Discussion:
Magdalenian KOD meaning tent, hut, a word of very many derivatives
Add Reply
Franz Gnaedinger
2018-07-21 07:38:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines

KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy' Arabic mu'qaddas
'sanctified, holy, consecrated' Turkish mukaddas 'holy (of places)' Persian
mogaddes 'holy, sanctified, sanctuaries' and has a parallel in Italian casa
di Dio 'house of God' for a church. Further derivatives of KOD are for example
Hebrew xasa (chasa) 'find protection' and 'setér 'hidden place, secret'.

whereupon Ruud Harmsen replied (quote)

Which x or ch is that? Anyway, it's not a q. Q was already distinct in
Proto-Semitic and Proto-whatsthenewofthatwiderlanguagefamily. If there
is a connection in the more remote past, that is:
1) unknown to us,
2) highly unlikely.

So what is your evidence that such a connection has existed?

(end of quote)

I don't understand the question. My reconstruction of KOD for tent, hut,
dates from 2006 and was inspired by a comment by Douglas G. Kilday.
The word has very many derivatives, among them cottage, hut, shed,
German Kate 'hut' and Hütte 'hut', Latin casa English house German Haus,
French château English castle, French cité English city, then also hat
as casing of the head, coat as casing of the body, and many many more
examples I gave over the years, in fact it is a most basic word in
hypothetical Magdalenian. This year I added a few more examples from
languages in Asia Minor, especially Hebrew and Arabic. Those languages,
my claim, evolved from the Late Magdalenian spoken in the region of
the Göbekli Tepe 12,000 years ago, and were blended with Afroasiatic
languages. A couple of words are still clearly recognizeable, especially
in the regligious context, as I explained many times. When you look at
language evolution and development ('evodevo' in biological lingo) the
original K branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut). You have to learn to look at language the way it actually
evolved over time: along the flow of time, not against it.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-21 08:14:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines
KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy'
Why do you continue to repeat this lie? Those are _two different words_.
Yusuf B Gursey
2018-07-21 13:39:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines
KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy'
Why do you continue to repeat this lie? Those are _two different words_.
Don't you know from Magdalenian 101 that one is an 'overforming' of the other?!
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 18:00:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 01:14:55 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines
KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy'
Why do you continue to repeat this lie? Those are _two different words_.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q-D-%C5%A0
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%93%D7%95%D7%A9

Same root, apparently.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 17:41:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
This year I added a few more examples from
languages in Asia Minor, especially Hebrew and Arabic. Those languages,
my claim, evolved from the Late Magdalenian spoken in the region of
the Göbekli Tepe 12,000 years ago, and were blended with Afroasiatic
languages.
Hebrew and Arabic ARE Afroasiatic languages, of the semitic branch.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 17:40:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines
KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy' Arabic mu'qaddas
'sanctified, holy, consecrated' Turkish mukaddas 'holy (of places)' Persian
mogaddes 'holy, sanctified, sanctuaries' and has a parallel in Italian casa
di Dio 'house of God' for a church. Further derivatives of KOD are for example
Hebrew xasa (chasa) 'find protection' and 'setér 'hidden place, secret'.
whereupon Ruud Harmsen replied (quote)
Which x or ch is that? Anyway, it's not a q. Q was already distinct in
Proto-Semitic and Proto-whatsthenewofthatwiderlanguagefamily. If there
1) unknown to us,
2) highly unlikely.
So what is your evidence that such a connection has existed?
(end of quote)
I don't understand the question.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Hebrew#Phonology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_alphabet#History
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleo-Hebrew_alphabet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_alphabet

Which phoneme/letter do you mean by "ch" of "x"?
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Further derivatives of KOD are for example
Hebrew xasa (chasa) 'find protection' and 'setér 'hidden place, secret'.
In other words, how is the xasa of chasa spelled in Hebrew letters?
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 17:47:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
12,000 years ago, and were blended with Afroasiatic
languages. A couple of words are still clearly recognizeable, especially
in the regligious context, as I explained many times.
When comparing Latin words with their modern counterparts, like French
or Portuguese, we see considerable change. Same when comparing Gothic
with Dutch (even though Gothic is not a grandparent of Dutch, but a
great-uncle).

Here we work at a time scale of between 1500 and 2500 years.

So how can it be likely that languages supposedly cognate, assuming a
common ancestor some 12,000 years ago, still betray the same
consonants in many cases?

