PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
   
Posts by Linguist  

Joined: 15 May 2010 / Male ♂
Last Post: -
Threads: Total: 1 / In This Archive: 1
Posts: Total: 37 / In This Archive: 37
From: Iran
Speaks Polish?: No
Interests: Linguistics

Displayed posts: 38 / page 1 of 2
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
Linguist   
19 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

Linguist:
man : man (guy/man)

This one made me laugh, use of the word guy is rather more slang ;0)

That definition on the left, "guy", is its meaning in Kurdish: "mam" / "man" ~ "guy; fellow; uncle" ;) it is a cognate of Avestan "manu" and English "man", Dutch "man", German "mann", etc.

I stand corrected, I have no idea where I was told that it was Nordic..

"Origin: Middle English, from Old French furieus, from Latin furiōsus, from furia, fury"

Yes I too think "Old French" is correct.

By the way what is your mother tongue?
Linguist   
18 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

You seem sincere. What should guys like me do then?

I try to be. Simply stop partiality and hatred. ;)

Ermm most of them are racists.

I see. I was thinking they mainly care for your skin, hairs, or eyes and since Polish people resemble them in these ways so they would be unscathed from racism. Any ways alas for whoever that is racist.
Linguist   
18 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

How much more precise can you be than seeing the very existence of the races, and the affinity that races feel towards one's own kinds?

All due respect, these are craps! Plz give the biological evidence as you claimed. Otherwise stop nonesensical sophistry.

And they have been for millena with Plato being just one of the examples. You have heard about Plato's "Republic" haven't you.

Do you mean Plato is arguing "racial intolerance"?!

On the biological scale we are indeed one species, but as individuals we do not think on the scale of the entire human kind.

For your knowledge we all are different indeed from a biological aspect. No one would possess the same body of genes as any one else had ever did. This is what makes us look different in many ways. But we are all human beings and there are humanitarian values which are accepted worldwide. Some may prefer Democritus and some Sokrates, some follow Muhammad, some Jesus, some Moses, and some Buddha. But there is no universally accepted and admired creed according to which "racial intolerance" would be interpreted alright. I am not talking about the useless political systems of our times, I am talking about "racial intolerance" which you maintain it fanatically.

And you are a linguist?

Not professionally. I am an amateur linguist.

So tell us about that vast difference between rationalization and ethical standards

Read Kant's dissertations on ethics.

Are these standards inherent in nature and completely irrational?

If you mean ethical standards, yes they are innate stuffs as well as philosophically "rational".

How can you call people derogatory name and then pretend to be some kind of defender of cross racial relations?

Thanks for insisting on your fallacy. For your information it is a general term in use which is sometimes considered to be offensive, not always nor often. My usage could not be including its "sporadically offensive meaning" becuz I did not mean to, as opposed to your malicious misrepresentation.

Are you in grade 5 reading some 19th century novels?

I am sorry that you still do not know some stuff are ageless.

"Noble savage", huh?

Are you trying to insult primitive people by remarking the term "savage"?!

ALL human groups are perfectly capable of committing acts that are considered unethical by other groups.

lol, it is amusing how you run forward (likely unintentionally). Did I say primitives are infallible?! You asked whether ethics is ingrained with humans nature or not and I exemplified these purely natural men and their obvious point of view abt ethicality.

Still, is it ethical for them to kill baby seals? The whole world protests when they do so.

lol, you are unbelievable. Nature is able to sustain a natural food circle (one eats the other and another its it and so on). Not the early men nor the primitives have ever caused something noticeably wrong within this circle. It is us-the so-called modern men who seriously jeopardize this planet. It was the civilized European hunters taking prideful photographs while standing next to the "Mounds of Buffalo-skulls", not the native Americans. By the way you hinted since some Eskimos hunt some baby seals, then the whole ethicality within the entire primitive creeds on this planet would be nothing?! Thanks again for your faithfulness to fallacy.

If need be we kill them, and they kill us. The "need" can be any need as defined by the perpetrator of the aggression.

Makes sense! (sick!)

The Nazis justified murder and they called it the law. Jews justified murder and they called it the Bible.

Do you really think these rush lines of examples would refute morality and thereby confrim your unsound idea of "racial intolerance"?!

Yes, the American and British war crimes are easily justified and accepted by their respective populations.

