|
Post by joustos on Oct 1, 2020 22:24:45 GMT
Page 1
On different days, weather and health permitting, I am going to write a tract (small treatise) about the field of study or investigation called "Logology" (= the study of Discourse or Speeches). What I call Philology used to be called, on occasions, Philology, and it was believed that the divine Hermes was the father of Philology or the first philologist (and the father of instrumental music, succeeded in music by the divine Apollo). {Notice how I have been packing information and realize that you are doing philology. This speaking/writing style of mine is not poetic and is not pleasant.} I have never taken courses in linguistics or etymology. So, I will not regurgitate things I learned formally. However, for years I have been doing etymology of words of many languages such as my native language, Anglo-Saxon (Old English), Basque, Eblaite (Canaanitic Syriac), and obscure Etruscan (which I translated -- made clear -- by doing the etymology of many of its words). What is an etymology and how is it done? This is one thing I will discuss and exemplify, so that some readers can become apprendices of the art of etymology and practise it for their native language, if so they wish.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on May 29, 2022 18:40:06 GMT
I came back to this site in order to make LOGOLOGY comprise also HERMENEUTICS (Imterprtation), which I have actually touched upon above. Hermeneutics: interpretation of something obscure; criticism; logical analysis; sometimes '[ scriptural] scholarship". Thus, e.g., Plato's search fpr the original meaning of some word or name -- etymologism -- is a form of hermeneutics. What about the nterpr. of oracles, omens, or signs [like smoke ---> fire]? Signs or cluses do not exist as such; certain thinga or events are to be recognized as portentuous/important, for which there is no method. Hermes is the spirit of discovery.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 3, 2022 21:01:07 GMT
I came back to this site in order to make LOGOLOGY comprise also HERMENEUTICS (Imterprtation), which I have actually touched upon above. Hermeneutics: interpretation of something obscure; criticism; logical analysis; sometimes '[ scriptural] scholarship". Thus, e.g., Plato's search fpr the original meaning of some word or name -- etymologism -- is a form of hermeneutics. What about the nterpr. of oracles, omens, or signs [like smoke ---> fire]? Signs or cluses do not exist as such; certain thinga or events are to be recognized as portentuous/important, for which there is no method. Hermes is the spirit of discovery. It is not only texts [scriptures] that can be obscure. E.g. the subject of a painting can, but "philology" is traditionally restricted to literary texts. My manuscript on Indo-European has a chapter titled "Interpretations and Etymologies"; it explains certain paintings at Pompeii and gives my etymological interpretation of some Lemnos inscriptions. Presently I will present a different doublet (which is hereby copyright by the author, me, and will be a part of the MS' Addenda [additions]): In a Magna Graecian dialect (my native language), we use a phrase to avert the bad effects of an 'evil eye": Long. "Uottu e nove, fore mal'uocquiu", literally = "eight and nine, outside/away [be] the evil eye. Fore < Latin Fore (= outside). Mal' = male, < Latin Malum or Italian Male (= bad; evil). Uocquiu < Ital. Occhio or Lat. Oculus (= eye). Those two numbers have no metaphorical meaning today and need be interpreted. My gut feeling is that they are an invocation of deities for assistance, Greek deities: The nine calestial [Olympian] deities and eight chthonic deities. ) Wherefore, the averting phrase must have originated among ancient Magna Grecians but was later adopted in different ethnic words. In ancient Greek mythology, the original gods were Ouranos (SKY) and Gaia or Chthon (EARTH), who mated and produced the seven planetary gods (Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jove/Zeus, Venus, and Chronos/Saturn, who caused his father to be lifted, wherefore the seven offsprings could leave the womb , and the Sun or solar Apollo... This is not according to the Ionian Hesiod's Theogony/Genealogy of the gods. I presume that the eight Chthonic (Earth and Underworld) deities are Hades; Poseidon, the god of fresh and salty waters; Hermes [psykhopompous etc.]; Persephone, as Kore was called after she was abducted by Hades; and Hekate, the triple goddess, the queen of the night, phosphorous [the major Ghost], whose appearence today is miscalled a UFO, the bearer of torches in Hades [hence the annual assister of Kore to return to the upperworld and produce springtime), and identifiable with the night luminary, the moon, Selene or Artemis. An ambiguity? To be expected, as the myhs were created by Greeks in different places and different times. Apollo and Hekate were both celestial and chthonic deities. More remains to be said.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 4, 2022 14:46:12 GMT