This is a question to Franz, but also to Daud Deden.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Daud Deden
2018-07-21 20:20:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
12,000 years ago, and were blended with Afroasiatic
languages. A couple of words are still clearly recognizeable, especially
in the regligious context, as I explained many times.
When comparing Latin words with their modern counterparts, like French
or Portuguese, we see considerable change. Same when comparing Gothic
with Dutch (even though Gothic is not a grandparent of Dutch, but a
great-uncle).
Here we work at a time scale of between 1500 and 2500 years.
So how can it be likely that languages supposedly cognate, assuming a
common ancestor some 12,000 years ago, still betray the same
consonants in many cases?
This is a question to Franz, but also to Daud Deden.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Ruud, just an example. A word (sound) = a faunal physical body, niche & behavior/phenotype; a word (meaning)
= a faunal genotype(biochemical protein replication-modification factory. Both evolve but have different boundaries & mechanisms of change. The result is that consonants can change very little, or change very much, often in large part due to local weather impact.
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-22 17:36:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 13:20:20 -0700 (PDT): Daud Deden
Post by Daud Deden
Post by Ruud Harmsen
When comparing Latin words with their modern counterparts, like French
or Portuguese, we see considerable change. Same when comparing Gothic
with Dutch (even though Gothic is not a grandparent of Dutch, but a
great-uncle).
Here we work at a time scale of between 1500 and 2500 years.
So how can it be likely that languages supposedly cognate, assuming a
common ancestor some 12,000 years ago, still betray the same
consonants in many cases?
This is a question to Franz, but also to Daud Deden.
Ruud, just an example. A word (sound) = a faunal physical body, niche &
behavior/phenotype; a word (meaning) = a faunal genotype(biochemical
protein replication-modification factory. Both evolve but have different
boundaries & mechanisms of change. The result is that consonants can
change very little, or change very much, often in large part due to local
weather impact.
Sorry, this is beyond my comprehension capabilities. I am simply not
smart enough to understand you. That probably means that you are
right.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Daud Deden
2018-07-22 21:29:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 13:20:20 -0700 (PDT): Daud Deden
Post by Daud Deden
Post by Ruud Harmsen
When comparing Latin words with their modern counterparts, like French
or Portuguese, we see considerable change. Same when comparing Gothic
with Dutch (even though Gothic is not a grandparent of Dutch, but a
great-uncle).
Here we work at a time scale of between 1500 and 2500 years.
So how can it be likely that languages supposedly cognate, assuming a
common ancestor some 12,000 years ago, still betray the same
consonants in many cases?
This is a question to Franz, but also to Daud Deden.
Ruud, just an example. A word (sound) = a faunal physical body, niche &
behavior/phenotype; a word (meaning) = a faunal genotype(biochemical
protein replication-modification factory. Both evolve but have different
boundaries & mechanisms of change. The result is that consonants can
change very little, or change very much, often in large part due to local
weather impact.
Sorry, this is beyond my comprehension capabilities. I am simply not
smart enough to understand you. That probably means that you are
right.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
A consonant may be permanent or it may be transient, due to environmental factors. If a tropical rainforest people move to a drier climate, many vowels may remain but some consonants will reduce, to save water. A prolonged aaaaah sound causes a significant loss of lung moisture, very costly unless one is living waterside. If you think this is nonsense, I can assure you that arid climate definitely affects speech patterns.
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 17:57:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
You have to learn to look at language the way it actually
evolved over time: along the flow of time, not against it.
If there is evidence, yes. But on your timescale, there isn't any.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 17:56:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
When you look at
language evolution and development ('evodevo' in biological lingo) the
original K branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut).
Over about 2500 years, yes. And longer than that? We know some, using
evidence from Avestan, Sanskrit etcetera. Perhaps 4000 or 6000 years.

Beyond that: WE JUST DON'T KNOW. There is no data.

Did you ever read about Hungarian and Finnish and the few languages in
that (or those? not all scholar even agree) same language family? Did
you see how hard it is to distinghuish genetic development from old
loans?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Uralic_language
7 thousand to 2 thousand years ago, scientists do not agree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Ugric_languages#Origins
"The validity of Finno-Ugric as a genetic grouping is under challenge,
[...]"

If this is already so difficult, while many living languages still
exist so they can be studied, how can you make any statements about a
hypothetical language of TWELVE thousand years ago?
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut).
The k of Kate and the c of cottage is the same sound. The difference
of spelling only.

English shed does non derive from an IE k, like the h of house does:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/house#Etymology_1
Note the word "possibly".

