NationStates Jolt Archive

As a language and linguistics graduate, I hereby propose that we include in the etymology curricula of the universities the possibility that, instead of languages gradually differentiating from one another, what happened was the Babel Tower story. All the evidence doesn't prove languages changed after all, since we weren't there when Indo-European became Latin, and etymology is just a theory anyways.

Discuss. And in case you're wondering if I'm being sarcastic, YES I AM.

As a language and linguistics graduate, I hereby propose that we include in the etymology curricula of the universities the possibility that, instead of languages gradually differentiating from one another, what happened was the Babel Tower story. All the evidence doesn't prove languages changed after all, and etymology is just a theory anyways.

Discuss. And in case you're wondering if I'm being sarcastic, YES I AM.

English:
25% German
25% French
25% Latin (yes, there is a difference between words of latin and french origin)
10% Greek
15% Other (including Celtic, Arabic, etc.)

*DISCLAIMER*- percentages may be slightly off from true values due to I haven't looked at the data in about a year.

...yay language purity...?

English:
25% German
25% French
25% Latin (yes, there is a difference between words of latin and french origin)
10% Greek
15% Other (including Celtic, Arabic, etc.)

*DISCLAIMER*- percentages may be slightly off from true values due to I haven't looked at the data in about a year.

...yay language purity...?

I'm WELL aware of your point, and as a language graduate I KNOW AND BELIEVE IN etymology. Do me a favor and read what I wrote in white, my friend. ;)

HEATHEN!!! :D

Brilliant! And, of course, equal time must be given to this theory. After all, it's just as good as any other theory. And if you don't give equal time to it, its because you hate God!

oh, i think some linguistic divergence is perfectly in keeping with the biblical story. as soheran put it in an old thread of mine about testable creationist hypotheses, "we should theoretically be able to trace all present-day languages back to several distinct, unrelated ancestor languages dating back to a few thousand years ago, and before that point, all language should be identical."

But... but... the written record clearly SHOWS gradual language change!
Yes, I KNOW this is satire, but doesn't mean I can't have fun with it too. ^_~

I can understand regional dialects, 'all of you' being 'y'all' for example, but Latin turning into French?

No way.

But... but... the written record clearly SHOWS gradual language change!
Yes, I KNOW this is satire, but doesn't mean I can't have fun with it too. ^_~

yes a gradual change AFTER the tower of babel. before the tower, its not so clear. you cant prove that everyone didnt speak the same language then.

But... but... the written record clearly SHOWS gradual language change!
Yes, I KNOW this is satire, but doesn't mean I can't have fun with it too. ^_~

Daijobu desu. ;)

Daijobu desu. ;)

Vous êtes baisé dans la tête. ;)

Languages don't change unless God says so.

I love how etymologists love to talk about how their theory is fact when it's just a religion. The only way to prove etymology is show the missing link between languages.

Also, there IS a difference between micro-etymology and macro-etymology. It is possible for certain words to change within a short time frame but for an entire language to be mutated -- like for example, Proto-Indo-European into Latin, Greek, Sanskrit, etc. is just theory and theories are just weak hypotheses with no grounded experimental research or evidence to prove them 100% beyond any unreasonable doubt.

Brilliant! And, of course, equal time must be given to this theory. After all, it's just as good as any other theory. And if you don't give equal time to it, its because you hate God!
No, no, no. You don't get it at all. It means you hate Graphic Designers. Or some spaceman designer or something...

Brilliant! And, of course, equal time must be given to this theory. After all, it's just as good as any other theory. And if you don't give equal time to it, its because you hate God!

If you read any post by an etymologist, you'll see that they are blatantly anti-Christian bigots and it's a severe problem in this nation, especially this forum. I can't walk down the street without being criticized for being a God-fearing Republican who (like the Founding Fathers and Jesus Christ before me) questioned the majority rule. Just because most linguists and anthropologists say that language changes grammatically and phonetically over time naturally and due to complex social interactions doesn't mean its true.

People laughed at Galileo and Newton. Now look at them. This, of course, shows that the people who are laughing at people like me (who DARE to *gasp* see some of the holes in your theory) will ultimately be wrong because as you know -- history always repeats itself.

So go ahead -- laugh at us Babelists. We have more circumstantial proof than there is for your "theory" but you're just prejudiced against Christians so you're suppressing it from the mainstream view. Almighty God will prove me right when comes down to wreak havoc and destruction upon the nonbelievers who dare question His holy edict.

English:
25% German
25% French
25% Latin (yes, there is a difference between words of latin and french origin)
10% Greek
15% Other (including Celtic, Arabic, etc.)

*DISCLAIMER*- percentages may be slightly off from true values due to I haven't looked at the data in about a year.

...yay language purity...?

Clearly this is just an example of microetymology. I mean I doubt anyone would argue that small changes in a linguistic structure can lead to the formation of a slightly new language in that structure, but clearly you can't make those small changes add up to make a whole new language form. It would take much longer than humanity had to develop. 6000 years.

Is it odd that I managed to type all of this with a straight face?

Is it odd that I managed to type all of this with a straight face

*ritually removes the white tags*

No. It just means you speak the Truth. Do not be ashamed to show the world their folly. For through shame comes realization and through realization, enlightenment. If, on the other hand, enlightenment does not come...there is always hell.

