Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: New Words

Expand Messages
  • swartsaxon
    (This is a reply to David s posting in which for some reason David s words were chopped off) My mother s side is partially African too, but partially goes back
    Message 1 of 115 , Oct 17, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      (This is a reply to David's posting in which for some reason David's words were chopped off)

      My mother's side is partially African too, but partially goes back to Scotland in the 1700's (her maiden name is McMillan), two brothers, one who emigrated to Canada and one who emigrated to the West Indies. My mother is light-skinned with freckles and auburn straight hair with streaks of gold (when she was younger). One of her sisters is very white and looks completely European. One of her sisters is medium brown-skinned but with straight hair. The last of her sisters is dark-skinned with sort-of afro hair, and looks definitely black. My brother has straight hair and looks like a tan-skinned Caucasian. My sister and I both have afro hair and are darker, although my sister's children (and my brother's children) look completely Caucasian.

      Yes, if there is any European on my father's side (he's quite dark but has a narrow angular protruding nose similar to Europeans'), I could be ultimately a Swart Frank. But I really believe it's a case of adoption of last name from European (English) masters, unless perhaps the English had dalliances with their African slaves and the offspring legitimately carried the English last name.

      Andrew

      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "swartsaxon" <anjarrette@...> wrote:
      >
      > Oh come on you can figure that one out. I'm black but I love Anglo-Saxon (and also Old Saxon), so I adopted an internet name that reflects both my colour/heritage and my chief love in life. As though I'm a black ('swart') Saxon. There could even be a tiny bit of Saxon ancestry in me, since my last name is Germanic (*Gêrhard or *Gêrwald, 'spear-bold/hardy' or 'spear-rule(r)', from Frankish but potentially from Old Saxon) and is an English name (of Norman origin). However I believe it's more likely that my African slave ancestors (on my father's side) in the Caribbean took on the last name of their English masters.
      >
      > Andrew
      >
      > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
      > >
      > > SwartSaxon? ;-)
      > >
      > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "swartsaxon" <anjarrette@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > OK agreed.
      > > >
      > > > Andrew
      > > >
      > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > OK, then we have another new improvement of our existing FS.
      > > > > I want to point out again that imho Folksprak is "ready" for a great deal already, since "we" decided to use the Folksprak to English dictionary posted August 29 by David as a standard, which has been adapted a few times after, and still can and will be adapted like now with the choice of the -AL suffix:
      > > > >
      > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak/files/Vordboken/Folksprak%20to%20english.html
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Hi Ingmar,
      > > > > > > Thanks for reminding of that other good reason of which would be better
      > > > > > > (if we settle on just one). -AL would agree better with all those
      > > > > > > further derived words with -AL- in the middle of them. eg form -> formal
      > > > > > > -> formalitaet.. Not form -> formell -> formalitaet. Much more schematic.
      > > > > > > That is one issue that makers of Interlingua had to resolve,
      > > > > > > naturalistic or schematic. The form of words was from the prototype
      > > > > > > rather than the commonest form, because they thought about all the
      > > > > > > derived words as well as root form. eg the IL word for body is copore,
      > > > > > > when a more majority-like form would be corps or corpo. But they gave
      > > > > > > consideration to the many case forms of the Latin word and it's effect
      > > > > > > on derived words such as "corporal".
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > I think that FS's number of french/romance/latin borrowings should be
      > > > > > > about average for our source languages, which given that English has
      > > > > > > larges number and Dutch has rather a few also, means FS will probably
      > > > > > > have a similar number to Dutch.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > On 15/10/2010 18:26, chamavian wrote:
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > I agree: having -AL [a:l] as the single suffix, as David wrote, may be
      > > > > > > > the best solution. This would solve the pronunciation problem of
      > > > > > > > -EL ["e:l] vs ["... @l] too, and derived suffixes such as -ALITAET
      > > > > > > > also have always -AL- in all source languages.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > About Latin words: I think FS shouldn't have less Latin words than the
      > > > > > > > Germanic source languages (I mean other than English) Dutch, German,
      > > > > > > > Swedish etc have.
