Main Page | Report Page

 

  Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » Everett refuted!!...

Author Message
Franz Gnaedinger...
Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 7:55 pm
 
On Aug 28, 11:06 pm, Trond Engen <trond... at (no spam) engen.priv.no> wrote:
[quote:68ec4dc774]
Modern Icelandic has <karlsvagninn>; Cleasby & Vigfusson
s.v. <kona> say that <kvennavagn> as the name of a
constellation is opposed to <karlsvagn>, but I don't see any
entry for the latter. It seems to be thought that <reiđ
Rögnis> 'Rögnir's (= Óđinn's) wain' in Völsunga saga is the
Big Dipper.
[/quote:68ec4dc774]
The name Rögnir is a derivative of Magdalenian
RAG meaning the line of the head and back of
an animal drawn in a cave, strongly evocative
of the whole animal (Leroi Gourhan). RAG has
very many derivatives, among them ancient Greek
rachis 'back, mountain ridge', German Rücken
'back', Bergrücken 'mountain ridge', Rigine 'layer
of stone pressed into the height by geological
forces' wherefrom Rigi, a quite famous mountain
in Switzerland (the one Mark Twain 'climbed'),
ragen 'to loom, tower', Recht 'law', recht richtig
'right', Latin rex 'king', regina 'queen', Sanskrit raj
'king'. Rögnir / Odin was then sort of a king, in the
sky present in Bootes who once was ARC TYR
who survived in king Arthur. And the heavenly bear
ARC that became a part of Ursa major but also
a wagon was seen as the wagon of Rögnir / Odin.
Considering that the princeps from Hallstatt had
been buried under his wagon, the wagon must
have been a symbol of status and power.

[quote:68ec4dc774]From Sigrdrífumál 31, Himinskenningar:

Hvernig skal kenna himin? Svá, at kalla hann Ymis haus
ok ţar af jötuns haus ok erfiđi eđa byrđi dverganna eđa
hjálm Vestra ok Austra, Suđra, Norđra, land sólar ok
tungls ok himintungla, vagna, ok veđra, hjálmr eđa hús
lofts ok jarđar ok sólar.

How shall one _ken_ the sky? Like this, to call it Ymir's skull
and thence jötunn's skull and plight or burden of dwarfs or
helmet (or perhaps ceiling?) of the West and of the East, of the
South, of the North, land of the sun and,
of the moon and of the celestial bodies, of the wagons, and of
(the) weather, helmet(/*ceiling) or house
of (the) air and of (the) earth and of (the) sun.
[/quote:68ec4dc774]
Magdalenian KAL means Underworld, seen as a large
cave deep down in the earth. In the above passage we
have several derivatives of KAL, namely skal 'skull'
(for example a bear skull was worshiped as image
of both a cult cave and of the cosmos, Marie E.P. König),
kalla 'to call' akin to German Hall 'sound (n)' and hallen
'to sound, resound', referring to the special acustics
that was used by the Paleolithic shamans in order to
produce all kinds of amazing effects, hjalm 'helmet or
ceiling', akin to German Hülle 'cover' verhüllen 'to cover',
referring to the fact that a cave lies hidden, while ceiling
refers to the roof of a cave that was often covered with
a figurative rendering of the sky, as for example in the
case of the splendid rotunda of Lascaux.

Also the Eddas grew out of the stock of Ice Age ideas.
 
Panu...
Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 10:20 pm
 
On Sep 2, 8:35 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote:95ce0f3559]No, it remains unsolved, which means we can't
calculate the positions of the stars into all eternity,
but we can safely calculate them 100,000 years
forward and backward in time. I calculated the
shifting of Arcturus, alpha Bootis, and found the best
position for the time of Chauvet, some 30,000 years
ago, when the bright star was the head of Bootes,
on the neck (gamma Bootis), above the broad
shoulders. Bootes was a herdsman of cattle who
led a bear across the sky, Arcturus meaning bear
guard. In the Ice Age, I believe, he was the hero
ARC TYR, overcomer TYR of the bear ARC,
and his grail was Corona, cranium of the bear
filled with bear blood, raised in a sacrificial rite.
Bear skulls ware placed on 'altars' in several
caves.

