Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Ancient Macedonian language Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:08 |
Originally posted by Anton
Such a cheap trick Flipper. BTW look what theMacedonian wrote:
2.Ancient Macedonian had no written form, so you wont be finding any scripts written in Macedonian.
If such an inscription be founded it will be claimed as falsificate
|
Nice scientific thought Anton!!!!
One side has as argyments inscriptions,ancient lexicons and of course words.
The other side has....NOTHING
|
|
|
Flipper
Arch Duke
Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:09 |
Originally posted by theMacedonian
For No. 2 (thats is so far nothing has been found so far) thats what we know atleast... but away from that...
How about finding a greek enscription on Macedonian teritory before 4 Century AD... i would like to see a sugnificant nomber of inscriptions pre dating this period. |
I've given you 6000 thousand inscriptions to choose from...
|
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:11 |
Originally posted by akritas
Originally posted by Anton
Such a cheap trick Flipper. BTW look what theMacedonian wrote:
2.Ancient Macedonian had no written form, so you wont be finding any scripts written in Macedonian.
If such an inscription be founded it will be claimed as falsificate
|
Nice scientific thought Anton!!!!
One side has as argyments inscriptions,ancient lexicons and of course words.
The other side has....NOTHING
|
"NOTHING" is underestimation. Did you read topic that you created together with Sharikin?
|
.
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:17 |
If you have arguments go there and post them. This is other topic and consern the ancient Macedonian language. And your arguments until now are "invisible"
Edited by akritas - 25-Oct-2006 at 13:17
|
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:27 |
Arguments were many, for example story about Phylota . But since you cannot explain it you always ask not to post it again.
|
.
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:49 |
Originally posted by Anton
Arguments were many, for example story about Phylota . But since you cannot explain it you always ask not to post it again. |
Then I shall remind you AGAIN my argument because as I see you forget easy.....
One of the questions that arises out of Curtius' inflated account of the Philotas affair is
Where did Curtius find all this information, with all its details and melodrama?
Were records of the trial's proceedings available, which could have been used by Curtius' source(s) or Curtius himself?
and I am explain
In Arrian (3.26.1-4), the Philotas-Parmenion affair is only 36 lines + 2 words long Plutarch yields 86 LCL lines + 3 words to the Philotas-Parmenion affair Curtius' account of the Philotas affair, on the other hand, amounts to 619 LCL lines + 81 words, or about 4537.8 words (6.7-1 1.40).
continue........
Edited by akritas - 25-Oct-2006 at 13:58
|
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 13:58 |
In any event, to comprehend as best as possible Curtius' account of the Philotas affair it becomes necessary to dissect its structure in a synoptic style. This will bring forth the steps involved in the construction of the details and dramatic techniques therein. One such dramatic technique is when Alexander, unexpectedly so-to-speak, asks Philotas whether hz (Philotas) was to defend himself in the putrius senno, because the Makedones were to pass judgement on him.
Curtius does not specify in what language Alexander addressed Philotas, but it has been inferred that it was in the koine. This is, of course, arbitrary inference, as Philotas, too, does not indicate in what language Alexander addressed him, although from the context neither of them was speaking in the pasrius senno of therein.
Alexander's question to Philotas whether the latter was to address the Makedones in the patrius senno (6.9.34) and Philotas' reply (below) to Alexander's accusation that he (Philotas) hated the putrius s e m and did not learn it (ibid. 9.36) are in themselves contradictory. When Alexander asked Philotas about the patrius sem , Philotas responded that he was going to speak in the same language as Alexander, presumably the koine because, besides the Makedones, there were also many others present and because Alexander's language was understood a pluribus (ibid. 9.35).
This response by Philotas would imply that there was a putrius senno and that Philotas knew it, but he preferred to speak in the language Alexander had used for greater comprehension, unless this was a ploy on the part of Philotas to cover up his not knowing the putnus senno, as accused by Alexander and later by Bolon.The contradiction in the pazrius senno motif shows up later, too, when Philotas in defending himself (6.10.23) says that the parrills sernlo had become obsolete because of the intercourse with other nations (lam pndem nativus ille sermo commercio aliarum gerzrium exolevit) , with the comment tam victoribus, quam victis peregrina lingua disceitda esr, which may be rendered into Greek as kathaper nikosin,osautos kai httimenoi xenis glossan mathitea.
