Ed Dawkins on Allahu Akhbar

[Robin]

I'm blocked for some reason, can someone tell me what Richard Dawkins tweeted?

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

I'm blocked for some reason, can someone tell me what Richard Dawkins tweeted?

Listening to the lovely bells of Winchester, one of our great mediaeval cathedrals. So much nicer than the aggressive-sounding “Allahu Akhbar.” Or is that just my cultural upbringing?

+2

 

[Roboramma]

There's a childishly easy way to turn the formulation you use here around, but I'm not going to be playing semantic games with you about what "speaking Mongolian" or "erasing language, means in this context, nor do I actually believe that you don't understand what mean.

I'd actually rather that you did make your "childishly easy" formulation rather than just saying that you could. The former might end up being a semantic game, but it at least would be upfront about it.

You are also free to think that when I say I don't understand your point I'm lying about that, but the truth is I'm not (you're also free to disbelieve that), and further I don't think your choice to disbelieve me is particularly helpful to the conversation.

I'm making posts in good faith and based in part on considerable respect for you as a person and your understanding of the topics under discussion. I don't necessarily expect the same amount of respect, but treating me as a dishonest contributor to the discussion is, well, the best I can say is not particularly helpful.

It's entirely possible that when you say using "Genghis" is cultural erasure you have a valid point, but you haven't presented a case for that that makes sense to me. That could be a failing on my part or yours or both of ours, or it could be because you don't have a valid point. I honestly don't know yet.

I'd appreciate it if you tried again.

Thanks.

 

[ddt]

Yeah, that's probably about as close as you'll get in Finnish.

In Swedish we say "Djingis Khan", which isn't very good if not as bad as the English one (j is unvoiced in Swedish, so it's like a consonant y). I believe it's from the German Dschingis, which in turn seems to come from the Russian Dzhingis.

I do wonder why Russian ends up with that particular representation. Intuitively I would have gone with a Tche (as in "Tchaikovsky") rather than D + Zh. It's unvoiced in Turkish, Tatar, Mongolian, Persian, Chinese etc, so I do wonder why it ended up being voiced in Russian and borrowing languages. Maybe Tche + i is just a rare syllable in Russian?

According to the Russian wikipedia, it is in fact written with the unvoiced Ч as its first letter, the same as the first letter of Tchaikovsky.

 

[GlennB]

The vowel shift is a shift in Greek, not in English. Eta was a long epsilon
(roughly) prior to middle Greek. The differing ending makes sense since English is not a strongly inflected langugae like Greek.

The word is utterly different, and not explained by a 'vowel shift'. Athens vs. Athina

While English does not render Latin (I think for practical purposes, we can group ultimately Greek words under Latin borrowings in English) perfectly consistently, there are broad patterns, and inconsistencies are generally attributable to vowel shifts. While I think it's to the detriment of English that spellings have not been revised nearly enough, these questions are much broader than a single particularly terrible romanization stumbling into the language, when similar words (other Turco-Mongol warlords' names) are rendered according to standardized rules.

If you don't see, however, how vehemently defending (while claiming not to be defending) a particularly terrible outlying representation of a foreign word with "It's the English name!" (which is circular reasoning in a normative discussion) is a form of cultural erasure, then you probably don't share the analytical framework I (and many scholars who study these things) use. To you, rendering a Mongolian name of a Mongol (who is the key figure in Mongolia's cultural heritage) in a way that completely ignores the Mongolian language is evidently value-neutral. To me, it's not, and being reasonably faithful to and respectful of the original languages has value in and of itself, and actively choosing not to do so is a value statement.

None of which explains why the use of Athens is any less a 'cultural erasure' than the English version of Genghis Khan. That name is sacred while the capital of a country with an ancient and pivotal history is not? And, along the way, you specifically allowed the importance of that Mongolian chap as - what? - a mark of respect?

I'm not saying I'm at all bothered about the Athens thing, but your position is irrational when it allows one but not the other.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I would bet that the emphasis shift in Athens is from Latin too, but I can't prove that.

No, my position is perfectly coherent when you consider vital context such as the milennia-long role of Graeco-Latin in Europe, and hey, why not the fact that Athens as the centre of Greek civilization is largely an invention of modern-era Greek nationalists who not many generations earlier considered themselves Rhomaioi. Yeah, those Romans are gonna be really upset about the influence of Latin on Greek loanwords in peripheral languages

Now I expect you to reply that such context doesn't matter for what you deem "rational", which is why I mentioned that you don't share my analytical framework.

