Hlaford (lord, glavar) - the head of a tribe?
Dušan Vukotić
from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
(warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough, especially
not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
(lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
only comic but completely senseless.
There is another etimology that can be proposed for the words lord and
lady, by comparing it with Slavic paterfamilias (glava porodice, Cz.
hlavy rodiny, Russ. глава семьи; the head of family; OSlav. глава
head). Serbian glavar (chief, warden; Cz. hlavny; Pl. główny), as we
can see, sounds similar to OE hlaford. In addition, there is a Serbian
word, which sounds almost the same as OE hlaford, and it is
'glavurda' (a big head; chief; Serbian surname Glavurtić).
Has any one been thinking about the possibility that English lord can
be a loanword from Serbo-Slavic glavar/glavurda (chief, the head of a
tribe, clan, family)?
Craoi...@gmail.com
>
>
> Has any one been thinking about the possibility that English lord can
> be a loanword from Serbo-Slavic glavar/glavurda (chief, the head of a
> tribe, clan, family)?
No. Go away.
Dušan Vukotić
> On Nov 27, 8:39 am, Du¹an Vukotiæ <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Has any one been thinking about the possibility that English lord can
> > be a loanword from Serbo-Slavic glavar/glavurda (chief, the head of a
> > tribe, clan, family)?
>
> No. Go away.
Hog Loony, what made you so sad?
I suppose, you have injured your sniveling snout again while digging
the shit pit?
DV
Craoi...@gmail.com
You are a bad man, Dushan. You are a very bad man.
Harlan Messinger
> According to serious etymologists the English title lord is derived
> from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
> Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
> (warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
> etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough,
Please do not use an impersonal construction like this to express *your*
personal assessment. Obviously enough other people are convinced that
it's dishonest of you to treat the hypothesis's failure to convince
*you* as a generality.
> especially
> not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
> (lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
> naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
> only comic but completely senseless.
The source of "lady" is hlafdige (load-kneader), not hlafæta. All three
hlaf- words are *attested*, and the transformation of two of them into
"lord" and "lady" is thoroughly attested from a steady stream of
examples from over the centuries, including the period where the f faded
into "u" before vanishing.
Ðo ne miȝte he non louerd ðhauen. (c1250)
Bruttes nemnede þa laȝen æfter þar lafuedi. (c1250)
Havelok 607 þis is ure eir þat shal ben louerd of denemark. (c1300)
Forð siðen ghe bi abram slep Of hire leuedi nam ghe no kep. (1325)
As for hlafæta, it is factual that it was a word. It meant servant or
dependent, regardless of how ludicrous you may find this to be.
Dušan Vukotić
above words.
In fact, this is a good oportunity for those, whose mind is open for
new ideas, to understand the "magic powers" of my Xur-Bel-Gon Speech
Formula (HSF). Namely, no one seems to have spotted that hlaford
'lord' is very closely related to OE heafod 'head' and that heafod is
akin to Slavic g(o)l(o)va/glava (Lat. caput; Gr. κεφαλή or κεβαλή).
Now, try to compare Greek kebale (head) with OHG gebal 'skull' (hence
Ger. Gipfel and Kopf) and try to understand that all these words are
derived from the same Gon-Bel basis as Serbo-Slavic glava (head).
Taking in consideration all the above facts, any average intelligent
person must come to the same "dubious" conclusion: Serbo-Slavic glavar
(head, chief; Serb. glavurda "big head") could be the word that came
from the same "arsenal" as OE hlaford (ME laverd lord).
Finally, I have one question for you and for all lingua experts on Sci-
lang: can you explain the relationship among words gallows, Lat.
gabalus, and Slavic glava (ОRuss. головьникъ/galovnik executioner; cf.
Eng. capital punishment )?
DV
Harlan Messinger
And here we are back in because-I-say-so land.
Trond Engen
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>
>> In fact, this is a good oportunity for those, whose mind is open for
>> new ideas, to understand the "magic powers" of my Xur-Bel-Gon Speech
>> Formula (HSF). Namely, no one seems to have spotted that hlaford
>> 'lord' is very closely related to OE heafod 'head' and that heafod
>> is akin to Slavic g(o)l(o)va/glava (Lat. caput; Gr. κεφαλή or
>> κεβαλή).
>
> And here we are back in because-I-say-so land.
Dušan is right in assuming that we need a code also for the meta-debates
about Xerbelgonian. But I prefer (XBG) to his (HSF).
--
Trond Engen
- hører hjemme i Derforland
Dušan Vukotić
Your wisdom is indisputable, but, unfortunately, your brain-Engine is
not in Trend anymore.
DV
António Marques
I think it would be justified courtesy to let him choose the code. Heck,
let Frantç choose one too. As long as they stick to them.
--
António Marques
Weland
> According to serious etymologists the English title lord is derived
> from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
> Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
> (warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
> etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough, especially
> not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
> (lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
> naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
> only comic but completely senseless.
Except the female lordly title is hlaefdige; hlafaeta is a servant: the
lady makes the bread, the lord owns the bread and doles it out, the
subservient eat the bread their lord gives them and on whom they depend
for food.
>
> There is another etimology that can be proposed for the words lord and
> lady, by comparing it with Slavic paterfamilias (glava porodice, Cz.
> hlavy rodiny, Russ. глава семьи; the head of family; OSlav. глава
> head). Serbian glavar (chief, warden; Cz. hlavny; Pl. główny), as we
> can see, sounds similar to OE hlaford. In addition, there is a Serbian
> word, which sounds almost the same as OE hlaford, and it is
> 'glavurda' (a big head; chief; Serbian surname Glavurtić).
>
> Has any one been thinking about the possibility that English lord can
> be a loanword from Serbo-Slavic glavar/glavurda (chief, the head of a
> tribe, clan, family)?
>
No, it would be ridiculous.
Dušan Vukotić
Not at all. In Serbian we can say hlebar (a baker who produces bread;
Bul. хлебар/hlebar baker; хлеборо̀дие/hleborodie fertility) and it
also sounds similar to halford (laverd) as well as the Bulgarian word
главатар/glavatar (chieftain, chief) that is the same as Serbian
glavar (chief) and glavurda (big head). As you probably know, the
English sufix -ard (or -art) indicates some regular activities
(coward, dullard, drunkard, wizard, braggart) and it appears to be the
same suffix as Greek -arch/y or Serbian -ar (vlad-ar ruler; gospod-ar
master, glava-r chieftain). I have no time now to explain you why and
how the words like Serbo-Slavic rad (work), red (order; cf. Serbian
redar bobby, urednik editor/redactor), uređenje (arrange, system) are
related to Greek ἐργον (work; cf. Serb. verganje/vršenje "working"
and Eng. working!) and whole spectra of words in other IE languages
that are derived from the Hor-Gon ur-basis, starting from its
essential meanings: circle (Serb. krug) and cruising/circling ( Serb.
kruženje).
