|
FreudianSlippers posted:Wait, wasn't Gaulish a Celtic language, meaning that it was about as closely related to Latin as German is to Hindi/Urdu? I mean, who knows, we have so little Gaulish that it's a big question mark, but Latin and Gaulish are both in the Italo-Celtic group. Names in -rix are Latin rex, that sort of thing. If that sounds the same to you as the relationship between German and Hindi, then . . .ok? I don't want to fight about it.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
I will admit that linguistics isn't my bag so I am very open to the idea that I am full of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Celts got around so much I'd expect their language group to have connections all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Wait, wasn't Gaulish a Celtic language, meaning that it was about as closely related to Latin as German is to Hindi/Urdu? homullus posted:I mean, who knows, we have so little Gaulish that it's a big question mark, but Latin and Gaulish are both in the Italo-Celtic group. Names in -rix are Latin rex, that sort of thing. If that sounds the same to you as the relationship between German and Hindi, then . . .ok? I don't want to fight about it. The relationship between the Italian and Celtic sides of Italo-Celtic is really unclear, since yeah we have almost nothing of the continental Celtic languages and basically all of it is written with the Latin or Greek alphabets, which, of course, means that all of it has potential influences from Latin or Greek. Caesar talks about having to write orders in Greek in case of interception because too many Gauls understand Latin, but if Caesar and his legions were marching around my back yard I'd learn Latin too so that's only scant evidence that Gaulish and Latin were at least somewhat mutually intelligible. Really, speaking of "Gaulish" as a single language isn't right anyway - a Cisalpine Gaul probably spoke something much closer to Latin than a Gaul in Normandy, whose language was closer to that of the Belgae or the folks across the Channel, or a Gaul living near Aquitania, which would be more Gascon/Basque-y. So, uh, continental Celtic is a complicated topic. Jazerus fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Jul 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
That's a good point, you have to remember how diverse languages used to be. Gaul alone probably had hundreds of variations. What Gaulish we have almost certainly comes from Gauls who had a lot of connection to the Romans and is not necessarily representative.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:Caesar talks about having to write orders in Greek in case of interception because too many Gauls understand Latin... Funny. Given that there had been Greek colonies on the south coast of Gaul for centuries already (Massilia was apparently founded circa 600 BC) and they traded with the Gauls further north, you'd think there would be a decent number of them who could read that language as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
homullus posted:I mean, who knows, we have so little Gaulish that it's a big question mark, but Latin and Gaulish are both in the Italo-Celtic group. Names in -rix are Latin rex, that sort of thing. If that sounds the same to you as the relationship between German and Hindi, then . . .ok? I don't want to fight about it. "Reich" and "Raj".
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 12:13
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:"Reich" and "Raj". That's definitely how Indo-European languages work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
I'm just saying that your example was awfully convenient. e: and in any case, once languages aren't really mutually intelligible anymore, it makes gently caress all difference to the speaker how closely related they are. Ras Het fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Jul 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:I'm just saying that your example was awfully convenient. I guess! To me, rex and -rix are more closely related than reich and raj. YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Look, you don't need to prove that Gaulish and Latin were related languages, we know it. I'm just saying that you made this comparison of one word to show how similar they were, and conveniently that same word in the two other languages you used for comparison are also very similar, even after five thousand years of geographic separation. It's both 1) a curiosity and 2) an example of how these things are kinda tricky and that you cannot use one example like that to make a point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
homullus posted:I mean, who knows, we have so little Gaulish that it's a big question mark, but Latin and Gaulish are both in the Italo-Celtic group. Names in -rix are Latin rex, that sort of thing. If that sounds the same to you as the relationship between German and Hindi, then . . .ok? I don't want to fight about it. Was that one village on the northern coast of Gaul full of kings?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Huh, I just got reich-raj-rex-reign poo poo there are a lot of em that all have to do with ruling.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
The first person who figured out that languages in India were related to ones in Europe must have been mindblown.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:The first person who figured out that languages in India were related to ones in Europe must have been mindblown. william jones wasn't the first but he's the first that is commonly known, and he was: quote:The Sanscrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists; there is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the Celtic, though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanscrit; and the old Persian might be added to the same family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jones_(philologist)
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
You missed the funny part:quote:In 1786 Jones postulated a proto-language uniting Sanskrit, Iranian, Greek, Latin, Germanic and Celtic, but in many ways his work was less accurate than his predecessors', as he erroneously included Egyptian, Japanese and Chinese in the Indo-European languages, while omitting Hindi.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:The relationship between the Italian and Celtic sides of Italo-Celtic is really unclear, since yeah we have almost nothing of the continental Celtic languages and basically all of it is written with the Latin or Greek alphabets, which, of course, means that all of it has potential influences from Latin or Greek. Caesar talks about having to write orders in Greek in case of interception because too many Gauls understand Latin, but if Caesar and his legions were marching around my back yard I'd learn Latin too so that's only scant evidence that Gaulish and Latin were at least somewhat mutually intelligible. Really, speaking of "Gaulish" as a single language isn't right anyway - a Cisalpine Gaul probably spoke something much closer to Latin than a Gaul in Normandy, whose language was closer to that of the Belgae or the folks across the Channel, or a Gaul living near Aquitania, which would be more Gascon/Basque-y. How... vexing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Prepare to have your minds exploded: Rainier is the francophone version of Ragnar, passed into English through the Normans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Mount Ragnar sounds much cooler 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
