Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 3]

[Abramelin]

7 hours ago, Piney said:

I find the idea of a middle dialect between Celtic and German fascinating.

I also think there was a Italo-Celtic middle dialect and/or a Proto-Italo Celtic spoken around Northern Italy and Southern Switzerland.

Nor genetic or linguistic and the whole idea borders on British Israelite racism. 

According to Vennemann the language spoken in the countries bordering the south--eastern North Sea was proto-Italic.

But you are right: the BritAm site applauds Vennemanns theories about a Semitic influence on Germanic.

But makes all that racism? 

[Piney]

5 hours ago, Abramelin said:

Now I am playing the Devil's Advocate: the OLB does mention an invasion/intrusion of a people from the east, the Magiar. And that around 2000 bce.

The Magyar invaded around 895 CE so I'd say it's a bit off. 

[Piney]

5 hours ago, Abramelin said:

According to Vennemann the language spoken in the countries bordering the south--eastern North Sea was proto-Italic.

No it wasn't. Proto-Italic formed in the Alpine region. 

[jaylemurph]

5 hours ago, Abramelin said:

According to Vennemann the language spoken in the countries bordering the south--eastern North Sea was proto-Italic.

What kind of data is Vennemann working from? There are hundreds of miles and significant natural boundaries (like the Alps) between those areas. Or is he using bad terminology— using proto-Italic for a preliminary PIE dialect area?

It just looks like he has a (fringe) theory he’s highjacking real linguistics to “prove” rather than theorizing from actual data. 

—Jaylemurph 

[Abramelin]

18 hours ago, Piney said:

The Magyar invaded around 895 CE so I'd say it's a bit off. 

Believe me, I KNOW. But a supporter of the OLB will mention those 'Magjar' (OLB spelling). In case you don't know: I am not one of the supporters.

[Abramelin]

18 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

What kind of data is Vennemann working from? There are hundreds of miles and significant natural boundaries (like the Alps) between those areas. Or is he using bad terminology— using proto-Italic for a preliminary PIE dialect area?

It just looks like he has a (fringe) theory he’s highjacking real linguistics to “prove” rather than theorizing from actual data. 

—Jaylemurph 

I only read a very critical review of Venneman"s, and that is how I learned about Vennemann.

Please give me a moment, and I will edit this post, and add the link to that review.

EDIT:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384105000690

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

18 hours ago, Piney said:

No it wasn't. Proto-Italic formed in the Alpine region. 

So you are another linguist? Well, I am not. If I can retrace a link to where he made that claim, I will most certainly post it. Again.

I'd like to ask you and others to search this part of the OLB thread, and maybe also the 2 former parts for quotes and links concerning Vennemann and his theories.

 

[Abramelin]

On 8/19/2020 at 6:56 PM, Abramelin said:

Thank you for your reply. If you don't mind, I will think about what you posted for a while, and come back with an answer.

You know what? I have found a link to some of the work of this crackpot:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvbkk16h.9?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

[jaylemurph]

30 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

So you are another linguist? Well, I am not. If I can retrace a link to where he made that claim, I will most certainly post it. Again.

I'd like to ask you and others to search this part of the OLB thread, and maybe also the 2 former parts for quotes and links concerning Vennemann and his theories.

 

Sorry, but no. Literally everything I’ve seen from/about this man screams poor scholarship, if not out-and-out ignorance of how real historical linguistics works.

I see no reason to spread any of his non-sense further or indulge your fantasy his work is worth discussing.

—Jaylemurph 

[Abramelin]

And now I really like to know, why you, who wrote a paper concerning linguistics, is able to call a professor in linguistics who has been taching for years on a university a crackpot.

You may not like his theories, but what do YOU have to offer? You know, like showing you are more sane than this professor?

 

[Piney]

3 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

Now, can you, Jaylemurph/Piney show me an example of those Scythian runes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Turkic_script#:~:text=The inscriptions%2C dating from the,the Altay mountains and Xinjiang.

https://omniglot.com/writing/orkhon.htm

[Abramelin]

Thanks.

But runes, Germanic runes happen to be centuries older than the ones you posted.

And though I forgot the exact date, the oldest Germanic runes were on some helmet. And it was in Germanic, written in Etruscan script.

Edited August 20, 2020 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

The helmet is the famous helmet of Negau (from ca. 300 bce). The inscription on the helmet may be read from right to left: "Harigasti teiwai".

[Essan]

Was it written in German runes or Etruscan script?  

[Abramelin]

 

7 minutes ago, Essan said:

Was it written in German runes or Etruscan script?  

According to linguists it was Germanic, written in Etruscan script. 300 bce.

I use the books of my library, but here is a link:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negau_helmet

 

[Piney]

1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

According to linguists it was Germanic, written in Etruscan script. 300 bce.

WRONG!

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negau_helmet

You keep pulling these lies out your ass.......

Quote

In any case, the Germanic name Harigast is almost universally read. Formerly, some scholars have seen the inscription as an early incarnation of the runic alphabet, but it is now accepted that the script is North Etruscan proper, and precedes the formation of the Runic alphabet. Harigast constitutes an attestation of the Germanic sound shift, probably the earliest preserved, preceding Tacitus perhaps by some two centuries.^[1]

Must (1957) reads Hariχas Titieva as a Raetic personal name, the first element from the Indo-European (Venetic rather than Germanic), the second from the Etruscan.

