Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
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
Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
At 03:54 AM 11/3/2003 -0500, Jon Murphy wrote: Actually Hebrew (and Arabic and Aramaic) are in the family of Indo-European languages. Sorry, no. I speak as a former linguistics major. Sanskrit is one of the bases, but the differences in sound of the Semitic languages are minimal when compared to the similarities. Having studied French, German, Russian, Latin, Greek and Hebrew, I beg to differ. As I remember my linguistics only Basque and Finnish are languages west of the Caucasian Mountains that aren't in the family. Also Hungarian and Lappish, which along with Finnish belong to the Finno-Ugric family. The other speakers are tribal peoples from east of the Ural mountains. Caroline * Caroline Usher DCMB Administrative Coordinator 613-8155 Box 91000
Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
As I remember my linguistics only Basque and Finnish are languages west of the Caucasian Mountains that aren't in the family. Also Hungarian and Lappish, which along with Finnish belong to the Finno-Ugric family. The other speakers are tribal peoples from east of the Ural mountains. There are a couple more Finno-Ugric in upper Volga region (Chuvash, etc.) but these will probably be extinct in a 100 years
Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
Dear all, As I remember my linguistics only Basque and Finnish are languages west of the Caucasian Mountains that aren't in the family. Also Hungarian and Lappish, which along with Finnish belong to the Finno-Ugric family. The other speakers are tribal peoples from east of the Ural mountains. There are a couple more Finno-Ugric in upper Volga region (Chuvash, etc.) but these will probably be extinct in a 100 years And do not forget the Estonians! They are even joining the EU next spring! I nearly can understand Estonian, but not quite... :-) Perhaps the difference is a little like between Italian and Spain? Arto, a Finn
Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
And do not forget the Estonians! They are even joining the EU next spring! I nearly can understand Estonian, but not quite... :-) Perhaps the difference is a little like between Italian and Spain? Quite correct, my apologies to the Estonian people. Caroline Especially considering that they have 4 times as many lutenists as have Lituanians. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
Many thanks for your message. You seem unhappy with the idea of Why unhappy? I couldn't care less. Lithuanian being described as the oldest (i.e. the least changed over the years) surviving Indo-European language, but you don't say which modern Indo-European language you think might be older. Icelandic (an extremely close relative of old Norse) is older, and A LOT more intact. Meilute Ramoniene and Ian Press, in their introduction to _Colloquial Lithuanian_ (London: Routledge, 1996), confirm that Latvian and Lithuanian are closely related to Old Prussian, a West Baltic language, which became extinct towards the end of the 17th century. This opinion is somewhat tendentious. It is a la mode in Lithuania to distance oneself from everything Slavic (for understandable reasons), but Prussian is more likely to have belonged to the Slavic rather than Baltic subgroup. If I remember right (from library books - so not available at home) Latvian and Lithuanian parted company with each other c. 800 AD, and the two languages have hardly changed for the past 800 or 900 years. Lithuanian itself is traditionally described as 'archaic'; what is, or ought to be, meant by this is that it retains a large number of features, particularly in declension, one might assume to have been present at an earlier stage in the history of the Indo-European languages. Putting it simply, Lithuanian might be placed alongside Latin, Greek and Sanskrit in its linguistic importance. With the difference that it and its numerous dialects are still spoken. No doubt. The INTERESTING thing is that Lithuanians are GENETICALLY closer to Slavs than the Balts (do not tell them this: they are as sensitive on this subject as the Japanese on their origin in Korea), so they are not the same people that broke off the Letts 1300 years ago, but a people that adopted that language. A related issue has a HUGE bearing on one particular paleolutenistic theory: Bulgarians (a genetically Turkic people who adopted an Indo-European Slavic language) are responsible for the introduction of short necked lutes into Europe in the 6th century (may Ferengizade's progeny all have large feet). More on the subject later. I am working on a webpage about linguistic evidence of Lute's Balkan entry into Europe. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: OT: Why was the K'berg MS stolen?
Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Just a question: What about Jiddish? I've learnt it would be exactly the same than the Mittelhochdeutsch and would be nearly unchanged for about 800 years? it is a branch which has, in fact, retained many a form of medieval German. Yiddish, however, has changed a lot over the centuries in that it e.g. took over a lot of vocabulary and some grammatical features from surrounding languages (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? :) -- Cheers, Mathias Mathias Roesel, Grosze Annenstrasze 5, 28199 Bremen, Deutschland/ Germany, T/F +49 - 421 - 165 49 97, Fax +49 1805 060 334 480 67, E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