The other thing you seem to be forgetting is the central meaning of
the English word "loaf". Could the OE word hlaf be related to Latin
globus (globe) and Late Latin lobus (lobe, a rounded projection) as
well as to Serbo-Slavic klobuk (clump, lump, clod, cloud; cf. Serb. h/
oblak cloud; h/oblina roundness; h/oblik effigy)?
Finally, can't you see that 'loaf' has the slang meaning 'head' too?
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Why?
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> > According to serious etymologists the English title lord is derived
> > from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
> > Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
> > (warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
> > etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough, especially
> > not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
> > (lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
> > naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
> > only comic but completely senseless.
>
> Except the female lordly title is hlaefdige; hlafaeta is a servant: the
> lady makes the bread, the lord owns the bread and doles it out, the
> subservient eat the bread their lord gives them and on whom they depend
> for food.
Don't be so sure! Compare ME lavede (OE hlaefdige) and OE hlafaeta. I
wouldn't say it has anything to do with hlaif/loaf but with
'love' (Sebo-Slavic ljubiti love; ljuba mistress; Russ. любовница;
Bul. любящ; любител/ljubitelj lover, fan). Hlaefdige might be the
"loved one" (cf. Ger. leben-dig/e lively).
DV
Harlan Messinger
> On Nov 28, 2:59 pm, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> On Nov 27, 3:30 pm, Harlan Messinger
>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> In fact, this is a good oportunity for those, whose mind is open for
>>> new ideas, to understand the "magic powers" of my Xur-Bel-Gon Speech
>>> Formula (HSF). Namely, no one seems to have spotted that hlaford
>>> 'lord' is very closely related to OE heafod 'head' and that heafod is
>>> akin to Slavic g(o)l(o)va/glava (Lat. caput; Gr. κεφαλή or κεβαλή).
>> And here we are back in because-I-say-so land.
>
> Not at all. In Serbian we can say hlebar (a baker who produces bread;
> Bul. хлебар/hlebar baker; хлеборо̀дие/hleborodie fertility) and it
> also sounds similar to halford (laverd) as well as the Bulgarian word
> главатар/glavatar (chieftain, chief) that is the same as Serbian
> glavar (chief) and glavurda (big head).
It's of no concern that it "sounds similar" to words that are unrelated
to it.
> As you probably know, the
> English sufix -ard (or -art) indicates some regular activities
> (coward, dullard, drunkard, wizard, braggart) and it appears to be the
> same suffix as Greek -arch/y or Serbian -ar (vlad-ar ruler; gospod-ar
> master, glava-r chieftain).
I can't imagine why you're discussing suffixes out of nowhere,
especially one like -ard that didn't enter English until centuries after
"hlaford" is attested. And, no, it has nothing to do with Greek -arch.
> I have no time now to explain you why and
> how the words like Serbo-Slavic rad (work), red (order; cf. Serbian
> redar bobby, urednik editor/redactor), uređenje (arrange, system) are
> related to Greek ἐργον (work; cf. Serb. verganje/vršenje "working"
> and Eng. working!) and whole spectra of words in other IE languages
> that are derived from the Hor-Gon ur-basis, starting from its
> essential meanings: circle (Serb. krug) and cruising/circling ( Serb.
> kruženje).
>
> The other thing you seem to be forgetting is the central meaning of
> the English word "loaf". Could the OE word hlaf be related to Latin
> globus (globe) and Late Latin lobus (lobe, a rounded projection) as
> well as to Serbo-Slavic klobuk (clump, lump, clod, cloud; cf. Serb. h/
> oblak cloud; h/oblina roundness; h/oblik effigy)?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, every f***ing thing comes from either clouds or
circles in Dusanland. When language first arose, people walked around
saying things like "circle circle cloud circle cloud cloud CLOUD
circle". You're like the Abbott and Costello thing where every attempt
at an explanation comes back to "third base".
> Finally, can't you see that 'loaf' has the slang meaning 'head' too?
As usual, I can't "see" something that you just made up and have no
reason to believe. But as usual, you think that if you say "can't you
see?" you think you've proved your point, right?
Harlan Messinger
> On Nov 29, 6:40 am, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> According to serious etymologists the English title lord is derived
>>> from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
>>> Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
>>> (warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
>>> etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough, especially
>>> not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
>>> (lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
>>> naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
>>> only comic but completely senseless.
>> Except the female lordly title is hlaefdige; hlafaeta is a servant: the
>> lady makes the bread, the lord owns the bread and doles it out, the
>> subservient eat the bread their lord gives them and on whom they depend
>> for food.
>
> Don't be so sure! Compare ME lavede (OE hlaefdige) and OE hlafaeta. I
> wouldn't say it has anything to do with hlaif/loaf but with
> 'love'
After the time you spent trying to convince people they're related to
"head", all of a sudden you're changed your mind and you want to
convince people they're related to "love"? As for "don't be so sure": do
you really not understand that these origins aren't made up, that
they're there in centuries of writing for all to see?
Dušan Vukotić
Your problem is that you cannot grasp that the evolution of language
is much simpler then the modern linguistic science is ready to
believe. I am asking you some questions because I wish to arouse and
encourage your critical thinking.
For instance, how it happened that German Leib (body) became life
(Leben) afterwards? Similar is in Slavic (telo body; from deblo,
debljina thickness) between words življenje (living) and h/oblina
(roundness). Cf. življenje (living), debljina (thickness), deblo
(trunk), telo (body).
If you compare Russian adjectives жилой/žiloy and живой/živoy (both
with the menaing "living") you will be able to perceive that these
words were derived from the Gon-Bel-Gon basis, where, in the first
case, the sound 'b' has been elided and in the second (živoy) the
sound 'l' is missing.
German past participle gelebt (lived) is also derived from the Bel =>
Leb transposed Gon-Bel-Gon basis (Serb. živeo; from gi-bel-go => ži-
blje-o => živeo; ijekavian form is still živjeo; lj to j sound change:
življeo => živjeo/živio).
Try to engage some of your mental energy into a real/serious thinking
instead of rejecting my explanations a priori.
DV
Craoi...@gmail.com
You should concentrate upon your own critical thinking, Baddie.
