The (H)Risen Christ
Dušan Vukotić
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/ca8723fa6359c486?
> L. oestrus vs. L. eostur.
> Toss in a couple of firy seraphim...
> and what do you get?
> One heck of an orgy
> called Easter!
> Spring has sprung and love is in the air.
> Gorge on rabbits and eggs!
> In honour of ...
> Lith. Aistra, PGmc. Austron
> and today's Ostara?
> Oh ya...an afterthought..."Christ has risen!"
> "You've got to be kidding!"
> "No, I'm not. You'll find him in that rabbit warren." ;-)
> Take care,
> Heidi
Old Slavic въскрьсениѥ (resurrection): Russ. воскресение, Serb. Vaskrs/
Uskrs are the words closely related to Oster, Easter, Ostara, Aistra
and these words are also closely related to the word "star"; Uskrs
(Easter) is also akin to Latin re-surrectio (surgo surgere; re-
surgere; resurrect). Dunube was once a resurrection river (Ister;
Greek Istros); i.e. its name was derived from the same primal basis
(Sur-Gon) as Greek αστηρ (star), Serbian zora (dawn), sunce (sun; from
su/r/nke) and zrak/a (sun-beam; ray).
The Greek word έσχάρα (fireplace, burner, torch) is phonetically
almost the same as the Serbian verb izgore-ti (burn) and the noun
iskra (spark; cf. Lat corusco /to twinkle, flash/; Serb. kresnuti /
sparkle, light up/). Now we can see that the Serbian words iskra
(spark; cf. Hun. szikra /spark/, Slavic loanword), kresati
(coruscate), is-krsnuti (to appear suddenly; emerge), us-krsnuti
(resurrect) and Uskrs (Easter) are clearly and logically related to
eachother.
When the name of Christ is in question (I wrote about it earlier
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/164103e932d60e10?) it
cannot be a calque from Hebrew Messiah (anointed one). Originally, the
Greek word χρίω (khrio, khriein) meant graze, similar to Serbian verb
gristi, grize (graze) and it is not an accident that English grease is
phonetically close to graze. :-)
In order to understand what really "happened" to the Christ's name we
must start from the OE rísan (to go up, rise; Serb. rast, rašćenje /
rise, raise, grow/). It means that the whole Christian doctrine is
based on the idea of resurrection; i.e. on the doomsday and the rising
of dead (as we know, Christ himself risen from his grave after he was
crucified and burried).
Christos is the (H)Risen One. ;-)
Of course, someone is going to ask what the words like Serbian iskra,
zora, zrak or Greek έσχάρα have in common with the name of Christ and
the process of Christening. Let me try to explain this with the
Serbian word "is-krasti" (to sneak away, sneak out). Namely, Serbian
word is-krasti (sneak out) has the meaning "to leave the circle", "to
leave the group", and the ancient man envisaged any group as a sort of
circle (Lat. cicus, circa, Serb. krug, Gr. krugos) and he also
imagined any possible processes in nature as a "circling" motion (Gr.
χορεια any circling motion, dance; Serb. kruženje /circling/; Eng.
cruising; Lat. circino /to form into a circle/). And, as you can see,
Slavic iskra is a sparkle that "sneaks away" (is-krasti /snaek out/,
is-krsnuti /to pop up/, us-krsnuti /resurrect/ from its "encircled"
entity.
Portuguese igreja (church) is a close relative to Spanish jugar (play)
and Serb. igra (game, play) and all these three words were derived
from Hor-Gon basis, i.e. from the common Romance circulo (Serb. igrali-
šte playground; Romanian cerc, Italian cerchia /circle/).
I hope, everyone has enough data at his disposal to understand that
German Kirche or Slavic cerkva (church), including English church
(from OE cirice, cyrce), belong to the group of words that were
derived from the Hor-Gon basis, which essential meaning was
"circle" (the round-shaped form of the sun).
DV
Harlan Messinger
> When the name of Christ is in question (I wrote about it earlier
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/164103e932d60e10?) it
> cannot be a calque from Hebrew Messiah (anointed one).
Evidently you don't think the Greeks knew how to speak their own language.
> Originally, the
> Greek word χρίω (khrio, khriein) meant graze, similar to Serbian verb
> gristi, grize (graze) and it is not an accident that English grease is
> phonetically close to graze. :-)
>
> In order to understand what really "happened" to the Christ's name we
> must start from the OE rísan (to go up, rise; Serb. rast, rašćenje /
> rise, raise, grow/).
Remarkable--they based their name for him on a word from a language
spoken by a small number of people in a remote corner of Europe
centuries before that language came to exist.
Dušan Vukotić
What about αρεταω (thrive) and αριστειος (belonging to the bravest;
bestowed as the prize of valour; αριστοκράτης aristocrat = the
usefull member of the society; Serb. korist (benefit, interest),
koristan (remunerative, useful, productive, beneficial); cf. Gr.
κορυστος heaped up, raised up; Serb. na-rasti (accrue). In addition
Ευχαριστία, sacrament, secret, consecrate, sacristy (and remember the
above mentioned Serb. iskrasti "to sneak out", "to leave the group/
entity"; also Serb. sakriti (hide, conceal).
Of course, a small metathesis is present among these words, but I hope
you are able to understand the way in which they have been
devloped. :-)
DV
Harlan Messinger
What about them? I think they're a list of words with some phonetic
resemblences between them. What's even funnier than when you make
pronouncements about relationships among words without an ounce of proof
is when you present lists of words and don't even claim anything about
them, as though a hole had just opened up in your brain and a bunch of
free associations just fell out.
> Of course, a small metathesis is present among these words, but I hope
> you are able to understand the way in which they have been
> devloped. :-)
I'm sure *you* don't understand the way in which they've been
"developed". You don't give any sign that you do.
Dušan Vukotić
>
> - Show quoted text -
If you cannot understand the relation among the words as Uskrs,
Easter, istok (east), east, uskrsnuće (re-surrection), resurrection,
incarnation, izvor (spring), zora (dawn), source etc., and if you are
unable to grasp that a "circle" is their essential "embodiment", you
better leave any lingual efforts in the future and go fishing.
DV
Harlan Messinger
>
> If you cannot understand the relation among the words as Uskrs,
> Easter, istok (east), east, uskrsnuće (re-surrection), resurrection,
> incarnation, izvor (spring), zora (dawn), source etc., and if you are
> unable to grasp that a "circle" is their essential "embodiment", you
> better leave any lingual efforts in the future and go fishing.
Once again: I don't see *you* explaining the relationship between them.
All I see you doing is pronouncing one to exist.
Marc
<hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Once again: I don't see *you* explaining the relationship between them.
> All I see you doing is pronouncing one to exist.
Shhh! He's hard at work proving my hypothesis. Let him rave. In fact,
the best thing to do is to add fuel to the fire. (Suggest other,
totally random but similar-sounding words.)
Marc
Dušan Vukotić
What a peculiar anthropoid-clown you are, Marx!
When will your next apelike-performing be held?
DV
Harlan Messinger
I've tried that, but he only seems to be interested when such a list is
the product of what he perceives to be *his* cleverness.
Dušan Vukotić
OK! Let me ask you another (more easier!) question: can you understand
the similar "encircled" logic hidden in words as Gr. σχολε, Lat.
schola, Ger. Schule, Serb. škola. This time it is not "krug" but
"kolo" (circle, wheel; PIE *kWlo-). Do you know why the Greek
"schooling" has the meaning "leisure or spare time" (σχολαζω)? Could
you try to grasp what the relation between the Greek word scholazo (to
be at leisure) and Serbian dokolica/dokoličiti (leisure, pastime; to
be at leisure) might be? In boath casis the basis is *kh(o)-kWlo-; cf.
