I fully understand your world view: It is totally incomprehensible to you that homo sapiens were given language to interact with the Creator of speech hardware and software. And that the human language program factory-installed at Eden was spun-off by a Big Bang at Babel into 70 languages (Sanskrit, Hellenic, Quechua., the Protos...) ... which have subsequently been naturally corrupting and breaking apart.Just the opposite of current theory, the MORE languages simplify, the closer they get to the original pan-Earth language, to Edenic (best documented in Biblical Hebrew).You laugh at me, and I laugh at you. One of us will get the last laugh.
My name יצחק YiTSK[H]ahQ means "He Shall Laugh."I respect your superior knowledge of linguistics. I realize that there may be up to 30% errors in my foreign links to Edenic, because I often don't have natives fact-checking, and identifying prefixes and suffixes, etc. But with English etymology, the "Indo-European roots" people are wrong at least 90% of the time. So Edenics is a Great Leap Forward. The scholars you revere are far from stupid. I call them Semitically-challenged.
You don't see a racist angle in linguistics. You may not be a student of history. (him:)
----------Archived posts http://isaacmozeson.posterous.com/ , Edenics searches + web games: http://www.edenics.net/
There are several problems with your email.
Anybody who gets racism out of evolution is, to quote the internet, DOING IT WRONG. See here: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA005.html. I'll expand on response 7; you're making an appeal to consequences, as in you're engaging in wishful thinking. A fallacy.I envy your naivete. Jews can't afford that luxury. Also, are you aware that the Indo- part of Indo-European means something? Indians aren't white. And yet, I still accept it. This should be obvious, but evolution has nothing to do with linguistics.If you ever met people from India or glanced at their culture, you'd know that they are lilly white. This is more than the lack of African noises and lips. Your comment is skin-deep. The kind of shallowness I expect from one who publishes criticism without decades of thought. Firing cockily from the hip, because YOUR teachers have the gospel truth. It would never occur to you that the reference books and authorities you revere can be considered illiterate fools from a different cultural perspective. It seems that I know a tad more about YOUR Western mind than you know of the Torah mind.
Attacking Indo-European gets you nowhere. The sound correspondences for both consonants and vowels are well demonstrated, and let's not forget grammar, more so than your very loose eyeballing of superficial looka-like words. I accept it just like I accept Uralic, Sino-Tibetan, Trans-New Guinea, Pama-Nyungan, Algic and Austronesian because there's evidence. Your's doesn't have any. I've seen thru your pdfs and articles and related media and when it's acceptable, you try to use the proto-languages as evidence of edenics but only when convienent because otherwise they don't exist.I hope we both live to 120. We will let history decide which method is more correct. In your world, sciences are completely revamped every generation. Undoubtably, linguists of ten years hence will trash all that you now hold true. Of course you think I'm wrong, but at least my teachings and thinking have not changed in millennia.
The words you try to pass off as insane:
affidavit from Latin ad + fīdō "I swear"
confide from Latin con + fīdō "together I trust"
faith from Latin fidēs "faith, trust"
federal from latin foedus "treaty, agreement, contract, league, pact"
fidelity from Latin fidēs "faith, trust"
Just wow. ?!!
BET BeDTa[K]H Bet-Tet-Het
ROOTS: There is no IE “root” for BET. ABET is said to come from Old French beter (to harass with dogs).
To BET is to assert that one is בטח BeTa[K]H (surely, certainly) right about something. בטח BoaDTaya[K]H is the verb “ to trust” in Deuteronomy 28:52 . The noun בטח BeDTa[K]H means security in Genesis 34:25. בטוח BaDTOOa[K]H (confidence), put the dental and bilabial in CONFIDENCE and FIDELITY.
The built-in antonym of this trusting bilabial-dental root is בדה BaDAh, speaking falsely – Proverbs 12:18.
BRANCHES: Do not BET that DEBTOR and DEBIT are "from Latin de (from) + habere (to have)" rather than from עבוט [A]hBHOADT (a pledge to repay). Czech dental-bilabials (reversed) of our Edenic bilabial-dental roots of BETTING, FAITH and VETTING include duvera (confidence, trust) and duverny (confidential).
Germanic words for BET sound like that major pledge and bet we take, called a WEDDING (see “WED”). The Spanish wedding, boda, is closer to the original Bet-Tet.
There is German wetten, Dutch wedden, Danish vaedde, Norwegian vedde and Yiddish vetten. Not supposed to be related are Finnish vetoa and Indonesian bertaruh with its nonhistoric Rs.