 

[ddt]

The word is utterly different, and not explained by a 'vowel shift'. Athens vs. Athina

Yes, it is. Iotacism: in modern Greek, about half of the written vowel/diphtong combinations are pronounced as in /i:/ This is a trend that started around the birth of Christ (no causality), in some places earlier, in other places later.

I'll still go by the trusted Erasmian pronounciation of Greek I learned in school, which, apart from the Latin-inspired stress is pretty close to what the ancient Greeks spoke, and I'll write the name of the capital as Αθηναι (Athênai). and not without its ending like those modern barbarian half-Turkish Greeks do. If it was good enough for Plato, it's good enough for me.

ETA: as to stress, ancient Greek had not so much a stress but a tonal accent. An acute meant a rise in tone, a grave a lowering in tone, and a circonflexe... you get the point I guess.

 

[GlennB]

I would bet that the emphasis shift in Athens is from Latin too, but I can't prove that.

No, my position is perfectly coherent when you consider vital context such as the milennia-long role of Graeco-Latin in Europe, and hey, why not the fact that Athens as the centre of Greek civilization is largely an invention of modern-era Greek nationalists who not many generations earlier considered themselves Rhomaioi. Yeah, those Romans are gonna be really upset about the influence of Latin on Greek loanwords in peripheral languages

Now I expect you to reply that such context doesn't matter for what you deem "rational", which is why I mentioned that you don't share my analytical framework.

Magnificent example of 'poisoning the well'. Bravo.

Athens has been critical to Greek (or, rather, Hellenic) history since B.C. and that's certainly not an "invention of modern-era Greek nationalists". Up and down in importance, certainly, and the nominal capital shifted around. So what?

 

[ddt]

I would bet that the emphasis shift in Athens is from Latin too, but I can't prove that.

I think that's just a particularity of English. AFAICS, Dutch, German, French all have the stress on the second syllable ("then").

No, my position is perfectly coherent when you consider vital context such as the milennia-long role of Graeco-Latin in Europe, and hey, why not the fact that Athens as the centre of Greek civilization is largely an invention of modern-era Greek nationalists who not many generations earlier considered themselves Rhomaioi. Yeah, those Romans are gonna be really upset about the influence of Latin on Greek loanwords in peripheral languages

The latter is comical when you consider that, up to the times of Cicero, Romans thought their own language and culture inferior, and the learned Romans actually even spoke Greek. Caesar's last words, if the story is true, would have been "kai su Brute" in Greek and not "et tu Brute" in Latin.

As to the former, you couldn't be more wrong. The ancient Greeks themselves recognized Athens as the foremost center of Greek civilization; as well as the not-so-Greeks such as Alexander who went there for his education, or many Romans who did so.

Where are the Spartan equivalents of philosophers like Plato or Aristotle? Where are the Corinthian equivalents of drama writers like Aischylos, Euripides or Sophokles? There's simply no comparison.

Athens has been critical to Greek (or, rather, Hellenic) history since B.C. and that's certainly not an "invention of modern-era Greek nationalists". Up and down in importance, certainly, and the nominal capital shifted around. So what?

Ah, that's how you came up with Epidauros.

Nitpick: for most of Greek history, there was not a unified Greek polity that could have a capital.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I
As to the former, you couldn't be more wrong. The ancient Greeks themselves recognized Athens as the foremost center of Greek civilization; as well as the not-so-Greeks such as Alexander who went there for his education, or many Romans who did so.

Where are the Spartan equivalents of philosophers like Plato or Aristotle? Where are the Corinthian equivalents of drama writers like Aeschylos, Euripides or Sophokles? There's simply no comparison.

Yes, I am well aware that the ancient Greeks saw Athens in that way (probably justifiably, though it is an argument largely from silence, and we know less than we'd like about the countless Anatolian city-states) But ancient Greek identity =/= modern Greek identity (I should have expounded further on that). Greekness was not even an ethnicity as we'd recognize it in ancient times, but a social status. And the centre of civilization for Rhomaioi had long been Constantinople.

Hell, Athens wasn't even the capital of the first Greek republic, and even then the idea seems to have been retaking Constantinople above all else.

 

[theprestige]

Yeah, that's probably about as close as you'll get in Finnish.

LOL. Finnish actually has a "k" sound, but somehow omitting it is "as close as you'll get"?

Why do you give Finnish a free pass in not "correctly" representing the name, but not English?