Anton how could Philotas state in the contio that the patrirrs sermo was no longer spoken, if it was still in vogue as suggested by Alexander's question?
And Anton how could Alexander pose such a question if the patrius sem was no longer spoken as Philotas declared?
lets see now your arguments as about Philotas case dear Anton
Edited by akritas - 25-Oct-2006 at 14:02
|
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 14:27 |
Akritas these are not arguments. These are your tractation or explanation of existing arguments. How could I know where did he take the information from? Does it really matter? Where did Herodotus for example take his information? Following your logic I may ommit any authors saying that Macedonians were Greeks by the fact that Greeks wanted to have the "glory" of macedonians (particularly Alexander).
|
.
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 14:30 |
Originally posted by Anton
Akritas these are not arguments. These are your tractation or explanation of existing arguments. How could I know where did he take the information from? Does it really matter? Where did Herodotus for example take his information? Following your logic I may ommit any authors saying that Macedonians were Greeks by the fact that Greeks wanted to have the "glory" of macedonians (particularly Alexander). |
Anton thank you AGAIN for your non-arguments
As about your supposing speculation-questions the answer is easy..By learning the ancient Greek or Latin languages. This is the answer in every speculation.
|
|
|
Menumorut
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Jun-2006
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1423
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 14:45 |
I've given you 6000 thousand inscriptions to choose from... |
I'm questioning myself what would Greek archaeologist feel if he would find inscriptions in Macedonian, non-Greek language, like in Northern Macedonia (today Republic of Macedonia) have been found:
KRESKAY SE SI VO LET SAL SO ILYU = Crackle you are in flight only (solely) with the sun
http://www.unet.com.mk/ancient-macedonians/lac_a.htm
The Ancient Macedonian language was the tongue of the Ancient Macedonians. It was spoken in Macedon during the 1st millennium BC. Marginalized from the 5th century BC, it is believed to have disappeared by the early centuries of the Common Era.[citation needed] It was probably spoken predominantly in the inland regions away from the coast. It is as yet undetermined whether the language was a separate yet sibling language which was most closely related to Greek, a dialect of Greek or an independent Indo-European language close to Greek, Thracian and Phrygian languages.
Knowledge of the language is very limited because there are no surviving texts that are indisputably written in the language, though a body of authentic Macedonian words has been assembled from ancient sources, mainly from coin inscriptions, and from the 5th century lexicon of Hesychius of Alexandria, amounting to about 700 words and proper names. Most of these are confidently identifiable as Greek, but some of them are not easily reconciled with standard Greek phonology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Macedonian_language
|
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 15:03 |
Your ancient Macedonian language or better the source that you give us Menumorut ifrom Vasil Ilyov that try to connect a A & C Bulgarian dialect that created 3000 years later with the Linear A!!!!!
You make me lauph LOUD!!!
So Menumorut .. please infrom us exactly how does this PSEUDO-professor of also unknown ancestry allegedly decipher a tablet that has ONLY been studied by Proffessor Hourmouziadis and his 'team' at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki??
But what can anyone expect from a totally inaccurate source..
First, the site in question was discovered in 1932 by Prof. A.Keramopoylos and NOT in 1853 as your source claims..
See the OFFICIAL Dispilio site instead of your PSEUDO-professor of unknown origin here:
First if this was any form of Slaic that would be PROTO-Slavic and not the Bulgarian dialect that they speak the Slavonic origin inhibants of the Macedonia!!!!!.
Second, exactly WHERE does the PSEUDO-prof. find this inscription. The inscription that has ONLY been examined by Hourmouziadis and his team before it was destroyed ???
Unless your 'Vasil Ilyov' was part of his team but was for some mysterious reason kept a secret..
According to your source. this:
is allegedly part of the inscription found..
Once again a totally inaccurate and manipulated propaganda attempt.. Why ??
