It is currently Sun 26 Oct 2014 1:47 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu 04 Apr 2013 11:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue 02 Apr 2013 12:25 pm
Posts: 22
Quote:
Yes, but has it been continuously inhabited all that time?


Yes it has up to the 19th century ad...

Quote:
If you do much historical linguistics, you soon realize that the closer the resemblances, the more likely it is you're dealing with coincidence or recent borrowing rather than more ancient connections.
But then, if you subscribe to Paleolithic Continuity Theory, then you think our entire contemporary understanding of historical language change is all bollocks anyway.


According to the official history, there should have been no contacts between the Irish and the Serbs. If we consider the Irish to be the "Celts" and the Serbs to be the "Slavs", then according to the official history they had no chance of ever meeting and influencing each other linguistically and culturally, because "Celts" disappeared from central Europe before "Slavs" arrived there. Also according to the official history "Celts" never lived in the Balkans.

And yet, Balkans has unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponymes ans hydronimes. I am talking about fields, streams, forests, lakes, mountain peaks...the things passing "Celtic" armies on their way to Greece definitely did not bother naming. There is also pile of "Celtic" words which are used in the Balkans (in Slavic languages) and in Ireland (in Gaelic) and nowhere else in non Gaelic and non Slavic world. And some of them have no root meaning in Gaelic and some of them have no root meaning in Slavic languages. How is this possible without the ancestors of the Irish once living in the Balkans? How is it possible that both "Slavic" and "Celtic" religious customs and myths and legends are so similar and not only that, but that some ancient religious traditions from Ireland can only be explained using Serbian counterparts because the actual meaning was preserved in Serbia but was lost in Ireland? And equally some Serbian traditions can only be explained using Irish counterparts because the actual meaning has been preserved in Gaelic language? How is it possible to have such overlap in the most ancient cultural layers in both nations without them at some stage living together or being the same?

The reason i postulate that this happened in Serbia is because this is where the center of metallurgy was in the ancient time and this is where the ancient Irish and Serbian legends say that the irish have departed from...

So i am not subscribing to anything, just trying to solve the above problem. To me "there is no explanation" is not an explanation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 04 Apr 2013 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun 17 Feb 2013 6:21 pm
Posts: 54
dublin wrote:
And yet, Balkans has unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponymes ans hydronimes. I am talking about fields, streams, forests, lakes, mountain peaks...

Can you give examples of such toponyms?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 04 Apr 2013 12:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri 01 Mar 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 86
dublin wrote:
Quote:
Yes, but has it been continuously inhabited all that time?

Yes it has up to the 19th century ad...

Source?

dublin wrote:
And yet, Balkans has unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponymes ans hydronimes. I am talking about fields, streams, forests, lakes, mountain peaks...the things passing "Celtic" armies on their way to Greece definitely did not bother naming. There is also pile of "Celtic" words which are used in the Balkans (in Slavic languages) and in Ireland (in Gaelic) and nowhere else in non Gaelic and non Slavic world. And some of them have no root meaning in Gaelic and some of them have no root meaning in Slavic languages. How is this possible without the ancestors of the Irish once living in the Balkans? How is it possible that both "Slavic" and "Celtic" religious customs and myths and legends are so similar and not only that, but that some ancient religious traditions from Ireland can only be explained using Serbian counterparts because the actual meaning was preserved in Serbia but was lost in Ireland? And equally some Serbian traditions can only be explained using Irish counterparts because the actual meaning has been preserved in Gaelic language? How is it possible to have such overlap in the most ancient cultural layers in both nations without them at some stage living together or being the same?

There's not an "unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponyms"; there's a very believable amount of chance resemblances. (Which are more likely than you seem to think.)

dublin wrote:
So i am not subscribing to anything, just trying to solve the above problem. To me "there is no explanation" is not an explanation.

Sometimes "there is no explanation" is the explanation. As the Irish comic Dara Ó Briain puts it, "Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale most appeals to you."

