Possible Etymology of Alexander

[Nikolaj]

There is no linearity to all this, that's for sure.

Spitfire, you are basing this linearity on the Slavic migration theory and there were no Slavs in that area. We are basing it off the historians who do believe an early form of Slavic was spoken within these regions. We are also not directly linking this to be Slavic, as we said earlier, we will be trying to incorporate other languages into the scenario to improve the integrity of our speculations and assumptions.

You are correct to an extent, it is either speculation or assumptions based off what we have to work with, never just one; just like the Slavic migration theory.

Edit:

Slavs and slavic from the 6th century is not a proof of being a macedonian or slavic or whatever because this is based on language alone..

Yes my friend, this is what I like about you, you understand that language does not depict ethnicity.

What we are also speculating is that the Macedonians always did speak a Slavic tongue and knew Greek, not Greek then transition into speaking another tongue.
Hence what I said earlier, the regions above us could have always spoken a Slavic tongue, therefore speculating that the Macedonians could have too isn't extreme or invalid.

[spitfire]

Spitfire, you are basing this linearity on the Slavic migration theory and there were no Slavs in that area. We are basing it off the historians who do believe an early form of Slavic was spoken within these regions. We are also not directly linking this to be Slavic, as we said earlier, we will be trying to incorporate other languages into the scenario to improve the integrity of our speculations and assumptions.

You are correct to an extent, it is either speculation or assumptions based off what we have to work with, never just one; just like the Slavic migration theory.

Edit:



Yes my friend, this is what I like about you, you understand that language does not depict ethnicity.

What we are also speculating is that the Macedonians always did speak a Slavic tongue and knew Greek, not Greek then transition into speaking another tongue.
Hence what I said earlier, the regions above us could have always spoken a Slavic tongue, therefore speculating that the Macedonians could have too isn't extreme or invalid.

Linearity only for linguistic matters. Had I used it for ehnic matters then early 19th century Athens is filled with albanians.

About the other point, I can see how macedonian could differ itself from slavic from the 6th century and onwards. I can't see how slavic or something similar was spoken prior to the coming of slavs.

One more point about ethnicity. Nationalism of the 19th century was very different than nationalism of the 20th century. In the 19th century it was a composing of populations. In the 20th century it was with abolishing populations.
I know all these.
Let's try to understand that missing links of identities is also how a nation arises. I think I read that somewhere Paparigopoulos history of the greek nation.
Therefore, even if links are missing it doesn't mean much.

Now how deep is that?

[Philosopher]

The compose of these two words is something you presume mate. Etymologically speaking. And to this no other use as a verb or adjective etc. is added.

It is not presumed. Anymore than the name “Bozhidar” is. It is common knowledge that this name is composed of two words: Bozy and dar. It is also common knowledge that Vasil is composed of two words: va and sil. Vasil is a name, similar to Bozhidar. While it cannot be precluded that Vasil can be used as a verb or adjective, it generally is not because it is a person's name. This does not mean it cannot be used as a verb or adjective.

No I don't quite believe this nor have I ever stated this exactly, you'll get it in a moment.

Your quote could not be clearer.

The construction of history tells us when the slavs came and when the slavic was used in the area. It does not tell us about the people who spoke it, how was it that they came to speaking it. This is what you keep misunderstanding with my points.

We question this construction of history. We question if Slavs ever came to the Balkans. We question whether Slavic came to the Balkans. We question and challenge the historical narratives.

Not quite, again. You are repeating the arguments on these threads and they are not found evedently true. The same with odysseas.

Just because you reject the arguments of the Odysseus thread does not mean the arguments presented in the other thread are wrong. You would have to weigh the merits of the arguments presented there separate from the merits of the Odysseus thread.

What you fail to understand and thus you fall into the trap of antiquity is that regardless when macedonian populations started to speak slavic, this does not inflict their origin. It's dead simple yet you keep not grasping it. Slavs and slavic from the 6th century is not a proof of being a macedonian or slavic or whatever because this is based on language alone.

Not so. In your mind it is not an issue. Great. In the eyes of most of your countrymen and history books it is the very heart of the name dispute. I agree language is not and should not be the basis. But your opinion is in the minority Spitfire.

About the other point, I can see how macedonian could differ itself from slavic from the 6th century and onwards. I can't see how slavic or something similar was spoken prior to the coming of slavs.