hailthefish posted:Mount Ragnar sounds much cooler Speaking of PNW Mountain Chat. One amusing fact is that the US Navy has commissioned several ships as the USS Hood, obviously naming them after the mountain in Oregon . However the mountain itself was named after Admiral Hood of the Royal Navy. Who some might recognize as being the British Admiral during the battle of the Chesapeake thus making the two USS Hoods indirectly named after one of the first enemy admirals of the United States Navy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:The first person who figured out that languages in India were related to ones in Europe must have been mindblown. Wait, people aren't being ironic? They really are related linguistically?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Wait, people aren't being ironic? They really are related linguistically? Indo-European language family. Most of the languages of Europe (Finnish, Hungarian, Estonian, and Basque are notable exceptions), the Caucasus region, Persian, and a number of northern Indian languages are all related. It's believed all these people are descended from the Proto-Indo-European people who likely lived in roughly Ukraine, north/northeast of the Black Sea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Wait, people aren't being ironic? They really are related linguistically?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Wait, people aren't being ironic? They really are related linguistically? Oh my friend, there are many linguistic delights awaiting you. Seriously though, no it is not bullshit but linguistics is loving complicated so good luck if you ever dive into it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Wait, people aren't being ironic? They really are related linguistically? Yeah the Aryan invasion of Northwest India is a real thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 13:05
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Prepare to have your minds exploded: Rainier is the francophone version of Ragnar, passed into English through the Normans. And they were called 'Norman' for a reason. Nordmann. A man from the North, i.e. Scandinavia, thus the sort of people who had names like Ragnar. They assimilated into France pretty quick compared to e.g. the Danelaw in England, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Wait, people aren't being ironic? They really are related linguistically? How could you not know this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 13:24
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:And they were called 'Norman' for a reason. Nordmann. A man from the North, i.e. Scandinavia, thus the sort of people who had names like Ragnar. They assimilated into France pretty quick compared to e.g. the Danelaw in England, though. Yeah they became French quick. Super important in the history of the English language which is now dominated by Latin words because of the Normans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
I thought everybody knew that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
There's a lot of weird stuff we say in English because of the Normans. Like how animals have Anglo-Saxon/English names, but once they become food they have Norman/French influenced ones. For example, the animal is a cow but as food we call it beef.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Yeah they became French quick. Super important in the history of the English language which is now dominated by Latin words because of the Normans. There's a lot of Latin in English for a lot of reasons. Romans were spreading Latin around Britain actively from the first century BC, and Latin was later the language of the church and the government. 1066 forced Anglo-Norman (with its own set of Celtic- and Latin-derived words) onto people outside the literate elite and also added a bunch of literate elite who were Normans (the super quick way alluded to). Continued contact with Europe added still more words.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
homullus posted:There's a lot of Latin in English for a lot of reasons. Romans were spreading Latin around Britain actively from the first century BC This bit in particular doesn't mean much though, especially since the proto-English were still chilling out in Denmark at the time. I'm not aware of there being much Roman-era Latin surviving in Welsh and Gaelic, which are the descendants of the languages spoken in Britain at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:This bit in particular doesn't mean much though, especially since the proto-English were still chilling out in Denmark at the time. I'm not aware of there being much Roman-era Latin surviving in Welsh and Gaelic, which are the descendants of the languages spoken in Britain at the time. -chester/-cester/-caster is Latin castrum.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
homullus posted:-chester/-cester/-caster is Latin castrum. That's wildly irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
homullus posted:-chester/-cester/-caster is Latin castrum. Place names don't count.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:This bit in particular doesn't mean much though, especially since the proto-English were still chilling out in Denmark at the time. I'm not aware of there being much Roman-era Latin surviving in Welsh and Gaelic, which are the descendants of the languages spoken in Britain at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Yeah Britons like to focus on their Roman history but it was a backwards frontier province occupied "only" for a few hundred years where almost all Roman influence was rooted out from the 5th century onward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Ultimately the whole west was a sideshow in a lot of respects. The east had the real population centres and cultural powerhouses, based in cities that were old and powerful when Rome was still a hill fort.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
For a very accessible experience, The History of English podcast is very good. Episode 40 discusses the first batch of words that entered english from latin prior to the Norman invasion and it's really a very small list and a lot are associated with the church. The later Norman infusion is much larger and broader. It's interesting to see how words differ in pronunciation and meaning when they entered from the same root, but first from latin and later from french. http://historyofenglishpodcast.com/2014/03/20/episode-40-learning-latin-and-latin-learning/
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Yeah Britons like to focus on their Roman history but it was a backwards frontier province occupied "only" for a few hundred years where almost all Roman influence was rooted out from the 5th century onward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 21:03
|
|