A few of my thoughts on the above (mythological) subject: We are familiar with the celestial or Parnassian Apollo [Gr./Ionian] Apollo (Apollon), the leader of the Muses, the god of music [who obtained Hermes' lyre, etc.], but was also known as Haplus and, among the Etruscans, as Aplu -- a name which is the basis of the Latin "Aprilis [mons]", the month called April, the month of seed germination in the earth.... Apollo is a chthonic power/god. The celestial Apollo became identified with Helios (the sun), especially among the Dorians. From the northern Peloponnese, they migrated southwards, where they founded Sparta and Pylos. The founded cities on the island of Rhodes and the adjacent mainland [Asia Minor] and built the famous colossus, the statue of the solar Apollo. They migrated to what will be called Philistia or Palestine. A remnant of Dorian culture: The religion of Ugarit [in Syriac Canaan] has two supreme gods, the Elohim , equivalent to Sky and Earth. The Elohim are also the gods of other Canaanites, the Hebrews, stated in Genesis-1, whereas Genesis-2 proclaims henotheism: the Hebrews must serve only one god, who is called Yahweh, .... The translators of Hebrew scriptures into Greek resolved the contradiction by translating both Elohim [plural] and Yahweh [singular] as Theos [God, singular]. So, we all became monotheists.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 4, 2022 17:04:51 GMT
I promised the exposition of another doublet , an interpretation, which I made [of numbers in a magic spell], and a new etymology, which may have been done by others, too, so obvious it is: Latin Pius (= pious) < Gr. Epios, beginning with an Eta (= gentle, mild, kind). In practice, at Athens, piety as understood as the respect for parents and for the gods.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 8, 2022 18:55:25 GMT
A FOLLOW-UP. Ukraine gained independence from Russia in the 20th century, but I don't know to what cultural extent they were really different. Historians, tell us. Did they have one common language? Perhaps the following words (learned online today) are typical of their language in general: Stone = Russ. kamen' = Ukr. kamin' Wall [stone wall] = Russ. stena =Ukr. stina The two words in each set are obviously kindred or cognates, which makes mutually intellegibility possible. The latter two words are also kindred of English STONE, German STEIN, Goth STAINS -- though not fully cognates. In cases like this, where the sounds are almost the same, but the meanings are only partially or distantly similar, I use the term Metonomy: one word [stone-wall] is used instead of another, of the topical one [stone]. I learned from the Online Etymol. Dict. that the modern Eng. word [Stone] is based on the Old Eng. (Anglo-Saxon) word Stan or Sten. My etymology: Stone/Stan < Greek Stia/Stion (= pebble, like the round pabbles in a river; used in calculations, and they were called Calculi in Latin. Obviously the plain Russ. and Ukr. words for Stone have a different origin, and so have Gal'ka and Hal'ka for the Gr. Stia/Pebble. The digging into Gr. Laxicons must continue. Provisional conclusion: The kindred and cognate Russian and Ukrainian words are independently based on ancient Greek words.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 9, 2022 19:40:18 GMT
Following the above: Greek has many synonyms or near-synomys. They were created by different tribes, in different places and in different times. For instance, Petros (Stone) or Petra (Rock) were inherited by the Romans, but not by the Slavs (Russians etc.) Latin has also the word Silix/Silicis [which > Italian Selce], which has been translated as Flint, Pebble, or Firestone. [In Italian, a Via Selciata is a Stone-paved Way.] Silix is obviously not from Gr. Stia, yet the two words seem to be related. On the other hand, Greek lexicons point out that Gr. Stia (Pebble) is a synonym of Gr. Ionic PsEphos, Doric Psaphos [replaced by Calculus in Latin], Aeolic Psaphax, as Homer would say. There are as many issues about the history of Greek as in other languages.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 10, 2022 15:49:31 GMT
The vicisitudes of languages! We all know that, because of peculiar kinships, languages have been assembled in groups, wherefore we speak of Germanic, Slavik, Romance, Italic groups. [For many good reasons, I have set the Indo-European languages in three groups: Hellenistic, Slavik [Old Church Slavonic, Bosnian, Czech, etc.], and Germanic. However, there is no strict uniformity within any group. There is borrowing of foreign words and obsolence of local words, and, what is more, some words in one group may be replaced by synonymous words of another group, all depending on historical circumstances. For instance, the word for House in a bunch of Slavic languages is not (or no longer is) Slavic: Slovak: Dom Russian: Dome Ukrainian: Diem Polish: Dom Chech: Du^m These five words are cognate; their source is likely, directly or indirectly, the Latin Dom[us] (= House), which is based on the Greek Dom[os]. But who can tell, without historical corroboration, whether or not they are based directly on Greek? In later times, the Latins or Romans adopted the Umbrian word Casa (= House), which replaced even the Southern Italian (Magna Graecian) Gr. Oikos or Oikia (= house, home), except in compound words such as Catuojiu [= Kata+Oikos, = the basement of a house, the under-house], and -- in the English form -- "economy" (home management; saving, thrift).