Harlan Messinger
I grasp that it isn't so "simple" (as though any of your explanations is
simple) just because you claim it is. When you ask questions that
contradict reality or that have no evidence to support the implied
conclusions, my critical thinking shields me from your nonsense, while
the same nonsense highlights the lack of critical thinking on your own end.
[snipping yet more haphazard collections of words with no sign of your
ever having comprehended what you've been told about the difference
between what you do and genuine analysis]
Dušan Vukotić
I've been trying to revive your hidden intellectual potential (it
seems unsuccessfully).
All these words (hlaf, loaf, love, lobe, globe etc.) are related and
any connection among them can be completely explained, even in the
thinnest details.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
I just wanted to make you acquainted with the origin of words like
Serbian biće (being), Latin vivo -ere, Greek βιος and "to be or not to
be", but I see it would be an unavailing effort from my side.
DV
Harlan Messinger
> I just wanted to make you acquainted with the origin of words like
> Serbian biće (being), Latin vivo -ere, Greek βιος and "to be or not to
> be", but I see it would be an unavailing effort from my side.
Out of the blue you felt you should "acquaint" me with your
misconceptions about some topic irrelevant to the topic that was being
discussed?
Harlan Messinger
Following wild goose chases isn't a sign of realizing one's intellectual
potential.
> All these words (hlaf, loaf, love, lobe, globe etc.) are related and
> any connection among them can be completely explained, even in the
> thinnest details.
No, they aren't. See if you can come up with the critical thinking
necessary to comprehend *that*.
Dušan Vukotić
I expected you to say that...no, it is not irrelevant. You forgot
German Leib and English body (building). ;-)
DV
Harlan Messinger
I didn't forget them. I am choosing not to indulge your pretense that
they're relevant to the discussion of "lord" and "lady" and not to
become ensnared in yet another morass of a conversation that goes a
million places without accomplishing anything.
Dušan Vukotić
German Leib is related to hlaif. As you can see, I mentioned 'body'
and 'building' trying to enlighten your mind, but with no avail.
Simply, your intelligence is manifestly inadequate in this case.
DV
Harlan Messinger
> On Nov 29, 5:49 pm, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> On Nov 29, 4:01 pm, Harlan Messinger
>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>>>> I just wanted to make you acquainted with the origin of words like
>>>>> Serbian biće (being), Latin vivo -ere, Greek βιος and "to be or not to
>>>>> be", but I see it would be an unavailing effort from my side.
>>>> Out of the blue you felt you should "acquaint" me with your
>>>> misconceptions about some topic irrelevant to the topic that was being
>>>> discussed?
>>> I expected you to say that...no, it is not irrelevant. You forgot
>>> German Leib and English body (building). ;-)
>> I didn't forget them. I am choosing not to indulge your pretense that
>> they're relevant to the discussion of "lord" and "lady" and not to
>> become ensnared in yet another morass of a conversation that goes a
>> million places without accomplishing anything.
>
> German Leib is related to hlaif.
No, it isn't.
> As you can see, I mentioned 'body'
> and 'building' trying to enlighten your mind, but with no avail.
> Simply, your intelligence is manifestly inadequate in this case.
Only in the sense that "enlighten" means "twist with misconceptions" and
"intelligence" means "propensity to fall for unsupported and
unsustainable nonsense".
Dušan Vukotić
<hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > German Leib is related to hlaif.
>
> No, it isn't.
Yes, it is.
DV
Harlan Messinger
German "Laib" (sometimes, evidently, spelled "Leib") = loaf is related
to "hlaif". But German "Leib" = *body* is not.
Weland
All sorts of reasons, one of the chief being that there is no linguistic
or historical evidence to suggest such a loanword. *AT BEST*, and again
there's no evidence presented so far, you have cognates. That's all.
Another is that you base things on what "sounds similar" in different
languages and yet often what "sounds similar" even in the *SAME*
language much less in different languages have no relationship to one
another at all. That's a couple quick reasons.
Weland
> On Nov 29, 6:40 am, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>
>>Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>
>>>According to serious etymologists the English title lord is derived
>>>from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
>>>Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
>>>(warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
>>>etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough, especially
>>>not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
>>>(lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
>>>naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
>>>only comic but completely senseless.
>>
>>Except the female lordly title is hlaefdige; hlafaeta is a servant: the
>>lady makes the bread, the lord owns the bread and doles it out, the
>>subservient eat the bread their lord gives them and on whom they depend
>>for food.
>
>
> Don't be so sure! Compare ME lavede (OE hlaefdige) and OE hlafaeta. I
> wouldn't say it has anything to do with hlaif/loaf but with
> 'love'
YOu may say it all you like, but "love" comes from OE "lof", which isn't
love in OE and ME, but "praise"; thus a hymn of praise in the liturgy is
a "lofsong". "Lof" and "hlaf" have no relationship to one another
etymologically.
(Sebo-Slavic ljubiti love; ljuba mistress; Russ. любовница;
> Bul. любящ; любител/ljubitelj lover, fan). Hlaefdige might be the
> "loved one" (cf. Ger. leben-dig/e lively).
Based on something besides wishful thinking? If you're going to claim
that philologists and lexicographers are all wrong, you must do better
than this. So, show us where OE -dige is "one" for example.
Weland
Not in Old English.
Dušan Vukotić
Loaf (hlaif) is the same word with the same meaning as lump or lobe
and its original meaning was not "bread". Even bread started from the
PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
vaření). In ancient times bread was mostly shaped in a round form and
therefore its name is derived from the notion of "roundness" [Serb.
kruh (bread) is derived from krug "circle"].
Consider the syntagm "a loaf of bread" and some things (I hope) will
become much clearer to you.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Of course, hlaford is not a loanword from Serbian ["glavar" (chief) or
"glavurda" (big head)]. It was a little joke of mine [a (mis)
calculated provocation :-(].
Nevertheless, these words are clearly related, because they all
"speak" about the round-shaped objects (glava head, globus, lobus,
lump, gomila heap, zemlja humus, caput etc.) and they are also
representing "the head of a tribe, family". This is the reason why I
am saying that lord (hlaford, haefod) is related to Serbo-Slavic
"glavar", "glavatar" (chief) as well as it is related to the other
words for "ruler", like cief, chieftain, captain, capo...
DV
Weland
The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
Even bread started from the
> PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
> vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
> vaření).
Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
In ancient times bread was mostly shaped in a round form and
> therefore its name is derived from the notion of "roundness" [Serb.
> kruh (bread) is derived from krug "circle"].
>
> Consider the syntagm "a loaf of bread" and some things (I hope) will
> become much clearer to you.
Yes, that you have no evidence for your contentions. That much is quite
clear.
