Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger <frgn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 00:57:37 -0700 (PDT)
On Aug 16, 5:51 pm, Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger.removet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
(...)
The brown one and the wild one don't convince
me as etymologies of bear. You can't say anything
in defence of these etymologies, nor can anyone
else in here, nor did Mallory and Adams take it up
in their PIE bible, nor do they propose another
etymology. All I see are offences. "Analyst"
pointed out a shortcoming of PIE, and the longer
you offend me the shorter and shorter you come
yourself. My Magdalenian approach solves the
problem in a big sweep, and I have this beautiful
vision of the verbal morsphospace keeping more
intact and retrievable information on the human
past than previously held possible. My task will
now be to remove the obstacles for other people
so they can share my vision. One obstacle is
surely the blind belief in Darwin's model of gradual
evolution. Peter T. Daniels once wrote that words
change so much that we can't know about them
as they were six thousand years ago. That's an
example of the unreflected application of Darwin's
model of evolution to language. Darwin explained
variety within a species, but not really the origin
of species, and certainly not stasis and deep
homology - features of the eye persist in phyla
that have been separated five hundred million
years ago. And if this can be, then also words
can live for a long time, words of Ice Age Eurasia
can still be present in the language of our time,
BIR as fur whereupon a newborn was laid. and
then a bag of fur wherein a baby was carried
around, to bear a child, to give birth to a child,
carry the newborn in a bag made of fur, to bear
it again, the bear as provider of the best fur,
longhaired, soft and warm, the fur being of
a brown color, the bear as a wild animal,
Latin ferus, the shape of a bear's head, round
with a long snout, as model of the pear, Latin
pire, from an unknown source ...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Trond Engen
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- References:
- proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: analyst41
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: analyst41
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: analyst41
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Prev by Date: Re: Ossetian sociolinguistics?
- Next by Date: Re: Ossetian sociolinguistics?
- Previous by thread: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Next by thread: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|