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 12, 2022 8:30:47 GMT
I don't know how are you going to type anything saying something like "Ukraine received independency from Russia" or "Russian as a main source from Slavs". Actually, there was a USSR, a conglomerate of countries, plus to it, Ukraine was partially taken by other countries also.
Anyway, I think you're missing a fat spot - Kiev, a capital of Ukraine, was originated far far more, than Moscow.
Words as 'stina' - 'stena' (ukr-rus) is just one of common examples among the family of languages of Slav. Actually, there was a letter/symbol 'ь/' (I cannot put it right now, it's a 'ь' with a crossed upper stick). And that letter was common for the family of slav languages. It's not possible to establish which sound 'i' or 'e', or 'y' (Belarussia) came first.
I'm a rookie, but your 'analysis' seems to be isn't a professional about Slav languages. Compare, for instance, Bulgaria and Ukrainian languages to find similarities. Bulgarian enlightement authors Boris and Gleb were Bulgarians. Many words in Ukrainian are much more fit to this, unlike Russia.
Russia had a reform 300 years ago made by Petro the 1st, who intented to change it. In the beginning of XIX the sum of reform was the maximum.
But this isn't a whole true. I think it's such a den, when people compare Ukrainian Russian do not even mentioning such a variety of different dialects. For instance, South regions of Russia were more Afghan-like (I'm not familiar with that family of lang) group, South-West - more typical to Ukrainian-Slobozhyansky (I am a Slobozhyanin - Kharkiv is one of Sloboda-Slobozhyanskay group; there was a Kharkiv philosopher Grigory Skovoroda who had left a major writings; his activity was during XVII. If you analyze him [his corpus of works was re-published in Toronto during 2009-2010 years), you may see how different his language was from Poltava-Kiev and Rostov-Moscow-Petersburg.
So, it's such a mythology that 'russian'-'ukrainian'. Our languages are different via the variety of different others, and similars, of course in many aspects. Another one is Galychina-Uzhgorod (West of Ukraine) - the similarity with Poland is great. Also there are partially similarity with Lithuanian (actually, there were times in XII-XIV when Ukraine and Lithuania were together as one country.
What my main notifications: a) not to take just 'Urkainian'-'Russian' - as historical, this isn't truth; b) Ukraine language keeps more older words, than Russian, and even Russians know that, this isn't a secret. It's enough to look at Old-Slavianic language which is still being used in Orthodoxy Church practice and compre those two. Especially it is seen for shorter forms of adjectives and verbs.