Weland
Uh huh.
>
> Nevertheless, these words are clearly related, because they all
> "speak" about the round-shaped objects (glava head, globus, lobus,
> lump, gomila heap, zemlja humus, caput etc.) and they are also
> representing "the head of a tribe, family". This is the reason why I
> am saying that lord (hlaford, haefod) is related to Serbo-Slavic
> "glavar", "glavatar" (chief) as well as it is related to the other
> words for "ruler", like cief, chieftain, captain, capo...
Well, now you're moving goal posts. You said that hlaford was a
loanword from Serbian. You were wrong. And now you say that was just
a joke and shift to a different discussion entirely.
Dušan Vukotić
> The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
> things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
I used, by chance, Gothic hlaif instead of OE hlaf, but it didn't
change anything of what I said.
> Even bread started from the
> > PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
> > vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
> > vaření).
> Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
> OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
Not quite...?
Your head seems not to be a euphemism for the male genitalia, but a
pure reality.
DV
Harlan Messinger
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>> Of course, hlaford is not a loanword from Serbian ["glavar" (chief) or
>> "glavurda" (big head)]. It was a little joke of mine [a (mis)
>> calculated provocation :-(].
>
> Uh huh.
>>
>> Nevertheless, these words are clearly related, because they all
>> "speak" about the round-shaped objects (glava head, globus, lobus,
>> lump, gomila heap, zemlja humus, caput etc.) and they are also
>> representing "the head of a tribe, family". This is the reason why I
>> am saying that lord (hlaford, haefod) is related to Serbo-Slavic
>> "glavar", "glavatar" (chief) as well as it is related to the other
>> words for "ruler", like cief, chieftain, captain, capo...
>
> Well, now you're moving goal posts. You said that hlaford was a
> loanword from Serbian. You were wrong. And now you say that was just
> a joke and shift to a different discussion entirely.
Weland, meet Dusan. This is his standard operating procedure: moving
goal posts and endless and baffling streams of words that get further
and further from what was being discussed in the first place while doing
nothing to support his original claims--rather, just more and more
claims that are no more acceptable than the original ones.
Dušan Vukotić
In fact, it was more a provocation than a joke. I did it because of
the "scientific" opinion that Slavic hleb is a loanword from Gothic
hlaif..
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Weland, do not listen Harlan! He is all wrong here; and he is too lazy
to read carefully what I have written. :-)
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> On Nov 30, 7:53 am, Harlan Messinger
>
>
>
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Weland wrote:
And don't listen to anyone who is trying to disparage your ability to
write and read ;-)
DV
PaulJK
Oh dear, I feel so sorry for you. See what Vasmer says.
And see what Trubachev says about the (way-out) Иоки's
hypothesis that Slavic borrowed a Chinese word for "rice corn".
That's a much better provocation by half, I say. :-))))
<quote>
WORD: хлеб
GENERAL: род. п. -а, мн. хлеба́, укр. хлiб, блр. хлеб, др.-русск. хлѣбъ,
ст.-слав. хлѣбъ ἄρτος (Остром., Еuсh. Sin., Супр.), болг. хляб (Младенов 669),
сербохорв. хле̏б, хље̏б, словен. hlẹ́b, род. п. hlẹ́ba, чеш. chléb, слвц. chlieb,
польск. chleb, в.-луж. khlěb, н.-луж. chlěb, klěb.
ORIGIN: Судя по интонации, следует говорить о заимствовании из герм.,
ср. гот. hlaifs "хлеб", др.-исл. hlėifr -- то же, что более вероятно, чем
родство с последними; см. Мейе, МSL 11, 179; Стендер-Петерсен 300; Мi. ЕW 87;
Лиден, РВВ 15, 515; Уленбек, AfslPh 15, 486; 16, 381; Бернекер I, 389;
Соболевский, AfslPh 33, 480 и сл.; ЖМНП, 1911, май, 166; Янко, WuS I, 95;
Перссон 303; Хирт, РВВ 23, 338; Эндзелин, СБЭ 121; Брюкнер 179; Махек,
"Slavia", 16, 210; Торп 109. В пользу заимствования говорит и заимствование
др.-герм. слова в фин. lеiрä "хлеб" (см. Томсен, Einfl. 150; Сетэлэ, FUF 13, 59)
и лтш. klàips "буханка, каравай" (М. -- Э. 2, 209). Другие допускают родство слав.
*хlěbъ с гот. hlaifs, реконструируя и.-е. *khlōibhos или *skloibhos, куда иногда
относят и лат. lībum "пирог, лепешка" (Педерсен, IF 5, 50; KZ 38, 393 и сл.;
Козловский, AfslPh 11, 386; Младенов 669), но в последнее время лат. слово
связывают -- как первонач. обозначение жертвенного хлеба -- с лат. lībārе
"совершать жертвоприношение, посвящать" и сравнивают с греч. λοιβᾶται σπένδει,
θύει (Гесихий), λοιβή "возлияние", λείβω "лью"; см. Перссон 303; Вальде--Гофм.
I, 796. Буга (ИОРЯС 17, I, 31 и сл.) ошибается, предполагая для лит. kliẽpas
"коврига хлеба" и лтш. klàips -- то же исконнобалт. происхождение. Популярная
урало-алт. этимология слова хлеб (Моль, МSL 7, 403) сомнительна; см. против
нее Бернекер I, 389.
TRUBACHEV: [Можно упомянуть еще гипотезу Иоки (FUF, 29, стр. 202 и сл.)
о происхождении слав. слова из кит.; ср. др.-кит. gli̯ǝр "рисовые зерна". -- Т.]
<unquote>
pjk
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Dušan Vukotić
> > In fact, it was more a provocation than a joke. I did it because of
> > the "scientific" opinion that Slavic hleb is a loanword from Gothic
> > hlaif..
>
> Oh dear, I feel so sorry for you. See what Vasmer says.
> And see what Trubachev says about the (way-out) Иоки's
> hypothesis that Slavic borrowed a Chinese word for "rice corn".
> That's a much better provocation by half, I say. :-))))
>
> <quote>
> WORD: хлеб
First, when will you stop with your arduous copy/paste drilling? I do
not believe that there is anyone here who doesn't know how to use
various databases, including Vasmer, too.
Polish gleba (ground, soil) is the word which is akin to hleb as well
as to Latin humus and Slavic zemlja (Gr.χω̂μα; Serb. humka mound,
hummock). In reality, Serbo-Slavic hleb (Serb. lepinja a small bread,
cake, Lat. libum) is related to Lat. globus/lobus; i.e. it is related
to Serb. lopta (ball), the word that is also known in some East-Slavic
dialects as hlopta or hlapta (Serb. zemljina lopta globus or lit. "the
ball of Earth".