      > > > > > > > How to use them and how often is another question: e.g. many Latin
      > > > > > > > words of English have their equivalents in Dutch, but in Dutch they
      > > > > > > > are only used in scientific or formal or archaic contexts and have
      > > > > > > > their Germanic synonyms for normal use, where in English they are much
      > > > > > > > more commonly used and are the only available form. But still they are
      > > > > > > > in the Dutch dictionaries, even when most Dutch speakers don't know
      > > > > > > > what they mean.
      > > > > > > > The question is: should all those words be in the FS dictionary or
      > > > > > > > should we focus on the more common, Germanic words first?
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > On 15/10/2010 13:50, anjarrette wrote:
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > I don't expect my opinion on these topics to carry much weight, but I
      > > > > > > > > > want to offer my two cents:
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > With regard to -al vs. -ell vs. -ael: If we're going to make an
      > > > > > > > > > artificial language, shouldn't we aim for simplicity as an arch-goal?
      > > > > > > > > > I mean, part of what makes artificial languages attractive is their
      > > > > > > > > > simplicity relative to natural languages. Otherwise we ought to just
      > > > > > > > > > go on using existing natural languages, they're complicated
      > > > > > > > enough, we
      > > > > > > > > > don't need to make new artificial languages with new or equal
      > > > > > > > > > complexities. So that being said, I would vote for one of two
      > > > > > > > options:
      > > > > > > > > > either reduce all of these endings to one (any of -ael, -ell, or -al
      > > > > > > > > > would do) as Ingmar suggests, or else use one of the endings _only_
      > > > > > > > > > for adjectives, the other ending _only_ for nouns, with no mixing and
      > > > > > > > > > no cases where the ending might indicate either a noun or an
      > > > > > > > > > adjective. If this is what you have already said David, then I
      > > > > > > > > > apologize, it has not been clear to me that this is what you are for,
      > > > > > > > > > if indeed it is what you are for.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Well if I were to go for just one ending, it would be for -al, which is
      > > > > > > > > the proto-type of the suffix, before all irreversible mutations have
      > > > > > > > > happened. I don't like the idea of forcing ALL words to have an
      > > > > > > > > artificial mixed ending, especially when there are many words such as
      > > > > > > > > global/national/federal where ALL cognates have an a-vowel.
      > > > > > > > > But what ever happened to the idea of going for the majority form?
      > > > > > > > > especially when it is quite an obvious majority using -el/-ell/-ell
      > > > > > > > kind
      > > > > > > > > of endings. As I pointed out before, with exception of English, the
      > > > > > > > > other Germanic languages are in very close agreement of whether to use
      > > > > > > > > -el or -al type of endings. And they follow French!
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > With regard to Latin endings, -um, -us, -i, -is, etc.: I know you
      > > > > > > > > > disagree, David, but I find that to me, someone who has loved the
      > > > > > > > > > Germanic languages his whole life and welcomes Folkspraak as an
      > > > > > > > > > opportunity to expand and glorify the Germanic languages, I find that
      > > > > > > > > > David you seem to have a very strong love of all things Latin. You
      > > > > > > > > > devote a large part of your time, thoughts, and energy to musing
      > > > > > > > about
      > > > > > > > > > how Latin endings should appear in Folkspraak, about words of Latin
      > > > > > > > > > origin that should be in Folkspraak, and so on. I know that modern
      > > > > > > > > > Germanic languages do have a large number of words from Latin, but I
      > > > > > > > > > feel that in the spirit of what Folkspraak was meant to be, at least
      > > > > > > > > > as I understood it, Latin words should be minimized. Or at least not
      > > > > > > > > > focussed on so much! I think we should spend as much time as possible
      > > > > > > > > > on the Germanic element of Folkspraak, and ways in which to form
      > > > > > > > words
      > > > > > > > > > with Germanic prefixes, suffixes, and main words. I even think that
      > > > > > > > > > many of the words that are common to many Germanic languages and are
      > > > > > > > > > borrowed from Latin, should be attempted to be replaced as much as
      > > > > > > > > > possible by familiar Germanic word-formations, with familiar Germanic
      > > > > > > > > > word-elements. I know you will disagree vehemently with this David,
