 'bear'.
Plus OCS bero, 'gather', Albanian bie, 'bring, take'.
And while we're at it, PIE *g^enh1- > Sanskrit janati, Old Latin geno:,
OEnglish cennan, 'beget', Greek genna'o:, all 'beget'. There's also
Latin gigno:, 'produce'.
That should give him plenty to work with.
J.
phog...@abo.fi
Well. of course there is Greek foro (I know, a very inadequate
transliteration: the first o is an omicron, the second one an omega.
Paul J Kriha
>>
>> > What is the relation between Sanskrit jan (give birth, be born) and
>> > English birth? Are these words derived from the same basis?
>>
>> Of course they aren't. The English word bith is related to the
>> Sanskrit root bhr-, which means "to carry, to support". Cognates
>> include German gebären, Latin ferre, fero, and Irish beir-, breith.
>
>More cognates: Swedish bära, [vittnes]börd, [yver]boren, German
>Geburt, Icelandic bera.
And Avest. baraiti (carry), Arm. berem, Alb. bie (lead, bring), Got. baíra (carry),
Irl. biru, Polish biorę, brać, Cz. beru, bráti (take), Russian брать, Slovak bérem, bráti.
In fact, many others can be found in Vasmer. And hay ho, even some spelling mistakes!
(English birth spelled brith :-)
pjk
Dušan Vukoti
(procreation, parturition, propagation, birth; procreative energy)?
Serbian pora-djanje (giving birth) and Sanskrit pra-jan (to be born,
produced)?
Finally, compare Serbian porod (birth) and English birth?
Getting a clue?
DV
Dušan Vukoti
What would you say about another question? Now it will be much easier
because you have already caught some clues (I hope).
Are the words, Sanskrit jan, Greek genna (birth), Latin prognatio
(birth), partus (birth), genus (birth, origin) and English birth
related to the Serbian word porod (birth)? ;-)
DV
The most delicious fruits are still to come!
Dušan Vukoti
<hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Dušan Vukoti wrote:
> > What about Serbian pora-djati (giving birth) and Sanskrit pra-jati
> > (procreation, parturition, propagation, birth; procreative energy)?
>
> to do any of the work involved yourself in identifying what the parts of
> each of these words means? Does Serbian pora-djati mean "birth birth",
> or does one of the parts have nothing whatsoever, on its own, to do with
> birth? Does "pra" have anything to do with birth, and does it have
> anything to do with Serbian "pora"? Do your own homework.
>
> > Serbian pora-djanje (giving birth) and Sanskrit pra-jan (to be born,
> > produced)?
> > Finally, compare Serbian porod (birth) and English birth?
>
> > Getting a clue?
>
> this without bothering to check them yourself first to see if they make
> any sense.
Now I understand why you set up your messages to disappear in a few
days.
Very clever of you Harlan! ;-)
DV
ranjit_...@yahoo.com
> What is the relation between Sanskrit jan (give birth, be born) and
> English birth? Are these words derived from the same basis?
Heard of false friends? Are the names <Nikki> and modern Greek [nIki]
(nu iota kappa eta) derived from the same name?
phog...@abo.fi
> What about Serbian pora-djati (giving birth)
Obviously po- is the prefix and -radjati is the verb part (cf. -
rodit', -rodzic' in Russian and Polish). Sometimes I really wonder
whether you are really that stupid or just irritating us.
phog...@abo.fi
Obviously Slavic languages have (as our friends already pointed out
elsewhere in this thread) the stem that appears in Polish as -br-, -
bior-, -bier-, -bór, -bor-, and usually means "to take". But do you
honestly think it will "obviate" Dushan in any particular way?
Dušan Vukoti
Do not listen to Kriha's pre-fixed ideas? ;-)
DV
Trond Engen
He is stubbornly ignoring the prefigating system, although it's
perfectly transparent and still productive (or so it seems to this
non-native). Thinking of it, do we have more than his own word to
support that he's really a native speaker of a Slavic language -- and
not some Jai Maharaj clone trying to outserb the Serbs?
--
Trond Engen
- hyphenating
Trond Engen
> the prefigating system
... or whatever it's called in Insular West Germanic these days.
--
Trond Engen
- lost touch a millennium ago
Dušan Vukoti
> phogl...@abo.fi skreiv:
Trond!
Please, do not make a clown of yourself. Try to employ your brain
cells. Is Latin producere prefixed word? Books are saying pro +
ducere? Are they right? They must be, there is inducere; in + ducere?
Dux, ducis, educo? What happened in reality? What looks logical may
still prove unworkable! What about pergenitus? Free your mind, man!
Prejudices cannot be of any help here?