Now, compare lopta (hlopta, ball) and OE hlaif
DV
Peter T. Daniels
Also, when Douchie says "related," he means no more than 'semantic
similarity'; he has never managed to learn that that's not what
linguistics or philology means by 'related'.
Dušan Vukotić
> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
>
>
>
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Weland wrote:
What a breathtakingly intelligent observation.
Very good Denials.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
>
>
>
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Weland wrote:
And I almost forgot...What is "douchie"?
Is it the same implement your female parent had been using for decades
trying to wash out the stench from her entrails after she had given
the birth to shitty peter Denials?
DV
Weland
> On Nov 30, 7:18 am, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
>>things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
>
>
> I used, by chance, Gothic hlaif instead of OE hlaf,
You used by error *A* Gothic form (acc sg), the normal Gothic form for
the nominative is hlaifs.
> but it didn't
> change anything of what I said.
Certainly it did: hlaifs, hlaf, lump, and lobe do not all refer to the
same things and come from different PIE roots.
>
>> Even bread started from the
>>
>>>PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
>>>vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
>>>vaření).
>
>
>>Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
>>OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
>
>
> Not quite...?
Indeed. It is debated as to whether OE bread comes from the
Proto-Germanic *brautham, which would come from the PGmc *breuwan
derived from the PIE *breuhe or whether it comes from PGmc *braudsmon
and is related to PGmc *brekan derived from PIE *bhreg. Stating one
side of a debated point as if it were fact isn't very helpful.
> Your head seems not to be a euphemism for the male genitalia, but a
> pure reality.
Personal commentary such as this only indicates that you can not provide
the evidence to support your claims. Perhaps you'd be good enough to
admit it now. No matter in either case.
Weland
Thanks Harlan....I see that that is the case, and very quickly does our
Dusan run down the rabbit hole.
Weland
So I perceive in this brief discussion so far. Good to have my
suspicions confirmed.
Weland
And your evidence that it isn't is what precisely?
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> > <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>Weland wrote:
>
There used to be quite a few linguists here, but they've been driven
away by the likes of Douche and Franz. Stick around and help be the
good money that drives out the bad.
Ekkehard Dengler
> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Weland wrote:
>>
What makes you think it's okay to call him "Douchie/Douche"?
Regards,
Ekkehard
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>> Weland wrote:
>
How else would you spell his hypocoristic in English?
Where are your complaints about his manipulation of the names of just
about every poster to this newsgroup?
Dušan Vukotić
Read my above answer to Paul Kriha.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 7:18 am, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>
> >>The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
> >>things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
>
> > I used, by chance, Gothic hlaif instead of OE hlaf,
>
> You used by error *A* Gothic form (acc sg), the normal Gothic form for
> the nominative is hlaifs.
Hlaibs too. Hlaifs is the devoiced form of hlaibs.
> > but it didn't
> > change anything of what I said.
>
> Certainly it did: hlaifs, hlaf, lump, and lobe do not all refer to the
> same things and come from different PIE roots.
It doesn't refer to the "sama thing" but it refers to the same round
form .
> >> Even bread started from the
>
> >>>PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
> >>>vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
> >>>vaření).
>
> >>Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
> >>OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
>
> > Not quite...?
>
> Indeed. It is debated as to whether OE bread comes from the
> Proto-Germanic *brautham, which would come from the PGmc *breuwan
> derived from the PIE *breuhe or whether it comes from PGmc *braudsmon
> and is related to PGmc *brekan derived from PIE *bhreg. Stating one
> side of a debated point as if it were fact isn't very helpful.
In addition, it (bread) could also come from the PGmc *brennan (Ger.
Brand fire; OE brand, brond "firebrand"; brand => bread?), similar to
Serbian piroška/prženica (from the noun prženje frying/burning/
parching; Russ. пирог, пирожок, Cz. piroh) or burek (from purenje
burning), Turkish börek (a loanword from Serbian).
But all this "hypotheses" doesn't change the point I have tried to
underline. The name of bread/loaf is shifted from something else(!!!).
In case of loaf it is more than clear that it comes from "roundness"
or from the round-shaped form of bread. Serbo-Slavic lopta
"ball" (from hlopta) is the source of the Slavic word "hleb" and in a
similar way it happened in Germanic languages - loaf, lump, lobe!
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Harlan Messinger
> On Nov 30, 6:54 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> On Nov 30, 7:18 am, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>> The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
>>>> things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
>>> I used, by chance, Gothic hlaif instead of OE hlaf,
>> You used by error *A* Gothic form (acc sg), the normal Gothic form for
>> the nominative is hlaifs.
>
> Hlaibs too. Hlaifs is the devoiced form of hlaibs.
>
>>> but it didn't
>>> change anything of what I said.
>> Certainly it did: hlaifs, hlaf, lump, and lobe do not all refer to the
>> same things and come from different PIE roots.
>
> It doesn't refer to the "sama thing" but it refers to the same round
> form .
Only in the same sense as "wheel" and "sundial" and "pizza" refer to the
"same" round form.
> But all this "hypotheses" doesn't change the point I have tried to
> underline. The name of bread/loaf is shifted from something else(!!!).
Because you say so? (In case your intended response to this is to stop
repeating myself like a broken record, my response to that will be to
tell you to stop repeating the behavior to which it's an appropriate
response.)
> In case of loaf it is more than clear that it comes from "roundness"
> or from the round-shaped form of bread. Serbo-Slavic lopta
> "ball" (from hlopta) is the source of the Slavic word "hleb" and in a
> similar way it happened in Germanic languages - loaf, lump, lobe!
Since "loaf", "lump", and "lobe" came from three unrelated sources, it
follows that you're wrong. ("Lobe" is from Latin.) The "h" in "hleb" and
"hlaf" connects the words to Ancient Greek "klibanos", baking oven,
centuries before the time when, in your theory, they would have to have
magically appeared. Besides, it would be an amazing coincidence if the
Germanic and Slavic peoples both added "h" to words that didn't
previously have them.
Ekkehard Dengler
> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>>
Since Dusan is not a friend of mine, I wouldn't be using any hypocoristics
in the first place, but if I had to, I would obviously prefer <sh> to <ch>.
I hope you're not trying to convince me that the similarity between your
spellings and "douchebag" is unintentional.
> Where are your complaints about his manipulation of the names of just
> about every poster to this newsgroup?