So far, though, I haven't even seen you doing that as much as rejecting established explanations (such as the etymologies of Éire, Hisar, garda, etc.) so you can replace them with ad hoc ones of your own. This kind of amateurish unsystematic approach hasn't been in vogue in scientific circles since the 18th century. It's like attempting to do archaeology on your own without the benefit of radiocarbon dating, phytolith analysis, magnometry, or any of the other innovations of the past two hundred years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 04 Apr 2013 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu 15 Sep 2011 12:06 pm
Posts: 1766
The Wikipedia article about that theory quotes this:

(Alinei's theory was again critically reviewed by Adiego Lajara (2002):[13])

Although some of Alinei's reflections on linguistic change are very interesting, it should be said that certain conceptions in his work -- such as the excessive immobility of languages or the relationship between types of language and progress in the prehistoric lithic industry -- are very debatable. Alinei's core theory -- continuity from the Palaeolithic --, runs into a serious difficulty: it obliges us to deal with words traditionally reconstructed for Indo-European, referring to notions that did not exist in the Palaeolithic as loans, when from the formal standpoint they are indistinguishable from those Alinei sees as being Indo-European in the Palaeolithic period.

_________________
Is fearr Gaeilg na Gaeltaċta ná Gaeilg ar biṫ eile
Agus is í Gaeilg Ġaoṫ Doḃair is binne
:)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Apr 2013 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue 02 Apr 2013 12:25 pm
Posts: 22
Hisar hill and the surrounding area have been continuously inhabited since 3000 bc. I don't know what kind of sources you are looking for, and i don't know of any one document that talks about it. The excavation is still going on. The iron works were only found few years ago. now they are discovering greek and roman artifacts and medieval ones as well.

This is from wikipedia site about city of Leskovac (Hisar is the old leskovac). You can see that even they have the old dating for the hisar fort, the new one is 14th century bc.

Quote:
Traces of life of the Brnjica culture (8th century BC) is seen at the Hisar Hill that was protected by a deep moat with a palisade on its inner side, a fortification similar to that of another fortification on the Gradac site in Lanište in the Velika Morava basin.[3][4] A later Iron Age settlement existed at Hisar dating from the 6th century BC until the 4th century BC.[4] Besides Greek fibulae and pottery, Triballi (Thracian) tombs have been excavated in 2005.[5] Archeological findings from the multi-layer sites indicate that the Scordisci and Triballi inhabited the Leskovac valley before the Roman conquest in the 1st century BC.[4] Famous cultural-historic monuments in this area are: the Roman necropolis in Mala Kopasnica originating from 2nd century AD, the Eastern Roman town of Justiniana Prima built in 535 AD. Slavs settled the region in the 6th century, and the town was known as Dubočica.

Leskovac City, Serbia
The Battle of Dubočica took place on September 24, 1454, between the Serbian Despotate and the invading Ottoman Empire, and ended in a Serbian victory. During Ottoman rule Leskovac was part of the Sanjak of Niš.[6]
The Jasunje monasteries dedicated to the Virgin of Transfiguration and St. John the Baptist were built in 1499 as an endowment of sister Ksenija. The Church of St. John the Baptist was built in the 16th century.
Leskovac became part of Serbia after the Treaty of Berlin in 1878, at which time Serbia also became fully independent from the Ottoman Empire. Full independence from the Ottoman Balkans initially had a negative impact on trade. However, by the end of the 19th century, the town of Leskovac was famous across the Balkans for its workshops which turned hemp into rope. Leskovac was known as Leskofça during Ottoman rule and was bounded to Niş sanjak until 1878.



Here is an article about roman and medieval artifacts found in 2004. It is in Serbian:

http://arhiva.glas-javnosti.rs/arhiva/2 ... 0302.shtml

Here they talk about finding smelting furnaces from the 14th century ad. So the same site had been used for smelting iron from 1400 bc to 1400 ad...This to me is continuity...

http://www.juznasrbija.info/?view=lat&a ... ry=drustvo

And if you have read the articles that i have posted originally about the site you would have seen this:

Quote:
There are no visible traces of corrosion on this
artefact. By a method of energetic dispersion X-fluorescent spectroscopy it is
established that the needle was made of iron with no traces of any other metals.


So not just any Iron age ironworks. The guys new how to make pure 100% iron, which is currently impossible to reproduce even in most advanced laboratories...

So you will have to trust my word on this if you want or go and google it yourself if you don't. The site has been continuously inhabited.

Quote:
There's not an "unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponyms"; there's a very believable amount of chance resemblances. (Which are more likely than you seem to think.)