Gr. κυκλος (ring; round), κυκλοθεν (from all around), κυκλόθι
(around), Serb. okolo (around; from h/okolo), dokolica (leisure).
I am sure you know that in ancient time the schools were "made up" for
those people who had nothing else (better!) to do than to get
educated.
DV
Harlan Messinger
> On Mar 30, 2:00 pm, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>
>>> If you cannot understand the relation among the words as Uskrs,
>>> Easter, istok (east), east, uskrsnuće (re-surrection), resurrection,
>>> incarnation, izvor (spring), zora (dawn), source etc., and if you are
>>> unable to grasp that a "circle" is their essential "embodiment", you
>>> better leave any lingual efforts in the future and go fishing.
>> Once again: I don't see *you* explaining the relationship between them.
>> All I see you doing is pronouncing one to exist.
>
> OK! Let me ask you another (more easier!) question:
Congratulations! This is the 500th time you have challenged someone to
explain a set of connections without ever having bothered to provide any
reasonable explanation for your pronouncements. You know, we aren't here
for the purpose of impressing you. If you have claims you want to make,
especially when the contradicting existing knowledge, then either put up
or shut up.
Dušan Vukotić
> OK! Let me ask you another (more easier!) question: can you understand
> the similar "encircled" logic hidden in words as Gr. σχολε, Lat.
> schola, Ger. Schule, Serb. škola. This time it is not "krug" but
> "kolo" (circle, wheel; PIE *kWlo-). Do you know why the Greek
> "schooling" has the meaning "leisure or spare time" (σχολαζω)? Could
> you try to grasp what the relation between the Greek word scholazo (to
> be at leisure) and Serbian dokolica/dokoličiti (leisure, pastime; to
> be at leisure) might be? In both cases the basis is *kh(o)-kWlo-; cf.
> Gr. κυκλος (ring; round), κυκλοθεν (from all around), κυκλόθι
> (around), Serb. okolo (around; from h/okolo), dokolica (leisure).
> I am sure you know that in ancient time the schools were "made up" for
> those people who had nothing else (better!) to do than to get
> educated.
I forgot Latin conligo (collect), conlega (colleague), Serb.
okupljanje (gathering, assembling); all the words derived from Gon-Bel-
Gon basis. Now you must be able to understand that school (škola,
σχολε) is nothing but “gathering”; i.e. collecting, occupying; Serb.
okupljanje (gathering, assembling).
DV
Harlan Messinger
Once *again* you demonstrate no understanding on *your* part, once
*again* nothing more than a pronouncement.
Dušan Vukotić
Obviously, you do not understand the relation between Latin oculus and
Slavic oko, between Serb. kolo (circle), Latin complecti -plexus
(surround, encompass) and Serb. okoliti (surround, encompass; okolina /
surroundings/), Lat. conligo (collect) and Serb. okupljati
(collect)...
Also, Lat. educatio, Serb. douka (education), Lat. diaconus, OE
deacon, Serb, djak (student).
It is impossible to understand the above words if we do not start from
the Gon_Bel_Gon basis; i.e. if we do not start from the noun kolo
(circle, cycle; Lat. caulae /hole, opening/) adverb okolo (around;
about from OE onbutan, Eng. in-habit; Lat. habito to dwell; cf. Serb.
na-seobina, selo /village/), and the word oko (eye; Lat. oculus).
DV
Harlan Messinger
No, obviously, YOU don't since, AGAIN, all you do is proclaim there to
be one, without any explanation, rational or otherwise.
>
> Also, Lat. educatio, Serb. douka (education), Lat. diaconus, OE
> deacon, Serb, djak (student).
>
> It is impossible to understand the above words if we do not start from
> the Gon_Bel_Gon basis
Lots of people understand these words and yet miraculously none of them
"start from the Gon_Bel_Gon basis" since not only are you the person who
invented it, but you're the only person who even understands what you
mean by "basis" every time you use it in this way.
Patrick Karl
> On Mar 30, 8:07 pm, Harlan Messinger
>
> I wanted to say that (without Gon-Bel-Gon primal basis) nobody can
> understand the way in which the above words have been "built up"
> through the history. In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I do not use
> neither roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms
> made by (re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon.
> There are 12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula",
I only count 6: Xur-Bel-Gon, Xur-Gon-Bel, Bel-Xur-Gon, Bel-Gon-Xur,
Gon-Xur-Bel, Gon-Bel-Xur. What are the other six?
> but when reduplications are included, the number of "primeval bases"
> might be significantly increased.
Perhaps all the way to 27?
(BTW, might I enquire what your linguistic background is? Education,
journal articles, books, etc.)
Dušan Vukotić
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 8:07 pm, Harlan Messinger
>
> > I wanted to say that (without Gon-Bel-Gon primal basis) nobody can
> > understand the way in which the above words have been "built up"
> > through the history. In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I do not use
> > neither roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms
> > made by (re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon.
> > There are 12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula",
>
> I only count 6: Xur-Bel-Gon, Xur-Gon-Bel, Bel-Xur-Gon, Bel-Gon-Xur,
> Gon-Xur-Bel, Gon-Bel-Xur. What are the other six?
Xur, Bel, Gon;
Xur-Bel, Xur-Gon, Gon-Bel, Gon-Xur, Bel-Xur. Bel-Gon
> > but when reduplications are included, the number of "primeval bases"
> > might be significantly increased.
>
> Perhaps all the way to 27?
Much more... For instance, Serbian words like nakaniti, nagoniti,
nagaziti, nagonjenje, konjanici etc. are derived from the
quadriplicated Gon syllable; poljubiti comes from Bel-Bel-Bel-Gon
combination, obljubljena from Gon-Bel-Bel-Gon, pogonjenje Bel-Gon-Gon-
Gon...bogobojažljiv Bel-Gon-Bel-Gon-Bel... I think that hundreds and
hundreds, even thousands, of similar combinations are possible.
We need a math expert here :-)
DV
Dušan Vukotić
>
> - Show quoted text -
I wanted to say that - without Gon-Bel-Gon primal basis - nobody can
understand the way in which the above words have been "built up"
through the history. In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I use neither
roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms made by
(re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon. There are
12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula", but when
reduplications are included, the number of "primeval bases" might be
significantly increased.
DV
Patrick Karl
> On Mar 30, 9:46 pm, Patrick Karl <jpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> On Mar 30, 8:07 pm, Harlan Messinger
>>> I wanted to say that (without Gon-Bel-Gon primal basis) nobody can
>>> understand the way in which the above words have been "built up"
>>> through the history. In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I do not use
>>> neither roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms
>>> made by (re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon.
>>> There are 12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula",
>> I only count 6: Xur-Bel-Gon, Xur-Gon-Bel, Bel-Xur-Gon, Bel-Gon-Xur,
>> Gon-Xur-Bel, Gon-Bel-Xur. What are the other six?
>
> Xur, Bel, Gon;
> Xur-Bel, Xur-Gon, Gon-Bel, Gon-Xur, Bel-Xur. Bel-Gon
Ah! I thought we were talking about "this three-syllabic 'formula'".
Apparently we can also have 1- and 2-syllabic formulae. Who knew?
(Where would one go to find the whole theory described?)
And did you notice that I asked for the other six and you gave me nine?