I can understand regional dialects, 'all of you' being 'y'all' for example, but Latin turning into French?

No way.

Go to Jamaica and see what passes for English.

Clearly this is just an example of microetymology. I mean I doubt anyone would argue that small changes in a linguistic structure can lead to the formation of a slightly new language in that structure, but clearly you can't make those small changes add up to make a whole new language form. It would take much longer than humanity had to develop. 6000 years.

Is it odd that I managed to type all of this with a straight face?

EXACTLY

if you look at the major linguistic groups (none of which i know so ill make this part up) they dont blend together and are essentially the same as they were when god seperated humanity. chinese didnt become english, sanskrit didnt become hausa. latin didnt become cherokee. there are discrete language groups that are inviolable.

as god intended.

As a language and linguistics graduate, I hereby propose that we include in the etymology curricula of the universities the possibility that, instead of languages gradually differentiating from one another, what happened was the Babel Tower story. All the evidence doesn't prove languages changed after all, since we weren't there when Indo-European became Latin, and etymology is just a theory anyways.

Discuss. And in case you're wondering if I'm being sarcastic, YES I AM.

*throws her Grammar Book at Heikoku*

EXACTLY

if you look at the major linguistic groups (none of which i know so ill make this part up) they dont blend together and are essentially the same as they were when god seperated humanity. chinese didnt become english, sanscrit didnt become hausa. latin didnt become cherokee. there are discrete language groups that are inviolable.

as god intended.

(Actually Sanskrit and Latin can be traced back to the same root Indo-European language family. :D)

But I agree. I can understand language variation in the different kinds of languages, but Latin won't suddenly become Mayan overnight.

EXACTLY

if you look at the major linguistic groups (none of which i know so ill make this part up) they dont blend together and are essentially the same as they were when god seperated humanity. chinese didnt become english, sanscrit didnt become hausa. latin didnt become cherokee. there are discrete language groups that are inviolable.

as god intended.

Also, there are so many holes in this theory (read: LIE) and to prove that I know what I'm talking about I am going to use several words specific to this field of study to make it seem like I have a firm grasp of linguistics. Elision, assonance, consonance, and so on can't just change randomly. If you're into statistics like me, you'll see that the probability of sound changing randomly is so small that it's negligible so therefore Babelism is the only logical answer to modern linguistics.

*throws her Grammar Book at Heikoku*

Typical etymologist rhetoric. If you can't attack the argument, attack the way it's presented. Just so you know, his grammar was impeccable.

Why don't you present some actual evidence for etymology?

I actually did look it over again, and it is.

Old English (approximately 900 AD)

On anginne gesceop God Heofenan and Eorthan. Seo Eorthe sothlice waes ydel and aemtig...

What words do you know in there? Now look at the others. Harder. HARDER. LOOK HARDER. Do they look at all familiar? Try sounding them out. Go on now. Sound at all familiar?



Try this one:

Middle English (about 1390, an excerpt from a tale by Chaucer)

A povre Wydwe, somdeel stape in age
Was whilom dwellyng in a narwe cotage,
Biside a grove, stondyng in a dale.


What words do you know in THAT sample? Now look at the others. Do they look at all familiar? Maybe like words you know in say, Spanish or Italian? Try sounding them out. How hard is this passage to understand, really?


Shakespeare’s English/Early Modern English (excerpt from Romeo and Juliet, about 1590)
But soft! What light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.


Ok, which words DON'T you recognize?


Modern English:
OMGWTF, LOL, u mean there related?

May we go back to Early Modern, please?

Go to Jamaica and see what passes for English.

Ya no raas klaat wid I mon!

Also, there are so many holes in this theory (read: LIE) and to prove that I know what I'm talking about I am going to use several words specific to this field of study to make it seem like I have a firm grasp of linguistics. Elision, assonance, consonance, and so on can't just change randomly. If you're into statistics like me, you'll see that the probability of sound changing randomly is so small that it's negligible so therefore Babelism is the only logical answer to modern linguistics.

QFT

say it, brother!

*smack* what part of "im making this part up" dont you understand?

besides, thats why i didnt have sanscrit not transforming into latin.

Hehehe.

Being Indian, it's the sort of thing I have an interest in looking up. Or had, at one point, when I was passably interested in linguistics.

(Actually Sanskrit and Latin can be traced back to the same root Indo-European language family. :D)

But I agree. I can understand language variation in the different kinds of languages, but Latin won't suddenly become Mayan overnight.

*smack* what part of "im making this part up" dont you understand?

besides, thats why i didnt have sanskrit not transforming into latin.

I don't dare express an opinion. You people are taking this seriously!

Holy crap, people are actually coming up with points to support my fake theory...

*Mad scientist gasp*

What have I done...

Holy crap, people are actually coming up with points to support my fake theory...

*Mad scientist gasp*

What have I done...

To make it plausible at all, you need to hypothesise some event which changed the way language evolved, then find some way of proving or disproving the occurrence of that event.

Calling it "Tower of Babel" instantly arouses suspicion, since "God did it" is an untestable hypothesis.

(/pseudo-philosophy)

Hehehe.

Being Indian, it's the sort of thing I have an interest in looking up. Or had, at one point, when I was passably interested in linguistics.

we've all dabbled in heathen beliefs before settling back into god's true science of babelism.