HYPOTHECATE is from Latin hypotheca (to pledge as security). To link this term with [A]hBHOAT or GHaBHOAT
is more than HYPOTHETICALl since the Ayin to H change is documented in Genesis 31:47 SHaHaD in Aramaic and Hebrew עד [A]iD or GHaiD both mean witness. Furthermore, hals (neck in Old Norse and in Dutch RINGHALS) is fromעל [O]aL or GHoaL (collar – Genesis 27:13): and HEDONISM (Greek hedone means delight) is from עדנה [E]DNaH or GHeDNaH (delight – Genesis 18:12). ע Ayin/ GH to H shifts occur in languages as close as Anglo-Saxon, where hrǽfen and עורב [O]WRai[V] mean raven, and also occur in languages as exotic as Maidu (California Indians), where hin and עין [A]YiN mean eye.
At the same time, it is easy to hearהבטחה HaBHDTa[K]HaH (promise, assurance) in hypotheca.
BUDDY, from British butty, may mean a close friend as in a ב-ט B-DT CONFIDANTE (Rahel Sherman).
More at ”AFFIDAVIT," "FAITH," and 'VOTE."
Vote from Latin votum from Latin voveo from PIE *h₁ewegʷʰ-.
Other people have done their work and don't need your artificial problem stemming from your essentially nonexistant standards for cognates.I think you know what I think about YOUR standards. "Non-existant" would be a compliment for the guano I find in published etymologies. I imagine that you might swallow this with the blind faith of a true believer. I have seen gentiles in college classes. Curricula is dogma not to be questioned. A Torah education is defined by constant questioning.
Your abode example as a purported cognate is yet another example of your dishonesty, laziness, or incompetence (your choice).I'm not sure you want to slug it out with me in public postings. I'm a published poet, have authored 9 books, won 2 natl. awards, 2 natl. satire publications, 100s of reviews at Kirkus and PW, taught English at NYC colleges for 15 years, incl. heading a dept. ... before a heat stroke in 1997 disabled me....Again, I am OK in your culture. You can't read a phrase in mine.I admire your knowledge, and I'd like to work WITH you. It's valuable to know, for example, that tipi doesn't mean a "house" in some languages, although it seems to in the one I cite.
Upon a two minute search it turns out the Proto-Semitic is *bayt. None of your examples have that middle consonant.Yod/Y is NOT a consonant. But I would not expect a PhD in linguistics to know such "forin" stuff.
Abode as a noun is first attested as "action of waiting" from abide the verb "to wait". The sense "habitual residence" came along a couple hundred years later. The -abad of Islamabad is from common Iranian āpāta- from *peh₂- "to protect". And yet, you still use it. Five minutes of research could've told you that. The funniest part is even if you refused to accept any other conclusion other than that abode and -abad are related, it wouldn't help you in the slighest as Punjabi and Urdu are Indo-European languages just like English.Surely you know that Moslems of all races borrow Arabic. You just forgot this in your attempt to be witty.
You just tried to use languages of the same family to prove relatedness to a completely different family.Sorry, I don't accept your notion that language families have lexical as well as grammatical import. There is ONE human family. Of course there are discerned branches, but the forest has been lost for the trees. This expression sums up Yaphetic or Hellinistic "thought."I have my textbooks from graduate linguists at NYU. I see how rapidly science is moving toward me, and away from you. With much thanks to the non-racist, real scientists in genetics, anthropology, etc. Your way, the non-Semitic way of thinking, is now a joke. You are too Orthodox, too fundamentalist to grasp this...yet.
Related, build in English is from O.E. bold, the , from proto-Germancic *boþlo, t. This is why people don't respect your 'work'.How many people respect YOUR work? How many world-class linguists have endorsed YOUR work?
And are you mistaking unhappy, humorless, jealous and sniping brainiacs for "people"?
There's really no point to edenics. It's really the least of religions' problems.
Edenics is part of the Theory of Everything. Your linguistics is part of the Theory of Nothingness.
Your shallowness clearly extends to thinking that Torah is akin to Xian idiocy, instead of the opposite of it. I am serious about wanting you as a valuable ally, a friend. You have impressive knowledge that can upgrade Edenics data. Hopefully, you think that monogenesis and Proto-Earth theory is valid, and that Edenics can be improved by you into something more valuable.I'm no cleric or saint, so I might have counter-punched a bit above. But I want you to know that I consider you sacred, an invaluable holder of pieces of the puzzle that I lack. I truly would be honored if we could work together one day. Your Cousin Isaac, too many times removed
Edenics DVDs and most recent book: THE ORIGIN OF SPEECHES. Edenic (Biblical Hebrew) as the original, pre-Babel human language program see our many resources at http://www.edenics.org/ incl. videos in English, Spn., Fr. or Ger.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Clash With an Edenics-Denier
Posted by IsaacMozeson at 2:13 PM