Wrong. Many celebrities (Noam Chomsky, S. Kubrick) never ever admitted any craps justifying unfair wars. And I think most Britons as well as Americans are already against war. Obama (true or false) polled becuz of his motto of changing the ongoing belligerency.

The same withing the muslim world within the framework of their own approaches, which certainly are in opposition to those of the US and UK.

It still has nothing to do with approving the "refutal of morality" and subsequently the "confirmation of racial intolerance", in your eyes.

So tell me, who is moral here?

Ok suppose I told you none. So could that mean "morality" is wrong?! Lets make another supposition, one day you get up and find all men on the earth claiming 2+2=3 for their own irrational reasons, so could you believe that 2+2=4 is wrong even though science has already confirmed it?! Utilize your gray cells man! "Rightness" is not up to its pretending followers, even if all men turned into wrong ones, Rightness still would be Rightness.

As someone said, fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.

As someone [God knows who] said, fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity [therefore there could not be any real "fight for peace" at all] ... after this therefore becuz of this....

the US did not give one bit about Poland and in fact sold Poland out to the USSR in Yalta.

As a fallacious arguer I knew you are going to say that. Werent the bulk of your resistance forces clustered in the UK? Are you denying that US saved the UK and afterwards all of you?! Yes they first rescue you from the Nazi occupation and racisim, then-for presently obscure reasons, entrusted you to Communism. Throughout the Communist rule you had your own country but probably under an unsavory government, nevertheless the Communist party members were indeed Polish natives. Anyways Communists didnt kill you becuz of your nose, or your non-German genes, etc. Your army just lost your home in a few months (or maybe only 30 days I am not sure) but US aids, thru Bolsheviks, saved you forever.

The help the USSR received from the US amounted to about 5% of the Soviet costs.

Who told you that accurate and odd percentage? I dont know the real amount of US aids for Soviets, at the present time, but one thing is obvious for me as an Iranian: our country got no nationwide railway until 1943 when Uncle Sam's financial sources finished it as soon as possible. A great railyway from the hot shores of Persian gulf all the way to the green Caspian coasts. And you know what for they constructed it? To convey the huge amounts of aids to Russia, whilst Nazis were approaching Caucasian mountains and had the main part of the green Europe as an oyster for themselves. It is a fact that without Uncle Sam the eastern frontier would end up a "Slaughterhouse of Communists", where Nazis would be measuring Russian noses to make sure whether they could live in their Utopian society or merit death. Have not you ever heeded this fact that Nazis started off continous retreats on both frontiers as soon as Americans joined the war?! Anyways it is an off-topic stuff and got nothing to do with the fact that no freaks on this planet should be intolerant towards the others.

It could be argued that Poles fighting in Poland during WW2 contributed more to the war effort than Americans ever did.

Are you that much partial?

When you consider then number of Poles fighting on the Western front then those 5% of American cash pales in comparison to Polish input towards the liberation of others.

Ok I will tell them that in accordance with your account it was Poland which liberated the Europe not America!! But I am afraid according to this statement of yours US once, at the same time, sells out Poland. Maybe Polish fighters just freed every where but Poland (such forgetfuls!) and it is why US could librate there and sell you out!

the US ... in fact sold Poland out to the USSR in Yalta.

Just thought you might want to know.

Ok forget abt it at all. The people you feel partial for are undoubtedly the only "Libertador" in the Europe. But would it still give the pretext to hate the others becuz of their race?!

I don't think humans are any more special in the universe than any other creatures.

Then whatever you think is a fact and could concern every body. Another sincere confession of course! Now I am getting the best impression I could ever conceive of you.

David Hume and Immanuel Kant would be a start.

Immanuel Kant cosiders "racial intolerance" as a moral matter?! For your knowledge the basis of such a bestial idea of racial intolerance is one's essentially better entity in comparison to the others. As I told you before according to Kant's ethicality it is the "good will" which is the only essentially "good" stuff within the cosmos, not a race nor a nation! Why are you making mock of yourself?!

heavens indeed. Look for proof in the old testament. Heck, there is some in the NT too.

But I am afraid you are resorting to your believe in a book, to justify your hatred towards Jews, whilst the book itself is brought about by a Jew-who is a universal pragaon of tenderness! Very rational.

In conclusion, you need to read more, study more and get some facts straight.

What a groundless conclusion based on irrelevant and absurd accounts, narrations, or freaky personal views.

For now you have very little material to form half decent arguments.