Holy crap, people are actually coming up with points to support my fake theory...

*Mad scientist gasp*

What have I done...

IT'S ALIIIIIIIIIIVE!!!

Gosh, and no one has even pointed out yet that languages are so complex that some outside entity logically must have designed them all at once! I mean, if I wrote all of the letters of all of the alphabets in the world on little pieces of paper and threw them all in the air, they wouldn't just assemble themselves into books, would they? I don't think so!

Chinese didn't become English

Yet gene samples from Chinese are entering the English language

Let's chow down on some pizza

Chow, from (pinyin) chao - chao fan - eat food

Uh oh, there's a typhoon heading our way

Typhoon, from (pinyin) Da Feng - big wind

I've a yen for some cookies dude

yen, meaning a "yearning" or "strong desire.

Language changes when it mates with another and advantageous aspects survive.

Given that, if you look at Papua New Guinea, for example, people in adjacent valleys can have entirely different languages.

You can see the same with birds that have been separated, by a mountain range for example, that are entirely different.

The real proof for evolution is that any system evolves along similar lines, small differences on a micro-level perhaps but very similar on a macro-level.

Even the universe evolved.

Gosh, and no one has even pointed out yet that languages are so complex that some outside entity logically must have designed them all at once! I mean, if I wrote all of the letters of all of the alphabets in the world on little pieces of paper and threw them all in the air, they wouldn't just assemble themselves into books, would they? I don't think so!

Quick! Someone get me a million monkeys on typewriters!

Yet gene samples from Chinese are entering the English language

Let's chow down on some pizza

Chow, from (pinyin) chao - chao fan - eat food

Uh oh, there's a typhoon heading our way

Typhoon, from (pinyin) Da Feng - big wind

I've a yen for some cookies dude

yen, meaning a "yearning" or "strong desire.

Language changes when it mates with another and advantageous aspects survive.

Given that, if you look at Papua New Guinea, for example, people in adjacent valleys can have entirely different languages.

You can see the same with birds that have been separated, by a mountain range for example, that are entirely different.

The real proof for evolution is that any system evolves along similar lines, small differences on a micro-level perhaps but very similar on a macro-level.

Even the universe evolved.


look, im not one of those nutcase "there is no linguistic drift" people. they are just crazy.

im a babel literalist who goes by the divine word that ALL language was created by god after the division of humanity at the tower of babel. any changes after that are real and driven by the will of god.

Yet gene samples from Chinese are entering the English language

Let's chow down on some pizza

Chow, from (pinyin) chao - chao fan - eat food

Uh oh, there's a typhoon heading our way

Typhoon, from (pinyin) Da Feng - big wind

I've a yen for some cookies dude

yen, meaning a "yearning" or "strong desire.

Language changes when it mates with another and advantageous aspects survive.

Given that, if you look at Papua New Guinea, for example, people in adjacent valleys can have entirely different languages.

You can see the same with birds that have been separated, by a mountain range for example, that are entirely different.

The real proof for evolution is that any system evolves along similar lines, small differences on a micro-level perhaps but very similar on a macro-level.

Even the universe evolved.

No, see, micro-linguistic-evolution is TOTALLY different from macro-linguistic-evolution. I'm not going to explain how it's different, but I'm right and you're wrong, and if you disagree it's only because you hate God.

No, see, micro-linguistic-evolution is TOTALLY different from macro-linguistic-evolution. I'm not going to explain how it's different, but I'm right and you're wrong, and if you disagree it's only because you hate God.

I agree with this wholeheartedly but am not going to add anything substantial to my post because you've summed up my opinions so succinctly. If only people recognized etymology as another pawn of the atheist liberal agenda to wipe out well-meaning Christians who simply wish to expose our children to both sides of the story. Kinda funny how those nasty liberals talk about tolerance but they aren't tolerant of pseudo-science, eh? Another example of the repression of Christianity in this once great nation. :(

look, im not one of those nutcase "there is no linguistic drift" people. they are just crazy.

im a babel literalist who goes by the divine word that ALL language was created by god after the division of humanity at the tower of babel. any changes after that are real and driven by the will of god.

No, see, micro-linguistic-evolution is TOTALLY different from macro-linguistic-evolution. I'm not going to explain how it's different, but I'm right and you're wrong, and if you disagree it's only because you hate God.

Your arguments have convinced me and I wish to contribute to your church.

When can we start burning the etymologists?

Your arguments have convinced me and I wish to contribute to your church.

When can we start burning the etymologists?

Hey, waitaminute, DONATING?

It was I who created Babelism!!!

Funny thing is, there is some kind of religious controversy over the origin of the Indo-European language. Some Indian nationalists are arguing that the Aryans originated in India, whereas the official theory goes with Eastern Europe.

le wiki. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_india_theory)

As a language and linguistics graduate, I hereby propose that we include in the etymology curricula of the universities the possibility that, instead of languages gradually differentiating from one another, what happened was the Babel Tower story. All the evidence doesn't prove languages changed after all, since we weren't there when Indo-European became Latin, and etymology is just a theory anyways.



Nice.