 

[ddt]

Yes, I am well aware that the ancient Greeks saw Athens in that way

Then you phrased that very poorly.

(probably justifiably, though it is an argument largely from silence, and we know less than we'd like about the countless Anatolian city-states)

And likewise Magna Graecia.

But ancient Greek identity =/= modern Greek identity (I should have expounded further on that).

I made a very rude remark about that upthread. But sheesh, I don't see the problem with attaching a bit of historical glamour (as long as you don't erect tastelessly big statues of those Great Ancient Ones and use them somehow as a reason for trying to conquer the world, but the Greeks haven't done that and I digress).

Greekness was not even an ethnicity as we'd recognize it in ancient times, but a social status.

Depends when we're talking. The Ancient Greece of Pericles' and Leonidas' times certainly had a sense of shared language and culture.

And the centre of civilization for Rhomaioi had long been Constantinople.

Then we're talking sometime between Caesar and Constantinople; in Caesar's times, Athens still was.

Hell, Athens wasn't even the capital of the first Greek republic, and even then the idea seems to have been retaking Constantinople above all else.

You mean during the Independence War, in the 1820s? No, indeed, Nauplion was, but that was only ever meant provisionally, and Athens was already made capital in 1834. Do you have any cite that, at that time, the Greek revolutionaries had the pipe dream they could conquer and control the Straits?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Then you phrased that very poorly.

Yes, that happens when writing from a phone at times.

I made a very rude remark about that upthread. But sheesh, I don't see the problem with attaching a bit of historical glamour (as long as you don't erect tastelessly big statues of those Great Ancient Ones and use them somehow as a reason for trying to conquer the world, but the Greeks haven't done that and I digress).

No, but if you want to make a claim about the use of language it helps if the language isn't rooted in reasons predating the current idea of the significance of what the language refers to.

You mean during the Independence War, in the 1820s? No, indeed, Nauplion was, but that was only ever meant provisionally, and Athens was already made capital in 1834. Do you have any cite that, at that time, the Greek revolutionaries had the pipe dream they could conquer and control the Straits?

Retaking Constantinople was an explicit part of Otto's Megali Idea.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

LOL. Finnish actually has a "k" sound, but somehow omitting it is "as close as you'll get"?

Why do you give Finnish a free pass in not "correctly" representing the name, but not English?

You clearly demonstrare here that you don't know what you are talking about, sorry. What is transcribed "kh" in "Khan" is not a k, but a velar/uvular/sometimes glottal fricative in Mongolian and Turkic languages, along with Persian etc. The glottal fricative is the familiar "h" sound. In Mongolian, it's the ch in "loch". H is arguably closer to that than k, and in fact shifts between the two are common in many languages.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Glottal Fricative would be a good name for a metal band.

 

[Steve]

Glottal Fricative would be a good name for a metal band.

It probably is already. Likely an Icelandic band.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

So, how do you feel about Peking Duck?

Donald was funnier.

 

[GlennB]

You clearly demonstrare here that you don't know what you are talking about, sorry. What is transcribed "kh" in "Khan" is not a k, but a velar/uvular/sometimes glottal fricative in Mongolian and Turkic languages, along with Persian etc. The glottal fricative is the familiar "h" sound. In Mongolian, it's the ch in "loch". H is arguably closer to that than k, and in fact shifts between the two are common in many languages.

Similar story in Greek with the loch sound. But you seem devoted to protecting the Mongolian vs the language of those who were putting up the Parthenon and inventing geometry while the Mongolians were discovering rock painting. Oh well ...

Meanwhile - "Labiodental fricative" would probably get banned as a band name because ... just because

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Similar story in Greek with the loch sound.

Not true for pre-Middle Greek though, is it? χ is an aspirated k there, right? I'm only really somewhat familiar with Koiné, though.

But you seem devoted to protecting the Mongolian vs the language of those who were putting up the Parthenon and inventing geometry while the Mongolians were discovering rock painting. Oh well ...

Parthenon, eh? Yes, it sure is a good thing the Persians had the time to teach the Greeks a bit of proper architecture before the ungrateful subjects revolted And gee, weird how the famous mathematicians seem to flourish after the Persian Empire leads to stable contact with the Near East. You'd almost think the Greeks ended up getting access to an even then milennia-old tradition of mathematics to build off.

(I have a pet theory about Platonism's roots in the Indo-Iranian concept of asha too, but I'll spare you that.)

 

[dudalb]

Donald was funnier.

Daffy was funnier then both.