DV
phog...@abo.fi
I am terribly sorry, Douchie, but I was fluent in Polish and Russian
years before I even heard your or Kriha's name, and have even
seriously tried to acquire Literary Neo-Shtokavian (which is my name
for the language you and your friends down there call either Serbian,
Bosnian or Croatian). So, I am perfectly able to make my own
conclusions regarding the etymology of Slavic languages, without your
or Kriha's help.
Joachim Pense
> What is the relation between Sanskrit jan (give birth, be born) and
> English birth? Are these words derived from the same basis?
>
"Jan Birth" is the name of quite some people, as a Google search
reveals.
Joachim
izzy
> What is the relation between Sanskrit jan
> (give birth, be born) and English birth?
Birth is probably related to (1) "pride" in the phrase "pride of
place" = first/foremost position,
with (2) "bird" in the phrase "catbird seat", and perhaps with (3)
Semitic bet-resh-aleph-shin-yod-saf = in the beginning, the first word
of Tanakh (the Old Testament) where the bet is a prefix.
Of course it is related to "bear" meaning to give birth, but it is not
related to "bear" meaning to carry. When the mother gives birth, she
*stops* carrying/supporting.
The "cat" in "catbird seat" is related to Goth-/Gott, Cath (as in
Catholic = god-like and cathedral = god+room, not seat), and Semitic
yod-heh as in YHVH = god + father, that is the CReaTor. Compare yod-
dalet = hand, memorial/monument (in honor of) with Greek kudos and
Latin CReDit. Let's give him "a big hand".
The "seat" in "catbird seat" is related to Latin status, situation. In
other words, "catbird seat" = first god status. It doesn't get any
better than that.
Whether Sanskrit jan is related to the gen- in Genesis is not for me
to say.
Shrink: Well, Mr. Cohen. What's your problem?
Izzy: People. People are the problem.
Shrink: What do you mean by that?
Izzy: When I talk to them, they just laugh and walk away.
Shrink: What do you say to them? Start at the beginning.
Izzy: OK. In the beginning I created the heavens and the earth ...
ciao,
Israel "izzy" Cohen
Dušan Vukoti
> your own work instead of playing games and then expecting others to fill
> in the details for you. Very clever of you.
You seem to be unable to comprehend what I was saying.
DV
DV
Paul J Kriha
My impression is that he is a (native) speaker of modern
Serbian. I also believe that he hasn't studied any other
contemporary or ancient Slavic languages. His understanding
of Slavic word morphology is totally weird and wilfully childish.
pjk
> Trond Engen
> - hyphenating
Dušan Vukoti
wrote:
> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in messagenews:hq2dneNU-og...@telenor.com...
> > phogl...@abo.fi skreiv:
OK sage, would you tell me are the words like Latin prognatus prefixed
or not; pro + gnatus? Compare Latin gnatus and natus; also praegnatis,
paegnantem; prae (before) + gnatus, gnasci (be born);
Serbian bremenita (with child, pregnant). ;-)
DV
p.s.
Modern Serbian is older than Old Serbian or OCS, because the Serbian
linguist and language reformer, Vuk Kardžic, turned it back to its
oldest "shepherd" form. OCS is the language modeled for the
ecclesiastic needs and purposes; as such OCS must have been
"decorated" in order to achieve its desirable mystical attributes. ;-)
DV
Dominic Bojarski
wrote:
> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in messagenews:hq2dneNU-og...@telenor.com...
> > > On 5 heinä, 19:02, Dušan Vukoti <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> What about Serbian pora-djati (giving birth)
>
> > > Obviously po- is the prefix and -radjati is the verb part (cf. -
> > > rodit', -rodzic' in Russian and Polish). Sometimes I really wonder
> > > whether you are really that stupid or just irritating us.
>
> > He is stubbornly ignoring the prefigating system, although it's
> > perfectly transparent and still productive (or so it seems to this
> > non-native). Thinking of it, do we have more than his own word to
> > support that he's really a native speaker of a Slavic language -- and
> > not some Jai Maharaj clone trying to outserb the Serbs?
>
> My impression is that he is a (native) speaker of modern
> Serbian. I also believe that he hasn't studied any other
> contemporary or ancient Slavic languages. His understanding
> of Slavic word morphology is totally weird and wilfully childish.
>
> pjk
>
I concur. He is definitely a native speaker of Serbian (or some other
Slavic language). Some of the mental associations he makes make sense
in Polish, too, but not in German or English.
In any case, he has never studied Slavistics or Linguistics, nor has
he ever read even one scholarly book in these fields except in a
cursory and selective manner. He may have studied a foreign language,
but not from a linguistics point of view. This is apparent because he
has never even once referred to material that would be covered in the
first year of a Slavistics or Lingustics program. His knowledge of
these fields is naive and dilettantish. Definitely self-taught.
