|
Also early modern Greek was like a third turkish before having all of those words go the way of greco-turks themselves.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
A lot of that Turkish stuff was in reality a stew of loanwords from all around the Middle East - it's right there in the neighborhood, the trade relations are oooooold, the Ottomans didn't just make it spontaneously materialize out of nowhere. Hell, sometimes those words entered Turkish via Greek (or even other Balkans languages), but still ended up stigmatized as 'Turkish loanwords' due to becoming present in everyday Turkish speech. Serbian has a bunch of Farsi loanwords, and not all of them are from after the Ottoman conquests.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 16:58
|
|
|
Y’all I’m starting to think that nationalism might be bad and stupid Just my opinion tho
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:I would say that most Greeks speak their language with a fairly flat affect, but it’s not often relaxing to listen to (see the speed of that first woman speaking at then TED talk, for instance). Flat is a good way to put it, most mainlanders kind of come off boring to me after my main exposure to Cypriots. Who from what I can tell sound like the Glasgow of the Greek world. Along with Cretans I think, the accent is supposed to be similar but I have zero exposure to Crete so I unno. Actually based on stereotype the Cypriots should be Edinburgh and Crete should be Glasgow. To the varying England English of the mainland. Grape fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Aug 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:07
|
|
|
By the time the Turks arrived to Anatolia they had already become quite Persianized to the point that you could arguably call the Seljuks Turko-Persian.
FreudianSlippers fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Aug 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:32
|
|
|
Obviously Mediterranean Man: No! We are true OG steppe nomads!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
Basically if you conquer Persia the Persianness is going to rub off on you. See: Alexander The Great, The Arabs, The Turks, The Mongols. etc
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Y’all I’m starting to think that nationalism might be bad and stupid It's sort of the result of the natural tendency to arbitrarily categorize things and figure out rules, but with much more political relevance than whether a hot dog is a sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:40
|
|
|
It's just basic human social psychology, you can sometimes redirect it towards ideology or sports or whatever, but the mechanism itself is always the same and it's never going away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
Then if the long expected war between the US and Persia were to happen you would expect Trump to style himself the Shahanshah before long.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
There's no way he can pronounce that.Phlegmish posted:Obviously Mediterranean Man
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 18:10
|
|
|
Grevling posted:Then if the long expected war between the US and Persia were to happen you would expect Trump to style himself the Shahanshah before long.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
Grevling posted:Then if the long expected war between the US and Persia were to happen you would expect Trump to style himself the Shahanshah before long. It would have to be Barron Trump that did this I think, after one or two successions due to "palace intrigue".
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
Grevling posted:Then if the long expected war between the US and Persia were to happen you would expect Trump to style himself the Shahanshah before long. Padishah Emperor
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:It's just basic human social psychology, you can sometimes redirect it towards ideology or sports or whatever, but the mechanism itself is always the same and it's never going away. There's a little nuance to that, in the sense that nationalism isn't inherent to human nature. Modern nation states appeared only a few hundred years ago. The "mechanism" you describe of people naturally categorizing in-groups and out-groups is true though. In a sense, modern nation states are sort of a refutation of this as well. Every European country is a hodge-podge of different languages and cultures, and nationalism managed to absorb some of these smaller "nationalities" into larger ones, some more successfully than others. Ironically many modern ideologies basically boil down to "actually you belong to a different in-group", for good or bad. My personal im14andthisisdeep take. I think I just said "I agree" in so many words. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Aug 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
Grevling posted:Then if the long expected war between the US and Persia were to happen you would expect Trump to style himself the Shahanshah before long. Soon this will be the image people will have of the average USA soldier. A tacticool guy with long beard, with sand camo even on a snowed forest 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 00:26
|
|
|
adoration for none posted:There's a little nuance to that, in the sense that nationalism isn't inherent to human nature. Modern nation states appeared only a few hundred years ago. The "mechanism" you describe of people naturally categorizing in-groups and out-groups is true though. Could this be summarised as “tribalism”, which is an inherent attribute of Great Apes, or is that far too simplistic?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 03:06
|
|
|
Capt.Whorebags posted:Could this be summarised as “tribalism”, which is an inherent attribute of Great Apes, or is that far too simplistic? It's too simplistic. The reason I say it's too simplistic is because tribalism doesn't have to be centered around the idea of a nation or a common bloodline. You might want to call nationalism a kind of tribalism, but there are a lot of tribalisms that aren't nationalistic. There are a bunch of theories of nationalism and its origins, but the most common theory is that European nationalism started around the French Revolution, when, having overthrown the King, the French revolutionaries turned to the idea of "France" and "Frenchness" to try to bring the people together, and also did a bunch of stuff to limit regional autonomy and suppress regional identity in favor of a French nation. (I'm obviously oversimplifying here).
