TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Happy Birthday Omega_M!!!1
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

oh, and happy bday MagemO

Happy B-day!!

Keep it real mate

happy bday

happy birthday mate, all the best

quote:

Originally posted by Lira stuff

something like PIE ?

MAGEMO!!!!!!!

Happy birthday.

im late but happy bday! hope you had a fun day!

quote:

Originally posted by eROs.au something like PIE ?

Yeah, PIE is their common ancestor, but we can't know for sure what it was like

quote:

Originally posted by Inertia vino, wine in spanish, is also wine in russian. at least according to a clockwork orange

True that, only the stressed syllable is different

quote:

Originally posted by eRRaTiK unf unf unf sounds the same no matter what language you speak

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Why Spanish, English, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, German, Marathi, French, Italian, Punjabi and Urdu are related For simplicity's sake, I'm going to pick Sanskrit (from which Hindi, Marathi have evolved) and Latin (from which Portuguese, French, ... have evolved). I'll also try to avoid any kind of jargon and stuff - if it does sound complicated, though, do tell me, and I'll try to make myself clearer Firstly, it's not rare for words with similar meaning to resemble one another. For example "Mirar" in Spanish means "to look", and so does the verb "Miru" in Japanese. However, once you analyse the languages more carefully, you can't see that happening systematically. However, when you have entire systems that resemble one another, then you probably something going on. When you compare Sanskrit and Latin numbers, for example, you don't need to be a linguist to notice something strikingly similar between the two languages: Latin Numbers Sanskrit Numbers 1 unus �ka 2 duo dv� 3 tres tr� 4 quattuor cat�r 5 quinque pa�ca 6 sex ṣ�ṣ 7 septem sapt� 8 octo aṣṭ� 9 novem n�va 10 decem d�śa The numbers 2,3,4,7 and 9 are almost identical and, when there are more differences, linguists can count on a bunch of rules that explain how the sounds changed in each of these languages. Notice, for example, how the sound "e" in Latin often becomes "a" in Sanskrit. However, that's not enough. If two languages are really genetically related (yup, that's the terminology), the grammar must also show some common traces. And, once again, you've got that: Words both in Sanskrit and Latin change according to their function in a sentence. For example, if you a rose is the subject of a sentence, in Latin, you say "Rosa". If it's the object, you say "Rosam". If something belongs to the god damn rose, you say "Rosae". And, this is the cool thing about Latin and Sanskrit. The way they do that is quite similar, and I'm adding Greek this time, just so you can understand how the changes "flow" accross languages: Latin Greek Sanskrit Genus Genos Ganas Generis Geneos Ganasas Genere Genei Ganasi Genera Genea Ganasu Generum Geneon Ganasam Did you find the common pattern? Well, let's consider "ganas, ganasas,..." the most conservative form. There's some evidence that intervocalic "s" fell in old Greek, and it became "r" in Latin. If you turn things back to what they probably were like, the similarities become even more obvious: "Old" Latin "Old" Greek Sanskrit Genus Genos Ganas Genesis Genesos Ganasas Genese Genesi Ganasi Genesa Genesa Ganasu Genesum Geneson Ganasam All these 3 languages treat their nouns the same way, and sound too much alike. You can assume that, if that's the case, they probably have a common ancestor (just like two brothers have the same parents). And, upon further inspection, that is the case. So that's briefly how we know that Spanish, English, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, German, Marathi, French, Italian, Punjabi and Urdu are all related edit: Why is there such a giant gap between the text and the tables!?

Awesome ! This seems to imply that these languages have either influenced each other or one has influenced the other. Do you know whether these languages evolved around the same time, or whether one predates the others ?

You deserve more than a birthday for what you did with that poor poor thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M Awesome ! This seems to imply that these languages have either influenced each other or one has influenced the other. Do you know whether these languages evolved around the same time, or whether one predates the others ?

Well,

As Eros.Au pointed out, we believe that both Sanskrit and Latin came from a hypothetical language called Proto-Indo-European. And, as it spread across distant lands, the different dialects became increasingly unintelligible (that's a common phenomenon). When two "dialects" are no longer mutually comprehensible, you tend to say they're two separate languages. But this is, by no means, objective.

Theoretical problems aside, it is safe to say that all these languages evolved around the same time, as no language remains "static" over time. If it sounds strange for some reason, here's a good analogy: contemporary monkeys are different from whatever ancestral we share in common with them, because monkeys too have evolved during this time. That's precisely why we aren't the same species.

The other day I came across this video. It's a talk show and the guest, Dean Brown, talks about the Sanskrit language. Didn't watch the whole thing, but I think Lira may be interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cQ4hIG9w7c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ4gWh5jVgo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9A_q8kxE8g

Who was Dean Brown ? A Sanskrit scholar, Linguist, physicist, friend of Albert Einstein and a computer scientist.

quote:

He was a sanskrit scholar. A few years ago the Philosophical Research Society published his translation of the Upanishads and Yoga Sutras. More than that, he was conversant with many all of the world's great spiritual texts. And, he studied them in their original languages. At one time he counted 25 languages with which he was familiar. He passion was to find the "invariants" within all of this literature - the metaphysical underpinnings of world spirituality. But, it would be a mistake to simply classify Dean as a student of metaphysics and religious traditions. He was a physicist of the highest order - making contributions to the development of the hydrogen bomb and designing the fuel element for the Nautilus, the world's first nuclear submarines. In his youth, he worked at the Institute of Advanced Studies in Princeton - and was a friend and colleague of Albert Einstein. They enjoyed playing "Go" together as a way of exploring Von Neumann's game theory. Dean was also a computer scientist. He is actually the first person, back in the 1950s, to suggest that computers would have applications in the field of education. He worked with the United Nations for several years introducing this technology to various countries around the world. One project involved installing computers throughout the educational system of Spain. At this time he wrote a fascinating little book on the essentials of learning. Dean was a founder of Zylog, Inc., a company that manufactured one of the first microprocessors, the Z80 chip - which is still in use today. Dean was instrumental in designing that chip. Another company that he founded, Picodyne, is still active today in the field of educational software.