That make me wonder why you said "...(t)here are 12 basic
permutations...", instead of 15.
You seem to have overlooked the following question in my first response.
Maybe you could devote some attention to it now? I would guess that
your dissertation was on the Xur-Bel-Gon theory, no? From what university?
Patrick Karl
I thought we were agreeing on 15 basic permutations, scattered over 1-,
2-, and 3-syllabic formulae.
Brian M. Scott
<jpk...@gmail.com> wrote in
<news:fsp5hf$pmr$1...@registered.motzarella.org> in sci.lang:
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
[...]
>> Xur, Bel, Gon;
>> Xur-Bel, Xur-Gon, Gon-Bel, Gon-Xur, Bel-Xur. Bel-Gon
> Ah! I thought we were talking about "this three-syllabic
> 'formula'". Apparently we can also have 1- and
> 2-syllabic formulae. Who knew? (Where would one go to
> find the whole theory described?)
> And did you notice that I asked for the other six and you
> gave me nine? That make me wonder why you said
> "...(t)here are 12 basic permutations...", instead of
> 15.
Perhaps his arithmetic is the equal of his linguistics.
[...]
Brian
Bart Mathias
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> Also, Lat. educatio, Serb. douka (education), Lat. diaconus, OE
>> deacon, Serb, djak (student).
>>
>> It is impossible to understand the above words if we do not start from
>> the Gon_Bel_Gon basis
>
>
> Lots of people understand these words and yet miraculously none of them
> "start from the Gon_Bel_Gon basis" since not only are you the person who
> invented it, but you're the only person who even understands what you
> mean by "basis" every time you use it in this way.
I think you're just jealous because you didn't think of it first!
Bart Mathias
Harlan Messinger
> On Mar 30, 8:07 pm, Harlan Messinger
> through the history.
Even with it there is no way for them to understand it because it's your
invention and bears no relationship to reality.
> In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I do not use
> neither roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms
> made by (re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon.
For which you have no proof, only a pronouncement (of something you made
up out of thin air).
> There are 12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula",
> but when reduplications are included, the number of "primeval bases"
> might be significantly increased.
For which you have no proof, only a pronouncement.
Peter T. Daniels
N. Ya. Marr thought of it first, only there were four primeval
syllables: SAL, BER, ROSH, YON.
Paul J Kriha
news:beaa17d3-ac4b-43ed...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Aren't you concerned what happens should he reach a critical mass?
pjk
XSH-BUM-GON !
Dušan Vukotić
> > Xur, Bel, Gon;
> > Xur-Bel, Xur-Gon, Gon-Bel, Gon-Xur, Bel-Xur. Bel-Gon
>
> Ah! I thought we were talking about "this three-syllabic 'formula'".
> Apparently we can also have 1- and 2-syllabic formulae. Who knew?
> (Where would one go to find the whole theory described?)
Do you understand what the word "permutation" means (it is the change
of order among the given elements/objects); and hadn't you noticed
that I was talking about possible _combination_ INSIDE the
threesyllabic "formula"? I hope you are clever enough to understand
that no permutation is possible if a single one object (undividable
unit) is set in line. In this case there are the three elements
(primordial syllables), which constitute the "well-spring" of human
speech (the "generator" of words).
> And did you notice that I asked for the other six and you gave me nine?
> That make me wonder why you said "...(t)here are 12 basic
> permutations...", instead of 15.
> You seem to have overlooked the following question in my first response.
> Maybe you could devote some attention to it now? I would guess that
> your dissertation was on the Xur-Bel-Gon theory, no? From what university?
All my books (papers) are written in Serbian and, I suppose, of no use
for you. I hope - my work (in English) - the book under the title "Xur-
Bel-Gon - the Human Speech Formula" will be finished by the end of
this year.
DV
Heidi Graw
>"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:e8210f2d-73b4-4ad5...@y24g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
(snip)
>N. Ya. Marr thought of it first, only there were four primeval
>syllables: SAL, BER, ROSH, YON.
Ah...let me take a guess:
From: salber roshyon
To: selber rüschen
Eng. translation: preening oneself...
fluffying oneself up for an occasion,
wearing frills. ;-)
Take care,
Heidi
Marc
<paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> XSH-BUM-GON !
And then there was silence...
Marc
Bart Mathias
But I bet Marr wasn't doing it as a send-up of Magdalanian, which is
what I suspect Dušan Vukotić is doing.
Brian M. Scott
<mat...@hawaii.edu> wrote in
<news:KtCdnf3o5YOWpmza...@hawaiiantel.net> in
sci.lang:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Mar 30, 9:14 pm, Bart Mathias <math...@hawaii.edu> wrote:
>>>Harlan Messinger wrote:
>>>>Dušan Vukotić wrote:
[...]
>>>>> It is impossible to understand the above words if we
>>>>> do not start from the Gon_Bel_Gon basis
>>>> Lots of people understand these words and yet
>>>> miraculously none of them "start from the Gon_Bel_Gon
>>>> basis" since not only are you the person who invented
>>>> it, but you're the only person who even understands
>>>> what you mean by "basis" every time you use it in this
>>>> way.
>>> I think you're just jealous because you didn't think of
>>> it first!
>> N. Ya. Marr thought of it first, only there were four
>> primeval syllables: SAL, BER, ROSH, YON.
> But I bet Marr wasn't doing it as a send-up of
> Magdalanian, which is what I suspect Dušan Vukotić is
> doing.
He isn't: it was mostly his insistence on pushing this crap
that got him kicked off Cybalist, and he didn't show up here
until after that.
Brian
Harlan Messinger
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:27:07 -1000, Bart Mathias
> <mat...@hawaii.edu> wrote in
> <news:KtCdnf3o5YOWpmza...@hawaiiantel.net> in
> sci.lang:
>> Magdalanian, which is what I suspect Dušan Vukotić is
>> doing.
>
> He isn't: it was mostly his insistence on pushing this crap
> that got him kicked off Cybalist, and he didn't show up here
> until after that.
Oh, I didn't know about Cybalist before. This is delightful. I see where
Dushan wrote, "Following the above way of thinking, I concluded that the
first spoken word must ultimately be the name of the one of most ancient
sun-deities." These beings had theretofore had no language yet they had
managed to share among themselves a concept as abstract as a sun deity.
A language-free mythology. I can't imagine the wordless discussions they
must have held at length on the attributes of their various gods.
Besides, what are "dada" and "mama", chopped liver?
Dušan Vukotić
> N. Ya. Marr thought of it first, only there were four primeval
> syllables: SAL, BER, ROSH, YON.- Hide quoted text -
I new nothing about Nicolas Marr when I "announced" my Xur-Bel-Gon
theory in 2004. It was two years later (January, 2006) that I first
heard about that Russian linguist/archaeologist (in a discussion with
G. Starostin). Even today I do not know how Marr came to his Sal-Ber-
Rosh-Yon ur-syllables. In my case the thing is simple, I used the
names of the most ancient divinities, Sur, Hor(u)s and Bel, "animated"
with the help of an "omnipotent" Gon syllable.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> He isn't: it was mostly his insistence on pushing this crap
> that got him kicked off Cybalist, and he didn't show up here
> until after that.
> Brian
Your head is crap, Brainy.
What is Cybalist at the moment?
A few ignorant and semiliterate people of the Arnaud's type are
showing their naked asses and fuck the brains of the rest of Cybalist
lingua-strivers.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
<hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Brian M. Scott wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:27:07 -1000, Bart Mathias
> > <news:KtCdnf3o5YOWpmza...@hawaiiantel.net> in
> > sci.lang:
> >> But I bet Marr wasn't doing it as a send-up of
> >> doing.