Let me guess, and it means "racial intolerance" is rational.

Unless you consider propaganda posters and motivational speeches actual knowledge.

For sure I do not care propagandistic craps. For instance stuffs like these are of course nothing to heed:

It could be argued that Poles fighting in Poland during WW2 contributed more to the war effort than Americans ever did.

If you are literally an intolerant person towards any people becuz of their race or religion or stuffs like that, so I am sorry for you in the heartiest way possible. On one hand you seem to detest the undergoing circumstances in the world and you feel that they are not right and fair, but on the other hand, instead of holding the right idea and trying to amend the world, you just sincerely devote yourself to exacerbate it in the worst way. :(
Linguist   
18 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

You are quoting Eva Hoffman not me

I adress you since you do have resort to her.

We haven't gotten to the religious aspect yet.

Sure we have. Your cited text directly involves both Judaism and Christianity. Particularly it stresses Judaic instructions as the probable "casus belli"!

you tell us all about the Judaic prejudice toward Christianity and Christians.

lol, there aint no such a thing at all. Judaism antedates Christianity. I also do not argue the divinity of Christianity ever. To me Christianity is an Abrahamic religion and extremely respectable. But some people among the ecclesiastical echelon had been spiteful towards Jews and certainly it is all their own personal culpa not, God forbid, pertaining to the Christianity in any ways! But you do denounce Judaism just becuz of some rumored accounts.

There is no thought control in EU yet

Oh hell yes there is. Do not make me split hairs. Is not there any restrictions curbing Nazis?! Maybe I should add the discriminational prohibitions towards some Islamic instructions and customs over Belgium, France, and Switzerland. Let me guess, perhaps your personal role models are the fellow Belgian, French, or Swiss legislators?!

but I'm glad you have the prescribed and correct thoughts and opinions.

I wish I could be glad in the same way about yours.

So, a phrase like "Polish anti-semitism" would be racist, right?

No need to the preceding terms like "Polish" etc. "Anti-semitism" is indisputably a kind of "racism".

Once again. Do you not agree with Ms. Hoffman that Jews were also prejudiced toward Poles and Christians?

Leave this very revered ma'am alone with her ideas in the middle of nowhere. Plz give me a tangible example of Polish Jews loathing Polish Christians unanimously ever.

Contrary to your probably initial presumptions, I am not Jewish. I am Muslim and according to my religous instructions and my personal perception colors, races, tribes, families, ancestors, languages, and even all monotheist creeds do not make any difference at all. But it is our "submission to the divine providence" as well as our "goodness" which make us more or less preferable before the Lord. I dont know what ever for you have found such sentiments towards another people, but be sure there is nothing wrong with Jews. Only if you were immoral athiests their adherent faith in monotheism throughout the history would be wrong indeed! Do the white Bambinos or the blonde Jesus depictions on the cross delude you and make you forget that he was from Nazareth and surely a Jewish by blood?! Are you gonna claim that it was also Jesus' fault that Romans crussified him, why not? Since he was a Jew too!!!

I just hope guys like you would comprise an insignificant minority within the Polish society!
Linguist   
18 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

We do know, however, that Jews had their ... strictly guarding certain business practices and "secrets" from non-Jews

For God sakes the European ecclesiastical system was given to denounce and prosecute the entire body of Jews on behalf Jesus Christ regarding to his crcuifixion! Shall we take it for granted moreover?!

became more rigorously observant.

What is wrong with that? It puts the freedom of belief under a groundless question mark.

I wonder Poland is a member of European Union, but some Polish opinions dont appear to be in unison with EU beliefs (it was the best description I could give for the obvious "racist" ideas fallaciously generalizing intolerance toward a specific people on account of unsavory behaviors of some of them).

... and that, much as they may be the targets of prejudice, they are not themselves immune to it.

It uses the verb "may". Here and overall throughout the history we have observed significant animosities towards Jews. But I have never ever heard of or seen any accounts on Jews loathing Polish people or whatever.

You, as Poles, should take care of every single hint of intolerance within your society towards other people.

What an unfortunateness. :(

they are the chosen folk.. lol

Sounds like jealous! lol, kidding ;)
Linguist   
18 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

I am 56 year old Polish-American man, I use any term I wish, and am proud to be a Polack.

Sure thing you could be whatever you wish, but I am afraid whether you got the right to tag such a term as "Polack" on the other Polish individuals or not? Anyways forget about it.