He has daily access to a university library or other large collection
of dictionaries in various languages. Most of his material is culled
directly from dictionaries or from the internet. He is completely
unfamiliar with primary or secondary literature. in any field. His
"theories" seem to have been created by himself with no input from any
other sources. He rarely refers to other scholars in his posts, and
when he does, it's invariably to the writers of dictionaries or pop
and controversial "liguists", such as Edo Nyland. He reads a lot on
"linguistic mysteries of the ancients", entirely in popular, non-
scholarly works, and probably chiefly on the internet. If another
poster mentions a scholarly work, he never answers on-topic,
indicating that he does not have the skills to look up the
references.
He did not complete his studies, or if he did, did not find gainful
employment in his field. This is apparent in the general contempt he
has for scholars. My guess is that he is currently working as a
doorman or security guard at a university library. This would explain
the amount of time he has on his hands, and his access to the
dictionaries and the internet.
To sum up, Dusan has all the hallmarks of a highly-frustrated,
obsessed, self-taught dilettante who is mad at the world for not
giving him the chance that he firmly believes he deserves. He's
annoying, but essentially harmless. His "theories" are too off-the-
wall to be taken seriously by anyone.
Dominic Bojarski
Dušan Vukoti
Dominic, according to your (above) psychobabble, you must be a failed
student of psychiatry or, more believable, a psychiatric patient on a
temporary leave.
I hope your appearance (and active participation) on Sci.lang will
provide some therapeutic benefits for your schizotypal personality.
Wish you all the luck!
DV
Artur Jachacy
> On Jul 6, 10:56 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
> wrote:
>> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in
>> messagenews:hq2dneNU-og...@telenor.com...
>> > phogl...@abo.fi skreiv:
>> > > On 5 heinä, 19:02, Dušan Vukoti <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> What about Serbian pora-djati (giving birth)
>>
>> > > Obviously po- is the prefix and -radjati is the verb part (cf. -
>> > > rodit', -rodzic' in Russian and Polish). Sometimes I really wonder
>> > > whether you are really that stupid or just irritating us.
>>
>> > He is stubbornly ignoring the prefigating system, although it's
>> > perfectly transparent and still productive (or so it seems to this
>> > non-native). Thinking of it, do we have more than his own word to
>> > support that he's really a native speaker of a Slavic language -- and
>> > not some Jai Maharaj clone trying to outserb the Serbs?
>>
>> My impression is that he is a (native) speaker of modern Serbian. I
>> also believe that he hasn't studied any other contemporary or ancient
>> Slavic languages. His understanding of Slavic word morphology is
>> totally weird and wilfully childish.
>>
>> pjk
>>
>>
> I concur. He is definitely a native speaker of Serbian (or some other
> Slavic language). Some of the mental associations he makes make sense in
> Polish, too, but not in German or English.
And then again, some don't.
See <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/2f0c908109bb2449> ff.
Artur
--
Gridneff: So the point is to get the message across,
without saying in so many words: You stupid fucking morons,
you're learning fucking elf languages!
Pan for Windows (beta) - <http://panbuilds.googlepages.com>
Dominic Bojarski
I did't mean "make sense" in that his associations are valid, but that
I can see how a native Slavic speaker would make them, and not a
native German or English speaker. As far as I can tell, nothing Dusan
writes makes sense in that they are valid, except, ocassionaly, by
chance.
Sorry. I should have written it less ambiguously.
Dominic Bojarski
Paul J Kriha
news:1183642750.9...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>On Jul 5, 9:27 am, phogl...@abo.fi wrote:
>> On 5 heinä, 16:12, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > What is the relation between Sanskrit jan (give birth, be born) and
>>
>> > > > Sanskrit root bhr-, which means "to carry, to support". Cognates
>> > > > include German gebären, Latin ferre, fero, and Irish beir-, breith.
>>
>> > > More cognates: Swedish bära, [vittnes]börd, [yver]boren, German
>> > > Geburt, Icelandic bera.
>>
>> > Cognates within Gmc don't do anything to forestall whatever argument
>> > DV may have up his sleeve.
Up his sleeve?
>> Does _anything_ forestall his "arguments"?-
>
>Well, if you have something from Balto-Slavic (BS seems especially
>appropriate here), it could obviate his search for something in
>Serbian with a surface resemblance. Do any of the IE etymological
>dictionaries fully incorporate the Anatolian data?