Anyway, I do thank you for any attention to this question. It's an interesting side of your work to look at it, but this is Logology aspect, and I'm not good in it. I barely know this.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 12, 2022 14:47:30 GMT
I don't know how are you going to type anything saying something like "Ukraine received independency from Russia" or "Russian as a main source from Slavs". Actually, there was a USSR, a conglomerate of countries, plus to it, Ukraine was partially taken by other countries also. Anyway, I think you're missing a fat spot - Kiev, a capital of Ukraine, was originated far far more, than Moscow. Words as 'stina' - 'stena' (ukr-rus) is just one of common examples among the family of languages of Slav. Actually, there was a letter/symbol 'ь/' (I cannot put it right now, it's a 'ь' with a crossed upper stick). And that letter was common for the family of slav languages. It's not possible to establish which sound 'i' or 'e', or 'y' (Belarussia) came first. I'm a rookie, but your 'analysis' seems to be isn't a professional about Slav languages. Compare, for instance, Bulgaria and Ukrainian languages to find similarities. Bulgarian enlightement authors Boris and Gleb were Bulgarians. Many words in Ukrainian are much more fit to this, unlike Russia. Russia had a reform 300 years ago made by Petro the 1st, who intented to change it. In the beginning of XIX the sum of reform was the maximum. But this isn't a whole true. I think it's such a den, when people compare Ukrainian Russian do not even mentioning such a variety of different dialects. For instance, South regions of Russia were more Afghan-like (I'm not familiar with that family of lang) group, South-West - more typical to Ukrainian-Slobozhyansky (I am a Slobozhyanin - Kharkiv is one of Sloboda-Slobozhyanskay group; there was a Kharkiv philosopher Grigory Skovoroda who had left a major writings; his activity was during XVII. If you analyze him [his corpus of works was re-published in Toronto during 2009-2010 years), you may see how different his language was from Poltava-Kiev and Rostov-Moscow-Petersburg. So, it's such a mythology that 'russian'-'ukrainian'. Our languages are different via the variety of different others, and similars, of course in many aspects. Another one is Galychina-Uzhgorod (West of Ukraine) - the similarity with Poland is great. Also there are partially similarity with Lithuanian (actually, there were times in XII-XIV when Ukraine and Lithuania were together as one country. What my main notifications: a) not to take just 'Urkainian'-'Russian' - as historical, this isn't truth; b) Ukraine language keeps more older words, than Russian, and even Russians know that, this isn't a secret. It's enough to look at Old-Slavianic language which is still being used in Orthodoxy Church practice and compre those two. Especially it is seen for shorter forms of adjectives and verbs. Anyway, I do thank you for any attention to this question. It's an interesting side of your work to look at it, but this is Logology aspect, and I'm not good in it. I barely know this. Eugene, as you can see in the sequence of my posts, I did NOT set out to discuss the Slav languages; the ongoing issue was about languages and dialects, and, as a researcher and student, I raised specific historical questions about Ukraine and Russia, while keeping an eye on the issue of the ultimate origin of their languages. A huge topic!
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 12, 2022 16:52:53 GMT
Speaking of the Indo-European languages, I just read an interesting article about the Yamnayan culture of Southern Russia and Ukraine as the source of "Indo-European" (3600-2300 B.C.) www.livius.org/articles/people/indo-europeansThe articles is based on the writings of various authors. For me, the dating is too recent -- to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 15, 2022 16:43:47 GMT
I promised the exposition of another doublet , an interpretation, which I made [of numbers in a magic spell], and a new etymology, which may have been done by others, too, so obvious it is: Latin Pius (= pious) < Gr. Epios, beginning with an Eta (= gentle, mild, kind). In practice, at Athens, piety as understood as the respect for parents and for the gods. The Greek Epios has been translated also as "Happy" [Good, Prosperous] even though it does not have the hard aspiration mark. If this is correct, then I can see that Engl. [H]appy is < Gr. Epi[os], possibly in its Doric fashion, namely *Api[os].
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 26, 2022 18:39:15 GMT
My Second Beginning started on May 29, 2022. [Today is June 26, 2022.] Topic: VARRO On some occasions I repeated the saying that the Latin words, or most of them, were derived from Greek. Well, some days ago I discovered what may have the source of this theory, namely the writings of the Roman author, born at Rieti near Rome, MARCUS TERENTIUS VARRO. [Varro/Varronis > Ital. Varrone.] He lived in the first century B.C., studied in Athens, and was involved in the lives of Julius Caesar, Augustus, and Cicero. He gained the reputation that, as his writings show, he was the most learned Roman and was a respected authority during the Middle Ages. Varro wrote on many subjects, including agriculture, the gods, and the Latin Language. His (short) 25 books [Libri XXV] on the Latin Language [ De Lingua Latina] have been lost -- probably destroyed when his vast library was destroyed -- except for six books which he had dedicated, and obviously given, to Cicero, the great Roman orator, jurisprudent, philosopher, and writer. Now, the extant Books V-X have been pleasantly translated into English by R.G. Kent. The Latin text and, on facing pages, the translation are available in the Loeb editions as well as online: www.attalus.com/info/varro/html The translation must have been a difficult task, since it had to be also of [cited] new topical terms and of Greek terms. Varro set out to discuss, in the manner of some Greek linguists, many Latin words in respect of [Gr.] "etymologian" [Etymology] and [Gr.] "(peri) s emaionomen on" [Semantics]. It seems to me that "Semantics" is too broad a term to translate that Greek technical term, judging from what Varro constantly does. He asks: Why is something called/named as it is called? [E.g., Why is a rose called Rose?] He does not subscribe to the theory that the names of things or actions are arbitrary, mere inventions. My translation, "Onomastic Aetiology".