 

 

[Abramelin]

Why you call what I post lies? I quote from Wikipedia, and YOU quote from Wikipedia.

Please explain the difference.

It appears to me you have some problems with understanding what you read.

"...but it is now accepted that the script is North Etruscan proper, and precedes the formation of the runic alphabet. Harigast constitutes an attestation of the Germanic sound shift, probably the earliest preserved..."

 

And this is what I posted:

"... According to linguists it was Germanic, written in Etruscan script. 300 bce. ..."

And, btw, using huge fonts doesn't prove well for your mental sanity, heh.

 

 

Edited August 22, 2020 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Ok, the emotions - hopefully - have settled somewhat.

Here a thesis supporting the idea that latin script was the origin of the Germanic runes:

https://www.google.com/search?q=runes+around+the+nort+sea&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m

I still think Vennemann has a point. Centuries before the Romans reached north-western Europe, the Phoenicians very probably discovered Cornwall in search of tin. They may have found out about Cornwall as a source of tin because of the Tartessians in Iberia. That they may have sailed that far north is suggested by an ancient historian (forgot his name, maybe in an edit), who mentioned the travels of Hanno (west-coast of Africa) and Himilcar to the north (from Gadeira/Cadiz). This Himilcar may not only have discovered Cornwall, but may also have entered the North Sea in search of amber.

[Piney]

Just now, Abramelin said:

Ok, the emotions - hopefully - have settled somewhat.

Here a thesis supporting the idea that latin script was the origin of the Germanic runes:

https://www.google.com/search?q=runes+around+the+nort+sea&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m

I still think Vennemann has a point. Centuries before the Romans reached north-western Europe, the Phoenicians very probably discovered Cornwall in search of tin. They may have found out about Cornwall as a source of tin because of the Tartessians in Iberia. That they may have sailed that far north is suggested by an ancient historian (forgot his name, maybe in an edit), who mentioned the travels of Hanno (west-coast of Africa) and Himilcar to the north (from Gadeira/Cadiz). This Himilcar may not only have discovered Cornwall, but may also have entered the North Sea in search of amber.

Just as long as you stop posting revisionist history which is used as Nazi propaganda.

Siculus was the historian. 

Here's the location and reference to the Phoenician tin stop in England.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ictis

 

[Abramelin]

Aaaah, so that was what made you explode!

Ok, but the Nazis supported whatever came up their alley. That doesn't mean I should simply forget about what was being discovered.

And you should have known I am NOT a supporter of the Nazis and their insane ideology. Just look at my username, my interest in the Phoenicians (Semites, closely related to the Hebrews), and me trying to study the Hebrew language.

Ok, I have a link too. It's about contact between Scandinavia and the eastern Mediterrenean:

https://novoscriptorium.com/2019/02/23/ancient-mediterraneans-in-scandinavia-bronze-age-trade/

 

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

The reason I posted the link in my former post, is because there are indications (not proof!) that the Minoans who may have visited Scandinavia, may have spoken a Semitic language.

Another link:

https://jarnaes.wordpress.com/1-minoan-crete-linear-a/

And this is my point: if Vennemann and Aarthun are right, Minoans and/or Phoenicians, who spoke a Semitic language, may have had an influence on the Germanic language.

I have sent you a link to Mailhammer before. When you read this guy's book, you will understand that it is about more than mere borrowings from a Semitic language. Now I am not pretending to be a linguist, but I understand from reading his book, that it is about 'ablaut'.

And ablaut is one of the main characteristics of Semitic languages

 And... a main characteristic of Germanic languages. Not for other Indo-European languages.

But again, I am not a linguist. But I am learning.

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by Abramelin

[Piney]

16 hours ago, Abramelin said:

The reason I posted the link in my former post, is because there are indications (not proof!) that the Minoans who may have visited Scandinavia, may have spoken a Semitic language.

No...on both. 

16 hours ago, Abramelin said:

And this is my point: if Vennemann and Aarthun are right, Minoans and/or Phoenicians, who spoke a Semitic language, may have had an influence on the Germanic language.

Most certainly not. Whatever substrate is in German is long lost. 

[Abramelin]

27 minutes ago, Piney said:

No...on both. 

Most certainly not. Whatever substrate is in German is long lost. 

If you had read Mailhammer's book, you'd know this about more than substrate. Or at least that's how I understood it.

[Piney]

34 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

If you had read Mailhammer's book, you'd know this about more than substrate. Or at least that's how I understood it.

I studied PIE, Anglisc- Saxon, Italic and Greek. I know plenty about IE substrates.

As for Minoans and Phoenicians going as far as Germany? That doesn't even make logistic sense. The whole idea shows zero common sense the way trade was set up in the Atlantic Bronze Age

[Abramelin]

Ok. So what did you read in Mailhammers book that convinced you he is wrong?

 

Edited August 25, 2020 by Abramelin