AFAIK, online Vasmer does have some.
pjk
Paul J Kriha
news:1183720463....@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>On Jul 6, 10:56 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
>wrote:
>> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in
>> > phogl...@abo.fi skreiv:
>> > > On 5 heinä, 19:02, Dusan Vukoti <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> What about Serbian pora-djati (giving birth)
>>
>> > > Obviously po- is the prefix and -radjati is the verb part (cf. -
>> > > rodit', -rodzic' in Russian and Polish). Sometimes I really wonder
>> > > whether you are really that stupid or just irritating us.
>>
>> > He is stubbornly ignoring the prefigating system, although it's
>> > perfectly transparent and still productive (or so it seems to this
>> > non-native). Thinking of it, do we have more than his own word to
>> > support that he's really a native speaker of a Slavic language -- and
>> > not some Jai Maharaj clone trying to outserb the Serbs?
>>
>> My impression is that he is a (native) speaker of modern
>> Serbian. I also believe that he hasn't studied any other
>> contemporary or ancient Slavic languages. His understanding
>> of Slavic word morphology is totally weird and wilfully childish.
>>
>> pjk
>>
>> > Trond Engen
>> > - hyphenating
>
>OK sage, would you tell me are the words like Latin prognatus prefixed
>or not; pro + gnatus?
I dunno.
I haven't studied enough Latin to cast judgements re L. prefixes.
There is an English word "prognathous" (or "prognathic")
[C19: from pro- (before) + Greek gnathos (jaw)]
When it comes to W.Slavic I am confident that my hit rate of
identifying what is a prefix and what is a root runs close to 100%.
However, since I know only little Latin or Greek, I am not even
sure if "gnatus" or "prognatus" is anything but a name.
I would be only guessing if I said that "pro-" is a prefix and
"Prognatus" is a name given to Greeks with big chins
or Romans who were born prematurely. :-)
>Compare Latin gnatus and natus; also praegnatis,
>paegnantem; prae (before) + gnatus, gnasci (be born);
>Serbian bremenita (with child, pregnant). ;-)
Bremenita tišina (pregnant pause) follows.....
>DV
>
>p.s.
>Modern Serbian is older than Old Serbian or OCS, because the
>Serbian linguist and language reformer, Vuk Kardzic, turned it
>back to its oldest "shepherd" form. OCS is the language modeled
>for the ecclesiastic needs and purposes; as such OCS must have
>been "decorated" in order to achieve its desirable mystical
>attributes. ;-)
Yeah, right!
pjk
Dušan Vukoti
wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:1183642750.9...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Vasmer...?
Russian paroda (breed, race, sort, type, class; Serbian rod, from po-
rod /birth/); Serbian porod/porodica (birth, family). Serb. bremenita
(pregnant, gravid), Russian (pregnant, gravid) -
nasalization of brenenit or brenenaya (Br-Gon-Gon basis).
Maybe this is a chance and a perfect opportunity for you to finally
understand the evolution of Slavic prepositions or IE prepositions in
general.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Russian bremenaya (pregnant); it seems, from time to time Google does
not support Unicode
Dominic Bojarski
But I have. The Latin word "progantus" is indeed prefixed. The Latin
prefix "pro-" corresponds to the English "for(e)-", the German "vor-",
the Polish "pro-" and "przed-", and the Serbian "pro-" and "pred-".
For more information, see:
http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE395.html
The "gn" in "prognatus" comes from the PIE stem "gen-", which means
"give birth to, beget. See:
http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE143.html
As for the Greek-derivous "prognathous", the Greek prefix "pro-" is
cognate with the prefixes listed abouve, and the stem "gnatho" is
derived from one of two Pie stems "genu-", the first of which means
"knee", and the other of which means "jaw, chin". See:
http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE145.html
> When it comes to W.Slavic I am confident that my hit rate of
> identifying what is a prefix and what is a root runs close to 100%.
>
The thing that surprises me most about Dusan is that he seems to have
only recently become aware of the prefixing system in Slavic
Languages.
In spite of my surname, I had to learn Polish from scratch, so I was
aware of the prefixing system from the very beginning. I naturally
assumed that all Slavs become aware of the prefixing system in early
childhood, and master it before they are eight or ten years old.
Dusan, on the other had, seems only to have recently become aware that
the Serbian equivalents of Polish words like, say, "podać", "poddać",
"dodać", "wydać" etc. are in fact combinations of different prefixes
with the same root. It seems that when he was learning Serbian as a
child, he memorized all of these as separate, unrelated words instead
of as members of word families based on the same root. This must have
cost him a great amount of time and energy. The prefixing system seems
to be something entirely new to him.
I am all the more surprised because in Slavic languages, the prefixes
are never separated from the root as they are in English and German.
Are there many other Slavic speakers like him?