Well, just like creationism, it certainly can be mentioned in passing in one of those 'did you know (and isn't it crazy people believe this)' moments...I'd be fine with that. :D

I agree with this wholeheartedly but am not going to add anything substantial to my post because you've summed up my opinions so succinctly. If only people recognized etymology as another pawn of the atheist liberal agenda to wipe out well-meaning Christians who simply wish to expose our children to both sides of the story. Kinda funny how those nasty liberals talk about tolerance but they aren't tolerant of pseudo-science, eh? Another example of the repression of Christianity in this once great nation. :(

why do they hate jesus/yesu/耶稣/Иисус/ يسوع /Yeshua/ΙΗΣΟΥΣ/Isus/Jishu??

why do they hate jesus/yesu/耶稣/Иисус/ يسوع /Yeshua/ΙΗΣΟΥΣ/Isus/Jishu??

They are jealous of his Freedom.

You liberal babelisms are nothing more than heathens, barely better than these Ruhlenists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Ruhlen). Those of us who know the truth look to scripture.

Man was created in god's image. Yet this image is not simply visual. Rather man was created to be the image of god in all ways. And we know through the bible that the Lord interacts with his people on many occassions, and when he does so, he is clearly speaking. Take on Mount Sainai when He interacted with Moses.

Yes, got spoke, and what language did he speak? Well all we need to do is check His divine and infallable word and we see, clearly, "Say to the Israelites, 'The Lord, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you!". That's right, He is speaking English.

Yes, English is the language of the Lord, and we, created in his oral image, also speak English. As such there is only one true language. All thise other idea of different "languages" is just an illusion by satanists. True believers know that the Lord speaks English and so must we all, any variation is merely the serpant. As we all know, the road to hell is paved with dangling particples!

Hey, waitaminute, DONATING?

It was I who created Babelism!!!

The Church of Ashmorian Babelism has nicer cookies.

The Church of Ashmorian Babelism has nicer cookies.

That's nothing.
My Church of Latter Day Poster's allows members of the congregation to delete their cookies and start afresh if they transgress our moral codes. All they need to do is fill out a request and put it in the pastor's digital file, he contacts the God of Lost Accounts, and the balance of good/evil/legal/illegal deeds is reset.

You liberal babelisms are nothing more than heathens, barely better than these Ruhlenists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Ruhlen). Those of us who know the truth look to scripture.

Man was created in god's image. Yet this image is not simply visual. Rather man was created to be the image of god in all ways. And we know through the bible that the Lord interacts with his people on many occassions, and when he does so, he is clearly speaking. Take on Mount Sainai when He interacted with Moses.

Yes, got spoke, and what language did he speak? Well all we need to do is check His divine and infallable word and we see, clearly, "Say to the Israelites, 'The Lord, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you!". That's right, He is speaking English.

Yes, English is the language of the Lord, and we, created in his oral image, also speak English. As such there is only one true language. All thise other idea of different "languages" is just an illusion by satanists. True believers know that the Lord speaks English and so must we all, any variation is merely the serpant. As we all know, the road to hell is paved with dangling particples!

The scary part being that I've actually heard people suggest, perfectly serious, that English should be an official language because it was what Jesus spoke.

The scary part being that I've actually heard people suggest, perfectly serious, that English should be an official language because it was what Jesus spoke.

that's...disturbing..

by the way, DM, you sent me a TG on UMP a while back about the other forum, can you TG that info on NS to me again?

I, personally, am a Intelligent Writerist--which is not at all Babelism in disguise... it doesn't say that God designed it, but only that an Intelligent Writer Designed all language. I believe that it was God, but it doesn't have to be. Our evidence is that many words are irreducibly complex. If you remove one letter, the word doesn't function anymore, so they can't have been written by pure chance. Just as a novel has an author, and a play has a playwright, language must have an Intelligent Writer.

But if you want to believe that your language etomologized from a caveman grunt, then you can. So I say we teach both theories-- let the kids decide which theory they support.

Amen, brother! To help prove the point, I'll quote the first verse from the Gospel of John.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Clearly, words are an expression of God, and God chose to express His Divine Self in English. He also created other languages, but it was English that was made right the first time around, and it is English that shall multiply and have dominion over all the Earth.

The other languages are an illusion; a test by Almighty God. Those who wish to be with Him will overcome this test and thrown away their heathen tongue!

You liberal babelisms are nothing more than heathens, barely better than these Ruhlenists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Ruhlen). Those of us who know the truth look to scripture.

Man was created in god's image. Yet this image is not simply visual. Rather man was created to be the image of god in all ways. And we know through the bible that the Lord interacts with his people on many occassions, and when he does so, he is clearly speaking. Take on Mount Sainai when He interacted with Moses.

Yes, got spoke, and what language did he speak? Well all we need to do is check His divine and infallable word and we see, clearly, "Say to the Israelites, 'The Lord, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you!". That's right, He is speaking English.

Yes, English is the language of the Lord, and we, created in his oral image, also speak English. As such there is only one true language. All thise other idea of different "languages" is just an illusion by satanists. True believers know that the Lord speaks English and so must we all, any variation is merely the serpant. As we all know, the road to hell is paved with dangling particples!