>
> > He isn't: it was mostly his insistence on pushing this crap
> > that got him kicked off Cybalist, and he didn't show up here
> > until after that.
>
> Oh, I didn't know about Cybalist before. This is delightful. I see where
> Dushan wrote, "Following the above way of thinking, I concluded that the
> first spoken word must ultimately be the name of the one of most ancient
> sun-deities." These beings had theretofore had no language yet they had
> managed to share among themselves a concept as abstract as a sun deity.
> A language-free mythology. I can't imagine the wordless discussions they
> must have held at length on the attributes of their various gods.
>
> Besides, what are "dada" and "mama", chopped liver?
Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in the
sky.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> >"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in message
Maybe, SIL-BER CHRIST-IAN or SLO-B-BER CHRIST-IAN? :-)
DV
Harlan Messinger
Very, very funny, considering I was quoting YOU claiming the bit about
the deity.
Either way, the "must have" part is hysterical: there is NO WAY POSSIBLE
WAY that the first word ever spoke could have been ANYTHING but a word
for the sun, BECAUSE DUSHAN HAS SO PRONOUNCED.
Heidi Graw
>"Dusan Vukotic" <dusan....@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:59d6c5d9-4459-426c...@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>On Mar 31, 8:56 am, "Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net> wrote:
> >"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> >news:e8210f2d-73b4-4ad5...@y24g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>
> (snip)
>
> >N. Ya. Marr thought of it first, only there were four primeval
> >syllables: SAL, BER, ROSH, YON.
>Heidi wrote:
> Ah...let me take a guess:
>
> From: salber roshyon
>
> To: selber rüschen
>
> Eng. translation: preening oneself...
> fluffying oneself up for an occasion,
> wearing frills. ;-)
>
> Take care,
> Heidi
>Dusan wrote:
>Maybe, SIL-BER CHRIST-IAN or SLO-B-BER CHRIST-IAN? :-)
Nah...given the word Rosh is included one could take it
as a reference to a Hebrew chief..
Salber...salver...a healing action.
Rosh...chief....a head guy...an important person.
Yon...gift...
The gift of a salvering chief....in reference to
a messiah no doubt.
I suspect N. Ya. Marr was merely engaging in
an ego trip with his theory. It's highly unlikely
that primal man's first words were to honour
a savior. He was far more likely to say,
"Where's the beef!" ;-)
Take care,
Heidi
Heidi Graw
I believe first words had more to do with what was nearer to the ground,
words of more immediate and practical use. Eyes first to the
ground, then up to the sky.
When one lives in survival mode, one naturally looks towards
one's immediate and pressing needs on the ground and at
hand.
"In the beginning was the word, and the word was 'moo.'"
"Where's the beef?" ;-)
Heidi
Dušan Vukotić
I have no reason to be either hysterical or nervous; especially, I
have no reason to be as jumpy as you are wiith your (above)
unnecessary capitalization.
I know what I am talking about because I checked out such a "sun-god"
hypothesis on an extremely big number of IE words.
DV
Harlan Messinger
That doesn't make any sense. Your reasoning, as YOU stated, is that it
must have been the first word because it's shiny and highly visible and
salutary--as though there were already a generally agreed-upon premise
that the first word must have described something shiny and highly
visible and salutary.
As far as "checking" is concerned, you *made up* connections between
your putative first words and heaven knows how many PIE roots. You can't
draw valid conclusions from your own imaginings. Or let's put it this
way: if you can, then so can Franz and since his findings contradict
yours, it follows that it's absurd to say that you can. QED.
Christopher Culver
> Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
> to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in
> the sky.
Precisely, and it has already been established by one of your
countrymen seven decades ago that that first articulated word was
"ağ". You're retreading old ground.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Yusuf B Gursey
: Dušan Vukotić <dusan....@gmail.com> writes:
:> Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
:> to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in
:> the sky.
: Precisely, and it has already been established by one of your
: countrymen seven decades ago that that first articulated word was
that was a turkish crackpot theory!
: "ağ". You're retreading old ground.
Peter T. Daniels
> In sci.lang Christopher Culver <crcul...@christopherculver.com> wrote in <87fxu58esh....@christopherculver.com>:
> : Dušan Vukotić <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> writes:
> :> Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
> :> to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in
> :> the sky.
>
> : Precisely, and it has already been established by one of your
> : countrymen seven decades ago that that first articulated word was
>
> that was a turkish crackpot theory!
>
> : "ağ". You're retreading old ground.
Are Turkish crackpot theories better or worse than Serbian crackpot
theories?
Yusuf B Gursey
: On Apr 1, 5:45??pm, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
:> In sci.lang Christopher Culver <crcul...@christopherculver.com> wrote in <87fxu58esh....@christopherculver.com>:
:> :> Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
:> :> to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in
:> :> the sky.
:>
:> : Precisely, and it has already been established by one of your
:> : countrymen seven decades ago that that first articulated word was
:>
:> that was a turkish crackpot theory!
:>
: Are Turkish crackpot theories better or worse than Serbian crackpot
: theories?
all the same.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
> >"Dusan Vukotic" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Good point. What little we can understand about meaningful
vocalizations among our closest relatives (monkeys anyway) seems to
mean things like "food over here!" or "snake!". They don't sit around
talking about the weather.
Ross Clark
Yusuf B Gursey
: In sci.lang Christopher Culver <crcu...@christopherculver.com> wrote in <87fxu58...@christopherculver.com>:
: : Dušan Vukotić <dusan....@gmail.com> writes:
: :> Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
: :> to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in
: :> the sky.
: : Precisely, and it has already been established by one of your
: : countrymen seven decades ago that that first articulated word was
: that was a turkish crackpot theory!
IIRC correctly an austrian named Kvergic laid the groundwork, the
specifics like ag~ were done by turks.
: : "ağ". You're retreading old ground.
Paul J Kriha
>On Mar 31, 10:25 pm, Harlan Messinger
><hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Brian M. Scott wrote:
>> > On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:27:07 -1000, Bart Mathias
>> > <math...@hawaii.edu> wrote in
>> > <news:KtCdnf3o5YOWpmza...@hawaiiantel.net> in
>> > sci.lang:
>> >> But I bet Marr wasn't doing it as a send-up of
>> >> doing.
>>
>> > He isn't: it was mostly his insistence on pushing this crap
>> > that got him kicked off Cybalist, and he didn't show up here
>> > until after that.
>>
>> Oh, I didn't know about Cybalist before. This is delightful. I see where
>> Dushan wrote, "Following the above way of thinking, I concluded that the
>> first spoken word must ultimately be the name of the one of most ancient
>> sun-deities." These beings had theretofore had no language yet they had
>> managed to share among themselves a concept as abstract as a sun deity.
>> A language-free mythology. I can't imagine the wordless discussions they
>> must have held at length on the attributes of their various gods.
>>
>> Besides, what are "dada" and "mama", chopped liver?
>
>Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
>to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in the
>sky.
Oh common, man! We all know that the very first spoken
word was "mum" or "m&m" meaning vagina, a hole in the
ground, or, in fact, any hole.
pjk
Heidi Graw
>"Paul J Kriha" <paul.nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:47f3...@clear.net.nz...
(snip)
>>Dusan wrote:
>>Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
>>to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in the
>>sky.
> Paul wrote:
> Oh common, man! We all know that the very first spoken
> word was "mum" or "m&m" meaning vagina, a hole in the
> ground, or, in fact, any hole.