Species and races.

Are you jesting? Plz give a more precise indication that wherein the biology affirms "racial intolerance among human beings as a biological base".

Molestation is not necessary for reproduction. Defending one's offspring is.

Aha, so now you twist it as a matter of "reproduction" and fruitfulness. Then according to your book "racial intolerance" is what people need to ensure the existence of their progenies? What an incredible idea. I wonder how many people over there, God forbid, contemplate like you!

Rationality is a social concept. Not biological one.

Is it supposed to mean rationality fails?

On social levels, as I said before, anything can be rationalized

It is of no importance if people attempt to rationalize, it matters how much their justifications would match with the ethical standards. All your mentioned states have done, or still do, irrational things. This is why people exemplify them. We got humanitarian values which benefit a worldwide acceptance and admiration. Your areguments are entirely against these valuse and unbelievably in order to moralize your unjustifiable intolerance idea you resort to some behaviors of a few countries which are already the unquestionable exemplars of immorality as well as unjustness themselves.

ethics, rationality and morality is but an illusion, a temporary creation

Well we do not discuss what is moral and what is immoral. Germans did not justify their actions by referring as "moral" to them, they simply acknowledged that they are "racist". British prime minister, Churchill, once declares that "we (British government) should use chemical weapons against those people who do not accept our viewpoints". Thereby the first air raid by chemical weapons took place, if I am correct, in 1920s against both civilian and militant Iraqi individuals in the history. As you see they all admit their bestiality nevertheless humanitarian values refutes it by all means. The same thing is held for racial intolerance as well.

Our nature has zero to do with morality.

Then you gotta take a glance at the so-called primitive people such as american natives or eskimos whom proverbs and native anecdotes are teemed with ethical points, and for sure they could be speculated as the closest people to the human nature. Morality is the fruit of mankind evolution. It is ridiculous that I have to relate such a sentence for you.

You are certainly free to agree with one of thousands of philosophers

Well it, same as most of your sayings, is a fallacious sentence. You couldnt underestimate Einestein's opinions just by referring to him as "one of thousands of scientists" neither you could disregard Imannuel Kant's ethical viewpoints just like that. Since personages such as them are among the best ones in their related fields, if not the best ones!

and I see you tend to lean towards those with anthropocentric views.

If there was no "anthropocentrism" or "ethical compulsion" so there would be no "fight for mankind freedom" and of course thereafter a Polish guy like you might even not had the faintest hint on this earthy planet by now becuz without any "moral necessity to fight for freedom", American tax payers and lawmakers would never ever take it for granted to help you directly (with your resistance forces) or indirectly (via aiding Soviets) during the WWII, which caused the salvation of your backs for the rest of the history.

I don't think humans are any more special in the universe than any other creatures.

A sincere confession. Now I can conceive a better impression of you in my mind.

sometimes intolerance can be defined as moral.

I see. So would you plz indicate that which philosopher has asseverated "racial intolerance" in his ethics? Or maybe it is in accordance with your own devised ethicality, if so then I think you are gonna need to refute those principles of Kant in a scientific manner first. "Sometime intolerance can be defined as moral" what the ... heavens!
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

This statement contradicts basic biology.

Where the heavens has biology confrimed "racial intolerance" as a base?!

A mountain of examples can be added.

I could give you the same amount of examples pertaining to molestation. As well as an already attested biological fact asserting copulation as a human necessity. So could I rationalize molestation in the same way that you do in favor of intolerance?!

What's wrong with asking questions?

No one says any thing's wrong with asking questions. Also there is no need to explain what is wrong with this question:

Are there no reasons for anti-semitism withing the Jews themselves? None?

The rationality is really pretty simple. The stronger sets the rules and the victors are not judged.

So you accepted that kind of so-called rationality as a pretty simple one. But I am afraid on the other hand you exemplify Israeli occupation, therefore you acknowledge that your supposed "judgement" could hold the same conception as that of "occupation". Yes I agree this time. Both racial intolerance and occupation are odious subjects. And for your knowledge they both are not reasonable and cannot hold any rationality due to their irrational substances.

Unfortunately, I have a feeling that you are trying to mix in morality/ethics into the mix.

Our nature is ingrained with morality. Not a single action or inaction of us should be immoral indeed. Afterwards it includes issues pertaining to intolerance too.

And that's where everybody is right and everybody is wrong.