I agree that most Slavic speakers, like you, would have little trouble
analyzing prefixed verbs and nouns. I have , however, seen rare
instances of educated people having memorized some words the same way
Dusan has.
For example, one of my colleagues, a 30-year-old physician whose
mother is a Polish philologist, was surprised to find out that the
Polish word "poduszka" (pillow) is composed of the prefix
"pod-" (under) and the word "ucho" (ear). I can also see Poles having
trouble with analyzing prefixed forms of "imać/jąć" because the
unprefixed verb has all but disappeared from the modern language.
But these are rare exceptions that affect only a tiny number of words.
Again, I as whether there are many other native Slavic speakers like
Dusan for whom the Slavic prefixing system is not part of their
language thinking?
Dominic Bojarski
Peter T. Daniels
wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:1183642750.9...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Some. (Anatolian data, right?) So the answer for Vasmer is No.
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> Paul J Kriha wrote:
> > "Dušan Vukoti" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1183720463....@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > >On Jul 6, 10:56 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
> > >wrote:
> > >> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in
Polish poduszka (Czech/Russian poduška), is an equivalent to Serbian
podloga
or English padding. Serbian podloga (bed, pillow, base, pad,
undercoat, bearer);
In Russian poduška also means saddle, pedestal, pad bearer;
I hope, now you understand why. ;-)
As you see, noting to do with your folk-etymological "under-ear".
Read Edo Nyland no more!
Serbian podloga => podloška => dlušek => dušek (mattress);
You seem to be a furious and (potentially) intelligent young man (!?),
but sometimes
it would be better if you could bridle your uncontrollable passion and
emotion.
Serbian proverb says: ne trči k'o tele pred rudu! (do not run ahead of
wagon like a
young bull!)
DV
Dominic Bojarski
> On Jul 7, 12:34 pm, Dominic Bojarski <dominicbojar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Paul J Kriha wrote:
> > > "Dušan Vukoti" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:1183720463....@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > > >On Jul 6, 10:56 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
> > > >wrote:
> > > >> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in
Try again, Serbian "podloga" (from "under" and "lie") is parallel to
Polish "podłoga", which means.... "floor". The words were probably
coined independently in both languages. It Serbian, because it "lies
under" the body or something else, in Polish, because it "lies under"
the rug or your feet.
If the Russian word "podushka" really does mean "saddle" as you say,
it because of metaphorical extension from the kind of pillow you sleep
on, the king that you put "under your ear".
As for calling me you, thanks, but I'm 47.
I'd really like to see you stop wasting your time with your silly
"theories" and seriously study up on Serbian and other Slavic
languages. What you will learn is more fascinating than anything you
can possibly come up with by yourself.
Stop fooling yourself; no one is going to take your "theories"
seriously. Even the least able first-year linguistics student can
immediately spot that you are bullshitting and have no idea what you
are talking about. You're making a clown of yourself. If that's what
you want, that's fine with me, but if you want to be taken seriously,
you have a lot of studying to do.
Dominic Bojarski
Dušan Vukotić
> On Jul 7, 2:15 pm, Dušan Vukotić <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 7, 12:34 pm, Dominic Bojarski <dominicbojar...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Paul J Kriha wrote:
> > > > "Dušan Vukoti" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > >news:1183720463....@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > > > >On Jul 6, 10:56 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >> "Trond Engen" <trond...@engen.priv.no> wrote in
Yes, good morning omniscient Dominus! Czech 'podlaha' (floor) or
Russian 'poduška' (pedestal, saddle); Serbian 'podloga' (floor,
pedestal, bottom,
pillow, pad, undercoat...); compare Slavic se-dlo (saddle); deminutive
se-dluška and the verb se-deti (seat) where the sound <l> has been
omitted;
The same sound change happened in case of podloga => podloška =>
poduška => dušek.
I hope, after this explanation you are not going to show your
infertile stubbornness any more
In fact, if you were not so stubborn I would show you how it looks
like to tramp on the Icelandic fótleggur ;-)
> If the Russian word "podushka" really does mean "saddle" as you say,
> it because of metaphorical extension from the kind of pillow you sleep
> on, the king that you put "under your ear".
A very unusual "metaphor", you must admit ;-)
Serbian dušek (mattress) is derived from 'podloga/pološka' (cf.
Serbian podložak /pad/, uložak /refill, cartridge/, udlaga /bandage
consisting of a firm covering/)
> As for calling me you, thanks, but I'm 47.
Pity for you; it means you learned a little for your age!
> I'd really like to see you stop wasting your time with your silly
> "theories" and seriously study up on Serbian and other Slavic
> languages.
Serious as your "under-ear" science? No, thanks!
> What you will learn is more fascinating than anything you
> can possibly come up with by yourself.
