Possible Etymology of Alexander

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • spitfire
    Banned
    • Aug 2014
    • 868

    I still don't get the verb part. I asked before but it went with no answer.

    Do you say for instance that a person is vasiling (meaning to reign) over matters? As one word not two.
    From what you tell me so far you only use it for a name that means in power for a person.
    Is it used as verb like "Βασιλεύω" (I reign)?

    Comment

    • Nikolaj
      Member
      • Aug 2014
      • 389

      Please refrain from using the terms 'modern Macedonia' or 'modern Macedonian language'.
      There is indisputable proof that shows our language hasn't changed for over a millennium from Lexicons.
      You should maybe start using the term neo-new-Greek (not new-Greek because that is an understatement when we compare ratios), if you are going to continue calling it the 'modern Macedonian language'.
      Otherwise, it makes no sense for you to be calling it that because it is inconsistent with the day and age we live in.

      Which assumptions are you referring to?
      You assume I mean something when I don't.
      - Last time you assumed I was saying there was 'modern Macedonian' within the coins inscriptions, when I was simply explaining how I could interpret the inscriptions on the coin.
      - The specific assumption I am referring to is that you assumed I had words that show insufficient correlation with Latin-Greek. I merely said there is a lot of data out there we can interpret to search for consistency, with also other types of words, this is something I will get into in the future.

      Now that we have that out of the way, let us continue our discussion on linguistics.

      Originally posted by spitfire View Post
      As I said, I would love to see the possibility as it would open a new window. What is most probable is that even the word sil comes from elsewhere and not modern macedonian.

      The only derivation I know is that it comes from a word in linear B' that means ceasar. Now I may take this as an explanation even though I don't quite see how it works with phoneme and letters.
      You see this is where you're inconsistent with your ideology. Yes, you agree there is major correlation with the word/name in Macedonian but we should also agree that it could be a possibility that it could be from somewhere else.
      I completely agree with that. However, this clearly only applies when it suits you, if something has a derivation in Greek, it also would imply it is directly Greek in your eyes, as proven evident throughout the thread.
      This is where we would have to discuss if you are of any use in this discussion apart from being able to translate and derive words in Greek. I am here to have an unbiased conversation and my questions are equivalent to anyone who is not Greek.

      Now directly on discussion of the derivation of the word/name.
      - We should bring other surrounding languages within the question and see their correlation to it and see how they break down the word.
      - I have never concluded directly that it is strictly a Macedonian derivation and name, only a possibility.
      - This is where we would take a step further to prove this assumptions validity, and where you would stop when it is in your favor.

      Comment

      • spitfire
        Banned
        • Aug 2014
        • 868

        Originally posted by Nikolaj View Post
        Please refrain from using the terms 'modern Macedonia' or 'modern Macedonian language'.
        There is indisputable proof that shows our language hasn't changed for over a millennium from Lexicons.
        You should maybe start using the term neo-new-Greek (not new-Greek because that is an understatement when we compare ratios), if you are going to continue calling it the 'modern Macedonian language'.
        Otherwise, it makes no sense for you to be calling it that because it is inconsistent with the day and age we live in.
        First of all I thought you regard yourself as a macedonian of today, meaning that you are a macedonian not living in the past, but living in the present. The same goes for the term modern macedonia. It is meant as something that is macedonia today. Making a distinction of macedonia in antiquity, but not meaning a different one other than the chronological.
        But if you don't want it it's OK. I never had a problem with calling macedonia macedonia, even old or new. I don't care really, I have enough evidence from the begining of the last century that makes me not having any problem at all with that. I cannot use some other terms of the events of the time. It's a thing with greek law, you (and I) will understand in due time. It's only been 10 days since there was a law about defining ethnic cleansing and I don't know yet the implications.

        However, I would like to see the correlation of macedonian language in the past with that of today (is that OK as terminology?). Now this would open a greater window for me.

        Originally posted by Nikolaj View Post
        You assume I mean something when I don't.
        - Last time you assumed I was saying there was 'modern Macedonian' within the coins inscriptions, when I was simply explaining how I could interpret the inscriptions on the coin.
        - The specific assumption I am referring to is that you assumed I had words that show insufficient correlation with Latin-Greek. I merely said there is a lot of data out there we can interpret to search for consistency, with also other types of words, this is something I will get into in the future.

