Creationists Argue Nessie Exists

No, saying Windermere is like saying Vinandr's Lake. There's no such thing as Lake Windermere. In fact, there's only a single lake in the Lake District. Everything else is a mere, water or tarn. That said, it has been known as Windermere Water in the past which isn't an awful lot better.
Okay, this is excessively pedantic and possibly wrong, but I was mildly irked when I saw "Vindandr's Lake" because the "r" in Vinandr is a nominative case marker, so "Vinandr's" is actually both an Old Norse nominative and a Modern English possessive. I was thinking that it really ought to be Vinand's lake (or mere), but actually, now I think about it, I suspect the genitive singular of Vinandr is Vinandar, so Windermere probably evolved from Vindandarmere.
 
I'm reaching the conclusion that Nessie exists, but Scotland doesn't. And that people are way too hung up on language. Language doesn't exist by itself, to be discovered by humans, the way physics does. Language is made by humans, and we remake it a little every time we speak or write. Loch Ness is both a loch and a lake at the same time. Which term we use depends on context. If you're asked what you sailed on yesterday, the proper answer would be Loch Ness. If you're asked what those bodies of water in Scotland are called, the proper answer would be lochs. If you're conducting a biology experiment that requires samples of microscopic life from the bottom of every lake in Europe you wouldn't skip Loch Ness because "it's a loch, not a lake".

What something is isn't the same as what something's called. You could call it the Sea of Ness or the Nessian Microocean or Queen Mary's Puddle or Burn's Spittoon and it's still the same damn body of water. Whether other people will know what the heck you're talking about is another matter, which is why we have language in the first place.
 
I do love it when colonials tell us what things should be called in our own language....

Rolfe.
 
I do love it when colonials tell us what things should be called in our own language....

Rolfe.

The term "lake" has a particular meaning. Loch Ness fits that meaning and is therefore a lake.

Nobody's said anybody has to call it that; nobody has proposed renaming it "Lake Ness." Call it what you want, but it is a lake.
 
The point is that it sounds really incongrouous to talk about Loch Ness, and then use the word lake. It's just the way the language is normally used.

I appreciate that foreigners often find it awkward to converse out of their comfort zone like that, and we probably shouldn't make too much of a fuss about it. On the other hand sometimes it's fun to wind people up. Soaking the Saxon is a time-honoured pastime.

Rolfe.
 
The name is Loch Ness. There is only one "lake" in Scotland and that is a corruption of Laigh, in that instance referring to the low-lying area adjacent. But do feel free to try and correct us Scots on the issue, what would we know about it after all.

;)

Corruption? Didn't the scots borrow "loch" from the irish? "Laigh" sounds 'anglified' and if so, would be a later version.
 
Yes. The point is that there may only be one "Lake" in Scotland, but Scotland has plenty of lakes.
 
I'm reaching the conclusion that Nessie exists, but Scotland doesn't. And that people are way too hung up on language. Language doesn't exist by itself, to be discovered by humans, the way physics does. Language is made by humans, and we remake it a little every time we speak or write. Loch Ness is both a loch and a lake at the same time. Which term we use depends on context. If you're asked what you sailed on yesterday, the proper answer would be Loch Ness. If you're asked what those bodies of water in Scotland are called, the proper answer would be lochs. If you're conducting a biology experiment that requires samples of microscopic life from the bottom of every lake in Europe you wouldn't skip Loch Ness because "it's a loch, not a lake".

What something is isn't the same as what something's called. You could call it the Sea of Ness or the Nessian Microocean or Queen Mary's Puddle or Burn's Spittoon and it's still the same damn body of water. Whether other people will know what the heck you're talking about is another matter, which is why we have language in the first place.

I think his account has been hacked - this is way too serious to be from TM....
 
Last edited:
Incorrect on both counts (unless 4 is plenty) ;): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lakes_of_Scotland

Ah, Wikipedia as a source! Excellent! As explained here:
Loch ( /ˈlɒx/ or /ˈlɒk/) is the Scottish Gaelic and Irish word for a lake or a sea inlet.

Scotland has very few natural water bodies actually called 'lakes'.

... so, to modify my earlier claim: Scotland has plenty of lakes, although very few of them are "Lakes".
 

Back
Top Bottom