Mathias,
> (Ukrainian, Russian, Polish, English). Actually, I doubt it can be called
an
> Indo-European language at all because half of it is Hebrew. There is, btw,
no
> Yidish word for the lute. So, what is this about? :)
>
Actually Hebrew (and Arabic and Aramaic) are in the family of Indo-European
languages. Sanskrit is one of the bases, but the differences in sound of the
Semitic languages are minimal when compared to the similarities. As I
remember my linguistics only Basque and Finnish are languages west of the
Caucasian Mountains that aren't in the family. The Latin "homo" means
mankind ("vir" is a man) and the Greek "homo" means same. But both are
Indo-European.
Yiddish, as someone else pointed out, is a conglomerate language from
Eastern Europe, and relatively recent in origin. Of course the most
conglomerate language is my own. English is a combination of the Gaelic of
the Celts (which included the Britons), the Teutonic of the Angles and
Saxons, and the French of the Normans. The ending of the name of a town may
be "ham", "wick(h)", "ton" or "ville". All mean the same, and one can almost
follow the history of the various conquests (none after 1066) by the names
that have held on.
I doubt that there is a Gaelic name for the lute either, it came later.
Best, Jon