>
> Stop fooling yourself; no one is going to take your "theories"
> seriously. Even the least able first-year linguistics student can
> immediately spot that you are bullshitting and have no idea what you
> are talking about. You're making a clown of yourself. If that's what
> you want, that's fine with me, but if you want to be taken seriously,
> you have a lot of studying to do.
Stick to the arguments if you have any! Any drunkard or psychiatric
patient could repeat your parroting words claiming he just returned
from Elba. Of course, at least as long as he became either sober or
self-conscious again.
DV
VK
There is no such word in Russian but there is word "poroda" (breed)
made by the standard schema from [rodit] (to give birth):
hodit (to walk) - pohod (a trip)
letat (to fly) - poljot (a fly)
meshat (to mix) - pomes (a mixture)
etc.
Prefix po- in Slavic languages has original meaning "an application of
the following action". Etymologically it is an ancient modifier from
PIE *pas (after, next)
> Serbian rod, from po-rod /birth/);
Wrong direction: Serbian "porod" from "rod" made by the same common
Slavic schema as above.
More complete Balto-Slavic line:
Russian "rod", Ukrainian "rid" (Gen.case "rodu"), Bulgarian "rod",
Slovenian "rod", Czech "rod", Slovakian "rod", Polish "rod", Upper and
Lower Sorbian "rod".
It can be deducted to Proto-Slavonic *ord with the original sillable-
forming sonant "r" and later with the regular methathesis on the stage
of forming new open syllable [sonant + vowel]. See further Armenian
"ordi" (son), Hittite "^ardu" (great-great-sun) with all words coming
from PIE "^ordh" (grown, tall)
NOTE: this type of metathesis of historically syllable-forming sonants
is so common for IE languages that modern IE bearers instinctively
accept the possibility of sonants "do not stay on their places but
jumping all around the word" :-) I would call it "a part of the
language mental model of a regular speaker" - unless there is already
some lesser ugly term for that. In this aspect "Magdalenian language"
was an interesting sample to me of how these instinctive models are
showing up in artificial constructions. It is the same as with humans
not able to produce a really random series of numbers: any series
appertaining to a particular individual will be a reflection of his
"mental footprint" and detectable if the series is long enough. Same
way with "Magdalenian language" any specialist can tell that it is
constructed by an IE language native speaker no earlier than XV-X B.C.
> Serb. bremenita (pregnant, gravid)
Also Russian adj. "beremennaya" (pregnant), "beremennost" (pregnancy),
Old Russian "brem'a" (a load, something to carry on) still retained in
elevated style as "a heavy responsibility to carry on".
Belorussian "beremo" (something to carry on), Bulgarian "breme",
Serbian "breme", Czech "brime", Polish "brzemie", Upper Sorbian
"bremjo", Lower Sorbian "breme", Old Slavonic "briemen".
All this from Proto-Slavonic *bero with the original meaning "to carry
on", in the historical period drifted to "to take by hand" then simply
"to take". See for instance Russian "brat" (to take), "ja beru" (I'm
taking), see also Old Indian "bhariman" (a carriage).
Overall PIE *bher (to carry on [by hands]) experienced different
meaning drifts in different IE branches. More or less universal one:
to carry on by hands
to carry on
to carry future child
to be pregnant
(English, Slavic languages)
English further continued the drift:
to be pregnant
to give birth
It is interesting to mention that in south states of the US the
original "to be pregnant" remained in vernacular usage until modern
time and now it is even coming back to the common vernacular language.
When the first time in a Californian store I had been told "- So help
her, man, she births" I truthfully got choked at the first moment. I
was very happy to realize that one did not ask me to play gynecologist
but simply suggested to help with her carriage to a pregnant woman :-)
P.S. Russian "junosha" (young man), adj. "juny" (young), Old Russian
"un" (young), Slovenian "junota" (young people), Old Czech "junoch",
Czech "jinoch" (young man), Slovakian "junach" (young people), junak
(a brave young guy), Polish "junoch" (young man).
Proto-Slavonic *jun, Litovian "jaunas" (young), Latvian
"jauns" (young), Old Indian "juvan", Gen.case "junas" (young), L
iuvenis (young), Iuna (goddess of youthhood and physical power), Go
"juggs". I guess anyone can further extend the list from her own
native language if this language is PIE-based.
P.P.S. "nasalization of brenenit or brenenaya (Br-Gon-Gon basis)"
Eh? No, no, please, don't explain, I don't really want to know. Just a
spontaneous exclamation.
P.P.P.S.
> Maybe this is a chance and a perfect opportunity for you to finally
> understand the evolution of Slavic prepositions or IE prepositions in
> general.