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 05:32
|
|
|
Capt.Whorebags posted:Could this be summarised as “tribalism”, which is an inherent attribute of Great Apes, or is that far too simplistic? I think so. "nationalism" is just a big tribe. We access and use our tribe instincts, that where originally designed for groups of 20 people to 20 million people. It sort of work. Of course our instincts are wrong. It make biological sense to sacrifice your life for other tribe member because you probably have blood relation with him, but not so much in a tribe with 300 million members, so dying for your country is a malfunction of our instincts. If humans continue evolving then will develop new instincts adapted to "nations" instead of tribes. Or maybe to "identities". If the nation state system last enough to make a effect on our biology. imo
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 08:08
|
|
|
This reminds me of a topic that I've mulled over making a post about for a while, the "Hellenization" of toponyms in Greece that occurred between the establishment of the Hellenic Republic in 1830s and the 1960s. After the fall of the Roman empire, many different ethnic groups settled in Greece, from the Slavs who migrated there during the early Medieval period, to the French; Spanish, and Venetians who controlled large areas from the 13th c. onwards; to the Albanians ("Arvanites") who were brought in as military settlers around the same time; to the Turks who came in as conquerors from the 14th c. onwards. As these groups became a part of regional life, their own toponyms largely replaced those that had been ubiquitous up until the end of antiquity. Following the Greek Revolution that led to independence in 1821, it was felt that the new Hellas needed to be "Greek," and that conspicuous traces of these "foreign" elements needed to be replaced with properly "Hellenic" counterparts. Given the growing conflicts over Albanian and Slavic populations within its borders, this meant swapping especially Slavic and Albanian toponyms for either Classical settlement names. In other cases, literal Greek translations or completely unrelated, descriptive Greek toponyms were substituted. In some cases, the toponyms replaced were actually entirely Greek in origin, but were simply seen as representative of "degenerate" (i.e. Demotic) Greek. This occurred in fits and starts between independence and the immediate post-WWII period, but was most thorough when the Hellenic Republic expanded northward to Thessaly, Macedonia, and Thrace in the period 1881-1920. After each phase of expansion, the government would appoint a panel of specialists -- linguists, ancient historians, folklorists, archaeologists -- to determine how they should rename local places. Oftentimes, the first stop was ancient geographers, especially Pausanias (2nd c. AD) and Strabo (1st c. AD). The panel of scholars would gather data and rename as many places as possible after the ancient settlements that were believed to have preceded them. Other places, often small villages that could not be associated with any known ancient settlement, might be renamed with a translation of the "foreign" toponym. Oftentimes, however, this was done with a poor understanding of the original language, so that mistranslations of Slavic and Albanian toponyms are widespread. In the parts of Greece that were not conquered from other imperial powers, the process was more ramshackle. Many communities with foreign toponyms were swept up in the desire to Hellenize and took their own initiative. In many cases, local amateur historians would research their own communities and approach the government with renaming suggestions, and for convenience's sake many of these were approved. The changes to Greek cartography were drastic: a 1909 government commission determined that 1/3 of all Greek villages, around 1,500 in total, had "barbaric" names that had to be changed. The ultimate irony is that many of those "purely Hellenic" toponyms were, in fact, pre-Greek or "Pelasgian" place names that had persisted after Greek-speaking populations migrated into the region of Greece c. 1600 BC. Because archaeology in particular was still rudimentary when much of this was ongoing, however, many of the ancient toponyms assigned were in fact incorrect. As a result, it is not uncommon today to find a modern settlement located dozens of kilometers away from the ancient settlement for which it is named. In some cases, toponyms were actually swapped, so that ancient settlement X is located at modern settlement Y, while ancient settlement Y is located at modern settlement X. Unfortunately, this whole process has left scholars studying changes in the Greek landscape over time with the worst of both worlds: modern Hellenized toponyms are rarely a good indicator of where the corresponding ancient settlements were located, while the whole process was so slapdash in many cases records of previous non-Greek toponyms were lost.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 12:46
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:There are a bunch of theories of nationalism and its origins, but the most common theory is that European nationalism started around the French Revolution, when, having overthrown the King, the French revolutionaries turned to the idea of "France" and "Frenchness" to try to bring the people together, and also did a bunch of stuff to limit regional autonomy and suppress regional identity in favor of a French nation. (I'm obviously oversimplifying here). To expand a bit on that. Monarchic France was divided into various provinces and chartered cities which all had their own specific arrangements with the Crown, which were local privileges. Mostly this took the form of lower taxes and higher investments than the "core" provinces. So it basically boiled down to "you agree not to rebel against the French state in exchange for subsidies". So on the nuit du 4 août what happened was the abolition of privileges. (Amusingly, English Wikipedia refers to it as "abolition of feudalism" instead; I find this change in nomenclature to be quite politically loaded). This was the start of French universalism: equal rights and duties for all. No special privileges based on birth or location, the same rules apply to everyone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 13:44