http://www.intuition.org/Brown.htm

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M The other day I came across this video. It's a talk show and the guest, Dean Brown, talks about the Sanskrit language. Didn't watch the whole thing, but I think Lira may be interested. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cQ4hIG9w7c http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ4gWh5jVgo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9A_q8kxE8g Who was Dean Brown ? A Sanskrit scholar, Linguist, physicist, friend of Albert Einstein and a computer scientist. http://www.intuition.org/Brown.htm

That was indeed inspiring, and I actually saw the whole thing

I should point out the fact that his etymologies seem to be poetical rather than factual, though, and seems to be based on the misconception that the European words he mentioned came directly from Sanskrit, and not from a common ancestor — at least, that's what I gathered from his explanation (he doesn't seem to treat "Latin" and "Sanskrit" as being sister languages). Nevertheless, Human, for example, comes from the Proto-Indo-European root dhghem-, rather than from sanskrit "Ohm" (is there any etymology available for this word, by the way? The only "ohm" I found was something else entirely ). Also, "-man" in "human" is not related to the actual word man (whose origin was independent), but from a abbreviation of the latin "humanus" (English is known for dropping these weak sounds in the end)... that's why the plural of "human" is "humans", rather than "humen".

Finally, "Deva" and "deity do share the same root (dyeu), but the semantic shift here came from "shining" and "sky" to "deity" (reason why the Latin word for day also shares this root), not from "sense". I do have to grant, however, that "God is your senses" is indeed a great insight, and only appeared in Europe quite recent forms of idealism (when compared to the Veidic tradition).

I wonder why this guy doesn't seem to be famous (I couldn't find a Wikipedia Entry, or a page from some educational institution), because a dialogue between him and an anthropologist would be quite remarkable

want me to paint you a picture/make a photochop? HB!

quote:

Originally posted by Lira That was indeed inspiring, and I actually saw the whole thing I should point out the fact that his etymologies seem to be poetical rather than factual, though, and seems to be based on the misconception that the European words he mentioned came directly from Sanskrit, and not from a common ancestor — at least, that's what I gathered from his explanation (he doesn't seem to treat "Latin" and "Sanskrit" as being sister languages). Nevertheless, Human, for example, comes from the Proto-Indo-European root dhghem-, rather than from sanskrit "Ohm" (is there any etymology available for this word, by the way? The only "ohm" I found was something else entirely ). Also, "-man" in "human" is not related to the actual word man (whose origin was independent), but from a abbreviation of the latin "humanus" (English is known for dropping these weak sounds in the end)... that's why the plural of "human" is "humans", rather than "humen". Finally, "Deva" and "deity do share the same root (dyeu), but the semantic shift here came from "shining" and "sky" to "deity" (reason why the Latin word for day also shares this root), not from "sense". I do have to grant, however, that "God is your senses" is indeed a great insight, and only appeared in Europe quite recent forms of idealism (when compared to the Veidic tradition). I wonder why this guy doesn't seem to be famous (I couldn't find a Wikipedia Entry, or a page from some educational institution), because a dialogue between him and an anthropologist would be quite remarkable

I watched the first video and that is why I asked whether any of these languages Sanskrit/Latin/Greek developed before any other. Because, Dean Brown seems to imply that Sanskrit and Latin are not "sister languages" as you mention.

ohm is actually spelled as AUM or simply Om. And a technically correct pronunciation needs significant practice. If pronounced correctly, it sounds very beautiful ! It has a very long, drawn out deep sound that stretches for more than 10 seconds.

quote:

Originally posted by lacksesepsotygh want me to paint you a picture/make a photochop? HB!

No thanks

But thank you for the wishes !! Festivus is over I guess.

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M ohm is actually spelled as AUM or simply Om. And a technically correct pronunciation needs significant practice. If pronounced correctly, it sounds very beautiful ! It has a very long, drawn out deep sound that stretches for more than 10 seconds.

search for some audios and you will see what I mean. It is pronounced in this manner only for the purpose of meditation and such. Otherwise it is pronounced as Ohm, by dropping the "h" sound.

edit : Check this video. After a first few recitations, he is able to hold the sound without any modulation for over 20 secs !

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M I watched the first video and that is why I asked whether any of these languages Sanskrit/Latin/Greek developed before any other. Because, Dean Brown seems to imply that Sanskrit and Latin are not "sister languages" as you mention.

Maybe the terminology is to blame for his confusion. Vedic Sanskrit was around just a bit earlier than Latin simply because Rome did not exist (so you wouldn't find "Latin speakers" before they had settled in Lazio). But, they were both around 800~500 BC.

His idea of India being Western is also interesting, by the way, and kinda reminded me of Jaspers' Axial Age

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M ohm is actually spelled as AUM or simply Om. And a technically correct pronunciation needs significant practice. If pronounced correctly, it sounds very beautiful ! It has a very long, drawn out deep sound that stretches for more than 10 seconds.

Oh, thanks! Lots of things make sense to me now. My geography teacher (in 6th grade) liked yoga very much, and had we recite "Aum" for a few minutes before the class started (I was one of the few students that took it seriously, however ). And that letter is quite popular around here

happy birthday rocketman

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.