Take the quotes away and that will be exactly my address to you.
VK
> Slavic language).
His "by syllables break apart" - if taken alone - would suggest the
opposite. They are too unnatural for a native speaker, even if he does
not have any linguistical education. It is as if say someone would
describe the word "underground" as consisting of "words"
"un", "dergro" and "und". In such case we could say for sure that for
this person "underground" is nothing but a meaningless sequence of
characters.
His passages seem remotely similar though to Heidegger's language
experiments, his "die Sprache spricht" formula. Kronecker-Heidegger
philosophy school takes a language as a system containing not only
current but all possible future states of this system as well. From
here language experiments of some poets of XXth century, theories of
"hidden senses" and "unpacking senses". In the recent time that was
greatly developed by Russian philosopher Nalimov in his
"Spontaneousity of consciousness" (1989, Russian edition). Grace to
the latter person I now speak Russian btw - I had to learn it in order
to read the book :-) :-( :-)
All this has an indirect connection to the linguistics and definitely
connected with information theories. It has zero none connection to
etymology and to historical reconstructions. So maybe we have a
student who read a Heidegger's or a Heidegger-like book from a wrong
page to a wrong direction, so now trying to apply it to the
reconstructive linguistics.
> Some of the mental associations he makes make sense
> in Polish, too, but not in German or English.
By his recent typo in Russian "poroda" ("paroda" with "a" instead of
"o" in unstressed position) I would say that he knows Russian in its
standard form where "ahing" (pronunciation of "a" instead of written
"o" in unstressed positions) is a norm. So he typed "poroda" as he
heard it, not as he saw it in the dictionary.
> In any case, he has never studied Slavistics or Linguistics, nor has
> he ever read even one scholarly book in these fields except in a
> cursory and selective manner.
Sustained.
> He may have studied a foreign language,
> but not from a linguistics point of view. This is apparent because he
> has never even once referred to material that would be covered in the
> first year of a Slavistics or Lingustics program. His knowledge of
> these fields is naive and dilettantish. Definitely self-taught.
Many self-taughts moved linguistics forward - oftenly much further
than academically-taught partners. So being a self-taught means
nothing bad by itself. But is he "-taught" as of now? That part I
would argue with. ;-)
...
> To sum up, Dusan has all the hallmarks of a highly-frustrated,
> obsessed, self-taught dilettante who is mad at the world for not
> giving him the chance that he firmly believes he deserves. He's
> annoying, but essentially harmless. His "theories" are too off-the-
> wall to be taken seriously by anyone.
Sustained.
VK
> P.S. Russian "junosha" (young man), adj. "juny" (young), Old Russian
> "un" (young), Slovenian "junota" (young people), Old Czech "junoch",
> Czech "jinoch" (young man), Slovakian "junach" (young people), junak
> (a brave young guy), Polish "junoch" (young man).
> Proto-Slavonic *jun, Litovian "jaunas" (young), Latvian
> "jauns" (young), Old Indian "juvan", Gen.case "junas" (young), L
> iuvenis (young), Iuna (goddess of youthhood and physical power), Go
> "juggs". I guess anyone can further extend the list from her own
> native language if this language is PIE-based.
I guess I got this from Dušan :-) but this P.S. is a puzzle with hints
to solve by anyone who's interested - but in this case a real
scientific puzzle. It is much simpler to solve to Serbian/Croatian
and Polish speakers: these languages preserved parallel lines of words
of the same root but with the original meaning. Old Slavic languages
and Latin are helpful as well. So: what is the original meaning of
*ju(v/n) and how is it reflected?
Paul J Kriha
news:1183803906.7...@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
And what? What's your point?
Russian "bremenaya" and the similar Serbian word are just
obvious calques of "gravid". As is the Czech "obte^z^kana'".
The Cz seems to have gone for a different word meaning "becoming
heavy" to calque "gravid". I presume the reason was because
the Czech "br^emeno" means "unwanted/unpleasant baggage".
:-)
pjk
Paul J Kriha
news:1183835786....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
I presume you can read azbuka. :-)
<quote vasmer>
ORIGIN: Праслав. *junъ, *junьcь родственно лит. jáunas "молодой",
лтш. jau^ns -- то же, лит. jaunìkis "жених, молодожен", др.-инд. yúvan-,
род. п. уū́nаs "молодой, юноша", сравн. степ. yávīyān, превосх. yáviṣṭhas,
авест. yuvan-, род. п. уūnō, лат. iuvenis, iūnior, iuvencus "бычок",
гот. juggs. Балто-слав. вокализм и интонация соответствуют сравн. степ.,
а формант -nо-, вероятно, из антонима *sеnоs "старый"
(Мейе, МSL 14, 360); см. Траутман, ВSW 106 и сл.; Остхоф, МU 6,
293 и сл.; Эндзелин, СБЭ 198; М.--Э. 2, 102; Бернекер I, 459;
Мейе -- Вайан 39; Мейе -- Эрну 590 и сл.; Перссон, IF 2, 244 и сл.
