------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 3 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: nomothete
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: NATLANG: icelandic, finnish, english
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: most looked-up words
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:50:59 -0700
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: nomothete
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:13:07 -0500, Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can "nomothete" or "Nomothete" mean "name-giver" as well as "lawgiver"?
> Umberto Eco seems to use this term with the latter sense:
>
> "...'out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and
> every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call
> them'. The interpretation of the passage is an extremely delicate matter.
> Clearly we are in the presence of a motif, common to other religions and
> mythologies -- that of the nomothete, the name-giver, the creator of
> language."
>
> Search for the Perfect Language, p. 8.
>
> Is Eco using the word incorrectly? I've always understood this to mean
> nomos + theticos. Is there any context outside of Eco's use of it here
> where this word means giving the name?
Yes. In Plato's dialogue "Cratylus" it is used it this way.
<< Socrates:
Perhaps, then, one artisan of names will be good, and another bad?
Cratylus:
Yes.
Socrates:
The name of such an artisan was lawgiver? [nomoqeths]
Cratylus:
Yes. >>
I seem to remember a detailed discussion in there of how the nomothete,
if a good one, will assign good sounds to the right words, (e.g., "rho",
a flowing sound, will go in words that pertain to fluid motion) but I'm
not sure where exactly it is right now.
But it seems that you're not the only one to think it a mistake, as
apparently "onomatothete" [onomatoqeths] was often written as a correction
of this word.
*Muke!
--
website: http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt: http://kohath.deviantart.com/
FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:56:10 -0700
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NATLANG: icelandic, finnish, english
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:14:52 +0000, Ian Spackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > A lot of older English texts with otherwise
>> > apparently modern spelling spell 'diverse'
>> > as 'divers'. When did the final -e become usual?
>>
>> I think it's still spelled as /divers/ in British
>> English. /diverse/ has pretty much always been the
>> American standard.
>
> 'Divers' and 'diverse' are two different words; the former is obsolescent,
> and means roughly 'several'.
Might be a bit strong to call them two different words... historically it
seems more to be a single lexeme that has specialized in meaning along its two
different spellings.
Actually, "diverse" can usually replace "divers" with little or no change in
actual meaning, while "divers" can't always replace divers: I don't think you
can say "The Germans have a divers culture" (however diverse it may actually
be).
*Muke!
--
website: http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt: http://kohath.deviantart.com/
FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:58:00 -0500
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: most looked-up words
Mark J. Reed scripsit:
> > I more often hear /'dzairo/, as if it were the word "gyro" = "gyroscope".
>
> Well, clearly you live in a less sophisticated part of the country than
> Atlanta. :)
I meant /Z/ not /z/, of course.
> > As for cicadas...
>
> Around here that's /s@'kei'[EMAIL PROTECTED]/, btw.
Ditto.
--
John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan
Consider the matter of Analytic Philosophy. Dennett and Bennett are well-known.
Dennett rarely or never cites Bennett, so Bennett rarely or never cites Dennett.
There is also one Dummett. By their works shall ye know them. However, just as
no trinities have fourth persons (Zeppo Marx notwithstanding), Bummett is hardly
known by his works. Indeed, Bummett does not exist. It is part of the function
of this and other e-mail messages, therefore, to do what they can to create him.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