You mean that great abyss where men compete and
only one wins the prize...a place sometimes called
chaos?
Think tens of thousands of sperm vying for that one ovum.
Kinda reminds me of a king who can raise great
armies just so he can f*ck the queen. Thousands
of men have to die so that one guy can score.
Why are men so stupid to go along with that
game plan?
Ah, pardon me....it's genetically encoded!
Mother Nature's design! ;-)
Take care,
Heidi
Craoi...@gmail.com
>
> Why are men so stupid to go along with that
> game plan?
>
If you said "Why are niggers so stupid..." or "Why are women so
stupid..." or "Why are kikes so stupid..." or "Why are sandniggers so
stupid...", you would be berated for bigotry, and for a reason.
However, when you say "Why are men so stupid..." you will not get your
due scolding.
This is precisely because I am against feminism: because it is not
about equal rights anymore, but about vindicating anti-male bigotry.
And because feminism has long ago been hijacked by people like Heidi
Graw, who accuse you of male chauvinism if you as a trained linguist
question their crap ideas about language.
Peter T. Daniels
Oh, go shack up with phoglund.
And "because" doesn't mean "why" in indirect questions.
Dušan Vukotić
Where did you see any Serbian theory (crackpot or not)?
DV
Heidi Graw
>"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:87569ffa-3888-429a...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>On Apr 2, 7:12 am, Craoibhi...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 2, 9:31 am, "Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>> > Why are men so stupid to go along with that
>> > game plan?
(snip)
>>Crybaby wrote:
>> This is precisely because I am against feminism: because it is not
>> about equal rights anymore, but about vindicating anti-male bigotry.
>> And because feminism has long ago been hijacked by people like Heidi
>> Graw, who accuse you of male chauvinism if you as a trained linguist
>> question their crap ideas about language.
>Peter wrote:
>Oh, go shack up with phoglund.
<chuckle> Ah well, Peter, Crybaby and Fogloony are but
two examples of testyrical males suffering from IMS (Irritable
Male Syndrome). They can't help their testronics. Hormone therapy
might be of help to guys like those two.
Take care,
Heidi
Trond Engen
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:87569ffa-3888-429a...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>> On Apr 2, 7:12 am, Craoibhi...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 2, 9:31 am, "Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are men so stupid to go along with that game plan?
>>>
>>> This is precisely because I am against feminism: because it is not
>>> about equal rights anymore, but [...]
>>
>> Oh, go shack up with phoglund.
>
> <chuckle> Ah well, Peter, Crybaby and Fogloony are but
> two examples of testyrical males suffering from IMS (Irritable
> Male Syndrome). They can't help their testronics. Hormone therapy
> might be of help to guys like those two.
One example. And you don't need to prove his case, you know. I liked
'testronics', though.
--
Trond Engen
- deincarnator
Peter T. Daniels
?! The poster I see as "Craoibhi..." is actually phoglund??? What
makes you think so?
Harlan Messinger
but "hIstrionics" has nothing to do with the Greek word for uterus.
Dušan Vukotić
<crcul...@christopherculver.com> wrote:
> Dušan Vukotić <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
> > to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in
> > the sky.
>
> Precisely, and it has already been established by one of your
> countrymen seven decades ago that that first articulated word was
> "ağ". You're retreading old ground.
Countryman? Have you ever attended any school? At least primary?
DV
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
[...]
> ?! The poster I see as "Craoibhi..." is actually phoglund???
> What makes you think so?
God, is that Petey ever THICK, as I've shown several times. And that
THICK imbecile is calling *me* "thick"!
Of course "Craoibhi..." is "phoglund," you THICK moron. He has given at
least *five* strong hints about his true identity.
Please, people, don't tell that THICK asshole Petey why you also knew
that our Finnish friend "phoglund" now posts as "Craoibhi..." Let that
THICK fucker Petey do his own research and don't spoon-feed that lazy
bastard, as usual.
~~~ Reinhold (Rey) Aman ~~~
Dušan Vukotić
"fire" of coherent thinking.
The process of REAL thinking was impossible until the man succeded to
secure a significant amount of spare (leisure) time for himself. It
is
the reason why we have _schools_ (Gr. σχολε/schole spare time,
leisure, rest,
ease; Lat. schola /learned leisure/).
DV
Trond Engen
> Only the sun was able to "enlighten" the human mind and to ignite the
> "fire" of coherent thinking.
Ah, of course. And when did the man's first encounter with the sun take
place?
--
Trond Engen
- from the dark ages
Dušan Vukotić
> "In the beginning was the word, and the word was 'moo.'"
> "Where's the beef?" ;-)
>
> Heidi
Of course, a certain kind of meaningful uttering (cry, shout, warning
or gratifying vocalization) existed before the time when Xur-Bel-Gon
"word-generator" started to "produce" the words. It is not excluded
that a complete mythological picture of the world pre-existed the
beginning of speech/auditory communication.
In the beginning was the beginning!
Dim the lights and let the movie begin! ;-)
DV
Harlan Messinger
>
> Only the sun was able to "enlighten" the human mind and to ignite the
> "fire" of coherent thinking.
>
> The process of REAL thinking was impossible until the man succeded to
> secure a significant amount of spare (leisure) time for himself. It is
> the reason why we have _schools_ (Gr. σχολη spare time, leisure, rest,
> ease; Lat. schola /learned leisure/).
Yet more pronouncements: we are to presume all these things to be true
because Dušan has decreed them to be true.
Dušan Vukotić
> > Only the sun was able to "enlighten" the human mind and to ignite the
> > "fire" of coherent thinking.
>
> Ah, of course. And when did the man's first encounter with the sun take
> place?
Then, when the man had nothing else to do but to lie leisurely in the
comfort of the cave... and when he first time yearned his next-
mourning encounter with the sun.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
<hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net>
> > The process of REAL thinking was impossible until the man succeded to
> > secure a significant amount of spare (leisure) time for himself. It is
> > the reason why we have _schools_ (Gr. σχολη spare time, leisure, rest,
> > ease; Lat. schola /learned leisure/).
>
> Yet more pronouncements: we are to presume all these things to be true
> because Dušan has decreed them to be true.
Not at all... but because any IE speaker is repeating it every day
(unconsciously of course); yourself included.
DV
Harlan Messinger
I've never said anything in my life that implies or refers to the
concept that "Only the sun was able to 'enlighten' the human mind and to
ignite the 'fire' of coherent thinking." It's doubly ridiculous because
even if it did *happen* that the first word related to the sun, your
addition of "only the sun was able", the assertion that it could not
possibly have happened any other way, the idea that you would even have
any way to know that, is exclusively your own delusion.
Dušan Vukotić
Once again: I know exactly what I am talking about. My HSF Xur-Bel-Gon
theory is almost infallible and it "told" me what happened in a
distant period of human history when the man started to articulate his
thoughts.
DV
Harlan Messinger
> On Apr 3, 12:40 am, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>> On Apr 3, 12:09 am, Harlan Messinger
>>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net>
>>>>> The process of REAL thinking was impossible until the man succeded to
>>>>> secure a significant amount of spare (leisure) time for himself. It is
>>>>> the reason why we have _schools_ (Gr. σχολη spare time, leisure, rest,
>>>>> ease; Lat. schola /learned leisure/).
>>>> Yet more pronouncements: we are to presume all these things to be true
>>>> because Dušan has decreed them to be true.
>>> Not at all... but because any IE speaker is repeating it every day
>>> (unconsciously of course); yourself included.