I think this is the fundamental point Spitfire. With this world view, you would have to reject the premise that some ancient Greek words are of Slavic origin because Slavic was absent in the Balkans until the 6th century or so. You are free to believe it.

[Nikolaj]

Linearity only for linguistic matters. Had I used it for ehnic matters then early 19th century Athens is filled with albanians.

About the other point, I can see how macedonian could differ itself from slavic from the 6th century and onwards. I can't see how slavic or something similar was spoken prior to the coming of slavs.

One more point about ethnicity. Nationalism of the 19th century was very different than nationalism of the 20th century. In the 19th century it was a composing of populations. In the 20th century it was with abolishing populations.
I know all these.
Let's try to understand that missing links of identities is also how a nation arises. I think I read that somewhere Paparigopoulos history of the greek nation.
Therefore, even if links are missing it doesn't mean much.

Now how deep is that?

Very.

All of these types of questions, and what you and I currently know, is what we will try to uncover and address.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Yes, but the most probable one is that -ander is how the word transliterates in latin.

Perhaps (that still doesn't explain the Asian renditions), but why do you think that is, given that other names are transliterated in essentially the same form from Greek to Latin?

Antiquity belongs to antiquity......a difference from the near past wouldn't you agree SoM?

Of course.

The other probabilities are linear A', linear B', Indo-european etc.

Indo-European is a reconstructed language, not an alphabet. How many examples can you cite from the Linear A or B alphabets which look like the Greek alphabet?

Because it was spoken by the people, whereas the Greek influence on these languages exists in a non so colloqual way.

As the Roman sphere of influence spread over a large area Latin came to be spoken by many people as a primary language which is why it later developed into separate languages. Greek was also spoken over a large area, but not as a primary language by most which is one of the reasons why it remained somewhat conservative in a cosmopolitan environment.

It is a Dorian dialect different than dorian dialects. This shows that it was spoken at the time.

I don't deny that some forms of Greek were spoken in Macedonia. How does the language on that inscription differ from other Dorian dialects?

Have you got examples of macedonian names of that period other than greek?

I haven't checked for the etymology of all Macedonian names recorded in antiquity, so I can't answer your question. Are you suggesting all of them are Greek? How many Greeks had names like Amyntas, Phillip, Parmenio, Cassander, etc prior to the rise of the Macedonians?

They are cognitive, therefore we follow the time line macedonian>slavic>old church slavonic>latin>greek.

They are cognates and all stem from PIE. But your timeline can be perceived as misleading because it suggests (to the ignorant at least) that the Macedonian word originally came from Greek. Further, it is incorrect to label the intermediary stage(s) between OCS (or Old Macedonian) and modern Macedonian as simply 'Slavic' .

[spitfire]

Perhaps (that still doesn't explain the Asian renditions), but why do you think that is, given that other names are transliterated in essentially the same form from Greek to Latin?

I gave an example. Maeander. It has the transliteration from greek to latin in both caes. Αι becomes ae and -ανδρος became -ander.

Indo-European is a reconstructed language, not an alphabet. How many examples can you cite from the Linear A or B alphabets which look like the Greek alphabet?

This point was made in order to show that greek had to come from somewhere. According to scholars linear A and B could be an origin.

As the Roman sphere of influence spread over a large area Latin came to be spoken by many people as a primary language which is why it later developed into separate languages. Greek was also spoken over a large area, but not as a primary language by most which is one of the reasons why it remained somewhat conservative in a cosmopolitan environment.

That's what I said also.

I don't deny that some forms of Greek were spoken in Macedonia. How does the language on that inscription differ from other Dorian dialects?

Are you saying that this type of language is not Doric? By substracting the other types of Doric you end up that it is a Doric form. Can it be anything else than Doric? It's not attic for sure, it is greek, so what's left?

I haven't checked for the etymology of all Macedonian names recorded in antiquity, so I can't answer your question. Are you suggesting all of them are Greek? How many Greeks had names like Amyntas, Phillip, Parmenio, Cassander, etc prior to the rise of the Macedonians?

All these names have a direct meaning in greek. Can you show me any other language that these names have a meaning? Not like Vasil which is a made up etymology that doesn't follow etymological rules. For instance there is no other example nor it is used in any other word than a name.