How do you know? Did you study toponymes and hydronimes of the Balkans? Or are you just arrogant and dismissive? No one is attacking neither you nor anything you believe in. Science is not a religion, there is nothing to defend. It is all about truth and learning. So stop fighting, and wait until i present the toponimes and hydronimes that i am talking about and then you can analyse them yourself and make up your own mind.

Just to start, in Serbia you can find Mountain Tara and river Tara, but also mountain taor which is how you pronounce Teamhair (tavor, taor (tabor)) the actual old name of Tara in Ireland.

In Serbian tabor is a military camp. Utaboriti se is to set up camp. Taborovati is to camp. Tavoriti is standing in one place, not moving. Tabor, Tavor, Taur, Tara....

And by the way there is no clear etymology for tara or Teamhair in Gaelic....

Have fun.

Quote:
Sometimes "there is no explanation" is the explanation. As the Irish comic Dara Ó Briain puts it, "Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale most appeals to you."


I like Dara. I have been living in Dublin for 20 years now and had a chance to see him many times. And he is funny, but he is also full of himself and full of the same Sh** you are now coming out with: "Just because i don't know about it and i don't understand it it doesn't exist and particularly if its not the established truth it is double rubbish". You know nothing about what i am talking about but you are dismissing it out of hand because you know everything and if you don't then its rubbish? Not very scientific...

Quote:
So far, though, I haven't even seen you doing that as much as rejecting established explanations (such as the etymologies of Éire, Hisar, garda, etc.) so you can replace them with ad hoc ones of your own. This kind of amateurish unsystematic approach hasn't been in vogue in scientific circles since the 18th century. It's like attempting to do archaeology on your own without the benefit of radiocarbon dating, phytolith analysis, magnometry, or any of the other innovations of the past two hundred years.


Don't use big words on me. I am but a simple amateur...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Apr 2013 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue 02 Apr 2013 12:25 pm
Posts: 22
Just found this:

Quote:
The Hill of Tara lies about midway between the towns of Dunshaughlin and Navan in the gently rolling countryside of south central Meath. The monuments comprising the core of the Tara complex are scattered along a low ridge about 2km long, orientated roughly north�south, a little to the west of the main Dublin-Navan road. Unimposing from the east, which is the usual modern approach, the ground rises steadily to about 155m above sea-level before dropping away quite steeply to the west, presenting an impressive vista over the central plain of Ireland.

This aspect is implicit in one of the two etymologies of its Irish name, Teamhair, provided by the ninth-century text Sanas Chormaic, i.e. a height from which there is a fine view. An alternative, and possibly more accurate, etymology emphasises the liminal nature of Tara, suggesting that the name has something to do with twilight or darkness, perhaps a sacred space or the gates to the Otherworld. It is likely, nevertheless, that the sense of elevation at Tara, which is conferred by the surrounding panorama rather than by its actual height above sea-level, was a key factor in the choice of this place for ceremonial activity.


http://www.knowth.com/tara-survey.htm

You set up tabor (military camp) on top of hills from which you can have a good view of the surrounding countryside...So in 9th century they still remembered (vaguely) the original meaning of the word. Now however we have this mumbo jumbo light dark crap which is "possibly more accurate".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Apr 2013 4:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri 01 Mar 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 86
dublin wrote:
Here they talk about finding smelting furnaces from the 14th century ad. So the same site had been used for smelting iron from 1400 bc to 1400 ad...This to me is continuity...

This is a leap of faith on your part. Finding artifacts from two widely separated periods is no evidence of continuity. I dug a hole in my garden on Wednesday to plant a shrub. I will dig another couple of holes tonight. This does not mean that I've been digging holes in the garden continuously since Wednesday.

dublin wrote:
So not just any Iron age ironworks. The guys new how to make pure 100% iron, which is currently impossible to reproduce even in most advanced laboratories...

That's all very interesting, but it has no bearings on the points I raised.

dublin wrote:
Quote:
There's not an "unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponyms"; there's a very believable amount of chance resemblances. (Which are more likely than you seem to think.)

How do you know? Did you study toponymes and hydronimes of the Balkans? Or are you just arrogant and dismissive?

Not of the Balkans specifically, but I am a linguist and toponyms are one of my areas of interest and have been for a couple of decades now.

dublin wrote:
No one is attacking neither you nor anything you believe in. Science is not a religion, there is nothing to defend. It is all about truth and learning. So stop fighting, and wait until i present the toponimes and hydronimes that i am talking about and then you can analyse them yourself and make up your own mind.

