Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ты-вы: etymology ?

On Sep 25, 4:02 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 25, 2:05 pm, Harlan Messinger

<hmessinger.removet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Just in case it isn't obvious to the OP, the "in my opinion" caveat is
essential. This analysis is fictitious, kind of a one-man parlor game of
Franz's that he finds pleasing but that has no basis in linguistic
research and evidence.

Harlan is right, my caveat is essential, on the other hand:
we are here in a scientific forum, not in a chat room
for beginners, and the sciences move along the borderline
between the known and the unknown. Sir Karl Popper,
eminent theoretician of the sciences, asked for testable
and falsifiable theses, but not only, he also asked for
daring theses, the more daring the better. I was wondering
about the double form of saying I and me, French je et moi,
and I find two possible roots for these words: humming
as origin of the m-words, and eye contact as origin of
the I / je / ego form, which is also an eye-form: les yeux
je, eye I, occulus ego. Moreover, eye words resemble
yes words: eye aye, eyes yes, oeuil oui, Italian occhio
for eye, Occitanian oc for yes, Scottish 'och, aye' as
affirmation with a fatalistic note, 'aye, aye, sir' as answer
to an order, American OK okay. The Magdalenian origin
would have been OC AY -- right eye (oc) left eye (ay).
The oldest form of saying yes was a firm look into each
other's eyes.

Can anyone explain the double form I and me, je et moi?
did anyone ever wonder? Asking questions and proposing
answers is the scientific way, avoiding new questions and
cutting the world down to a textbook size is the unscientific
way so precious to sci.lang and it's killrating mob.

.

Relevant Pages