Dum in Czech and Latin

[HenHanna]

“Nil sapientiae odiosius (est) acumine nimio.”

-------- So compact and elegant...


Czech: Nic není pro moudrost škodlivější než přílišná bystrost.


Polish:
Nic nie jest bardziej szkodliwe dla mądrości niż nadmierna bystrość.


_____________

Yes, one-letter changes in word endings are extremely common in
Czech.

This is due to the complex system of declensions and conjugations, where
words change form depending on their grammatical role in a sentence.

For example, the word for "house" is "dům". Its declensions might look
like this:

Nominative: dům (the house)
Genitive: domu (of the house)
Dative: domu (to the house)
Accusative: dům (the house, direct object)
Vocative: dome (O house!)
Locative: domě (in the house)
Instrumental: domem (by the house)

_______________

interesting... This dum is unrelated to Latin dum


Dum scribit, cantat. (While he writes, he sings.)

Expecta dum venio. (Wait until I come.)

[Ed Cryer]

Post by HenHanna
“Nil sapientiae odiosius (est) acumine nimio.”
           --------    So compact and elegant...
Czech:    Nic není pro moudrost škodlivější než přílišná bystrost.
   Nic nie jest bardziej szkodliwe dla mądrości niż nadmierna bystrość.
_____________
       Yes, one-letter changes in word endings are extremely common in
Czech.
This is due to the complex system of declensions and conjugations, where
words change form depending on their grammatical role in a sentence.
For example, the word for "house" is "dům". Its declensions might look
Nominative: dům (the house)
Genitive: domu (of the house)
Dative: domu (to the house)
Accusative: dům (the house, direct object)
Vocative: dome (O house!)
Locative: domě (in the house)
Instrumental: domem (by the house)
_______________
     interesting...  This dum is unrelated to Latin dum
Dum scribit, cantat.    (While he writes, he sings.)
Expecta dum venio.      (Wait until I come.)

It's probably from Lati

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2024-10-24, Ed Cryer <***@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:

[Czech]

Post by HenHanna
For example, the word for "house" is "dům". Its declensions might look

It's probably from Latin "domus".

You might think that, but the etymological consensus is that Slavic
"dom" and Latin "domus" are cognates, both going back to PIE *dṓm.

The -ů-/-o- alternation in the Czech word is a common pattern, due to
a soundshift from earlier long ó > uo > ů [uː]. Polish has a similar
alternation -ó- [u]/-o-, albeit not in this word.

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Christian Weisgerber
[Czech]

Post by HenHanna
For example, the word for "house" is "dům". Its declensions might look

It's probably from Latin "domus".

You might think that, but the etymological consensus is that Slavic
"dom" and Latin "domus" are cognates, both going back to PIE *dṓm.
The -ů-/-o- alternation in the Czech word is a common pattern, due to
a soundshift from earlier long ó > uo > ů [uː]. Polish has a similar
alternation -ó- [u]/-o-, albeit not in this word.

Indo-European was never a language. Nobody ever spoke it. It's a
collection of similar bits and pieces of language assembled with
hindsight. And when it comes to Proto-Indo-European, well, .... castles
in the air.
It's as if you were to walk through a junk-yard of old and trashed cars,
find similarities, and build families of them. And then you examine the
families, and find similarities in those, whence you construct a
previous family.
Given some perseverance you might fathom it back prior to the Tower of
Babel, and find some original lingo that all the homines sapientes
coming out of Africa spoke and understood. (:-

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Christian Weisgerber
[Czech]

Post by HenHanna
For example, the word for "house" is "dům". Its declensions might look

It's probably from Latin "domus".

You might think that, but the etymological consensus is that Slavic
"dom" and Latin "domus" are cognates, both going back to PIE *dṓm.
The -ů-/-o- alternation in the Czech word is a common pattern, due to
a soundshift from earlier long ó > uo > ů [uː]. Polish has a similar
alternation -ó- [u]/-o-, albeit not in this word.

Indo-European was never a language. Nobody ever spoke it. It's a
collection of similar bits and pieces of language assembled with
hindsight. And when it comes to Proto-Indo-European, well, .... castles
in the air.
It's as if you were to walk through a junk-yard of old and trashed cars,
find similarities, and build families of them. And then you examine the
families, and find similarities in those, whence you construct a
previous family.
Given some perseverance you might fathom it back prior to the Tower of
Babel, and find some original lingo that all the homines sapientes
coming out of Africa spoke and understood.  (:-
Ed

Latin, on the other hand, was a living language. It was the native
tongue of a group of people who inhabited N. Italy. They grew and
prospered, traded and fought for trade and power, while their thinkers
and artists wrote books to glorify and explain their world.

We have those books. We can read them.
They were like us; large human brain, our modern concerns and questions
resounding around them

[Silvano]

Post by Ed Cryer
Latin, on the other hand, was a living language. It was the native
tongue of a group of people who inhabited N. Italy.

Northern Italy? LOL. Please have a look at an atlas and find Rome in Italy.

[Ross Clark]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Christian Weisgerber
[Czech]

Post by HenHanna
For example, the word for "house" is "dům". Its declensions might look

It's probably from Latin "domus".

You might think that, but the etymological consensus is that Slavic
"dom" and Latin "domus" are cognates, both going back to PIE *dṓm.
The -ů-/-o- alternation in the Czech word is a common pattern, due to
a soundshift from earlier long ó > uo > ů [uː]. Polish has a similar
alternation -ó- [u]/-o-, albeit not in this word.

Indo-European was never a language. Nobody ever spoke it. It's a
collection of similar bits and pieces of language assembled with
hindsight. And when it comes to Proto-Indo-European, well, .... castles
in the air.
It's as if you were to walk through a junk-yard of old and trashed cars,
find similarities, and build families of them. And then you examine the
families, and find similarities in those, whence you construct a
previous family.
Given some perseverance you might fathom it back prior to the Tower of
Babel, and find some original lingo that all the homines sapientes
coming out of Africa spoke and understood.  (:-
Ed

I haven't seen this kind of radical I-E skepticism around here since the
Indocentrics of yesteryear, now thankfully departed. Do you have an
alternative explanation for the many resemblances among I-E languages on
which scholars have based their reconstruction of the proto-language?
Does your skepticism apply to all the other language families and their
associated proto-languages?