GENERAL: ю́н, ю́на, ю́но, юне́ц, ю́ница, ю́ноша. Заимств. из цслав.,
судя по наличию ю- при исконном у-; см. Шахматов, Очерк 142;
укр. ю́ний, стар., др.-русск. унъ "молодой, юный", уность, уноша, уница,
ст.-слав. юнъ νέος, νεώτερος (Остром., Супр.), стар. болг. юн (Младенов 700),
юне́ц, юне́ ср. р. "бычок", юна́к "герой", сербохорв. jу́нац, род. п. jýнца "бычок",
jу̀ница "телка", словен. junóta, собир., ж. "молодежь", júnǝс "бычок, жук-олень",
др.-чеш. junec "бычок", junoch "юноша", чеш. jinoch "юноша",
слвц. junač ж. "молодежь", junák "парень, смельчак", польск. junosza,
junoch "юноша", juniec "бычок", junak "юноша", н.-луж. диал. junk "бычок",
полаб. jä́unac "бычок, тягловый скот".
<unquote>
Artur Jachacy
> Polish "junoch" (young man).
This one is unknown to me. I suspect you wanted
> junak (a brave young guy)
It also used to be a motorcycle brand (for brave young guys).
John Atkinson
> "Dušan Vukotić" <dusan....@gmail.com> wrote...>>> [...] Serb. bremenita
>>> (pregnant, gravid), Russian (pregnant, gravid) -
>>> nasalization of brenenit or brenenaya (Br-Gon-Gon basis).
>>> Maybe this is a chance and a perfect opportunity for you to finally
>>> understand the evolution of Slavic prepositions or IE prepositions
>>> in
>>> general.
>>> DV
>>
>>Russian bremenaya (pregnant); it seems, from time to time Google does
>>not support Unicode
>
> And what? What's your point?
> Russian "bremenaya" and the similar Serbian word are just
> obvious calques of "gravid". As is the Czech "obte^z^kana'".
>
> The Cz seems to have gone for a different word meaning "becoming
> heavy" to calque "gravid". I presume the reason was because
> the Czech "br^emeno" means "unwanted/unpleasant baggage".
Well, the Spaniards seem quite happy to use "embarazar", be pregnant,
and "embarazada", pregnant woman, even though "embarazar" also means the
same as its English cognate.
> :-)
John.
Dušan Vukotić
> "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz> wrote ...
>
>
>
> > "Dušan Vukotić" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote...
Not incidentally of course; Serbian brat, buraz, burazer (brother) ;-)
DV
Brian M. Scott
<john...@bigpond.com> wrote in
<news:Mf4ki.4595$4A1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au> in
sci.lang:
[...]
> Well, the Spaniards seem quite happy to use "embarazar",
> be pregnant, and "embarazada", pregnant woman, even
> though "embarazar" also means the same as its English
> cognate.
Beats ON <eigi heil> 'pregnant', literally 'not hale'!
Brian
Dušan Vukotić
Br-Gon basis; Serbo-English: prezati <=> press <=> prineti <=> bring
<=> bremenita <=> pregnant <=> porod <=> birth <=> brat <=>
brother... ;-)
Embark also fits well into the above scheme and it is equal to Serbian
prineti bring or preneti (carry-over, transfer); this kind of
nasalization is also known in Serbian; for instance uMpregnuti/
upregnuti (harness);
Now it became clear that an emperor is a ruler who _oppresses_
people.
DV
VK
> >*ju(v/n) and how is it reflected?
>
> I presume you can read azbuka. :-)
I surely do :-) - the Usenet chocks on it sometimes :-( But not in
this post though.
> <quote vasmer>
> лат. iuvenis, iūnior, iuvencus "бычок",
> стар. болг. юне́ ср. р. "бычок", юна́к "герой",
> сербохорв. jу́нац, род. п. jýнца "бычок",
> jу̀ница "телка",
> словен. júnǝс "бычок, жук-олень",
> др.-чеш. junec "бычок",
> польск. juniec "бычок"
> н.-луж. диал. junk "бычок",
> полаб. jä́unac "бычок, тягловый скот".
> <unquote>
Bingo! If I had a prize then it would be yours :-) :-|
P.S. Glory to Iupiter (Father Iu), to that mighty bull before he
become human-like, now we can close this thread as fully clarified, I
guess.