Amen, brother! To help prove the point, I'll quote the first verse from the Gospel of John.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Clearly, words are an expression of God, and God chose to express His Divine Self in English. He also created other languages, but it was English that was made right the first time around, and it is English that shall multiply and have dominion over all the Earth.

by the way, DM, you sent me a TG on UMP a while back about the other forum, can you TG that info on NS to me again?

Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the V.P. is such a V.I.P., shouldn't we keep the P.C. on the Q.T.? 'Cause if it leaks to the V.C. he could end up M.I.A., and then we'd all be put out in K.P.

that's...disturbing..

by the way, DM, you sent me a TG on UMP a while back about the other forum, can you TG that info on NS to me again?

Gladly. TG sent.

Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the V.P. is such a V.I.P., shouldn't we keep the P.C. on the Q.T.? 'Cause if it leaks to the V.C. he could end up M.I.A., and then we'd all be put out in K.P.

What heathen tongue is this???

Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the V.P. is such a V.I.P., shouldn't we keep the P.C. on the Q.T.? 'Cause if it leaks to the V.C. he could end up M.I.A., and then we'd all be put out in K.P.

Weird code words aside, you wouldn't happen to be a D&Der, would you? I've been advertising every time there's a PNP-related thread but I never know who might be interested who hasn't heard that I'm part of a message board pen and paper group that is open to anyone willing to play.

The other languages are an illusion; a test by Almighty God. Those who wish to be with Him will overcome this test and thrown away their heathen tongue!

Even so, the heathen tongues are pointers to the greatness of God.

Who but God could have made such a complex language as this?

"En el principio era el Verbo (la Palabra), y el Verbo estaba ante Dios, y el Verbo era Dios."

All languages, from the greatest to the smallest, bespeak the glory of the Lord!

Weird code words aside, you wouldn't happen to be a D&Der, would you? I've been advertising every time there's a PNP-related thread but I never know who might be interested who hasn't heard that I'm part of a message board pen and paper group that is open to anyone willing to play.

Alas no, I've never had the imagination, I've no idea why I'm on NS to be honest, I simply suck at any form of role-playing.

The scary part being that I've actually heard people suggest, perfectly serious, that English should be an official language because it was what Jesus spoke.

Well, of course it is. The whole Bible is in English, even the name "God" is an English word.

I'd like to hear the Hateists explain THAT. What, they think someone changed the word of God? Bwaaahahaha!

I should Troll more often ... "Hateists" is a rather sweet li'l anagram!

*evil cackle*

You liberal babelisms are nothing more than heathens, barely better than these Ruhlenists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Ruhlen). Those of us who know the truth look to scripture.

Man was created in god's image. Yet this image is not simply visual. Rather man was created to be the image of god in all ways. And we know through the bible that the Lord interacts with his people on many occassions, and when he does so, he is clearly speaking. Take on Mount Sainai when He interacted with Moses.

Yes, got spoke, and what language did he speak? Well all we need to do is check His divine and infallable word and we see, clearly, "Say to the Israelites, 'The Lord, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you!". That's right, He is speaking English.

Yes, English is the language of the Lord, and we, created in his oral image, also speak English. As such there is only one true language. All thise other idea of different "languages" is just an illusion by satanists. True believers know that the Lord speaks English and so must we all, any variation is merely the serpant. As we all know, the road to hell is paved with dangling particples!


neo, neo, neo, what false prophet have you been following?

you need to read the bible more closely.

moses comes after the tower of babel. GOD created all the languages of the earth in one moment in discrete immutable form 4500 years ago. ALL languages were made by god in that moment (with small variations of microetymology that have occurred since--probably in reflection of or distancing ourselves from god)

ENGLISH, the language of mt sinai, is GOD'S CHOSEN LANGUAGE. most specifically the english of the court of king james in 1611. with all english variations after that caused by our sinfulness.

thats why jesus spoke english too.

You liberal babelisms are nothing more than heathens, barely better than these Ruhlenists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Ruhlen). Those of us who know the truth look to scripture.

Man was created in god's image. Yet this image is not simply visual. Rather man was created to be the image of god in all ways. And we know through the bible that the Lord interacts with his people on many occassions, and when he does so, he is clearly speaking. Take on Mount Sainai when He interacted with Moses.

Yes, got spoke, and what language did he speak? Well all we need to do is check His divine and infallable word and we see, clearly, "Say to the Israelites, 'The Lord, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you!". That's right, He is speaking English.

Yes, English is the language of the Lord, and we, created in his oral image, also speak English. As such there is only one true language. All thise other idea of different "languages" is just an illusion by satanists. True believers know that the Lord speaks English and so must we all, any variation is merely the serpant. As we all know, the road to hell is paved with dangling particples!

There are even home-video's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apZLS3rZPq4) of God speaking to his followers. Hah silly linguists, have any better proof than this?

neo, neo, neo, what false prophet have you been following?

you need to read the bible more closely.

moses comes after the tower of babel. GOD created all the languages of the earth in one moment in discrete immutable form 4500 years ago. ALL languages were made by god in that moment (with small variations of microetymology that have occurred since--probably in reflection of or distancing ourselves from god)

ENGLISH, the language of mt sinai, is GOD'S CHOSEN LANGUAGE. most specifically the english of the court of king james in 1611. with all english variations after that caused by our sinfulness.

thats why jesus spoke english too.With the notable exception of the "thou shalt not kill" which was clearly intended as "thou shalt not murder"...