On a stalactite in the rear hall of Chauvet are
painted a woman - legs and big vulva - and the
front of a bull, his head covering her womb,
showing, I believe, the supreme leader as bull
(or bull man) born again by the heavenly goddess
in the region of the Summer Triangle Deneb Vega
Atair.

In the Brunel chamber of Chauvet is an inscription
of red dots, five of them showing a domino five,
identified by one poster Holly with my PAS for
everywhere (in a plain), and a sixth dot in upper
position which I read as CA for the sky:

  O     O     O  CA
      O
  O     O  PAS

PAS CA, everywhere PAS in the sky CA, may
the bull man be reborn by the goddess in the sky
and roam the heavens in his next life as he roams
the land in this life ...

The early constellations may well have been the
'Odyssey' of the Ice Age people, showing the
adventures of their supreme leader or bull man,
for example how he fought and overcame the bear.
Parts of this 'epic' would have been performed
as dances under the open sky, in abris, or in caves,
many of which represent the sky in figurative form
(rotunda and axial gallery of Lascaux, for example).
The splendors of the heavenly vault and starry sky
would have been the first cinema. Consider that
we call a movie star a star.

A stalker admires a quality or an ability he lacks
and therefore denies, which paradox generates
the alternate current he runs on. A milder form
of envy compares my work of years to one single
pseudo-historical mini-factoid of absolutely
no interest. Again milder forms consist in pure
undiluted twenty-four carat stupidity placed in
my way.

I am still waiting for scientific arguments against
my panorama of the Ice Age mind, coherent all over,
rich in surprising detail, based on my new approach
to early language, embedded in my studies of visual
language, terra ignota for most every linguist.

I won't yield to scientific impotence - ad hominems,
verdicts dropped from a meta-level, and the killrating
campaign led by a psychopanu and his stable full
of aliasses, each one saddled and bridled with an
own Google account, allowing multiple killrating.
Instead I will go on transforming unqualified attacks
into fuel to further boost my work.

Those who consider my work a mountain range of
humbug, nonsense, absurdity, idiocy, foolishness,
mistakes and errors, quackery, faults, fallacies
and misapprehensions may simply point out the
highest peak of blunder and I will go there and climb
it. So far every crest and pinnacle proved to be solid.
[/quote:95ce0f3559]
The highest peak of blunder is the fact that you construct a language
of your own - the Magdalenian language - for which no evidence exists
outside your mind. Thus, you confuse your own fantasy with science.
 
Brian M. Scott...
Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:10 pm
 
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:42:12 +0200, Trond Engen
<trondnet at (no spam) engen.priv.no> wrote in
<news:h7jisq$9rf$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org> in sci.lang:

[quote:29ed871e20]Brian M. Scott:

On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 00:45:10 +0200, Trond Engen
trondnet at (no spam) engen.priv.no> wrote in
news:h7hjpn$l9o$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org> in sci.lang:
[/quote:29ed871e20]
[...]

[quote:29ed871e20]A guess at the etymology: IE *(s)kel- "divide, split",
with something that looks close to a formal
correspondence in Hitt. <GIS^kalmi> "piece of firewood".

That's also de Vries' suggestion, noting Lith. <kelmas
'Baumstumpf' and OPruss. <kalmus> 'Stock' as well as Gk.
skalmós> 'Ruderdolle, Pflock'. But see also below.

The s-less root is attested in Germanic, in e.g. No.
'hold' "flesh".

SAOB s.v. <hull> takes it to be from PGmc. *hulđa < PIE
*klto- < *kel- 'to strike, cut'. (Presumably that's *kltó-,
to give the *đ.) De Vries notes both possibilities. I've
not had time to look at the data in Pokorny, so at this
point I've still an open mind.

Isn't that the same root?
[/quote:29ed871e20]
Pokorny and Watkins both have separate entries for them. My
teaching schedule this term is a less than ideal, and I've
not been able to find the time to hunt much further or to
examine their data to see why the separation.