      > > > > > > > > > and will regard it as maybe unrealistic, maybe impractical, maybe
      > > > > > > > > > inefficient, or whatever other negative criticism you may find. But I
      > > > > > > > > > know that I as a speaker of a Germanic language do not like the idea
      > > > > > > > > > of creating a Germanic inter-language with so much Latin in it! It
      > > > > > > > > > reminds me too much of English, whose extreme historical fondness for
      > > > > > > > > > replacing its native vocabulary with words from Latin and French I
      > > > > > > > > > have always found to be something shameful, regrettable, and even
      > > > > > > > > > confusing. I say confusing because so many of those complex Latin
      > > > > > > > > > words must be memorized and learned as "big words" when it would have
      > > > > > > > > > been so easy to form them from native elements that would be more
      > > > > > > > > > easily recognized, understood, and remembered. I think it's
      > > > > > > > actually a
      > > > > > > > > > drawback of English, I don't believe the language was really enriched
      > > > > > > > > > by all those borrowings from Latin, because Old English had its own
      > > > > > > > > > native Germanic words for most of the words we now take from Latin,
      > > > > > > > > > and because having to memorize these "big words", often with a
      > > > > > > > > > pronunciation or stress pattern that must also be memorized, makes
      > > > > > > > > > English that much more difficult. I see the same thing happening with
      > > > > > > > > > your (David) suggestions for Folkspraak. I find that Folkspraak is
      > > > > > > > > > becoming awfully close to a Romance-Germanic hybrid, rather than a
      > > > > > > > > > Germanic interlanguage. It is becoming similar to modern English I
      > > > > > > > > > find. Yes, the other modern Germanic languages do also have many many
      > > > > > > > > > Latin words, but in these other Germanic languages such words are
      > > > > > > > more
      > > > > > > > > > often part of the elevated language, words that are not commonly used
      > > > > > > > > > in daily life (whereas in English, Latin words are indeed commonly
      > > > > > > > > > used in daily life -- sometimes they have come to us through French).
      > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that you David would like these Latin words to be part
      > > > > > > > > > of the everyday vocabulary of Folkspraak -- at least that's how it
      > > > > > > > > > _appears_. That is something I do not agree with. It is something
      > > > > > > > that
      > > > > > > > > > amounts to a subjective emotional personal preference, but is
      > > > > > > > > > something I feel rather strongly about. That being said, I don't
      > > > > > > > > > expect you will try to replace any of the many Latin-derived words
      > > > > > > > you
      > > > > > > > > > have offered with Germanic replacements. I think you like the Latin
      > > > > > > > > > vocabulary, and probably think they are a good thing for
      > > > > > > > Folkspraak. I
      > > > > > > > > > can understand such a viewpoint, but emotionally I strongly disagree
      > > > > > > > > > with it. I like Folkspraak as a Germanic language.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Andrew, If you take example the last 28 words I contributed as "New
      > > > > > > > > Words", 19 of them are of Germanic in origin. This includes Germanic
      > > > > > > > > words such as STAG and SHLAGER which have even acquired international,
      > > > > > > > > non-Germanic currency. I often contribute alternative words with
      > > > > > > > similar
      > > > > > > > > meanings, both Romantic and Germanic. eg both ABSENT and AFWESEND.
      > > > > > > > > (another loan translation of Latin !) I don't actually make any
      > > > > > > > > preference for whether words are of Germanic origin or of Latin origin
      > > > > > > > > when I search for words. I simply look for words that are 1. related
      > > > > > > > > (from a common source), 2. Have the same meaning in the majority of the
      > > > > > > > > source languages. Sometimes this turns up Germanic words, often it
      > > > > > > > turns
      > > > > > > > > up Latin words.
      > > > > > > > > I don't see anybody else contributing new vocabulary to the language
      > > > > > > > > recently. Perhaps if someone less Romanophile than me made active
      > > > > > > > > contributions, you might see more native Germanic vocabulary. But I
      > > > > > > > > still believe that FS vocabulary must past the test of having cognates
      > > > > > > > > with like-meaning present in the majority of the source languages. So
      > > > > > > > > vocabulary proposals that don't meet that criterion would get strong
      > > > > > > > > objections from me.