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 26, 2022 20:16:11 GMT
Continuation of topic VARRO Varro's two aspects of linguistics (Etymology and Semantics or, specifically, Onomastic Aetiology) are mentioned in Book V, at the beginning of his treatment of the Latin language. Judging from his practice, his etymologies of Latin words are normally the etymologies of compound words, but if he cannot find the Latin roots of Latin words, he proposes Greek words which are alike in sound (and, therefore, in the alphabetical scripts). Unfortunately, like Pokorny and Semerano, he did not consciously make a clear distinction between cognates and homophones [similar in sound but totally different in meaning], wherefore some of his etymologies from Greek and even from Latin are worthless. Each of his etymologies, based on his vast knowledge, must be examined critically, as I will do as soon as I can. Samples: VI.6. NOX 'Night', suggests Pacuvius, is < Lat. Nocet 'harms' because it nocet [harms], unless it is < Greek Nix 'Night'. After all, Varro continues in his discussion of times, the time the Greeks call Hestera 'Evening' is what is called Vesper 'Evening' in Latin. Varro is right in deriving those two words from Greek.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 26, 2022 22:43:04 GMT
Topic: VARRO VI.56. LOQUI 'to talk' has been said to be < Locus 'Place'. This is another wrong etymology. To nte that Loqui > Locutio 'phrase'. So, Loqui or Lok-ui and Locus or Lok-us seem to have the same root, but in fact the two words are entirely different in meaning and it is impossible from either one to be historically derived from the other. Varro does not provide a correct etymology, but as he knew Greek, he must have seen that Loqui [Loquor, Locutio, etc.] is < Gr. Lego; Logos [Log-/Lok-] 'Talk, Speak'. In the above post: Varro referred to a certain Pacuvius, who derived Nix from Nocet. Pacuvius made the same mistake. He was deceived by the fact that Nix or Nik-s and Nocet or Nok-et seem to have the nearly similar root, when in fact the two words are entirely different in meaning; they are not cognates. VI.61. DICO, 'I say', Varro asserts, has a Greek origin, Deiknuo 'I show'. VI.9. VER 'Spring' < Gr. Her 'Spring'.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jun 27, 2022 15:06:24 GMT
Topic: VARRO VI.80. VIDEO 'I see' is < [from] Visus 'Sight', and this is < Vis 'Strength', for, of the five senses, it is greatest in the eyes. // About the first etymology: It is true that VIDeo and VISus are affine/kindred words, but Visus , as well as the supine form of the verb VIDere, namely Visum, seems to be based on VID-, rather than the other way around.// About the second etymology: Even if it is true that strength is a conspicuous quality of the eyes (or sight), it is doubtful that Sight was named from the name of that quality. (A lion may be a symbol of strength, but, either in Greek or in Latin, it is not named from any word that means Strength.) So, here we have a doubtful onomastic aetiology. VI.33. APRILIS 'April' {{a spring month}} is < Venus, says Fulvius, but I [Varro] think that it is < Aperit 'it opens' since it opens everything. // In fact, APR-ilis and APER-ire 'to open' have practically the same root, nearly the same in sound or look, but not necessarily in meaning, since we do not know what "April" means. My first etymology was of the Latin "Aprilis", which as an agricultural month I explained in great length as "Apuru + ilis" -- the Apollonian/germination month. Sorry, Marce. VI.79. LUCERE 'to shine' <Lat. Luere 'to loose', because it is by light that the shades of night [Tenebrae] are dissolved. Come on, Marce, LUC-ere [LUK-ere] is obviously < Lat. LUX [LUKs] 'Light'. Lucere is what Lux does; the two words are kindred. VI.38. A great number of words are derived from an original element by the addition of prefixes. such as Pro-cessit and Re-cessit. // Hence one can say that, e.g., Recessit 'he drew back' is < Re+Cessit. Vi.61. [bis] Dico > Judicare 'to judge', because Jus Dicitur 'Right Is Spoken'. // Conversely: JUDICARE < Jus + Dico.
|
|