Hah silly linguists, have any better proof than this?

you mean LIEguists

With the notable exception of the "thou shalt not kill" which was clearly intended as "thou shalt not murder"...

No, no, it's "Thou shalt not kill unborn babies". Satanic Masonic Atheist Mexican Jew Lizards used their psychic powers to remove the last two words.

Babelism is simply intellectual cowardice. Its followers dare not cut the apron-strings that bind them to their safe, circumscribed little universe in which some Great Librarian lets them read only those parts of the book of Nature that have been approved by some invisible PTA. Oooh, it's so daring of them to admit that language undergoes micro-evolution! And I suppose, when a whole new field of knowledge develops, and words are being invented overnight, that'd still be micro-evolution? The entire language of information technology? The words that harried sub-editors on sleazy rags invent desperately for tabloid headlines to describe the latest (by then out-dated) fad? Camel-toe? Whale-tail? Statusphere? You mean your God speaks Truth directly to journalists?

I could go on, but I won't. No doubt some of you are already scurrying off to report me to your moderators. It's obvious that this entire site is completely in the hands of the Babelists -- I note that one moderator has actually declared herself to be such, and I'm sure that others are skulking around here incognito, hoping to lure me and others who have the integrity to defy your illusions into breaking your petty rules. However, I expect no difficulty in outwitting your childishly simple technology.

Ardchoilleans;13252774']Babelism is simply intellectual cowardice. Its followers dare not cut the apron-strings that bind them to their safe, circumscribed little universe in which some Great Librarian lets them read only those parts of the book of Nature that have been approved by some invisible PTA. Oooh, it's so daring of them to admit that language undergoes micro-evolution! And I suppose, when a whole new field of knowledge develops, and words are being invented overnight, that'd still be micro-evolution? The entire language of information technology? The words that harried sub-editors on sleazy rags invent desperately for tabloid headlines to describe the latest (by then out-dated) fad? Camel-toe? Whale-tail? Statusphere? You mean your God speaks Truth directly to journalists?

I could go on, but I won't. No doubt some of you are already scurrying off to report me to your moderators. It's obvious that this entire site is completely in the hands of the Babelists -- I note that one moderator has actually declared herself to be such, and I'm sure that others are skulking around here incognito, hoping to lure me and others who have the integrity to defy your illusions into breaking your petty rules. However, I expect no difficulty in outwitting your childishly simple technology.

enjoy your time in hell.

Ardchoilleans;13252774']Babelism is simply intellectual cowardice. Its followers dare not cut the apron-strings that bind them to their safe, circumscribed little universe in which some Great Librarian lets them read only those parts of the book of Nature that have been approved by some invisible PTA. Oooh, it's so daring of them to admit that language undergoes micro-evolution! And I suppose, when a whole new field of knowledge develops, and words are being invented overnight, that'd still be micro-evolution? The entire language of information technology? The words that harried sub-editors on sleazy rags invent desperately for tabloid headlines to describe the latest (by then out-dated) fad? Camel-toe? Whale-tail? Statusphere? You mean your God speaks Truth directly to journalists?

I could go on, but I won't. No doubt some of you are already scurrying off to report me to your moderators. It's obvious that this entire site is completely in the hands of the Babelists -- I note that one moderator has actually declared herself to be such, and I'm sure that others are skulking around here incognito, hoping to lure me and others who have the integrity to defy your illusions into breaking your petty rules. However, I expect no difficulty in outwitting your childishly simple technology.

You literary scientists with your Frankenstein words!

Look, I could cut a cat in half and sew it to half a dog - ooh, look, an entirely new animal, this must be proof of evolution!

Camel-toe, statusphere :rolleyes:

Rubbish.

These words you put forward are made-up, sewn-together words. They're neither alive nor filled with the breath of God.

People like you, playing with the cadavers of Gods work make me sick and, as Pope Ashmoria says, you'll burn in hell!

enjoy your time in hell.

I don't need no steenking hell, Babelist. I'm proud to admit I'm a linguist. I follow grammatical rules not because some bogeyman threatens me with a dark cupboard if I disobey, but because I respect my listeners.

May I add that no true Sco-- no true Babelist would think to threaten me into obedience or taunt me with my presumed fall from grace. What happened to "Turn the other page", eh?

Wait a second...

I created a religion to bring us all together... Then people misinterpreted me, and started bickering about details.

Oh no! I'm the average original center-person of a religion!

Wait a second...

I created a religion to bring us all together... Then people misinterpreted me, and started bickering about details.

Oh no! I'm the average original center-person of a religion!

What are you saying? What dialect is that? I can't understand a word you state. Primitive.

Join the Protestant Renewal of Language Form Follows Function United Brotherhood.

Learn to speak with your debilitation.

Ardchoilleans;13252806']I don't need no steenking hell, Babelist. I'm proud to admit I'm a linguist. I follow grammatical rules not because some bogeyman threatens me with a dark cupboard if I disobey, but because I respect my listeners.

May I add that no true Sco-- no true Babelist would think to threaten me into obedience or taunt me with my presumed fall from grace. What happened to "Turn the other page", eh?

its not a threat, its god's promise. dont hate the player, hate the game.


errr um i mean..

repent and share in the true words of god's grace, my brother (or sister)

I have no need of repentance or forgiveness, except from my fellow-humans, for my failures as a human being -- not for my failure to follow some set of rules formulated by a bunch of frustrated celibate scribes lo, these many volumes ago.