"Just about every poster" seems an exaggeration, but I'm certainly not
saying Dusan isn't guilty of the same thing. It's just sad to see you
stooping to that level. I don't think it's a good idea to reserve your
common decency for people who haven't been putting forward misguided
etymologies.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Dušan Vukotić
Try to compare Greek κόλλαβος (cake, roll) and κλίβανος (bread-
baking vessel) or Serbian hleb (bread) and hlebara (bread-baking
oven). Greek 'kolabos' also means "a small coin" and it additionally
proves that this name is given in accordance with the round form of
cake or coin. As you can see, the meaning of Eng. loaf is not limited
only to bread but it can be any other food formed in a particular
shape. Slavic kolbasa (sausage) is as well named like that because of
its round form (Slavic kolo /wheel, circle/).
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
Do not worry Ekkehard,
I don't mind; he can call me whatever he likes.
Of course, I would prefer a serious debate instead of a prejudiced a
priori rejection of anything that doesn't fit into his narrow-
scientific realm of a ludicrously-ambitious-self-destructive
persiflage.
DV
Ekkehard Dengler
> On Dec 1, 8:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
>>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>>
Don't get me wrong. Your etymologies are being rejected for good reason.
They are certainly imaginative, but unfortunately fail to make the least bit
of linguistic sense, which makes it almost impossible to enter into any kind
of meaningful discussion about them, just as a climatologist would find it
difficult to seriously discuss whether Wednesdays tend to be hotter than
Thursdays. I don't think you appreciate how immensely patient Harlan has
been with you.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Dušan Vukotić
> >>>from the compound hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (ward, warder). In Serbo-
> >>>Slavic it could be calqued as "hlebo-vratar" - hleb (loaf) + vratar
> >>>(warder; the guardian of entrance; Serb. vrata door). Such an
> >>>etymology, albeit possible, doesn't seem convincing enough, especially
> >>>not if we take in consideration the woman "lordly" title - hlafæta
> >>>(lady), literally "the one who eats loaf/bread". I must add here that
> >>>naming a woman (mistress, a lord's wife) as "loaf-eater" would be not
> >>>only comic but completely senseless.
>
> >>Except the female lordly title is hlaefdige; hlafaeta is a servant: the
> >>lady makes the bread, the lord owns the bread and doles it out, the
> >>subservient eat the bread their lord gives them and on whom they depend
> >>for food.
>
> > wouldn't say it has anything to do with hlaif/loaf but with
> > 'love'
>
> YOu may say it all you like, but "love" comes from OE "lof", which isn't
> love in OE and ME, but "praise"; thus a hymn of praise in the liturgy is
> a "lofsong". "Lof" and "hlaf" have no relationship to one another
> etymologically.
You mean OE lufu (love) leof (loved)? OE lof (praise), wherefrom
German Lob, loben (praise, to praise), is, of course, akin to lufu
(love) and it is clear at first sight.
There is no direct relationship between lof/lufu and hlaf, you are
right; but both words are distantly related through the
"roundness" (Lat. obvolvo to wrap up, cover all round; Serb. obljubiti
cover all round; copulate (!!!); poljubiti kiss; po(k)lopiti to cover,
oklop armor). Latin volubilitas (turning, revolution; roundness; Serb.
oblina, oblovina) is derived from the reduplicated Bel basis and it is
related to fullness, plenty, Latin copia (from coplia) and Serbian
obilje, obilato (plenitude, plentiful; Slavic polno, plno, puno
fully).
Compare English ample (Lat. amplus) and Latin amplexor (embrace,
love); ball and full, be-loved;
Serbian oblo (round) obilan (abundant, copious), obljubljen (beloved):
in fact, obljubljen also means "enclosed" (Serb. opkoljen surrounded);
i.e. op-klopljen, oklopljen (armored, shelled) or za-ljubljen
(enamored), za-klopljen (closed, imprisoned)
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> Dusan Vukotic wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 8:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
The problem is that the most of the people on this forum are heavily
burdened with the "scientific" teaching of modern linguistic. Of
course, such a knowledge is helpful (useful) but it also may be
extremely hindering, in sense of preventing people to see the wood
behind the "all-knowing tree".
Additionally, it is impossible to understand what I am talking about
if the reader is not familiar with some of the Slavic languages,
because the internal logic and kinship among the words are not so
precise in Germanic, Romance and Greek vocabulary.
DV
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
"Douche" is a perfectly good English word.
> > Where are your complaints about his manipulation of the names of just
> > about every poster to this newsgroup?
>
> "Just about every poster" seems an exaggeration, but I'm certainly not
> saying Dusan isn't guilty of the same thing. It's just sad to see you
> stooping to that level. I don't think it's a good idea to reserve your
> common decency for people who haven't been putting forward misguided
> etymologies.
See what you said about "immense patience" in your next message.
Harlan Messinger
I already know that you're wrong, so why are you still making up things
for me to compare?
[snip]
Dušan Vukotić
I don't think it is a problem; if you do not want to read someone's
rantings you can avoid it easily. For instance, peter Denials is the
most prolific contributer on this list and I haven't seen any of his
posts for months. Simply, I realized that his writings are entirely
worthless and I decided not to waste the precious time on reading such
claptraps.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
You have initiated this discussion, not me. Next time tell me what do
you want to hear.
Is there anything that you (already) don't know?
DV
Harlan Messinger
I initiated this discussion? I started this thread with comments about
"hlaford" and "hlafete"? I claimed that "lobe" = "lump" = "loaf"?
Amazing. I wonder what you think "initiated" means.
I *ended* this branch of the discussion by demonstrating the
incorrectness of your assertions. Now I'm only commenting on your futile
attempt to continue a branch that has already reached a dead end by
compulsively listing more words that shed no further light on the subject.
Dušan Vukotić
If "demonstration" means to say that you "already know that I am
wrong" then you are right - then you really "demonstrated
incorrectness of my assertions".
I started this thread but you are the one who kept this discussion
alive by commenting it (it means, "initiative" :-) was on your side).
DV
Peter T. Daniels
The threading of this message, then, is most ironic .... and he
responded twice to one posting of mine just yesterday.
His memory is obviously just as bad as Harlan has been saying it is
for months -- or else he is a bald-faced liar.
Dušan Vukotić
> On Dec 1, 8:02 am, Duðan Vukotiã <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:40 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 1, 2:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
> > > > Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > > > On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> > > > >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > > >>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > > >>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> > > > >>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > >>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
What a jerk! It occurred on my thread, where I was obliged to read and
answer any new post. You came to "my house", idiot!
Otherwise, I wouldn't even know that peter Denials exist at all.