Brian
 
Trond Engen...
Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:24 am
 
Brian M. Scott:

[quote:6857e4aa0a]On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:42:12 +0200, Trond Engen
trondnet at (no spam) engen.priv.no> wrote in
news:h7jisq$9rf$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org> in sci.lang:

Brian M. Scott:

On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 00:45:10 +0200, Trond Engen
trondnet at (no spam) engen.priv.no> wrote in
news:h7hjpn$l9o$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org> in sci.lang:

A guess at the etymology: IE *(s)kel- "divide, split",
with something that looks close to a formal
correspondence in Hitt. <GIS^kalmi> "piece of firewood".

That's also de Vries' suggestion, noting Lith. <kelmas
'Baumstumpf' and OPruss. <kalmus> 'Stock' as well as Gk.
skalmós> 'Ruderdolle, Pflock'. But see also below.

The s-less root is attested in Germanic, in e.g. No.
'hold' "flesh".

SAOB s.v. <hull> takes it to be from PGmc. *hulđa < PIE
*klto- < *kel- 'to strike, cut'. (Presumably that's *kltó-,
to give the *đ.) De Vries notes both possibilities. I've
not had time to look at the data in Pokorny, so at this
point I've still an open mind.

Isn't that the same root?

Pokorny and Watkins both have separate entries for them. My
teaching schedule this term is a less than ideal, and I've
not been able to find the time to hunt much further or to
examine their data to see why the separation.
[/quote:6857e4aa0a]
Thanks. I haven't had much time myself lately. And, anyway, my question
was one of surprise, not of demand.

But now it occurs to me that just here, if the two are related, it might
be possible to catch a glimpse of a difference in meaning coming with
the s-mobile.

--
Trond Engen
 
Panu...
Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:14 am
 
On Sep 3, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote:29ff9c0833]No, it remains unsolved, which means we can't
calculate the positions of the stars into all eternity,
but we can safely calculate them 100,000 years
forward and backward in time. I calculated the
shifting of Arcturus, alpha Bootis, and found the best
position for the time of Chauvet, some 30,000 years
ago, when the bright star was the head of Bootes,
on the neck (gamma Bootis), above the broad
shoulders. Bootes was a herdsman of cattle who
led a bear across the sky, Arcturus meaning bear
guard. In the Ice Age, I believe, he was the hero
ARC TYR, overcomer TYR of the bear ARC,
and his grail was Corona, cranium of the bear
filled with bear blood, raised in a sacrificial rite.
Bear skulls ware placed on 'altars' in several
caves.

On a stalactite in the rear hall of Chauvet are
painted a woman - legs and big vulva - and the
front of a bull, his head covering her womb,
showing, I believe, the supreme leader as bull
(or bull man) born again by the heavenly goddess
in the region of the Summer Triangle Deneb Vega
Atair.

In the Brunel chamber of Chauvet is an inscription
of red dots, five of them showing a domino five,
identified by one poster Holly with my PAS for
everywhere (in a plain), and a sixth dot in upper
position which I read as CA for the sky:

  O     O     O  CA
      O
  O     O  PAS

PAS CA, everywhere PAS in the sky CA, may
the bull man be reborn by the goddess in the sky
and roam the heavens in his next life as he roams
the land in this life ...

The early constellations may well have been the
'Odyssey' of the Ice Age people, showing the
adventures of their supreme leader or bull man,
for example how he fought and overcame the bear.
Parts of this 'epic' would have been performed
as dances under the open sky, in abris, or in caves,
many of which represent the sky in figurative form
(rotunda and axial gallery of Lascaux, for example).
The splendors of the heavenly vault and starry sky
would have been the first cinema. Consider that
we call a movie star a star.

A stalker admires a quality or an ability he lacks
and therefore denies, which paradox generates
the alternate current he runs on. A milder form
of envy compares my work of years to one single
pseudo-historical mini-factoid of absolutely
no interest. Again milder forms consist in pure
undiluted twenty-four carat stupidity placed in
my way.

I am still waiting for scientific arguments against
my panorama of the Ice Age mind, coherent all over,
rich in surprising detail, based on my new approach
to early language, embedded in my studies of visual
language, terra ignota for most every linguist.