They are cognates and all stem from PIE. But your timeline can be perceived as misleading because it suggests (to the ignorant at least) that the Macedonian word originally came from Greek. Further, it is incorrect to label the intermediary stage(s) between OCS (or Old Macedonian) and modern Macedonian as simply 'Slavic' .

I don't know what the ignorants perceive. I only know that linearity is most important when it comes to etymology.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I gave an example. Maeander. It has the transliteration from greek to latin in both caes. Αι becomes ae and -ανδρος became -ander.

I am aware of the parallel examples. I asked your opinion on why -andros becomes -ander from Greek to Latin when the latter is able to adequately transliterate other Greek or supposedly Greek names in essentially their proper form (eg: Arkadios > Arcadius, Theodosios > Theodosius, etc).

This point was made in order to show that greek had to come from somewhere.

Of course it had to have come from somewhere. But there is no such thing as an "indo-european" alphabet (which you alluded to). That was my point.

According to scholars linear A and B could be an origin.

Which scholars?

Are you saying that this type of language is not Doric?

Perhaps you need to revisit the response you made previous to this one to refresh your memory. You stated that it is a Dorian dialect different than Dorian dialects. As a follow up, I asked how it differed from other Dorian dialects. That was the question.

All these names have a direct meaning in greek.

I am not denying that there are Macedonian names (as they've been rendered in Greek) which have a Greek origin. I asked if all Macedonian names recorded in antiquity are Greek. It is either a yes, no or I don't know. I also asked how many of these names were used by Greeks prior to the Macedonians. It is either an all, most, some or I don't know. Can you refer me to a credible etymological dictionary which confidently explains the names Cassander and Parmenio?

Can you show me any other language that these names have a meaning? Not like Vasil which is a made up etymology that doesn't follow etymological rules. For instance there is no other example nor it is used in any other word than a name.

I have been following your discussion with Philosopher regarding this and other words. To be honest, I used to spend more time researching such terms in the past. My understanding of linguistics is much better than it once was and my interest has shifted towards a more scientific approach. The only thing I will say in relation to the term 'basileus' at this point is that it is a word which represents something in Greek and as such has developed derivatives, but its origin is not Greek and it has no etymology in that language.

I only know that linearity is most important when it comes to etymology.

When it comes to languages, linearity without the application of examples from internal reconstruction and the comparative method can be misleading, just like your timeline.

[spitfire]

I am aware of the parallel examples. I asked your opinion on why -andros becomes -ander from Greek to Latin when the latter is able to adequately transliterate other Greek or supposedly Greek names in essentially their proper form (eg: Arkadios > Arcadius, Theodosios > Theodosius, etc).

And I gave examples of how -andros becomes ander in latin. Do you want me to give you more examples? Cassander is one. That's how latin transliterates from greek. It's no mystery. The other names you mention here don't have -andros as their ending. Why are you denying this? I can give many more. Arkadios is someone from Arkadia and I already talked about Theodosios in my discussion with Philosopher about the -dar (gift). But these names don't end in -andros, so I don't see your point.

Of course it had to have come from somewhere. But there is no such thing as an "indo-european" alphabet (which you alluded to). That was my point.

I did not allude to anything of the sort. I said that greek comes from another language or other languages. That was the point. These languages evolved and formulated greek, as it happens with all languages.

Which scholars?

Most of them. Linear A is minoan and Linear B is Mycιnic.

Perhaps you need to revisit the response you made previous to this one to refresh your memory. You stated that it is a Dorian dialect different than Dorian dialects. As a follow up, I asked how it differed from other Dorian dialects. That was the question.

What is it exactly you want me to do? Decipher the meanng of the tablet? This is a Doric language, I can make out quite a few words on it in greek, but there are types that differentiate. What else could it be?

I am not denying that there are Macedonian names (as they've been rendered in Greek) which have a Greek origin. I asked if all Macedonian names recorded in antiquity are Greek. It is either a yes, no or I don't know. I also asked how many of these names were used by Greeks prior to the Macedonians. It is either an all, most, some or I don't know. Can you refer me to a credible etymological dictionary which confidently explains the names Cassander and Parmenio?