Immanuel Kant, as a paragon of ethicality, declares that "good will" is the only thing within the entire universe which is "unquestionably good". So I disagree, ethics is not where everbody would be found both right and wrong at the same time or anything like that.

Morality is relative.

Is it supposed to sell intolerance as a moral stuff?

Polacks pissed

To my knowledge "Polack" got an offensive meaning in English. So plz do not use it when you write in English.

You do not have the power or organizational capability...It takes money, BIG money to have a revolution...

I do not think so. People in Iran achieved an Islamic revolution in 1979 with no significant sources of money while facing the monetary giants as sworn opponents before theirselves. Anyways they, Poles, could still hate the royal families instead of privileged classes, couldnt they?!

Look at Bolsheviks...Baby, big money behind them

Bolsheviks triumphed in 1917 with a "big money behind them"?! But as far as I know they were mostly ordinary communists fanatically loathing the rich as well as bourgeois (both as the major possessors of money within every society). Then where from this "big money" got allotted "behind them"?!
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

We all are intolerant in one form or another.

Sounds like an idea of compulsory fatality. Contrary to your opinion I firmly believe that human beings are by no means doomed to be intolerant in any ways.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with Poles in the UK.

So why did you ask me to observe their position in the UK?!

I see no need to correct it. The question stands.

I hope you would alter your mind.

It all depends on the context and just to illustrate it with an example: a thief gets jail time. Is the thief persecuted by the judge?

Let me see according to this context on one side there is "a thief getting convicted by a judge's suggestion, therefore would the judge be a persecutor?". And on the other hand there is "you suggesting to detect the cause of hatred within the hated people, therefore would you be a persecutor?". Then you are supposed to be the "judge" and the people who endure discrimination are the fellow "convict" and expectedly you should not be speculated as a "persecutor" at all. What an impressive rationality of course!
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

Any sense of unfairness, real or perceived, will cause some form of hatred

It still doesnt justify racial intolerance, does it?

Just look at the the Poles in UK.

What is wrong with Polish immigrants in the UK?

As opposed to answers, I thought questions can hardly be incorrect.

For your information "rhetorical questions" could be gonna need correction in case of incorrectness. Like "are women equal to men? Are they?! or "are not all your girls cheap easy-pierced sluts?!"
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

Poland didn't have kings since it was partitioned and even before that for many centuries kings were elected and had little power.

I was given to assume there was a royal government until 1939. Well I had no idea that Polish people lost their independence by 1795 and it was no sooner than 1918 that a republican government began to rule over there.
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

While other European countries hunted, killed and/or expelled Jews Poland gave them all kinds of rights.

No one is gonna reject the unjust essence of some social phenomenons in the medieval Europe. But I still wonder if these priviliges could cause hatred toward any groups, so why did not Polish people find abhorance about kingships that were allegedly given to privilige particular classes during their sovereign? Since to my knowledge Poles did not get ride of royalism until it was once and for always overthrown by the Nazi German. Please correct if I am wrong. By the way you still didnt correct your last question. :(

Germans, Armenians, Tatars, Cossacks and other nationalities had "extraordinary priviliges

That is it all about.
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

Honestly your last line made me come to think that you might be trying to convey some unsavory feelings about them by stressing "extraordinary priviliges". Anyways I hope you would correct your previous question as well.
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

There's barely 15.000 Jews in Poland

I did a lil search and I hunted up that by late 2006 some 25,000 Jews were over there in Poland. Anyways it is not lonlily a matter of Jews. You, as Poles, should take care of every single hint of intolerance within your society towards other people. And of course in a more general aspect it is not only you who are ethically obliged to do so, but the entire human societies are respectively responsible too.

Jews were granted extraordinary privileges a few decades before that, by Boleslaus the Pious.

Let me make an example. Suppose I am an owner of a swell hotel in your twon and one day your mayor comes to me and privileges me however my new extra-rights would seem unfair and aggravating to you. So which one of us you should loathe due to this aggravation?

Are there no reasons for anti-semitism withing the Jews themselves? None?

Maybe you should tell us?

is on the other bloody hemisphere.

Sorry I know it is splitting hair but are not they both on the same-Northern bloody hemisphere?

Yeah i get a negative boner

Well dont you get so! :) We should know how to deal with different situations and bad circumstances should not lead us into worse things. ;)

Because i got into discussions, i care when it influences me or Poland and thats that.