I won't yield to scientific impotence - ad hominems,
verdicts dropped from a meta-level, and the killrating
campaign led by a psychopanu and his stable full
of aliasses, each one saddled and bridled with an
own Google account, allowing multiple killrating.
Instead I will go on transforming unqualified attacks
into fuel to further boost my work.

Those who consider my work a mountain range of
humbug, nonsense, absurdity, idiocy, foolishness,
mistakes and errors, quackery, faults, fallacies
and misapprehensions may simply point out the
highest peak of blunder and I will go there and climb
it. So far every crest and pinnacle proved to be solid.

Everybody is welcome to the above game apart from
my stalker and his many aliases.
[/quote:29ff9c0833]
It is none of your business to tell people how to behave in this
group, noting that you repeatedly commit precisely what you are
accusing other people of. For instance, you comment upon threads about
matters you have no idea of, and then accuse everybody else of
persecuting you.
 
Panu...
Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:15 am
 
On Sep 2, 8:55 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote:1de59da4e2]On Aug 28, 11:06 pm, Trond Engen <trond... at (no spam) engen.priv.no> wrote:



Modern Icelandic has <karlsvagninn>; Cleasby & Vigfusson
s.v. <kona> say that <kvennavagn> as the name of a
constellation is opposed to <karlsvagn>, but I don't see any
entry for the latter.  It seems to be thought that <reiđ
Rögnis> 'Rögnir's (= Óđinn's) wain' in Völsunga saga is the
Big Dipper.

The name Rögnir is a derivative of Magdalenian
RAG meaning the line of the head and back of
an animal drawn in a cave,
[/quote:1de59da4e2]
More probably, the name Rögnir is a derivative of the plurale tantum
regin = gods, plural genitive ragna, which is found in "ragna rök",
for instance.
 
Franz Gnaedinger...
Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:14 am
 
On Sep 3, 5:00 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote:f6b8f1f85b]
IIRC the precession cycle is something like 24,000 years, because they
like to say that 12,000 years ago the North Star was Vega, which is
across the circle from Polaris.
[/quote:f6b8f1f85b]
No, 26,000 years. During the Pyramid Age
of Ancient Egypt, some 4,500 years ago,
the pole was near Thuban, alpha Draconis,
and in the time of the Chauvet cave, some
30,000 years ago, the pole was again near
Thuban. The precesssion plays no role in
the relative movement of the so-called
fixed stars against each other that counts
for the apprearance of a constellation.
I calculated the position of Arcturus,
alpha Bootis, using the numbers I have
in a book at home, not with a computer,
and I found that some 30,000 years ago
the bright star marked the head of Bootes,
or, by then, ARC TYR, he who overcomes
TYR the bear ARC ...
 
PaulJK...
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:28 am
 
Panu wrote:
[quote:a20067bbdf]On Sep 3, 4:35 pm, "PaulJK" <paul.kr... at (no spam) paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Panu wrote:
On Aug 30, 12:14 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Aug 29, 4:45 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <y... at (no spam) TheWorld.com> wrote:
[...]
Well, I must admit that the available software I have been using does
not reach further back in time than some 2000 years AD.

I just tested my free copy of Cartes du Ceil. It accepts dates from
20,000BC to 20,000AD. It, however, only calculates the positions
of planets from 3,000BC to 3,000AD.

I have never tried Cartes du Ciel, I only have Redshift 5 (now
defunct, because the CD was damaged).
[/quote:a20067bbdf]
I can only recommend Cartes du Ciel, it's the best freeware
software I've ever used. Excellent value for money :-)

The only minor problem I had with it was its slight reluctance
to accept time UTC+13. I don't think that would worry you
much over there where you are in Europe, unless you wanted
to setup a virtual observatory in the middle of Pacific.

pjk
 
Odysseus...
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:52 am
 
In article
<3196d9c9-d283-4ee6-b98f-a92853913ec4 at (no spam) y36g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

[astronomers]

[quote:74f4f4d10e]Does that mean they've finally gotten off the reference date of 1950
A.D.?
[/quote:74f4f4d10e]
AFAICT the FK5-based J2000 coordinate system has been in common use
since the 1980s. But I still refer to a few books that use the B1950
system: my old Peterson's field guide (by Menzel), the _Skalnate Pleso_
atlas, and _Burnham's Celestial Handbook_.