Here's one used by philosopher also.

http://www.behindthename.com/name/cassander

Also about Parmenion this one in greek means someone who is staying and waits. From "Παραμένων". I can give also the explanation for every part of the word including its ending. It is very easy in greek. You would find it easy too if you knew greek.

I have been following your discussion with Philosopher regarding this and other words. To be honest, I used to spend more time researching such terms in the past. My understanding of linguistics is much better than it once was and my interest has shifted towards a more scientific approach. The only thing I will say in relation to the term 'basileus' at this point is that it is a word which represents something in Greek and as such has developed derivatives, but its origin is not Greek and it has no etymology in that language.

Pretty much what I have said, with the addition that there is no one word Vasil used anywhere else except a name in macedonian. As one word not two.

When it comes to languages, linearity without the application of examples from internal reconstruction and the comparative method can be misleading, just like your timeline.

I did give examples of linearity. Here it is . Feel free to correct me.

[Soldier of Macedon]

And I gave examples of how -andros becomes ander in latin.

I have already acknowledged that there are other examples. Let's not tread over the same ground.

That's how latin transliterates from greek. It's no mystery.

There is a reason (relative to linguistics) why this happens in Latin. I am attempting to discover this reason. If it is beyond your understanding, that's fine.

The other names you mention here don't have -andros as their ending. Why are you denying this?

I am not denying it.

Arkadios is someone from Arkadia and I already talked about Theodosios in my discussion with Philosopher about the -dar (gift). But these names don't end in -andros...........

Yes, I know they don't end in -andros. My question relates to why Latin renders -ander from -andros in name endings but retains the same Greek form for names with different endings. I thought you knew more about linguistics than you actually do, hence the reason why my inquiry was directed at yourself. Given that this is not the case, I will seek this information from those who are more versed with the topic.

I did not allude to anything of the sort.

Yes, you did.

I said that greek comes from another language or other languages.

No, you didn't (at least not in that sentence). You brought into question the Phoenician origin of the Greek alphabet (post #93), I asked you what the other probability was (post #150), and you suggested one as "Indo-european" (post #151). The point of discussion related to the Greek alphabet, not the language. You've obviously confused the two.

Most of them. Linear A is minoan and Linear B is Mycιnic.

Assuming that we're (now) on the topic of language as opposed to alphabet, most scholars do not consider Greek to have derived from Minoan, and some of those that consider it to have derived from Mycenaean admit that certain connections established between the two are based on conjecture. I am not discounting a Mycenaean element in Greek, I just don't believe it was the sole source which contributed to its development as a language.

What is it exactly you want me to do?

Elaborate on your assertion that the Dorian written on the tablet is different to other Dorian dialects. If you can't, then say so, or at least provide a reference point so I can research it myself. You can also ease up on the paranoia and stop misinterpreting my curiosity as denial of everything you write.

Here's one used by philosopher also.
http://www.behindthename.com/name/cassander

It mentions a possible etymology, not a certain one.

Also about Parmenion this one in greek means someone who is staying and waits. From "Παραμένων".

Is there an online or other (credible) etymological dictionary which makes reference to this and other ancient Macedonian names?

[spitfire]

I have already acknowledged that there are other examples. Let's not tread over the same ground.

There is a reason (relative to linguistics) why this happens in Latin. I am attempting to discover this reason. If it is beyond your understanding, that's fine.

You are basing your assumption in nothing. This is the way how latin transliterate -andros.

I am not denying it.

Yes you are, you just did. Again.

Yes, I know they don't end in -andros. My question relates to why Latin renders -ander from -andros in name endings but retains the same Greek form for names with different endings. I thought you knew more about linguistics than you actually do, hence the reason why my inquiry was directed at yourself. Given that this is not the case, I will seek this information from those who are more versed with the topic.

How many times do I have to explain it? You are asking me of why the rule is like this? I don't know. Possibly because its easier this way.

No, you didn't (at least not in that sentence). You brought into question the Phoenician origin of the Greek alphabet (post #93), I asked you what the other probability was (post #150), and you suggested one as "Indo-european" (post #151). The point of discussion related to the Greek alphabet, not the language. You've obviously confused the two.

I did not confuse anything. I mentioned the point I was making, so your emphasis on what is and what is not is redundant.