        Now that we have that out of the way, let us continue our discussion on linguistics.
        Fine. Let's not assume about what I mean. I made it clear.

        Originally posted by Nikolaj View Post
        You see this is where you're inconsistent with your ideology. Yes, you agree there is major correlation with the word/name in Macedonian but we should also agree that it could be a possibility that it could be from somewhere else.
        I completely agree with that. However, this clearly only applies when it suits you, if something has a derivation in Greek, it also would imply it is directly Greek in your eyes, as proven evident throughout the thread.
        This is where we would have to discuss if you are of any use in this discussion apart from being able to translate and derive words in Greek. I am here to have an unbiased conversation and my questions are equivalent to anyone who is not Greek.

        Now directly on discussion of the derivation of the word/name.
        - We should bring other surrounding languages within the question and see their correlation to it and see how they break down the word.
        - I have never concluded directly that it is strictly a Macedonian derivation and name, only a possibility.
        - This is where we would take a step further to prove this assumptions validity, and where you would stop when it is in your favor.
        Fine. Why don't you bring other languages into play. That could show even more correlations. I'm not sure why are you accusing me of being inconsistent though. It's not like I came here and said that this is it take it or leave it. I don't think so at all.
        Last edited by spitfire; 09-22-2014, 09:05 PM.

        Comment

        • Philosopher
          Senior Member
          • Sep 2008
          • 1003

          Originally posted by spitfire View Post
          I still don't get the verb part. I asked before but it went with no answer.

          Do you say for instance that a person is vasiling (meaning to reign) over matters? As one word not two.
          From what you tell me so far you only use it for a name that means in power for a person.
          Is it used as verb like "Βασιλεύω" (I reign)?
          The word "sil" is commonly used as "sila", which means "power". When used alone, the word would indicate "power", as in "I have much sila". This is different than "vasil", when "va" and "sil" are used together, because in this instance it signifies "a person in power".

          Comment

          • spitfire
            Banned
            • Aug 2014
            • 868

            Originally posted by Philosopher View Post
            The word "sil" is commonly used as "sila", which means "power". When used alone, the word would indicate "power", as in "I have much sila". This is different than "vasil", when "va" and "sil" are used together, because in this instance it signifies "a person in power".
            Lovely. Don't tell me that this noun is feminine as it is in greek "δύναμη".

            But it is not used as one word vasila, it's two words meaning in power right?
            Is this something like a phrasal verb (like in english give up take up etc)?

            In this case it is a verb, however etymology is not applied.

            Comment

            • Nikolaj
              Member
              • Aug 2014
              • 389

              Originally posted by spitfire View Post
              First of all I thought you regard yourself as a macedonian of today, meaning that you are a macedonian not living in the past, but living in the present. The same goes for the term modern macedonia. It is meant as something that is macedonia today. Making a distinction of macedonia in antiquity, but not meaning a different one other than the chronological.
              But if you don't want it it's OK. I never had a problem with calling macedonia macedonia, even old or new. I don't care really, I have enough evidence from the begining of the last century that makes me not having any problem at all with that. I cannot use some other terms of the events of the time. It's a thing with greek law, you (and I) will understand in due time.

              However, I would like to see the correlation of macedonian language in the past with that of today (is that OK as terminology?). Now this would open a greater window for me.
              I understand you mean it as no insult, I just think it's redundant and stupid to not keep the principle consistent when you say the Greek language, if you are Greeks of today.
              There is a Macedonian Lexicon, i'm sure you'll have no trouble finding it with a search query on our forum.
              If this opens new doors for you then be it, even if it were not there, we're basing our discussion on the Macedonian language.

              Fine. Why don't you bring other languages into play. That could show even more correlations.
              I never said it wasn't a possibility, I only said that this is how you can come to conclude its validity; The sole reason wasn't to prove it wrong, but to prove it's correct.
              I am sorry, I only speak Macedonian and English. This is why it isn't a simple task any honest person would agree to that. Like I said, it is something I will get into.
              I am not going to rush this subject just for our discussion, it has nothing to do with you, only my personal interest in linguistics.