>> I've never said anything in my life that implies or refers to the
>> concept that "Only the sun was able to 'enlighten' the human mind and to
>> ignite the 'fire' of coherent thinking." It's doubly ridiculous because
>> even if it did *happen* that the first word related to the sun, your
>> addition of "only the sun was able", the assertion that it could not
>> possibly have happened any other way, the idea that you would even have
>> any way to know that, is exclusively your own delusion.
>
> Once again: I know exactly what I am talking about.
In the same sense that J.R.R. Tolkien knew exactly what he was writing
about when he crafted the Ring tales--but at least he recognized that
his product was a work of fiction.
> My HSF Xur-Bel-Gon
> theory is almost infallible
So you keep proclaiming, incessantly, without an ounce of proof. It
works as long as you allow yourself infinitely leeway to imagine
relationships--without feeling the slightest inclination to check
yourself by determining whether they follow any patterns, as opposed to
being completely haphazard, as they happen to be.
> and it "told" me what happened in a
> distant period of human history when the man started to articulate his
> thoughts.
That's called psychosis. Dušan, meet Franz. Franz, Dušan.
Pat
> On Mar 30, 9:46 pm,PatrickKarl<jpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Du¹an Vukotiæ wrote:
> > > On Mar 30, 8:07 pm, Harlan Messinger
>
> > > I wanted to say that (without Gon-Bel-Gon primal basis) nobody can
> > > understand the way in which the above words have been "built up"
> > > through the history. In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I do not use
> > > neither roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms
> > > made by (re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon.
> > > There are 12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula",
>
> > I only count 6: Xur-Bel-Gon, Xur-Gon-Bel, Bel-Xur-Gon, Bel-Gon-Xur,
> > Gon-Xur-Bel, Gon-Bel-Xur. What are the other six?
>
> Xur, Bel, Gon;
> Xur-Bel, Xur-Gon, Gon-Bel, Gon-Xur, Bel-Xur. Bel-Gon
I thought that now that you've had a few days to think about it I
would bring this up again. You said originally that there were "12
basic permutations inside this three-syllabic 'formula'". When I
reported that I only could find 6, you responded with 9 more. To my
way of counting, that means there must be 15 basic permutations inside
your formula.
So, which is it? 12 or 15?
Heidi Graw
(snip)
>In the beginning was the beginning!
>Dim the lights and let the movie begin! ;-)
Two people were nuzzling on the ledge
of a cliff near the entrance of their cave.
Suddenly, Mooga saw something move
in the distance. "Moomat! Moomat!
Many, many Moomat!" A herd of
mammoths were moving across the
plaine.
His wife Mukla quickly scampered
into the cave and returned with a
spear in her hand. "Mooga, go kill
moomat if you want dinner tonight."
Mooga obeyed his wife and took the spear
to hunt the mammoth. In the meantime,
Mukla primped and preened her furs.
Satisfied she looked pretty enough
for the other wildlife, she went out
to pick berries and gather up
some greens for the meat she was
hoping Mooga will bring back home.
Mooga hasn't been too ambitious of
late. He spent far too much time
staring up into the skies and imagining
things. Mukla became ever more
unhappy about that.
Meat was becoming more scarce because
Mooga was becoming more and more
lazy. He tried to justify his laziness
by claiming that the Gods shall provide!
Needless to say, Mukla had to spend
far too much time trying to keep Mooga
ambitious and motivated enough so they
could enjoy a more comfortable living.
No meat, no dinner. No dinner, no nookie.
Mooga decided it's best he go out to do
all that dangerous hunting! ;-)
Heidi
Dušan Vukotić
> On Mar 30, 4:02 pm, Duðan Vukotiã <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 30, 9:46 pm,PatrickKarl<jpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 30, 8:07 pm, Harlan Messinger
>
> > > > I wanted to say that (without Gon-Bel-Gon primal basis) nobody can
> > > > understand the way in which the above words have been "built up"
> > > > through the history. In my "reconstructing" HSF theory I do not use
> > > > neither roots nor lemmas. My "bases" are the first agglutinated forms
> > > > made by (re)combining of the three ur-syllables - Xur, Bel and Gon.
> > > > There are 12 basic permutations inside this three-syllabic "formula",
>
> > > I only count 6: Xur-Bel-Gon, Xur-Gon-Bel, Bel-Xur-Gon, Bel-Gon-Xur,
> > > Gon-Xur-Bel, Gon-Bel-Xur. What are the other six?
>
> > Xur, Bel, Gon;
> > Xur-Bel, Xur-Gon, Gon-Bel, Gon-Xur, Bel-Xur. Bel-Gon
>
> I thought that now that you've had a few days to think about it I
> would bring this up again. You said originally that there were "12
> basic permutations inside this three-syllabic 'formula'". When I
> reported that I only could find 6, you responded with 9 more. To my
> way of counting, that means there must be 15 basic permutations inside
> your formula.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Are you blind or stupid or both?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/3c32dbc56d71fe17?
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> > Easter, istok (east), east, uskrsnuće (re-surrection), resurrection,
> > incarnation, izvor (spring), zora (dawn), source etc., and if you are
> > unable to grasp that a "circle" is their essential "embodiment", you
> > better leave any lingual efforts in the future and go fishing.
>
> Once again: I don't see *you* explaining the relationship between them.
> All I see you doing is pronouncing one to exist.
What can I do to make you understand that Latin corusco -are is
related to Serbian words kresnuti (to flash, inflame) and tresnuti/
treskati (shake) and that all these words are derived from the word
circus (Serb. krug circle), via cruising (Serb. kruženje circling
around) I cannot help you other way. All phonetic changes (velar to
dental) are absolutely clear and regular in this case. Can you grasp
that English run (from AS ryne) is most closely related to the Serbian
werb krenuti/kreni (get going, go, start; krenuti putem take the road.
Of course, you would be able to understand it if you saw that Germanic
"run" has lost its initial velar (cf. Goth. garuns street; set in
motion). AS rinnan (flow, run) can be related to Serbian reka (river)
and runiti (rout) and roniti (dive, pour).
What else should I say to open your mind; do you know were the English
word rotate came from? Can you not see that rotate is a close relative
to Serbian okretati (rotate)?; again from krug, circus or circle
(ring). What if I said to you that English area is related to Serbian
okrug (area, district) and kraj (site, area)?
There are thousands of examples how the words sprang from the Hor-Gon
basis, which is branched into three main meanings: circle (krug,
ring), fire (gorenje, kresanje; coruscate) and water (rout, rinnan,
reka, runiti, roniti) etc. The shape of the sun is round, circling is
causing crushing as well as correction and corrugation and
coruscation, including rotation and running...
Please Harlan, do not be stupid, be smart!
DV
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> >"Dusan Vukotic" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Poor Mooga! :-)
DV
Harlan Messinger
> On Mar 30, 2:00 pm, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
>>
>>> If you cannot understand the relation among the words as Uskrs,
>>> Easter, istok (east), east, uskrsnuće (re-surrection), resurrection,
>>> incarnation, izvor (spring), zora (dawn), source etc., and if you are
>>> unable to grasp that a "circle" is their essential "embodiment", you
>>> better leave any lingual efforts in the future and go fishing.
>> Once again: I don't see *you* explaining the relationship between them.
>> All I see you doing is pronouncing one to exist.