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shed#Etymology_1

A completely distinct etymology.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
António Marques
2018-07-21 18:06:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
When you look at
language evolution and development ('evodevo' in biological lingo) the
original K branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut).
Over about 2500 years, yes. And longer than that? We know some, using
evidence from Avestan, Sanskrit etcetera. Perhaps 4000 or 6000 years.
Beyond that: WE JUST DON'T KNOW. There is no data.
Did you ever read about Hungarian and Finnish and the few languages in
that (or those? not all scholar even agree) same language family? Did
you see how hard it is to distinghuish genetic development from old
loans?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Uralic_language
7 thousand to 2 thousand years ago, scientists do not agree.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Ugric_languages#Origins
"The validity of Finno-Ugric as a genetic grouping is under challenge,
[...]"
If this is already so difficult, while many living languages still
exist so they can be studied, how can you make any statements about a
hypothetical language of TWELVE thousand years ago?
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut).
The k of Kate and the c of cottage is the same sound. The difference
of spelling only.
I have no idea why you keep repeating the same things to folks who don’t
listen, so I might just as well take the opportunity to point out that Kate
is consistently more aspirated than cottage.
Post by Ruud Harmsen
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/house#Etymology_1
Note the word "possibly".
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shed#Etymology_1
A completely distinct etymology.
Ruud Harmsen
2018-07-21 20:22:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 18:06:31 -0000 (UTC): António Marques
I have no idea why you keep repeating the same things to folks who don’t
listen, so I might just as well take the opportunity to point out that Kate
is consistently more aspirated than cottage.
Really? And that corresponds with the spelling?

I don't know, because one of the defects in my English accents is that
I hardly aspirate at all.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Daud Deden
2018-07-21 20:31:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
When you look at
language evolution and development ('evodevo' in biological lingo) the
original K branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut).
Over about 2500 years, yes. And longer than that? We know some, using
evidence from Avestan, Sanskrit etcetera. Perhaps 4000 or 6000 years.
Beyond that: WE JUST DON'T KNOW. There is no data.
Did you ever read about Hungarian and Finnish and the few languages in
that (or those? not all scholar even agree) same language family? Did
you see how hard it is to distinghuish genetic development from old
loans?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Uralic_language
7 thousand to 2 thousand years ago, scientists do not agree.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Ugric_languages#Origins
"The validity of Finno-Ugric as a genetic grouping is under challenge,
[...]"
If this is already so difficult, while many living languages still
exist so they can be studied, how can you make any statements about a
hypothetical language of TWELVE thousand years ago?
THE FURTHER BACK YOU GO, THE MORE SIMILAR THE WORDS!!!!

