Re: Educating Language Gifted Students Questions

izzy wrote:
>>> Type 1 idioms ... are simply the [English]-ification
>>> [via transliteration] of foreign phrases. ...
>
>> Yes, yes. But you do have to put forward some evidence that this
>> might have happened. Not to mention 'when' and 'how'.
>
>>> Type 2 idioms are simply the literal translation into [English] of
>>> idioms that already exist in another language.
>
>> But you have to provide evidence that that might have happened.
>
> One should not insist that the etymology of an idiom be proven
> more precisely or accurately than the etymology of words and
> phrases that are not idioms.

I try to be precise or accurate in my use of words: I wrote "might have
happened". This is what you have not demonstrated.

> For most of the lexicon, the when and how cannot be precisely
> known. Dictionary etymologies, including those in the OED,
> range from "educated guesses" to near certainty. At the near
> certainty end of the spectrum I would place the names of recently
> discovered elements. However, see "getting one's bearings =>
> Gallium < Lecoq or Gallia (France) ? " at this URL:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/ABOUT-WORDS/2003-02/1045505446

I think we can safely say that both meanings were in Lecoq's mind - there is
no way of determining which was uppermost. Wasn't the cockerel used as a
symbol by the Third Republic? I don't believe your "bearings" story :-)

> Nonetheless, the phonetic aspect of tracing idioms to their
> source is sometimes easier than tracing other words to
> their source because idioms tend to have more syllables.

I have a feeling that this bizarre statement may come back to haunt you :-)

>> And taking words from Late Latin that have Greek roots is a
>> standard mechanism.
>
> Yes. I would call that a standard pattern or customary path.
> This type of pattern also occurs in idioms. The numbers are
> not as large because the ratio of idioms to regular words is
> very small. But here are some examples:
>
> The "beans" in "spill the beans" and "(he doesn't know) beans
> about ..." both seem cognate with Hebrew BiNaH = meaning,
> understanding, wisdom. To "spill" is to tell, as in Yiddish spiel,
> from Hebrew samekh-peh-resh SaPeR = to tell.

I very much doubt that "spiel" comes from Hebrew. Do remember what Yiddish
actually is.

> The "dogs" in "raining cats and dogs" and "(his life) went to the
> dogs" both seem cognate with Hebrew shin-kuf-aiyin SH'Ki3a
> = "to descend" at a time when the shin had a dental sound and
> the 3 = aiyin had a G-sound as in 3aZa = Gaza. Compare OE
> docga = dog.
>
> The "bag" in "let the cat out of the bag" and "(he was) left holding
> the bag" both seem cognate with Hebrew bet-gimel-dalet BaGaD
> = to betray. To let the cat out of the bag is to betray the truth, or
> betray (someone) by telling the truth. An Aramaic term for truth is
> KiSHoT. Giving the shin its ancient dental sound produces KiToT
> or "cat out". The poor soul who was left holding the bag was the
> only one betrayed. Everyone else got away.

Again, you have to demonstrate that the expressions actually originated in a
culture with a knowledge of Hebrew or Aramaic (or even Yiddish).

>> Precisely how many languages were targetted by Hebrew?
>> Just out of interest, how many English expressions have come
>> from Aramaic?
>
> I don't think any language was a "target" of Hebrew, but many
> languages have been affected by it because the Old Testament
> was written mostly in Hebrew and the bible has been translated
> into more languages than any other book.

"Mostly in Hebrew"? You have presumably heard about the book that described
George Washington as "one of the first presidents of the United States"?

Biblical translators with a knowledge of Hebrew have always been a small
elite. One would have to demonstrate words escaping from them into the
English language - presumably in the 17th century or thereabouts. That sort
of thing did happen, of course - mostly from Greek. For example, "nous" and
"jot" (iota). "Crony" is learned slang from the universities, as is "chum".
But give me some actual Hebrew examples.

> Aramaic has had a
> large influence on other languages because it was a lingua franca
> for about 600 years.

Which 600 years? Which languages?

> By comparison, English has been a lingua
> franca for less than 300 years. But, English has already had a
> tremendous impact on Israeli Hebrew. Russian is now having
> some impact on Hebrew pronunciation.
>
> To see an overview of when and where other languages have
> been affected by Semitic, go to:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/ABOUT-WORDS/2002-08/1029997811

That just demonstrates that other people think you are a crank.

> To see how Western Semitic (Phoenician) affected the names of
> countries throughout Asia minor and north Africa, go to:
> http://www.usenet.com/newsgroups/sci.archaeology/msg06557.html

I don't think you'll get many takers for your "Body Maps".
--
John Briggs


.

Loading