Assuming that we're (now) on the topic of language as opposed to alphabet, most scholars do not consider Greek to have derived from Minoan, and some of those that consider it to have derived from Mycenaean admit that certain connections established between the two are based on conjecture. I am not discounting a Mycenaean element in Greek, I just don't believe it was the sole source which contributed to its development as a language.

Again you are basing this against nothing. You should provide what the "other side" states. Is there one? And regardless of the existance of whatever side, this is a proof that other pre-historic languages preceded greek.

Elaborate on your assertion that the Dorian written on the tablet is different to other Dorian dialects. If you can't, then say so, or at least provide a reference point so I can research it myself. You can also ease up on the paranoia and stop misinterpreting my curiosity as denial of everything you write.

What do you call a dialect that resembles greek in ancient times other than very closely related languages? What else is left there? Again you are given proof but you are saying it's not enough. Do you have any clue of the opposite? No you don't. You are the one suggesting something and the burden of proof lies on you. I already gave sufficient evidence, now let's see yours.

It mentions a possible etymology, not a certain one.

That along with the meaning in greek is the most likely explanation. Again, have you got a more direct one? You don't avoid direct connectivity in linguistics in favor of indirect connectivity. Let alone the fact that I have found many topics in this forum that have many mistakes when it comes to greek or the interpretation of greek. Many mistakes and very obvious that comes from the lack of understanding of greek.

Is there an online or other (credible) etymological dictionary which makes reference to this and other ancient Macedonian names?

I'm not sure about what is there and what is there not. To its entity, the internet is according to what I say.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Yes you are, you just did. Again.

Spitfire, I have not denied it nor am I denying it now. I don't appreciate your insinuations and I will not tolerate your blatant lies just because you have difficulty grasping certain elements of the English language. I suggest you cease the charade before you use up my goodwill.

You are asking me of why the rule is like this? I don't know.

Thanks. If you said this in the beginning you would have saved the both of us some time.

I did not confuse anything. I mentioned the point I was making, so your emphasis on what is and what is not is redundant.

The point of discussion related to the alphabet, not the language. Period. If you want it to mean something else in your own mind then go right ahead, but don't insult my intelligence in the process.

Again you are basing this against nothing.

What, that Greek is not descended from Minoan? That some of the connections made between Greek and Mycenaean are based on conjecture? Do some proper research on the subjects.

You should provide what the "other side" states.

You made the statement (although at this point given how you've confused alphabets and languages one wonders if what you wrote is what you actually meant). The onus is on you to corroborate it.

What do you call a dialect that resembles greek in ancient times other than very closely related languages? What else is left there? Again you are given proof but you are saying it's not enough. Do you have any clue of the opposite? No you don't. You are the one suggesting something and the burden of proof lies on you. I already gave sufficient evidence, now let's see yours.

I am going to explain this one more time. I am not denying that the language in the tablet is Dorian. But you said that the Dorian in the tablet is different to Dorian dialects. I asked how is it different. You keep responding with irrelevance stemming from paranoia. I couldn't care less if the language on the tablet was Swahili, I was just asking you to clarify a point that you made. Nothing more.

That along with the meaning in greek is the most likely explanation.

Perhaps, but it is not beyond doubt. And even if it was, it wouldn't bother me, I just wanted to know.

Again, have you got a more direct one?

No. That is why I asked you.

Let alone the fact that I have found many topics in this forum that have many mistakes when it comes to greek or the interpretation of greek. Many mistakes and very obvious that comes from the lack of understanding of greek.

I am sure there are, and you're welcome to highlight these errors so long as you don't behave like a dick in the process. I notice that you've become increasingly aggravated in this thread. I don't know what your problem is, nor do I care, but you should rid yourself of the chip on your shoulder and adjust your attitude because I have neither the time nor the patience to deal with people who have suddenly decided to go bipolar for some unforeseen reason.

[Philosopher]

All these names have a direct meaning in greek. Can you show me any other language that these names have a meaning? Not like Vasil which is a made up etymology that doesn't follow etymological rules. For instance there is no other example nor it is used in any other word than a name.

Spitfire, the problem we have is that you are inconsistent in your approach. Let me give an example. The name “Bozihdar” is composed of two words bozy and dar. You would agree that this name is Slavic, right? No one uses this name, which is composed of two Slavic words, as a verb or adjective. It is used as a noun.