About a decade ago the IAU resolved to replace coordinates based on the
equinox of a reference date with something called ICRS (the
International Celestial Reference System), which is based on the
positions of several hundred extragalactic radio sources WRT the
barycentre of the solar system; earlier plans to continue using FK5,
with J2050 & seq., have apparently been cancelled.

[quote:74f4f4d10e]Have all the sky atlases been revised to reflect this?
[/quote:74f4f4d10e]
They seem to get replaced rather than revised.

--
Odysseus
 
Brian M. Scott...
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:43 am
 
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:48:00 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
<news:152becce-3fe3-4567-b27a-ca2d701b2850 at (no spam) z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang:

[...]

[quote:ab9f4131fa]Hmm. You'd think they could at least handle back to Julian Date 1,
which is a couple millennia earlier than that. (And also fairly close
to the beginning of the Mayan cycle that's about to end, no?)
[/quote:ab9f4131fa]
Not very close: the difference is almost 1600 years.

The origin of the Long Count is generally thought to be 11
August 3114 BCE (proleptic Gregorian) = 6 September 3114
(proleptic Julian) = Julian day number 584283. Some Maya
scholars put it two days later. The origin of the Julian
date is noon UT on 1 January 4713 BCE (proleptic Julian).
 
Peter T. Daniels...
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:25 pm
 
The latest issue of *Language* (which arrived today) contains a reply
by the original authors to Everett's reply.

Google groups wouldn't let me post a reply to my initial posting in
this thread.
 
Franz Gnaedinger...
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:05 pm
 
On Oct 30, 12:25 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]The latest issue of *Language* (which arrived today) contains a reply
by the original authors to Everett's reply.

Google groups wouldn't let me post a reply to my initial posting in
this thread.
[/quote]
You should know by now that you can only reply to messages
that have been posted not longer than about six weeks previously,
the oldest ones in this thread as of today from August 31 p.pm.
You didn't say very much in your first message anyway, so you
can repeat it, and make your point. Which is?
 
johnk...
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:40 am
 
On Oct 30, 3:05 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 12:25 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

The latest issue of *Language* (which arrived today) contains a reply
by the original authors to Everett's reply.

Google groups wouldn't let me post a reply to my initial posting in
this thread.

You should know by now that you can only reply to messages
that have been posted not longer than about six weeks previously,
the oldest ones in this thread as of today from August 31 p.pm.
You didn't say very much in your first message anyway, so you
can repeat it, and make your point. Which is?
[/quote]
His point was to update the linguists on this list with information on
an interesting reply made in a linguistic journal. This is what
sci.lang is good for. Since you are not a linguist of any sort and
you think usenet is a publishing house, it is no surprise that you
don't see the point. Not to mention that you're an idiot.
 
Peter T. Daniels...
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:15 am
 
On Oct 30, 7:40 am, johnk <jhobartk... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 3:05 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:

On Oct 30, 12:25 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

The latest issue of *Language* (which arrived today) contains a reply
by the original authors to Everett's reply.

Google groups wouldn't let me post a reply to my initial posting in
this thread.

You should know by now that you can only reply to messages
that have been posted not longer than about six weeks previously,
the oldest ones in this thread as of today from August 31 p.pm.
You didn't say very much in your first message anyway, so you
can repeat it, and make your point. Which is?

His point was to update the linguists on this list with information on
an interesting reply made in a linguistic journal.  This is what
sci.lang is good for.  Since you are not a linguist of any sort and
you think usenet is a publishing house, it is no surprise that you
don't see the point.  Not to mention that you're an idiot.
[/quote]
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
 
Franz Gnaedinger...
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:12 pm
 
On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
[/quote]
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary, but thank you for this anyway.
Going by apperception I never took Everett seriously,
a hype of that sort that goes against the basic
understanding of language usually eliminates itself
after a short while.
 
 
Page 8 of 11    Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:43 am