Babelists are the people who cry out against the innocent Oxford comma, which harms no-one. Babelists are the ones who dare not begin a sentence with "and". Babelists hide away in their secret bedrooms lasciviously poring over subordinate clauses, then pose in public as users of only direct, manly simple sentences. Hemingways, the lot of them!

Yes, Hemingways! I'm not afraid to say it! I dare you to refute it!

But you Babelists won't, will you? You'll just go crying off complaining that I'm "flaming" your cute little cult. Well, I've read your rules, and you can't flame a cult, so don't try that one on. Try sticking to the argument and refuting my points -- but you can't, can you?

Wait a second...

I created a religion to bring us all together... Then people misinterpreted me, and started bickering about details.

Oh no! I'm the average original center-person of a religion!

Heikoku Superstar?

Ardchoilleans;13252861']I have no need of repentance or forgiveness, except from my fellow-humans, for my failures as a human being -- not for my failure to follow some set of rules formulated by a bunch of frustrated celibate scribes lo, these many volumes ago.

Babelists are the people who cry out against the innocent Oxford comma, which harms no-one. Babelists are the ones who dare not begin a sentence with "and". Babelists hide away in their secret bedrooms lasciviously poring over subordinate clauses, then pose in public as users of only direct, manly simple sentences. Hemingways, the lot of them!

Yes, Hemingways! I'm not afraid to say it! I dare you to refute it!

But you Babelists won't, will you? You'll just go crying off complaining that I'm "flaming" your cute little cult. Well, I've read your rules, and you can't flame a cult, so don't try that one on. Try sticking to the argument and refuting my points -- but you can't, can you?

lol

you, sir, are a TROLL.

i bet you dont believe a single thing you wrote. i bet you LOVED the old man and the sea!

Babelists are the ones who dare not begin a sentence with "and".

What are you talking about, every line in Genesis aside from 1 & 27 starts with 'And'

Link (http://www.bartleby.com/108/01/1.html#S1)

At least read up on what you criticize.

You confuse us with Grammaticists.

Whether I believe what I wrote is immaterial. Whether Babelists believe the nonsense that they spout is the centre of this discussion, which I, sirrah, have attempted to conduct fairly and reasonably, not by accusing my opponents of "trolling", a piece of in-group terminology the meaning of which I understand well enough to reject the appelation out of hand.

Were I trolling, I would lard my posts with provocative statements designed to evoke an emotional response from my opponents. Instead, I lay the facts before you, firmly and fairly: Babelism is false. Your concession to "micro-etymology" is false. Science has proven repeatedly the untruth of the Babelical constructs. You cannot even demonstrate the existence, at the appropriate time, of any tower as high as you claim your wonderful structure to be.

What are you talking about, every line in Genesis aside from 1 & 27 starts with 'And'

Link (http://www.bartleby.com/108/01/1.html#S1)

At least read up on what you criticize.

You confuse us with Grammaticists.

I confuse you with no-one, sir. You confuse yourselves.

Ardchoilleans;13252888']Whether I believe what I wrote is immaterial. Whether Babelists believe the nonsense that they spout is the centre of this discussion, which I, sirrah, have attempted to conduct fairly and reasonably, not by accusing my opponents of "trolling", a piece of in-group terminology the meaning of which I understand well enough to reject the appelation out of hand.

Were I trolling, I would lard my posts with provocative statements designed to evoke an emotional response from my opponents. Instead, I lay the facts before you, firmly and fairly: Babelism is false. Your concession to "micro-etymology" is false. Science has proven repeatedly the untruth of the Babelical constructs. You cannot even demonstrate the existence, at the appropriate time, of any tower as high as you claim your wonderful structure to be.


SCIENCE?! what science? linguistics hardly qualfies as a theory let alone science! its all conjecture based on hypotheticals, correlations and circumstantial evidence.

do we have recordings of how people talked in the past? NO. so how can you claim to be more correct than a scholarly babelist?

heikoku is right, we must allow all theories of language to be taught so that our children are not led blindly into false blasphemous beliefs! i would not have my children and grandchildren sent to hell for false beliefs.

Ardchoilleans;13252888']You cannot even demonstrate the existence, at the appropriate time, of any tower as high as you claim your wonderful structure to be.

Hello?

It's in the Bible.

1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

4 And they said, Come, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

6 And the Lord said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them." 7 Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.

9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Hello?

It's in the Bible.

Oho, fine proof! It's in the Bible! But it's not in National Geographic, is it? It's not in Scientific American, is it? For every book that you can quote it in, I can quote two that it's not in!

(And yes, I am aware that the lower-case "b" for "book" is blasphemous, but, as you have already consigned me to the lake of burning fire, I imagine this will serve merely to heap a minor coal upon my head.)

Ardchoilleans;13252929']Oho, fine proof! It's in the Bible! But it's not in National Geographic, is it? It's not in Scientific American, is it? For every book that you can quote it in, I can quote two that it's not in!

(And yes, I am aware that the lower-case "b" for "book" is blasphemous, but, as you have already consigned me to the lake of burning fire, I imagine this will serve merely to heap a minor coal upon my head.)