I think every one appreciates your feelings and worries about your home. I assure you reality is never ever to be distorted or concealed. Ceratinly the bulk of Polish people hold such feelings towards the others, as beautiful as their extra-beautiful country. :)
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

I agree. There is no plausible pretexts to hold animosity towards a specific folk. That is to say no action or inaction from any individuals, including Casmir the Great for instance, must result into such ill-feelings about a group of people.

I'm starting to think Polonius is Yehudis or Maregeas alt hell bent on creating fuss on these forums.

I am afraid but this, as you remarked, squable is, in accordance with history and the ongoing circumstances on the earth, one of the hugest issues in mankind's bygone causing many disgracful historical events so far.
Linguist   
17 May 2010
History / Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]

Jew boiled in oil (one of the penalties the Jewish court could impose)

Even an obvious indication such as "an eye for an eye" was already interpreted as "a fine that must be paid off for the sake of an eye inujry compensation", amongst Rabbinical community a couple of centuries before diaspora-and subsequently any presence of Jews within Poland. So I can assure you "getting boiled in the oil" is not something one could ever use as an instrument to brand Jews.
Linguist   
17 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

Just to give an example how dangerous it is to give a literal translation for a figurative term ... ;).

It seems to be your intrinsic orientation to take it that way.

But ... now the monkey comes out of the sleeve, I think that some Dutch are really making a pot out of it ;)

If an individual Kurd loved Dutch, then some Dutch would be going to make a pot out of it?! lol, you mean after this therefore because of this? ;)

Some Etymological Similarities between Kurdish and Dutch:

Kurdish : Dutch : English
berza : berg (heights/mountain)
hend : einde (end)
adan : eten (edibles/to eat)
der : deur (door)
dep : diep (deep)
ez : ik (I)
ene : in (in)
jar : jaar (period/year)
mang : maan (moon)
man : man (guy/man)
min : mijn (my)
ro : rood (red)
dan : tand (tooth)
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

I see. So it has wandered this way from Latin to English : Latin > French > Dutch > English. Certainly you wouldnt use a Russian dictionary. :) I love your language (probably that Polish linguist would come again while shouting "it is funny people who dont know any Dutch, love this language!" ;)
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

Just a departure note here, it's funny how those who claim English is such a 'cool' language, usually don't know how to speak or understand it correctly)))

Do you have any materials on this stuff? Or it is just your "personal perception"? By the way I didnt claim my English is perfect. I find it, English, cool "personally". I dont think to express a personal opinion would be funnier than "claiming to be a Polish linguist but denying etymological likeness between Polish "znac" and Kurdish "zanin" at the same time. ;)

You're Taurean? I see, I' Capricorn born in the Chinese year of the Ram. My ex-wife would use my Chinese propensities very often but that's for an adult oriented website. LOL

What is Taurean?

I see. Well therefore we are astrologically compatible, lol. I am a Tiger Taurus. Taurean is referred to a Taurus born person. May I know what was your ex-wife's sign?

?? See above description. Got that from a Dutch etymologic dictionary.

Sorry I have no idea about Ariosto's Orlando Furioso, so what does it have to do with a Dutch?
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

Es war eine lustige Anekdote, Lyzko. I think here every one is aware of etymological and non-etymological similarities now. ;)
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Language / Does anybody know of a list of Polish-English False Friends and True Friends? [60]

lol are you kidding me bro? There is difference for sure. In origination of scaling "billion" is something and in its modern American concept it is something else. As you mentioned scaling itself is originated from somewhere else but America. Nonetheless that using "billion" instead of "milliard" is originated from America. This is the difference, however they both regard scaling overally.
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Language / Does anybody know of a list of Polish-English False Friends and True Friends? [60]

Ok now I get you. You got me misunderstandingly. I wrote this:

"It is an American, to my knowledge, phenomenon in which "milliard" gave way to "billion". But its true and logical concept is still remained in British English as well as in the other languages."