              Comment

              • spitfire
                Banned
                • Aug 2014
                • 868

                Originally posted by Nikolaj View Post
                I understand you mean it as no insult, I just think it's redundant and stupid to not keep the principle consistent when you say the Greek language, if you are Greeks of today.
                There is a Macedonian Lexicon, i'm sure you'll have no trouble finding it with a search query on our forum.
                If this opens new doors for you then be it, even if it were not there, we're basing our discussion on the Macedonian language.
                Since I understand what happened at the time and place it would be stupid of me to think otherwise. There is an automatic relation to the past. Let's skip that.

                Hopefully this Lexicon has many words. I'll give it a look.


                Originally posted by Nikolaj View Post
                I never said it wasn't a possibility, I only said that this is how you can come to conclude its validity; The sole reason wasn't to prove it wrong, but to prove it's correct.
                I am sorry, I only speak Macedonian and English. This is why it isn't a simple task any honest person would agree to that. Like I said, it is something I will get into.
                I am not going to rush this subject just for our discussion, it has nothing to do with you, only my personal interest in linguistics.
                Yes I see. Well Philosopher is here, I'm here, I think we can put our knowledge to the test. And yes greek is very difficult even for the greeks.

                Comment

                • Nikolaj
                  Member
                  • Aug 2014
                  • 389

                  Originally posted by spitfire View Post
                  Since I understand what happened at the time and place it would be stupid of me to think otherwise. There is an automatic relation to the past. Let's skip that.

                  Hopefully this Lexicon has many words. I'll give it a look.

                  Yes I see. Well Philosopher is here, I'm here, I think we can put our knowledge to the test. And yes greek is very difficult even for the greeks.
                  This does not differentiate you being able to call it Greek and then refer to a 'new Macedonian language'. Your language developed as much as French and Latin did, Macedonian has developed the least as it has held constant which shows its integrity.
                  If anything it should be called new-Greek and then Macedonian when we compare ratios of what has been held constant, but we aren't assholes to do such.

                  As is every language for everyone, which is essentially why each country has units for its own tongue. Yours is no different.

                  Comment

                  • Nikolaj
                    Member
                    • Aug 2014
                    • 389

                    TBA in this post.

                    Comment

                    • spitfire
                      Banned
                      • Aug 2014
                      • 868

                      Tell me Nikolaj, this lexicon, is it this?



                      Because if it is, its from the 16th century and it has about 300 definitions. I don't see correlations. It uses greek alphabet instead of Cyrilic alphabet. Why is that? I don't know. I would understand if there was a correlation in greek but there isn't one.
                      Is there something to show me of the language used in ancient time for instanse B.C. or close to that?

                      I was refering to a language from antiquity to the present. A language that consists of a few thousand words at least.

                      Actually New-Greek is the term for greek spoken today. No Kidding that's how it is in school. I remember literature called like that. That doesn't mean it's different, it means that it's today's greek, very similar to those thousands of years ago.

                      You haven't understood what I said about the facts of which time. I thought we skipped the part where I said I understood what was happening in macedonia at the first half (at least) of the previous century. Hellooooooo!!
                      Last edited by spitfire; 09-22-2014, 10:45 PM.

                      Comment

                      • Nikolaj
                        Member
                        • Aug 2014
                        • 389

                        Originally posted by spitfire View Post
                        Tell me Nikolaj, this lexicon, is it this?



                        Because if it is, its from the 16th century and it has about 300 definitions. I don't see correlations. It uses greek alphabet instead of Cyrilic alphabet. Why is that? I don't know. I would understand if there was a correlation in greek but there isn't one.
                        Is there something to show me of the language used in ancient time for instanse B.C. or close to that?

                        I was refering to a language from antiquity to the present. A language that consists of a few thousand words at least.

                        Actually New-Greek is the term for greek spoken today. No Kidding that's how it is in school. I remember literature called like that. That doesn't mean it's different, it means that it's today's greek, very similar to those thousands of years ago.

                        You haven't understood what I said about the facts of which time. I thought we skipped the part where I said I understood what was happening in macedonia at the first half (at least) of the previous century. Hellooooooo!!
                        You do realize, the fact that it is so similar, probability is that it would most likely still be consistent if there were more words added, especially thousands.
                        If you are are denying its viability because of the amount of words in the lexicon you're then implying the language only had 300 words.
                        You should ask what is the consistency of those words being accurate to what we have today. Not disregard it because of its lack of words and doesn't suit your agenda.