Ahhh, simple dear Menumorut because the inscription on the plate actually looked like THIS :
and according to Prof. Hourmouziadis and his team, the corresponding 'letters' to the inscriptions of Linear A' which is definitely NOT Slav(e)ic are the following..
Edited by akritas - 25-Oct-2006 at 15:10
|
|
|
Menumorut
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Jun-2006
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1423
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 15:15 |
What language do you consider was spoken in the territory of Macedonia between 1500 BC and 500 BC?
|
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 15:30 |
Originally posted by Menumorut
What language do you consider was spoken in the territory of Macedonia between 1500 BC and 500 BC? |
The thread consern the language of the ancient Macedonians.This era started between 650 BC and after. Macedonian history originated since the Macedonians conquered the Emathia(Vrygians) at that date. If you have something diffrent as about the topic bring us.But not FYROMIan propagandistic sources like Vasil Ilyov!!!!
And given answer in your question the Macedonian Land (Emathia) , not the today geographical Macedonia inhabited by Illyrians-Frygians and Greeks at 1200-650 BC. Until now we don't have any evidence from different language.
|
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 17:29 |
Originally posted by akritas
and according to Prof. Hourmouziadis and his team, the corresponding 'letters' to the inscriptions of Linear A' which is definitely NOT Slav(e)ic are the following..
|
Slav(e)ic -- what language is it? Is it from word "Slave"? Are you trying by that to offend around 200 000 000 people? I sent a report to moderator about this. Unless you appoligize and change your post yourself.
|
.
|
|
Seko
Emperor
Spammer
Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2006 at 21:07 |
Since the issue has been raised, I'm interested to find out what it means too.
For others, keep within the parameters of the topic.
Edited by Seko - 25-Oct-2006 at 21:11
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Oct-2006 at 06:08 |
Interesting mistyping
|
.
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Oct-2006 at 11:05 |
Ahhh, simple dear Menumorut because the inscription on the plate actually looked like THIS :
|
1. What is the reason to put it in this direction and not in the first? Turn it 90 degrees anti-clock wise and you will get what it was. With addition three more lines of course.
2. How could one explain this in ancient greek-speaking and greek writing macedonians?
|
.
|
|
akritas
Chieftain
Hegemom
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Oct-2006 at 11:49 |
Originally posted by Anton
1. What is the reason to put it in this direction and not in the first? Turn it 90 degrees anti-clock wise and you will get what it was. With addition three more lines of course. |
Turn it on in any direction want. The result is the same.We speak for a logophonetic text(Linear A) that has symbols and of course never deciphere. Linear B and Cypriot both exhibit considerable similarity to Linear A. Because of its time depth, Linear A appears to be the immediate ancestor to both of these writing systems.
Originally posted by Anton
2. How could one explain this in ancient greek-speaking and greek writing macedonians?
|
I don't understand your question.
|
|
|
theMacedonian
Knight
Joined: 24-Oct-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 60
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 02-Nov-2006 at 11:37 |
why did us stop writing i was enjoyng that...
or was my "historical incopentence" you fueling spark that now has ran out...
whell if this is so... i will boost you historical hormones soon... I just wanna see how all this works out.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Dec-2006 at 21:06 |
Plato in his book "Cratylus" said
"
Soc. Shall I tell you what I suspect to be the true explanation of this and several other words?- My belief is that they are of foreign origin. For the Hellenes, especially those who were under the dominion of the barbarians, often borrowed from them. Her. What is the inference? Soc. Why, you know that any one who seeks to demonstrate the fitness of these names according to the Hellenic language, and not according to the language from which the words are derived, is rather likely to be at fault. Her. Yes, certainly. Soc. Well then, consider whether this pur is not foreign; for the word is not easily brought into relation with the Hellenic tongue, and the Phrygians may be observed to have the same word slightly changed, just as they have udor (water) and kunes (dogs), and many other words. "
If Greeks borrowed words from the barbarians(aka non-Greeks) what makes the words we came to know as Greek actualy be Greek?
-Is it because they wore written in the Greek script(originaly pheonisian origins)
-Is it because it was the Greek Language?
-Or is anything with "os" at the end automaticly Greek?! even though there is no explanation of the word?!
|
|