DV
Peter T. Daniels
What an idiot. He claims he doesn't read my posts -- now he claims he
reads my posts if they're in "his threads." As if he and Franz "own"
threads!
Weland
The only roundness is the circularity of your argument.
Weland
Or in other words, no evidence for it whatsoever.
Dušan Vukotić
Poor peter Denials! No one "owns" the thread, but if you started a
certain topic, it would be a matter of common decency to read (and, if
possible, answer) all readers' questions and comments.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
>
> >>And your evidence that it isn't is what precisely?
>
> > Read my above answer to Paul Kriha.
>
> Or in other words, no evidence for it whatsoever.
If you are illiterate, yes.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> The only roundness is the circularity of your argument.
In Serbian there are three possibilities where the names for bread and
other baking products of dough are derived from:
- krug, circle -
- kolač (cake; from "kolo" circle, wheel),
- hleb (bread; from "glava", h/lobanja, a round object, head,
globe)
- kruh (from "krug" circle)
- bakings
- pecivo (from "peći" to bake)
- burning
- piroška, burek, prženica (from "pržiti" fry, burn, parche;
"purenje" burning;
cf. Ger. Braten 'roast', Brot 'bread').
It is similar in other Slavic and IE languages.
I advised you not to listen to some lousy peters, who know nothing,
but, unfortunately, you didn't take me seriously. A ten-year-old mind
would be able to grasp what I was talking about here.
DV
Weland
Still lacking evidence.....insults aren't evidence in anyone's book.
Weland
Being able to grasp what you are talking about is different than knowing
that you wrong. If your linguistic methodology is at the ten year old's
level of comprehension, perhaps you'd best stick with that audience.
Dušan Vukotić
There are no insults, just statements of observed facts...
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> On Dec 1, 11:55 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>
> > The only roundness is the circularity of your argument.
>
> In Serbian there are three possibilities where the names for bread and
> other baking products of dough are derived from:
>
> - krug, circle -
> - kolač (cake; from "kolo" circle, wheel),
> - hleb (bread; from "glava", h/lobanja, a round object, head,
> globe)
> - kruh (from "krug" circle)
> - bakings
> - pecivo (from "peći" to bake)
> - burning
> - piroška, burek, prženica (from "pržiti" fry, burn, parche;
> "purenje" burning;
> cf. Ger. Braten 'roast', Brot 'bread'
>
> > I advised you not to listen to some lousy peters, who know nothing,
> > but, unfortunately, you didn't take me seriously. A ten-year-old mind
> > would be able to grasp what I was talking about here.
>
> Being able to grasp what you are talking about is different than knowing
> that you wrong. If your linguistic methodology is at the ten year old's
> level of comprehension, perhaps you'd best stick with that audience.
OK more-than-12-year-old wise guy, tell me, what's wrong with my above
statement?
DV
Weland
Then observe better. Making a claim and providing evidence aren't the
same activity. Even an idiot can see that, and those who can not seem
to must be in a worse condition than the idiot. Just an observation of
facts.
Weland
Your application.
Harlan Messinger
Your expectation that people will accept it Just Because You Say So.
Weland
>>
>>>>The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
>>>>things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
>>
>>>I used, by chance, Gothic hlaif instead of OE hlaf,
>>
>>You used by error *A* Gothic form (acc sg), the normal Gothic form for
>>the nominative is hlaifs.
>
>
> Hlaibs too. Hlaifs is the devoiced form of hlaibs.
"devoiced form"? Oi. In any case, it doesn't change the fact that you
used an incorrect form and then compounded your error by claiming that
you used a form from another language which turned out to be erroneous too.
>
>>>but it didn't
>>>change anything of what I said.
>>
>>Certainly it did: hlaifs, hlaf, lump, and lobe do not all refer to the
>>same things and come from different PIE roots.
>
>
> It doesn't refer to the "sama thing" but it refers to the same round
> form .
Let's remember what you actually claimed: "Loaf (hlaif) is the same word
with the same meaning as lump or lobe...." Not quite the same thing as
saying that they are different words that refer to the same thing (or
same round form). Further, the attribution of "round form" to "lump"
seems odd, since "lump" is a mass of unspecified shape and lobe and
globe (lobus<lobos) are related, but are not related to lump or hlaf.
And bread, then as now, need not be in a "round" shape but could be
shaped to anything desired, so this "stream of consciousness"
association of supposed semantic fields doesn't work here either.
>
>>>> Even bread started from the
>>
>>>>>PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
>>>>>vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
>>>>>vaření).
>>
>>>>Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
>>>>OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
>>
>>>Not quite...?
>>
>>Indeed. It is debated as to whether OE bread comes from the
>>Proto-Germanic *brautham, which would come from the PGmc *breuwan
>>derived from the PIE *breuhe or whether it comes from PGmc *braudsmon
>>and is related to PGmc *brekan derived from PIE *bhreg. Stating one
>>side of a debated point as if it were fact isn't very helpful.
>
>
> In addition, it (bread) could also come from the PGmc *brennan (Ger.
> Brand fire; OE brand, brond "firebrand"; brand => bread?), similar to
> Serbian piroška/prženica (from the noun prženje frying/burning/
> parching; Russ. пирог, пирожок, Cz. piroh) or burek (from purenje
> burning), Turkish börek (a loanword from Serbian).
>
> But all this "hypotheses" doesn't change the point I have tried to
> underline. The name of bread/loaf is shifted from something else(!!!).
Most words are! In English, to write comes from writan, originally
meaning to inscribe, to read comes from raedan, to advise, to type comes
from a device "typewriter", and is shortened from "to typewrite", and is
certainly shifted from its Latin root, itself a shift from its Greek
root. So what? A huge number of words' meanings are shifted from
something else. Next are you going to reveal that the sun is in the sky?
> In case of loaf it is more than clear that it comes from "roundness"
> or from the round-shaped form of bread.
Clear apparently only to you.
Serbo-Slavic lopta
> "ball" (from hlopta) is the source of the Slavic word "hleb" and in a
> similar way it happened in Germanic languages - loaf, lump, lobe!
Evidence besides loose associations? None? Thought so.
Dušan Vukotić
A "lyrical" reasoning of a chronic drunkard ;-)
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Well, not people - children!
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Are we still observing the evidences of your illiteracy?
DV
Dušan Vukotić
Latin gleba is clump/lump of earth. Read again my previous answer to
Kriha
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/0f3d3aa7b989f5c6?hl=en&
> >>>> Even bread started from the
>
> >>>>>PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
> >>>>>vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
> >>>>>vaření).
>
> >>>>Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
> >>>>OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
>
> >>>Not quite...?