>
> What can I do to make you understand that Latin corusco -are is
> related to Serbian words kresnuti (to flash, inflame) and tresnuti/
> treskati (shake) and that all these words are derived from the word
> circus (Serb. krug circle), via cruising (Serb. kruženje circling
> around) I cannot help you other way. All phonetic changes (velar to
> dental) are absolutely clear and regular in this case. Can you grasp
> that English run (from AS ryne) is most closely related to the Serbian
> werb krenuti/kreni (get going, go, start; krenuti putem take the road.
> Of course, you would be able to understand it if you saw that Germanic
> "run" has lost its initial velar (cf. Goth. garuns street; set in
> motion). AS rinnan (flow, run) can be related to Serbian reka (river)
> and runiti (rout) and roniti (dive, pour).
Look at how you approach this: with appeals. "What can I do to make you
understand ...?" "Can you grasp that ...?" In other words, you don't
have a clue in your head how to demonstrate ANY of these relationships.
All you know how to do is decide for yourself that they exist and then
get completely exasperated that the rest of the world requires a higher
level of demonstration than "it's obvious to Dušan" or "there's a
resemblance".
>
> What else should I say to open your mind;
It isn't about opening minds. It's about you learning how to make a case
for these things. Please, Dušan, don't be stupid, be smart.
Paul J Kriha
> >"Paul J Kriha" <paul.nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> >news:47f3...@clear.net.nz...
> >>Dusan wrote:
> >>Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
> >>to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in the
> >>sky.
>
> > Oh common, man! We all know that the very first spoken
> > word was "mum" or "m&m" meaning vagina, a hole in the
> > ground, or, in fact, any hole.
>
> You mean that great abyss where men compete and
> only one wins the prize...a place sometimes called
> chaos?
>
> Think tens of thousands of sperm vying for that one ovum.
>
> Kinda reminds me of a king who can raise great
> armies just so he can f*ck the queen. Thousands
> of men have to die so that one guy can score.
>
> Why are men so stupid to go along with that
> game plan?
Genetics. Evolution. Big brains are expensive.
Man evolves only as clever as he needs to be
to attract and impregnate a female.
Heidi, Heidi, please stop insulting women!
pjk
> Ah, pardon me....it's genetically encoded!
> Mother Nature's design! ;-)
>
> Take care,
> Heidi
>
Heidi Graw
>> "Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net> wrote in message
>> news:GKFIj.12404$pb5.4669@edtnps89...
>> >"Paul J Kriha" <paul.nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>> >news:47f3...@clear.net.nz...
>> >>Dusan wrote:
>> >>Wrong, Harlan, the first "articulated" word must have been connected
>> >>to the sun, the shiniest and the most visible (salutary) object in the
>> >>sky.
>>
>> > Paul wrote:
>> > Oh common, man! We all know that the very first spoken
>> > word was "mum" or "m&m" meaning vagina, a hole in the
>> > ground, or, in fact, any hole.
>> Heidi wrote:
>> You mean that great abyss where men compete and
>> only one wins the prize...a place sometimes called
>> chaos?
>>
>> Think tens of thousands of sperm vying for that one ovum.
>>
>> Kinda reminds me of a king who can raise great
>> armies just so he can f*ck the queen. Thousands
>> of men have to die so that one guy can score.
>>
>> Why are men so stupid to go along with that
>> game plan?
> Paul wrote:
> Genetics. Evolution. Big brains are expensive.
> Man evolves only as clever as he needs to be
> to attract and impregnate a female.
So, if the female makes it more difficult
and challenging to be accessible, then the
male will grow smarter? Iow, she can
set the standard of intelligence in men?
>
> Heidi, Heidi, please stop insulting women!
I don't think that is the case. You're the one
claiming a man's intelligence level is something
a woman has control over. ;-)
Now, let's look at the real world. In societies
where women are hidden and kept away from
men until a marriage has been arranged for them,
I don't see that those societies doing
as well in terms of the sciences, technological
advances and economic output as the societies
where women are much more accessible.
So, it seems to be easy women create
smarter men. Hard to get women end up
with dummies.
Well, in any case, it appears that the
spark in a man's loin lights up his
brain. The more he is around women,
the brighter he becomes. ;-)
Take care,
Heidi
Patrick Karl
I am neither, but I suspect you are one of them. You did not address
the matter at all in that message, but rather mouthed a rather
simplistic lesson on permutations:
|Do you understand what the word "permutation" means (it is the change
|of order among the given elements/objects); and hadn't you noticed
|that I was talking about possible _combination_ INSIDE the
|threesyllabic "formula"? I hope you are clever enough to understand
|that no permutation is possible if a single one object (undividable
|unit) is set in line. In this case there are the three elements
|(primordial syllables), which constitute the "well-spring" of human
|speech (the "generator" of words).
If you look above in this message, you will see where I hazarded what
seemed to me to be the six possible permutation of Xur, Bel, and Gon in
response to your assertion that there were 12 possible permutations.
But you replied (as you can see above) with a list of an additional nine
permutations, for a total of 15.
So I ask again with the hope that this time you'll be responsive, which
is it? 12 or 15? (I might mention that I'm losing faith in your HSF
theory; it seems a little flakey if you can't decide something as
fundamental as the number of basic permutations of your magic three
syllables.)
Paul J Kriha
YES, that's exactly right! :-)
> > Heidi, Heidi, please stop insulting women!
>
> I don't think that is the case. You're the one
> claiming a man's intelligence level is something
> a woman has control over. ;-)
Sure you are insulting women. You are insulting
them by implication.
The men's stupidity is the product of hundreds of thousands
of years of selective breeding experiment conducted by women.
You said, men are stupid. If after so many thousands of generations
they are still stupid, the only conclusion one can draw is that
women are not even intelligent enough to figure out it might be
good idea to have a smart breadwinner and smart kids.
:-)
> Now, let's look at the real world. In societies
> where women are hidden and kept away from
> men until a marriage has been arranged for them,
> I don't see that those societies doing
> as well in terms of the sciences, technological
> advances and economic output as the societies
> where women are much more accessible.
>
> So, it seems to be easy women create
> smarter men. Hard to get women end up
> with dummies.
>
> Well, in any case, it appears that the
> spark in a man's loin lights up his
> brain. The more he is around women,
> the brighter he becomes. ;-)
Well, you may say this, that and the other, but you are
a woman and according to you women can't tell or don't
care to tell a smart man from a dummy.
So, there you are. :-)
pjk
> Take care,
> Heidi
lora...@cs.com
> >"Dusan Vukotic" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I'm confused here..
Instead of "Mooga, go kill moomat if you want dinner (and nookie)
tonight."
By applying Dushan's Xur-Bel-Gon Basis wouldn't 'Mukla' (Bel-Bel) said
something more like:
'Xur ! Gon Gon-Gon Bel-Gon Xur-Bel Xur-Bel-Bel Bel-Gon' ???
Wouldn't that be more correct?
Dušan Vukotić
> > Are you blind or stupid or both?
> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/3c32dbc56d71fe17?
>
> I am neither
Are you sure you haven't been mislead?
DV
Heidi Graw
(snip)
>Paul wrote:
> The men's stupidity is the product of hundreds of thousands
> of years of selective breeding experiment conducted by women.
> You said, men are stupid. If after so many thousands of generations
> they are still stupid, the only conclusion one can draw is that
> women are not even intelligent enough to figure out it might be
> good idea to have a smart breadwinner and smart kids.
> :-)
You've heard the term, "useful idiot," have you not?
Back in the days when I was a much younger woman,
I had a very good paying job, a house, a car, and money
for exotic vacations. I quite literally had it all!