|
|
|
Tei posted:Soon this will be the image people will have of the average USA soldier. A tacticool guy with long beard, with sand camo even on a snowed forest If you add 100 kg and some Hapsburg-type signs of generational incest, that's just the image people have of the average USA person in general. e: I guess the beard is a good way to hide your lack of chin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 16:59
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:To expand a bit on that. Monarchic France was divided into various provinces and chartered cities which all had their own specific arrangements with the Crown, which were local privileges. Mostly this took the form of lower taxes and higher investments than the "core" provinces. So it basically boiled down to "you agree not to rebel against the French state in exchange for subsidies". Right. That also had the effect, though, of marginalizing ethnic and linguistic minorities. So, for instance, French was seen as "the language of liberty" with other French dialects and languages as just a "peasant's patois", and while there wasn't the level of active suppression that went on in the Third Republic, non-French speakers still were seen as potentially suspect, and there was a push to standardize French throughout France.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
The Revolution also tended to conflate the will of Paris with the will of the entirety of France as well, which was part of how there was a regional revolt against the revolution. Usually nationalism gets used to push people apart, so there's things like national movements that identify foreigners or minority groups as a bad thing to be antagonistic to or regional movements that define themselves in contrast to the greater whole to push towards separatism, but Italian and German nationalism really stand out to me from how they took all the weird abstract things that define culture and used them to pull a lot of people together rather than apart, linking states that had been divided. Of course, that eventually led to fascist movements trying to purge local ethnic impurities half a century after unification, so it's a mixed bag. And on a smaller scale you can see a lot of movements to bring some people together end up just pushing others apart, like with sports or school spirit. It's weird.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:The Revolution also tended to conflate the will of Paris with the will of the entirety of France as well, which was part of how there was a regional revolt against the revolution. I mean, after Napoleon it was easy to perceive and portray the future of Europe as a momentous clash of nations set upon destroying each other until The Supreme Race reigns triumphant, so Germany being united under a banner that already had a lot of the proto-fascist elements in place wasn't a surprise as such
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:The Revolution also tended to conflate the will of Paris with the will of the entirety of France as well, which was part of how there was a regional revolt against the revolution. It's a very human thing to promote solidarity with the in-group and hostility to the out-group, no matter how ill-defined both are. Point in case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Flanders#/media/File:County_of_Flanders_(topogaphy).png These are the borders of the Medieval County of Flanders and they look nothing at all like the borders of the current Flemish Community. On July 11, Flanders' National Holiday, I posted a joke on social media how only people from this region are actually Flemish, the rest are just sparkling Dutch-speakers, and while the majority thought it was funny, some Flemish nationalists reacted really saltily (or straight-up didn't understand the joke). See, one of the prevailing articles of faith in Flemish nationalism is that Belgium is an artificial construct whereas Flanders is a more 'natural' entity, which is obviously an absurd statement since the present-day provinces of Antwerp, Flemish Brabant and Limburg never belonged to the County of Flanders and the County itself had always had a French-speaking minority.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 21:15
|
|
|
They're certainly easily trolled, I've heard that one so many times before. I'd just roll my eyes and respond that meanings of words change over time, and the use of 'Flanders' as a pars pro toto dates all the way back to the 9th century, since before that it solely referred to the area immediately surrounding Bruges, not the later county. Whether modern-day Flanders is 'natural' or not has nothing to do with the borders of medieval administrative units, anyway. At most they can be used as a rebuttal towards people discussing history anachronistically. Obviously Flanders was not a solidified nation back in 1830, it has Belgium to thank for that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:I mean, after Napoleon it was easy to perceive and portray the future of Europe as a momentous clash of nations set upon destroying each other until The Supreme Race reigns triumphant, so Germany being united under a banner that already had a lot of the proto-fascist elements in place wasn't a surprise as such I don't know that I'd call Wilhimine Germany "proto-fascist", but Germany had a....complicated relationship to the French Revolution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:58