I didn't talk abt the origin of scaling, but only abt the phenomenon in which "milliard" gives way to "billion". And for sure it is an American phenomenon which is logically and historically not true, but apparently accepted, according to my given source, amongst scientists.
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Language / Does anybody know of a list of Polish-English False Friends and True Friends? [60]

It is an American, to my knowledge, phenomenon in which "milliard" gave way to "billion". But its true and logical concept is still remained in British English as well as in the other languages. A "billion" got twice zeros compared to that of a "million" and "trillion" got three times as many zeros as a "million". By the way "bi-" means "two" and "tri-" means "three".
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Language / Does anybody know of a list of Polish-English False Friends and True Friends? [60]

I am afraid but the story of "false-friends" and "tru-friends" might not encompass those words which are already "loans" from a tertiary language. That is to say Polish "hazard" ~ "gambling" and English "hazard", are both of an Arabic origin (Arabic "az-zahr" ~ "to die") which have adopted new semantic concepts. The same thing also occurs for English "lunatic" and Polish "lunatyk" (sleepwalker) where they both are originally borrowed from Latin "lunaticus" (moon-struick).

I am not sure but Polish "gnat" (bone) and English "gnat" could be considered as sorts of false-friend. Or Dutch "die" (that) and English "die".

However in a pure "false-friends" instance both words would carry outward as well as semantic similarities but no etymologies in common. For example English "bad" and Persian "bad" both convey the same meaning and exactly resemble each other but are by no means derived from the same root. Or Kurdish "neq" and English "neck" both besides their similar definitions look like each other too, but are not etymological cognates.
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

I see. I thank Thee. ;)

Any time pal. :)

Since you're a linguist I have to vent. I've never liked the Romance, Germanic and Slavic categories, who came up with those terms anyway?

I wish it was more like Roman, Teutonic and Polyniesque languages... ...or something similar. Slavic sounds so subservient to me.

Well I am not exactly a linguist it is not my profession of course. But I do love linguistics rabidly. And, as a Taurean, I often grasp whatever I literally love.

Unluckily I don’t know who exactly came up with those terms for the first time. But one thing is for sure, they are the only terms in effect. For instance you cannot refer to German, English, or Danish, as any thing outside of "Germanic language". I agree sometimes some terms are not appropriate nevertheless they benefit from a general acceptance amongst Linguists.

Ok, I feel better now. lol

;)
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

Amathyst:
I noticed this when I visited terror haza in Budapest...Languages have cross overs. Furious is a Nordic word..but we use it daily in the English language ;0)

Furious is a Nordic word? Really?

"Furious" is exactly a loanword of Latin origin via Old Frisian (?) or Old French (?). I couldnt get it properly because in the "Online Etymology Dictionary" it is accounted under the entry "furious":

"late 14c., from O.Fr. furieus, from L. furiosus "full of rage, mad," from furia "rage, passion, fury." Furioso, from the It. form of the word, was used in Eng. 17c.-18c. for "an enraged person," probably from Ariosto's "Orlando Furioso.""

But if I am not gonna be mistaken, I think "Old French" is correct. It is a loan via Old French.
Linguist   
16 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

@ Amathyst
I see. Yes you are right. Although I think Scandinavian or German influences are easier to bear with since these languages are in a pretty closer connection with English already. But French and totally Romance (Latin, Spanish, French, etc) borrowings take English a little bit far from its original spot. If I am not mistaken the first fella who attempted to purify English suggested the below sentence instead of the very well-known "to be or not to be, this is the question":

To be or not to be, this is the ask-thing

Anyways English is already an all cool language. :)

That's because one and the same tribe settled down in these regions in the past, and ofcourse their language evolved over time. I guess that's what I mean with real similarities and coincedental similarities.

I know. Well yes for sure Germanic languages share more similarities with each other than what would they do with Romance or Slavic or Iranian languages. The same thing happens for Slavic languages too. But as a linguistically confirmed fact, Iranian and Slavic languages share some unique similarities which bring them into a particular connection, not attested amongst other groups. For example P.I.E "k" changes into "s" in both Iranian and Slavic languages and in Germanic it becomes "h", whilst Romance languages keep it unchanged and Armenian retains it as "sh". You can see the above fact if you take a brief look at the word "dog" in the mentioned languages:

P.I.E : kwon*

Iranian and Slavic "k > s"
Iranian: spe (Kurdish) < spaka < svaka* < sva(n)ak* < kwon
Slavic: suka (Polish) < swaka* < svaka* < sva(n)ak* < kwon

Germanic "k > h"
Germanic: Hund (German) < khund* < khwan* < kwon

Romance "k > c"
Romance: canis (Latin) < kwan-is* < kwon*

Armenian "k > sh"
Armenian: shun < chun* < kun* < kwon*

May be Polish "suka" and Kurdish "spe" / "spek" would not appear very similar in an ordinary guys eyes but for someone with an eye for Linguistics they are pretty similar.