Exactly the same in zoology, botany and any study of evolving systems.
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut).
The k of Kate and the c of cottage is the same sound. The difference
of spelling only.
K seems to derive from:
A. Xy-- (sky/skin)
B. --NGDua-- (dwell/shell/skel)
C. --tlachya (leaky, galact)
among others...
Post by Ruud Harmsen
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/house#Etymology_1
Note the word "possibly".
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shed#Etymology_1
A completely distinct etymology.
Twigs are completely different, but may originate from the exact same branch (which was a twig a few years before)
Post by Ruud Harmsen
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com
Daud Deden
2018-07-21 20:09:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines
KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy' Arabic mu'qaddas
'sanctified, holy, consecrated' Turkish mukaddas 'holy (of places)' Persian
mogaddes 'holy, sanctified, sanctuaries' and has a parallel in Italian casa
di Dio 'house of God' for a church. Further derivatives of KOD are for example
Hebrew xasa (chasa) 'find protection' and 'setér 'hidden place, secret'.
whereupon Ruud Harmsen replied (quote)
Which x or ch is that? Anyway, it's not a q. Q was already distinct in
Proto-Semitic and Proto-whatsthenewofthatwiderlanguagefamily. If there
1) unknown to us,
2) highly unlikely.
So what is your evidence that such a connection has existed?
(end of quote)
I don't understand the question. My reconstruction of KOD for tent, hut,
dates from 2006 and was inspired by a comment by Douglas G. Kilday.
The word has very many derivatives, among them cottage, hut, shed,
German Kate 'hut' and Hütte 'hut', Latin casa English house German Haus,
French château English castle, French cité English city, then also hat
as casing of the head, coat as casing of the body, and many many more
examples I gave over the years, in fact it is a most basic word in
hypothetical Magdalenian. This year I added a few more examples from
languages in Asia Minor, especially Hebrew and Arabic. Those languages,
my claim, evolved from the Late Magdalenian spoken in the region of
the Göbekli Tepe 12,000 years ago, and were blended with Afroasiatic
languages. A couple of words are still clearly recognizeable, especially
in the regligious context, as I explained many times. When you look at
language evolution and development ('evodevo' in biological lingo) the
original K branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut). You have to learn to look at language the way it actually
evolved over time: along the flow of time, not against it.
I've never heard of kate as hut. Carlos L. suggested ecatl/Hecate as wind deity, not impossibly linked to tipis of the plains-steppe N.D.L.a.Kota. I do not accept Franz's Kota as earlier than xyuambuatla/shade-hut-coat etc., a minor yet important distinction.
Daud Deden
2018-07-21 20:11:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Daud Deden
Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In my Magdalenian thread I wrote these lines
KOD DhAG accounts for Hebrew qodash modern kadosh 'holy' Arabic mu'qaddas
'sanctified, holy, consecrated' Turkish mukaddas 'holy (of places)' Persian
mogaddes 'holy, sanctified, sanctuaries' and has a parallel in Italian casa
di Dio 'house of God' for a church. Further derivatives of KOD are for example
Hebrew xasa (chasa) 'find protection' and 'setér 'hidden place, secret'.
whereupon Ruud Harmsen replied (quote)
Which x or ch is that? Anyway, it's not a q. Q was already distinct in
Proto-Semitic and Proto-whatsthenewofthatwiderlanguagefamily. If there
1) unknown to us,
2) highly unlikely.
So what is your evidence that such a connection has existed?
(end of quote)
I don't understand the question. My reconstruction of KOD for tent, hut,
dates from 2006 and was inspired by a comment by Douglas G. Kilday.
The word has very many derivatives, among them cottage, hut, shed,
German Kate 'hut' and Hütte 'hut', Latin casa English house German Haus,
French château English castle, French cité English city, then also hat
as casing of the head, coat as casing of the body, and many many more
examples I gave over the years, in fact it is a most basic word in
hypothetical Magdalenian. This year I added a few more examples from
languages in Asia Minor, especially Hebrew and Arabic. Those languages,
my claim, evolved from the Late Magdalenian spoken in the region of
the Göbekli Tepe 12,000 years ago, and were blended with Afroasiatic
languages. A couple of words are still clearly recognizeable, especially
in the regligious context, as I explained many times. When you look at
language evolution and development ('evodevo' in biological lingo) the
original K branched into various different consonants: K(ate) c(ottage)
sh(ed) h(ut). You have to learn to look at language the way it actually
evolved over time: along the flow of time, not against it.
I've never heard of kate as hut. Carlos L. suggested ecatl/Hecate as wind deity, not impossibly linked to tipis of the plains-steppe N.D.L.a.Kota. I do not accept Franz's Kota as earlier than xyuambuatla/shade-hut-coat etc., a minor yet important distinction.
I meant Franz's KOD.
Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski
2018-07-21 20:19:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Daud Deden
I've never heard of kate as hut.
Sure you haven't, because you are ignorant and stupid and don't know languages. Such as German, where Kate indeed can mean "hut".
Post by Daud Deden
Carlos L. suggested ecatl/Hecate as wind deity,
Eecatl with an audible -h- between the two e's is Classical Nahuatl for wind. Not "wind deity", but simply wind. Go learn real languages, idiot.
Daud Deden
2018-07-22 21:43:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski
Post by Daud Deden
I've never heard of kate as hut.
Sure you haven't, because you are ignorant and stupid and don't know languages. Such as German, where Kate indeed can mean "hut".
Post by Daud Deden
Carlos L. suggested ecatl/Hecate as wind deity,
Eecatl with an audible -h- between the two e's is Classical Nahuatl for wind. Not "wind deity", but simply wind.
Carlos L. referred to it (ehecatl) as a deified feature of nature, with Hecate a variant.

Go learn real languages, idiot.

Why? So I can talk out of my ass, like you do? Nein danke, comrade, itu lain betul je.
Daud Deden
2018-07-22 21:49:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Daud Deden
Post by Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski
Post by Daud Deden
I've never heard of kate as hut.
Sure you haven't, because you are ignorant and stupid and don't know languages. Such as German, where Kate indeed can mean "hut".
Post by Daud Deden
Carlos L. suggested ecatl/Hecate as wind deity,
Eecatl with an audible -h- between the two e's is Classical Nahuatl for wind. Not "wind deity", but simply wind.
Carlos L. referred to it (ehecatl) as a deified feature of nature, with Hecate a variant.
Go learn real languages, idiot.
Why? So I can talk out of my ass, like you do? Nein danke, comrade, itu lain betul je.
---
Kod technically did not mean tent, it meant coat, ***@Finnish, though it was used to name the tent. Xyua(mb)uatl.
Loading...