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Does this count as a map? This got me thinking about historical growth rates. I went to Wikipedia to check out various countries, and I found out Hungary's been losing people continuously since 1981. That's almost four straight decades of population loss. Fairly exceptional, too, most former Eastern Bloc countries only started declining in population by 1990 for obvious reasons (and some have recovered since). I wonder if it's because it was easier for Hungarians to emigrate during the Cold War period. Another interesting comparison, Belgium vs. Bulgaria on opposite ends of the continent. In 1989 they were at ~9,938,000 and 8,767,000, respectively. A difference of 1.171 million. By 2019, thirty years later, it was 11,431,000 and 6,951,000, so 4.480 million more people living in Belgium. That's a remarkable divergence, and if the trend continues in the coming decades, it could become 2:1. Czechia and Slovakia have bucked the trend by remaining more or less stable over the past decade, presumably due to there being less economic pressure to emigrate + modest immigration from elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 03:38
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:They're certainly easily trolled, I've heard that one so many times before. I'd just roll my eyes and respond that meanings of words change over time, and the use of 'Flanders' as a pars pro toto dates all the way back to the 9th century, since before that it solely referred to the area immediately surrounding Bruges, not the later county. Certainly, I know all of this. I guess that people getting upset over this speaks to their nationalist fragility, like imagine telling a jingoistic American that the US is not the "best" country in the world, not even by a stretch. I mean, ultimately any kind of nationalism is about storytelling and myth-making and it's all make-believe, but man if Flemish nationalism doesn't take the cake for being so completely devoid of any genuine joy (maybe Serbian nationalism is even worse, though). Barring the easy-going wit of Peumans, there's not a single Flemish nationalist I can imagine as being cheerful. Both sets of my grandparents were Flemish nationalists, too, and on my father's side the house was filled with kitschy statuettes of the IJzertoren and heraldic lions, and on my mother's side July 11 was observed with the same stodgy zeal that people went to church with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Greeks definitely play the "best" national thing. Though not with countries lol. Like "Greeks are the greatest culture on earth! Greece kinda sucks though..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
If I was greek I could see myself getting pretty salty about how northern/western Europe and overseas anglos often crow about how their great western civilization descended from glorious free ancient Greece while also often absolutely trashing on modern greeks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:If I was greek I could see myself getting pretty salty about how northern/western Europe and overseas anglos often crow about how their great western civilization descended from glorious free ancient Greece while also often absolutely trashing on modern greeks. Ah, that is because the modern Greek is no Hellene, but a Slavic and Turkic mongrel, the degenerate product millennia of interbreeding that eliminated all of the best features of the glorious, Aryan people of Plato and Pericles. There was none of that stuff in Northern Europe, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 18:22
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:Ah, that is because the modern Greek is no Hellene, but a Slavic and Turkic mongrel, the degenerate product millennia of interbreeding that eliminated all of the best features of the glorious, Aryan people of Plato and Pericles. Depends how far north. The Belgae tribe, who gave their name to Belgium, are not really modern Belgians' ancestors since most of them were either wiped out or integrated into the Roman settler population. I believe Y-DNA research has indicated that the further north you travel from the Seine, the less Celtic genetic heritage you'll find, which also kind of tracks with the ancient language border between Germanic and Romance languages.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:22
|
|
|
3D Megadoodoo posted:If you add 100 kg and some Hapsburg-type signs of generational incest, that's just the image people have of the average USA person in general. Lack of a chin was... not the Hapsburg problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
chippocrates posted:Lack of a chin was... not the Hapsburg problem. They've come around to it in America.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
Pope Hilarius II posted:Depends how far north. The Belgae tribe, who gave their name to Belgium, are not really modern Belgians' ancestors since most of them were either wiped out or integrated into the Roman settler population. I believe Y-DNA research has indicated that the further north you travel from the Seine, the less Celtic genetic heritage you'll find, which also kind of tracks with the ancient language border between Germanic and Romance languages. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
Feels like there's a good chance one of you nerds here would know what I'm talking about. A while ago I read an article on the different ways how new territories in the US were surveyed and parcels divided, which lead to those areas looking distinct to this day because the way land was divided often persisted to this day. Any ideas? My googling fails completely here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 23:15
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Feels like there's a good chance one of you nerds here would know what I'm talking about. A while ago I read an article on the different ways how new territories in the US were surveyed and parcels divided, which lead to those areas looking distinct to this day because the way land was divided often persisted to this day. Any ideas? My googling fails completely here. Sounds like Fishmech.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
 Age of Empires 2 civilizations Koramei fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 23:37
|
|