Well, I think a lot of your examples seemed to be coincedental similarities. Some aren't though!

I am sorry that I have to express so, but in this case what you or me think do not matter ever. The above given examples (An Etymological Similitude) are resulted from the immense labor of linguists throughout history and are scientifically proved. They all do share the same root and are by no means to be speculated of any coincidental likeness at all. Brother, I am not making up my lists you can personally go after the Polish words and hunt up their Proto Indo European roots one by one.

I can do magic (wordplay.) with words if I really want to. I love language. (I used to write funny punchlines and poetry a lot, but somehow I've lost my inspiration.)

I see. Yea I do love to immerse myself into a sea of words too. However the inspiration of mine comes to me sporadically and I do compose some really amateur poems in Kurdish and Persian once in a blue moon.

Look at the world map. Slavic territory. Turkish territory. Slavic languages share a lot of similarities, and some Slavic tribes encountered the Ottomans. (There are probably better examples, but I can't help but to think of Vlad the impaler!)

Yes I am aware the confrontation of Slavic and Turkic tribes in the history. But if you told me Bulgarian, Serbian, Croatian, or even Ukrainian and Russian got Turkish loans, I wouldn’t get astonished becuz these nations have been in close contact with Turks as well as they have gone thru a period of Turkish rule somehow. But to my little knowledge Polish people never ever been under any Turkish rule and it was really amazing to hear of Turkish loans in Polish. Maybe they are military terms or I don’t know maybe you have got them via other Slavic languages. Anyways I have the vaguest idea about it.

@ Asik

Well revered "Asik", thanks for your remarks. But I aint gonna respond your comments on "An Etymological Similitude" one by one, since they are merely your personal views and utterly against the scientifically proven linguistic facts, and therefore they are of no authenticity and importance.

Here my point is to stress on the "unique" and "scientific" similarities between Kurdish (as an Iranian) and Polish (as a Slavic language).

One little example I would prefer to make, you wrote:
"wiz : wiaz : wingʰ* (elm) - nothing here! wiąz doesn't look or sound like wiz"

Regardless of the fact that even a 10 year old kid could recognize the apparent similarity between "wiz" and "wiąz"; the worthy of mention linguistic point is that both Kurdish (Iranian) and Polish (Slavic) languages develop original "g" into "z". Whilst no other linguistic group, outside of either Iranian or Slavic, represents such a shift at all.

You also stated: "but we all are connected with the rest of the earth's population, simply because we are humans and as humans we all are able to speak !"

I didn’t deny our global connection neither I claimed we are not humans nor I talked a single word about our ability to speak! I just simply tried to say we, somehow, speak alike. I don’t know what ever for but some people over here seem really spoiling for causeless infuriation and starting off prejudice, unfortunately.

I am not here to claim any thing but simply linguistic facts. And my mentioned similarities are not and could not be demeaning you or your national entity or any thing like that once in a thousand years! Nonetheless people around our round world often welcome such topics specially when they, the topics, are impartially accurate and sincere.
Linguist   
15 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

First I noticed exclusive similarities between Kurdish and Russian. From then on I recognized that almost all Slavic languages, including Polish, share some unique likenesses with Kurdish (and Iranian languages) too.

To me it is interesting to see how come after at least three milleniums still languages such as Kurdish and Polish got something in common. Regarding to the fact that the speakers of these two language never ever been in a close contact during the last three milleniums! I also got a very beloved friend who's from Poland and her presence in our local forum motivated me to have a virtual journey over a Polish forum in return. :)
Linguist   
15 May 2010
Off-Topic / Some Kurdish and Polish Similarities [53]

Thanks for your comment STFU. But all due respect I am afraid none of the words mentioned under the post "An Etymological Similitude" are coincidentally similar.

However for example Kurdish "nav" and Polish "nazwa" are most likely similar in an accidental manner.

Thanks by the way, language is all I got :wink:

I noticed this when I visited terror haza in Budapest...Languages have cross overs. Furious is a Nordic word..but we use it daily in the English language ;0)

Yes. Also "sky" or "Tuesday" are non-English loans of Scandinavian origin. But these instances dont halt us from the fact that English "house", German "Haus", and Dutch "huis" are etymologically similar and no one has borrowed it from the others. :)