>
> >>Indeed. It is debated as to whether OE bread comes from the
> >>Proto-Germanic *brautham, which would come from the PGmc *breuwan
> >>derived from the PIE *breuhe or whether it comes from PGmc *braudsmon
> >>and is related to PGmc *brekan derived from PIE *bhreg. Stating one
> >>side of a debated point as if it were fact isn't very helpful.
>
> > In addition, it (bread) could also come from the PGmc *brennan (Ger.
> > Brand fire; OE brand, brond "firebrand"; brand => bread?), similar to
> > Serbian piroška/prženica (from the noun prženje frying/burning/
> > parching; Russ. пирог, пирожок, Cz. piroh) or burek (from purenje
> > burning), Turkish börek (a loanword from Serbian).
>
> > But all this "hypotheses" doesn't change the point I have tried to
> > underline. The name of bread/loaf is shifted from something else(!!!).
>
> Most words are! In English, to write comes from writan, originally
> meaning to inscribe
More exactly, 'carve', 'scratch', 'cut in' - similar to Serbian
rezanje (carving, cutting in; Russ. вырезать; Cz. řezat)
>, to read comes from raedan, to advise,
From Latin ratio -onis (a reckoning, account, consideration,
calculation; Serb. računati reckon, raditi work, urediti arrange; Pol.
rada; po-rada
advice)
> to type comes
> from a device "typewriter",
Don't be ridiculous! "Type" comes from Greek τύπτω (typto) "strike,
beat"; Serb. tupkati, tapkati, dobovati (patter, roll, trip, tap)
DV
Yusuf B Gursey
> On Nov 30, 6:54 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>
> > Dušan Vukotić wrote:
> > > On Nov 30, 7:18 am, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>
> > >>The word is "hlaf", not hlaif, and both "lump" and "lobe" mean different
> > >>things and come from different roots entirely and don't mean the same thing.
>
> > > I used, by chance, Gothic hlaif instead of OE hlaf,
>
> > You used by error *A* Gothic form (acc sg), the normal Gothic form for
> > the nominative is hlaifs.
>
> Hlaibs too. Hlaifs is the devoiced form of hlaibs.
>
> > > change anything of what I said.
>
> > Certainly it did: hlaifs, hlaf, lump, and lobe do not all refer to the
> > same things and come from different PIE roots.
>
> It doesn't refer to the "sama thing" but it refers to the same round
> form .
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > >>>PIE root *bhreue- or from the HSF Bel-Hor-Gon basis (brew, Serb.
> > >>>vrenje brewing;bariti boil; Russ. варить, пиво-варение; Cz. vařit,
> > >>>vaření).
>
> > >>Not quite, and in any case, nothing to do with your claim that "hlaf" in
> > >>OE is a euphemism for the male genitalia.
>
> > > Not quite...?
>
> > Indeed. It is debated as to whether OE bread comes from the
> > Proto-Germanic *brautham, which would come from the PGmc *breuwan
> > derived from the PIE *breuhe or whether it comes from PGmc *braudsmon
> > and is related to PGmc *brekan derived from PIE *bhreg. Stating one
> > side of a debated point as if it were fact isn't very helpful.
>
> In addition, it (bread) could also come from the PGmc *brennan (Ger.
> parching; Russ. пирог, пирожок, Cz. piroh) or burek (from purenje
> burning),Turkishbörek (a loanword fromSerbian).
the etymology of bo"rek is unclear, but it is not from serbian. it may
have an internal etymology in turkic or it may be a loanword from
persian.
>
> But all this "hypotheses" doesn't change the point I have tried to
> underline. The name of bread/loaf is shifted from something else(!!!).
> In case of loaf it is more than clear that it comes from "roundness"
> or from the round-shaped form of bread. Serbo-Slavic lopta
> "ball" (from hlopta) is the source of the Slavic word "hleb" and in a
> similar way it happened in Germanic languages - loaf, lump, lobe!
>
> DV- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dušan Vukotić
>
> the etymology of bo"rek is unclear, but it is not from serbian. it may
> have an internal etymology in turkic or it may be a loanword from
> persian.
The fact is that burek/börek is a word of undoubted IE origin (Serb.
purenje/prženje burning; piroga, piroška; Russ. пирог/pirog pie,
pastry). The basis of these words is Bel-Hor-Gon (according to my HSF;
Latin fla-gra-ntia burning; Serb. prljenje) or *bher-gn- (Serb. baren
cooked). Even English bread seems to be derived from the same root
(Ger. braten roast, Brot bread)
DV
Harlan Messinger
The fact is that when a person as knowledgeable as Yusuf says that
something like this isn't true, it probably isn't a fact and, by the
definition of the word "undoubted", it isn't undoubted.
> The basis of these words is Bel-Hor-Gon
Impossible, since there's no such thing.
Dušan Vukotić
Where did you see that Yusuf said that "something like that wasn't
true"? He said that "the etymology of burek is unclear"!
When will you learn to read?
I emphasized that the Bel-Hor-Gon basis is the basis from my HSF
theory.
DV
Ekkehard Dengler
> On Dec 1, 2:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
So is "disingenuous". "Douche" is a "perfectly good English word" only in
the sense that it exists and you spelled it correctly.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 2:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
But "douchebag" is completely irrelevant (with considerably different
connotations).
Ekkehard Dengler
> On Dec 8, 11:10 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Dec 1, 2:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
>>>>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>>
I suspect you're being deliberately obtuse. "Douche" is of course short for
"douchebag" and an extremely common insult.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Dec 8, 11:10 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Dec 1, 2:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>>>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
Even Rindhole will back me on this one. "Douche" is by no means "short
for" "douchebag"!
A douche, in English, is a cleansing preparation most often referenced
in the context of feminine hygiene.
Dušan Vukotić
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Dec 8, 11:10 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Dec 1, 2:02 am, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "Ekkehard Dengler" <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Weland <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:53 am, Harlan Messinger
> >>>>>>>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Weland wrote:
>
Your fixation to douche bag appears to be a little bit
problematic. ;-)
OTOH, it is well known that Denials suffers from DBWS (douche bag
worship syndrome), because he uses such equipment regularly to wash
out the seminal fluid from his ruined rectum.
DV
Ekkehard Dengler
Yes, it is, as a quick Google search would have shown you:
6,220 results for <"stupid douche" -"douche bag" -"douche bags">
5,280 results for <"stupid douchebag" OR "stupid douche bag">
Regards,
Ekkehard
Peter T. Daniels
I guess I don't go among people who are too lazy to use an entire
derogative!