Well since the sole purpose of science seems to be an attack on our religion, I'd hardly expect your own 'bibles' to provide evidence.

The difference is that the Bible is the word of God.

How do we know? The Bible tells us.

All your science, on the other hand, is simply circular reasoning.

Ah, reasoning! Pure reason did, indeed, lead to many conclusions later shown to be as near actuality as the human mind could come without the instruments needed to conduct proper observations.

But it also led to learned discussions on the sex of archangels, or the classic how-many-angels-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin debate.

I prefer my "reason" salted with "proof".

In all honesty, I'm in danger of convincing myself.

It's a good analogy however, and worth tucking away in my mind. The thing is, I really don't meet any fundamental Christians who don't believe in evolution. I hardly meet any Christians at all if I think about it.

Any good Christian message boards we can try this out on because this liberal, heathen place presents no serious response.

Well, damn, I was at least trying. We haven't even been through the "science exists to disprove religion" one, and it's a slow news day here.

But thank you, I'd forgotten how much fun it could be -- that T-word that I definitely wasn't doing, I mean.:D

And we should all be grateful to Heikoku. Let's do a whip-round and buy him a nice martyrdom.

Quote:
Old English (approximately 900 AD)

On anginne gesceop God Heofenan and Eorthan. Seo Eorthe sothlice waes ydel and aemtig...

What words do you know in there? Now look at the others. Harder. HARDER. LOOK HARDER. Do they look at all familiar? Try sounding them out. Go on now. Sound at all familiar?

Well, I'm guessing "waes" means "was", "Eorthe" means "Earth", and "Heofenan" means "Heaven", but beyond that, it looks like gibberish to me.

(*looks harder as per your instructions*)

OK, maybe "ydel" means "ideal", I'm guessing?

Almost all of it looks like it was written by a 5-year-old. LOL

Try this one:


Quote:
Middle English (about 1390, an excerpt from a tale by Chaucer)

A povre Wydwe, somdeel stape in age
Was whilom dwellyng in a narwe cotage,
Biside a grove, stondyng in a dale.


What words do you know in THAT sample? Now look at the others. Do they look at all familiar? Maybe like words you know in say, Spanish or Italian? Try sounding them out. How hard is this passage to understand, really?

A poor widow, ???? ???? in age
Was ???? dwelling in a narrow cottage,
Beside a grove, standing in a dale.

Sorry, I can't figure out "somdeel stape" or "whilom", but the rest of it is decipherable.

Quote:
Shakespeare’s English/Early Modern English (excerpt from Romeo and Juliet, about 1590)
But soft! What light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.


Ok, which words DON'T you recognize?

There's nothing HERE I don't recognize; it's all plain to me.

Quote:
Modern English:
OMGWTF, LOL, u mean there related?

May we go back to Early Modern, please?


An internet n00b or a computer illiterate may not have any idea what "OMGWTF" or "LOL" mean, but I know them.

Ardchoilleans;13252888']Whether I believe what I wrote is immaterial. Whether Babelists believe the nonsense that they spout is the centre of this discussion, which I, sirrah, have attempted to conduct fairly and reasonably, not by accusing my opponents of "trolling", a piece of in-group terminology the meaning of which I understand well enough to reject the appelation out of hand.

Were I trolling, I would lard my posts with provocative statements designed to evoke an emotional response from my opponents. Instead, I lay the facts before you, firmly and fairly: Babelism is false. Your concession to "micro-etymology" is false. Science has proven repeatedly the untruth of the Babelical constructs. You cannot even demonstrate the existence, at the appropriate time, of any tower as high as you claim your wonderful structure to be.

Oh yeah? Well, if English came from German, why do people still speak German, huh? I bet no one's ever asked you that!

Oh yeah? Well, if English came from German, why do people still speak German, huh? I bet no one's ever asked you that!

I'd love to see a linguist answer that. Any replies? Oh guess not, your post is 100% valid and irrefutable. Linguists like to act like know-it-alls but when I make a simple request like I just did no one answers.

They're just scared that we're right.

I'd love to see a linguist answer that. Any replies? Oh guess not, your post is 100% valid and irrefutable. Linguists like to act like know-it-alls but when I make a simple request like I just did no one answers.

They're just scared that we're right.

They should be scared. I'm very sorry to say that everyone who disagrees with me and my views will be burning in hell for eternity. I'm so very sorry that I'm going to go on at great length about how, while I'm a wonderfully nice person who would never wish ill on anyone, they all totally deserve to be boiled alive in a pit of lava while demons poke them in the eyeballs with red-hot fondue forks.

Oh yeah? Well, if English came from German, why do people still speak German, huh? I bet no one's ever asked you that!Because they're Germans, duh!

But no, nobody's ever asked me that one before. Not in an online forum supposedly devoted to intelligent debate, but in fact packed with fuzzy-minded Babelists who believe that people exist to serve words, not the other way around. So if your Babelist God suddenly decided to call your Bible Fluffy, your arguments would read, "But it must be true, it's in Fluffy"?

Bah! It's like arguing with a marshmallow. Messy and far too sweet.

(OOC: sorry, but I've gotta leave the office now, and I don't give much for my chances of clearing the kids off the computer at home. Bye.)