I'm not getting defensive. I'm trying to explain to you the fundamental flaws in your methodology. If your methodology is badly flawed, it doesn't matter what data you present, your results will still be invalid. Case in point:
dublin wrote:
Just to start, in Serbia you can find Mountain Tara and river Tara, but also mountain taor which is how you pronounce Teamhair (tavor, taor (tabor)) the actual old name of Tara in Ireland.

This is exactly what I'm talking about: Comparing a contemporary Irish word with a contemporary Serbian one when you're arguing for prehistoric contact is a fundamental methodological flaw. You need to compare the earliest attested forms of each name, since the forms of names can and do change significantly over time.

Since Irish orthography is rather conservative, even the spelling itself demonstrates that you are on the wrong track: medial mh in Irish comes from earlier *m. So there's labial consonant in the stem of the name Teamhair that isn't reflected at all in the Serbian toponym. Where did it go? (Or, conversely, how did it get added?)

Moreover, this only supports the point I made earlier about chance resemblances. It isn't hard to find placenames with "Tara" around the world. There's an island in Indonesia called Batu Tara. (Batu means "stone".) There's a town called Tara (太良) on the Japanese island of Kyūshū. Does this mean that the Celts settled East and Southeast Asia as well as Western and Southern Europe?

dublin wrote:
In Serbian tabor is a military camp. Utaboriti se is to set up camp. Taborovati is to camp. Tavoriti is standing in one place, not moving. Tabor, Tavor, Taur, Tara....

Tabor is an obvious borrowing of Turkish tabur "battalion; military camp". Any etymological dictionary of Serbian (or Hungarian or Rumanian or any of the other languages which have borrowed the same word) will tell you that.

dublin wrote:
And by the way there is no clear etymology for tara or Teamhair in Gaelic....

There's a big difference between "X doesn't have a clear etymology" and "any etymology I propose for X is as good as any other". If you're really interesting in the origins of the name, I suggest you read the scholarly articles concerning it in The kingship and landscape of Tara from Four Courts Press. The leading theories are that it derives from a Proto-Indo-European root *tem- meaning "dark" or "cut" with the nominal suffix *ro-. Both of these elements are richly attested in Indo-European languages, as is deriving words in this manner.

dublin wrote:
Quote:
Sometimes "there is no explanation" is the explanation. As the Irish comic Dara Ó Briain puts it, "Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale most appeals to you."

I like Dara. I have been living in Dublin for 20 years now and had a chance to see him many times. And he is funny, but he is also full of himself and full of the same Sh** you are now coming out with: "Just because i don't know about it and i don't understand it it doesn't exist and particularly if its not the established truth it is double rubbish". You know nothing about what i am talking about but you are dismissing it out of hand because you know everything and if you don't then its rubbish? Not very scientific...

I never claimed to know everything; neither does Dara. He's actually rather modest about his achievements. All the same, he has a degree in Mathematical Physics from University College Dublin. So when it comes to science and the scientific method, it's safe to say that he generally knows what he's talking about. And I have a degree in Linguistics from the University of Chicago. So again, it's not like I'm talking out of my ass when I say that your understanding of historical linguistics is faulty.

I don't know what your background is, but let's say you're an auto mechanic with years of experience working on cars. How well would you take to someone coming into your place of work and telling you they know better than you how to repair cars, that you're going about it all wrong, and that they can repair their own with nothing more that a hammer and some aluminum foil? Would you tell them, "Golly, you must be right; my whole life's work has been a waste!" Or would you say, "Have you noticed that your car doesn't actually run? Perhaps you might want to read a book on car repair before going at it again."

I'm telling you your car doesn't run. Not because I'm "arrogant and dismissive", but because I'd really like you to learn how to fix it for real.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Apr 2013 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon 29 Aug 2011 3:36 am
Posts: 244
I think that questions about, and friendly discussions of, the etymology of Irish words is within the scope of this forum. However, the parties involved in this discussion don't agree on what the appropriate standard of evidence is for this type of linguistic research. Without agreement on that, I don't think the discussion can go anywhere but further downhill. For that reason, I am locking this thread.

If you'd like to re-open the discussion, please feel free to contact one of the moderators.

_________________
賢いふくろぐま Image
Seans Eile - free software to help you practice your Irish
Scéala na Wombait - Muddle-headed Memes and Musings


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group