However, my house needed windows replaced
and some other renovations. I moaned and
griped to my friends, "All I need is a man
with some muscle. He doesn't have to
have a brain or anything. I can always
tell him what to do."
Well...6 months later, lo and behold! I met
the man who would become my husband.
However, he came with a bonus! A brain...
a real working brain!
YES!!!
A man with muscle and a brain,
who would have thunk it? Well...I decided
he was a real keeper. We've been married
for over 25 years! He's been useful to
me throughout all that time! ;-)
Take care,
Heidi
Patrick Karl
Pretty sure. But I'm amazed by your refusal to address this issue. I
thought your HSF theory spoke to you. It must have been lying when it
said there were 12 basic permutation of the three syllable formula.
Dušan Vukotić
> Dušan Vukotić wrote:
> > On 3 апр, 18:10, Patrick Karl <jpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Are you blind or stupid or both?
> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/3c32dbc56d71fe17?
> >> I am neither
>
> > Are you sure you haven't been mislead?
>
> Pretty sure.
Can you not remember the moment when you bumped your head and became
retarded?
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> >"Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> >news:47f5...@clear.net.nz...
>
> (snip)
>
> >Paul wrote:
> > The men's stupidity is the product of hundreds of thousands
> > of years of selective breeding experiment conducted by women.
> > You said, men are stupid. If after so many thousands of generations
> > they are still stupid, the only conclusion one can draw is that
> > women are not even intelligent enough to figure out it might be
> > good idea to have a smart breadwinner and smart kids.
> > :-)
>
> You've heard the term, "useful idiot," have you not?
Do not push to hard, Heidi.
Educate him in a small doses.
Kriha is (temporarily) an useless idiot...
DV
Paul J Kriha
> >Paul wrote:
> > The men's stupidity is the product of hundreds of thousands
> > of years of selective breeding experiment conducted by women.
> > You said, men are stupid. If after so many thousands of generations
> > they are still stupid, the only conclusion one can draw is that
> > women are not even intelligent enough to figure out it might be
> > good idea to have a smart breadwinner and smart kids.
> > :-)
>
> You've heard the term, "useful idiot," have you not?
You mean the term coined by somebody called Ulyanov?
> Back in the days when I was a much younger woman,
> I had a very good paying job, a house, a car, and money
> for exotic vacations. I quite literally had it all!
>
> However, my house needed windows replaced
> and some other renovations. I moaned and
> griped to my friends, "All I need is a man
> with some muscle. He doesn't have to
> have a brain or anything. I can always
> tell him what to do."
>
> Well...6 months later, lo and behold! I met
> the man who would become my husband.
> However, he came with a bonus! A brain...
> a real working brain!
>
> YES!!!
>
> A man with muscle and a brain,
> who would have thunk it? Well...I decided
> he was a real keeper. We've been married
> for over 25 years! He's been useful to
> me throughout all that time! ;-)
I've never met an intelligent and well educated woman who
was willing to share her entire life with a thicko, a woman
who sooner or later wasn't looking for an intelligent and
educated life partner.
pjk
Heidi Graw
(snip)
>> Heidi wrote:
>> You've heard the term, "useful idiot," have you not?
>Paul wrote:
> You mean the term coined by somebody called Ulyanov?
Argh...and here I thought it was coined by some
guy named Iosef. Aleksandr wrote something
about "The Gulag Archipelago." Have you read
any of Solzhensitsyn's works?
Take care,
Heidi
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> I've never met an intelligent and well educated woman who
> was willing to share her entire life with a thicko, a woman
> who sooner or later wasn't looking for an intelligent and
> educated life partner.
What about your wife? Is she unintelligent and uneducated? :-)
DV
Dušan Vukotić
I hope Kriha wouldn't deem my above words as offensive. It is a normal
joke among the Serbs.
My wife is always "boasting" that she married me after she concluded
that her future husbund is dumb enough for her taste and
expectations.
She always stayed what she was: a BRIDE who maintained the BRIDLE! :-)
DV
Patrick Karl
What kind of a retarded question is that?
It must be awfully embarassing for you to have made such a grievous
mistake about your pet theory. What else can I conclude from your
persistent refusal to answer my simple question:
When you said there were 12 permutation of the three-syllable basic
formula, but later contributed 9 permutations to my 6, adding up to not
12 but 15, what in the hell did you mean?
It sounds to me like Dušan doesn't even know his own pet theory!
Dušan Vukotić
Permutation Karl, why don't you go back to kindergarten... you
pathetic little dumbo?
Play with blocks until your brain starts working again!
DV
Paul J Kriha
> >"Paul J Kriha" <paul.nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> >news:47f6...@clear.net.nz...
> (snip)
>
> >> Heidi wrote:
> >> You've heard the term, "useful idiot," have you not?
>
> >Paul wrote:
> > You mean the term coined by somebody called Ulyanov?
>
> Argh...and here I thought it was coined by some
> guy named Iosef.
(Iosef Bros Tito? :-)
You probably think it was Uncle Joe Dzhugashvili because
you learned the term from internet pages, or from people
who learned it from there.
If you read a little bit about what Ulyanov said and wrote
prior to and during NEP (New Economic Policy), before his
heart attack, while he was the top dog in charge of the Bolshevic
party, you'd know that he kept using that term well before
Dzhugashvili had any chance to enveigle himself into a position
of power and say anything profound people around him
would care to write down in the history books.
> Aleksandr wrote something
> about "The Gulag Archipelago." Have you read
> any of Solzhensitsyn's works?
You asking me.... you really asking me???
Actually, I have never managed to read "Gulag" from cover
to cover. When it came out in the sixties,the subject of the
story was an old hat for me. I wouldn't rate it extra high just
because of it. I felt, it didn't have much of any artistic value,
his prose was boring and pedestrian. I thought I was reading
a bad translation, so I borrowed a Russian language version
but it was just the same in blue, so to speak.
> Take care,
No worries, she'll be right.
pjk
> Heidi
Paul J Kriha
news:dd589519-599c-4e99...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>On Apr 5, 8:23 am, Dušan Vukotić <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 5, 5:41 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I've never met an intelligent and well educated woman who
>> > was willing to share her entire life with a thicko, a woman
>> > who sooner or later wasn't looking for an intelligent and
>> > educated life partner.
>>
>> What about your wife? Is she unintelligent and uneducated? :-)
You judge for yourself, she has a MSc in automation and
electrical engineering. I met her in my twenties when I was
working as a uni asistent lecturer in her fifth year, when she
was my student. Still, the marriage lasted only seven years.
(Yes, that's right, seven! And that was just the first seven...:-)
>I hope Kriha wouldn't deem my above words as offensive.
What? When did that ever worry you?
Peter T. Daniels
wrote:
> Actually, I have never managed to read "Gulag" from cover
> to cover. When it came out in the sixties,the subject of the
> story was an old hat for me. I wouldn't rate it extra high just
> because of it. I felt, it didn't have much of any artistic value,
> his prose was boring and pedestrian. I thought I was reading
> a bad translation, so I borrowed a Russian language version
> but it was just the same in blue, so to speak.
*One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich* reads rather better in
English (and was a pretty good movie, too) -- maybe it's so in the
original too?
Paul J Kriha
news:831d8e71-8929-4920...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
[...]
>*One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich* reads rather better in
>English (and was a pretty good movie, too) -- maybe it's so in the
>original too?
I haven't read any of his books in English so I can't compare
it with other translations and originals. "One Day" is an earlier
work than "Gulag". You are probably right. IIRC, when I read
then, I thought it was better read than "Gulag".
pjk