Now, just because this name is used only as a name does not mean its etymology is “made up” and “doesn't follow etymological rules”, does it?

Vasil follows the same pattern as Bozihdar. It is composed of two words in Slavic. It has etymological meaning in Slavic. It is used as a noun. This does not mean it is made up.

Be consistent.

Here's one used by philosopher also.
http://www.behindthename.com/name/cassander

Can you please provide me a citation or reference of where I stated or suggested anything at all about the name Cassander?

Let alone the fact that I have found many topics in this forum that have many mistakes when it comes to greek or the interpretation of greek. Many mistakes and very obvious that comes from the lack of understanding of greek.

Can you please provide examples of errors, mistakes, or distortions of the Greek language?

[spitfire]

Can you please provide examples of errors, mistakes, or distortions of the Greek language?

Since SoM has decided to deny everything there is in the expence of nothingness, and call me bipolar, I think I can give you a clue.

Μακεδονίζειν - Μακεδονίζων. If you don't know how the -ing is formed in greek you would probably understand that this means a different language. Nothing like this is true. Λακεδαιμονίζειν εστί φιλοσοφείν, meaning literally that Lakedemonizing is philosophising. Lakedemonising is when you use very few words to convey a meaning.

If you don't know this, then you may understand that it refers to another language. It's a very simple case of not knowing what it mens in greek.
From there, you can build up on this mistake and make a puzzle that has an incorect piece. It is what usually happens. In this very same thread Alexandrov from the misconception of the genitive form in greek is another example, this one's of olympic medal proportions! It is almost unbelievable how wrong this is and still makes its way for arguments!

You need to understand greek, otherwise you are prone to mistakes. That's the way it is, there's no two way about it.

[spitfire]

Spitfire, the problem we have is that you are inconsistent in your approach. Let me give an example. The name “Bozihdar” is composed of two words bozy and dar. You would agree that this name is Slavic, right? No one uses this name, which is composed of two Slavic words, as a verb or adjective. It is used as a noun.

Now, just because this name is used only as a name does not mean its etymology is “made up” and “doesn't follow etymological rules”, does it?

Vasil follows the same pattern as Bozihdar. It is composed of two words in Slavic. It has etymological meaning in Slavic. It is used as a noun. This does not mean it is made up.

Be consistent.

So what does the name alexandar mean in macedonian? Let's say that dar is a gift, what do the other components mean? We already found that there are missing links, therefore the obvious solution is to go to where there aren't missing links, and that was in greek.

The problem with this word Vasil or any other etymology is that it is not consistent. Bozidar consists of two very apparent meanings. Vasil on the other hand does not. Vasil is like Napoleon, Bozidar isn't.

To understand this better, you seem to forget that your etymology of Vasil consists of an action. It is understandable why this action needs to find itself in other words. But it doesn't.
This is not the same case as Bozidar. You can't Bozidarize the same as you can't Theodorize (greek equivalent) because it is not an action that requires a verb. But you do Vasilize in greek whereas you don't Vasilize in macedonian. That's linguistics. It's not that simple.

Another thing, to understand why in greek it is very easy to understand the meaning.
Despite SoM's conclusion that my knowledge of linguistics is limited, you need to know the cognitive and incognitive skills in order to even use it in practical ways.

This is why you don't really need flashcards when you present vocabulary in greek. It's because of the relation of words. This relation makes the use of cognitive skills much more present than incognitive skills and therefore the need of flashcards is limited to a degree of not needing them at all.

Unfortunately some people jump into conclusions. I can't do anything about it. Limited knowledge is worst than no knowledge at all.

[Amphipolis]

Yes, I know they don't end in -andros. My question relates to why Latin renders -ander from -andros in name endings but retains the same Greek form for names with different endings. I thought you knew more about linguistics than you actually do, hence the reason why my inquiry was directed at yourself. Given that this is not the case, I will seek this information from those who are more versed with the topic.

It should also be noted that -ndro is retained in several Latin cases:

Greek/Latin
Nominative: Alexandros/Alexander,
Genitive: Alexandrou/ Alexandri
Accusative: Alexandron/ Alexandrum
Dative: Alexandro(h)/ Alexandro
Ablative: (Greeks don't have this)/Alexandro
Vocative: Alexandre/ Alexander