                        The reason why it is written using Greek is clearly denoted on the second page. Nor does it matter to me, because we're speaking strictly on the pronunciation of the words and the words used.
                        The fact that it is written in another language means nothing, as for example you can convert Latin to Greek and Greek to Latin. The fact it didn't use Cyrillic means nothing and is quite an amateur argument.



                        Pronunciation is key and the words they used, not script, e.g. two general sentences.

                        Comment

                        • spitfire
                          Banned
                          • Aug 2014
                          • 868

                          Tell me Nikolaj, what are your thoughts on this?



                          In your words surely you can't deny it because there is no other yet. The fact that it exists tells us that it such language existed.
                          Last edited by spitfire; 09-23-2014, 04:51 AM.

                          Comment

                          • Nikolaj
                            Member
                            • Aug 2014
                            • 389

                            Originally posted by spitfire View Post
                            Tell me Nikolaj, what are your thoughts on this?



                            In your words surely you can't deny it because there is no other yet. The fact that it exists tells us that it such language existed.
                            The Pella Curse tablet. Your point?

                            But lets disregard everything I've said in the past paragraph shall we?

                            1. Of [Theti]ma and Dionysophon the ritual wedding and the marriage I bind by a written spell, and of all other
                            2. wo[men], both widows and maidens, but of Thetima in particular, and I entrust to Makron* and
                            3. [the] daimones, and (only) when I should dig up again and unroll and read this,
                            4. [?] that she might wed Dionysophon, but not before, for I wish him to take no other woman than me,
                            5. and that [I] grow old with Dionysophon, and no one else. I [am] your supplicant:
                            6. Have pity on [Phil?]a*, dear daimones, for I am (a) dagina? of all my dear ones and I am abandoned.
                            7. But guard [this] for my sake so that these things do not happen, and wretched Thetima perishes miserably.
                            8. ... but that I become happy and blessed.

                            Comment

                            • spitfire
                              Banned
                              • Aug 2014
                              • 868

                              Originally posted by Nikolaj View Post
                              The Pella Curse tablet. Your point?

                              But lets disregard everything I've said in the past paragraph shall we?
                              My point is about consistency. What do you think?

                              What was it you said in the last paragraph? That 16th century macedonian is pretty much the same as today's macedonian? Yes, so? Have you seen other languages from that era? Greek for instance?
                              The last speech of the last Emperor of Byzantium for instance in 1453. It's pretty much how it would be today.

                              So, what does this lexicon prove about consistency? More or less nothng. On the other hand the curse tablet might make you think that languages evolve and this is apparent in a larger scale of time, than that of 500 years.
                              Last edited by spitfire; 09-23-2014, 05:33 AM.

                              Comment

                              • Soldier of Macedon
                                Senior Member
                                • Sep 2008
                                • 13670

                                Originally posted by spitfire
                                In a possible scenario, it could be difficult for the -ndre to be pronounced in Asia, hence it became -ar or -er and latin followed suit afterwards.
                                And another possible scenario is that people in Asia became accustomed to the name through Macedonian and Thracian soldiers in their own native language(s).
                                Whatever the case, language on its own is not sufficient for a common descent of something.
                                I agree, especially when a certain language is used by others for convenience, like you and I right now (yet neither of us are claiming descent from Henry VIII).
                                .......greek alphabet that derived from phoenician alphabet (probably).
                                And what is the other probability?
                                I was refering to a language from antiquity to the present. A language that consists of a few thousand words at least.
                                Macedonian (like most of today's languages) doesn't have a specific literature that began in antiquity. Latin does have such a history, just like Greek. Why do you think the former broke into several different languages whereas the latter didn't?
                                In your words surely you can't deny it because there is no other yet. The fact that it exists tells us that it such language existed.
                                The Pella Katadesmos was written in Greek, not Macedonian. It doesn't even exhibit Macedonian sound changes.
                                Originally posted by Amphipolis
                                we don't know the original names of the Macedonian Kings only through the works of historians, but also from the coins they printed (themselves) and I guess also from various other inscriptions.
                                I am not suggesting that certain Macedonians didn't have Greek names, but your examples don't indicate how all of their names were pronounced in the native language.
                                In the name of the blood and the sun, the dagger and the gun, Christ protect this soldier, a lion and a Macedonian.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X