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Languages have the vocabulary that they need for the task at hand. Old
      > > > > > > > > English was spoken by a mostly illiterate society of people whose lives
      > > > > > > > > were rule by absurd superstitions. If you had a time machine and could
      > > > > > > > > actually met someone from Old England, you'd find him/her to be the
      > > > > > > > > strangest person you'd ever meet. Old England had the vocabulary for
      > > > > > > > > that environment. But already had many Latin borrowings. Middle English
      > > > > > > > > changed because of the need to change, it acquired new vocabulary
      > > > > > > > > because the society changed and adapted. The Normans bought new
      > > > > > > > concepts
      > > > > > > > > and changed the social strata.
      > > > > > > > > The point I am making is languages don't acquire new vocabulary unless
      > > > > > > > > there is a need for it to express new concepts. The invention of the
      > > > > > > > > printing press lead to an internationalization of knowledge and a new
      > > > > > > > > wave of Latin borrowings to all western languages that were written
      > > > > > > > > down. They acquired the same Latin words because of Latin's continued
      > > > > > > > > usage as a common tongue. in the realms of science, law and trade.
      > > > > > > > > I often find that it's the English speakers who think English has too
      > > > > > > > > many Romance borrowings. Who have a wistful desire and regret that
      > > > > > > > > English was less "corrupted" by Romance influence and more of a "pure"
      > > > > > > > > Germanic languages. It's often linguistically naive people with a
      > > > > > > > > "romantic" view of the continental Germlangs and think they are less
      > > > > > > > > tainted and therefore better Germlangs. Some non-trivial study of
      > > > > > > > > languages other than Icelandic should reveal that these beliefs are
      > > > > > > > > barely true. I want to stress that English is not the only Germanic
      > > > > > > > > language with lots of borrowings from Latin. Other Germlangs are
      > > > > > > > > tainted, polluted, corrupted, violated by the presence of Latin
      > > > > > > > > borrowings. German has Latin-derived Pferd, Fenster, Insel and kurz
      > > > > > > > > where English has Germanic horse, window, island and short!
      > > > > > > > > FS should have the right amount of romance/Latin borrowings. It should
      > > > > > > > > have just as many as an average continental Germanic language, and
      > > > > > > > > perhaps a little more, given that these borrowings are so useful for
      > > > > > > > > their international currency.
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Some of the crazy ideas that I propose are actually to make Latin words
      > > > > > > > > fit better into FS, to make them work better in a Germanic language.
      > > > > > > > > Which is why for example, I proposed losing Latin noun case endings or
      > > > > > > > > the Latin verb infinitive. I'm not sure if bending Latin words' forms
      > > > > > > > > counts as making FS more latinate or less latinate.
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Andrew
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > I think we should be trying for a balance in all things. I just
      > > > > > > > don't
      > > > > > > > > > > think that artificially forcing the speech to fit one form in
      > > > > > > > this case
      > > > > > > > > > > is really worth it, given the small benefit to overall ease of
      > > > > > > > use. I
      > > > > > > > > > > honestly don't think English speakers are going to be that
      > > > > > > > confused, by
      > > > > > > > > > > those words ending in -ell -- not anymore than by words ending
      > > > > > > > in -ael.
      > > > > > > > > > > For English speakers, it doesn't matter if the word ends in -al
      > > > > > > > or -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > or -ael, the FS word will have a totally different stress
      > > > > > > > pattern from
      > > > > > > > > > > the English cognate, so the exact pronunciation of the vowel isn't
      > > > > > > > > > going
      > > > > > > > > > > to matter. But do you have any curiousity as to why certain French
      > > > > > > > > > words
      > > > > > > > > > > have a -el ending and others a -al ending? In French why actuel
      > > > > > > > and not
      > > > > > > > > > > *actual. Why global and not *globel
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > If we are on the subject of artificially normalizing the
      > > > > > > > language, I've
      > > > > > > > > > > often thought that eliminating "Latin" noun case endings such as
      > > > > > > > -us,
      > > > > > > > > > > -um and -is would also bring some benefits to the language. Eg
      > > > > > > > instead
      > > > > > > > > > > of "museum", we'd have *musee., insted of "forum, we'd have *for or
      > > > > > > > > > > *fore. Instead of "tempus", we have *temp or *tempor, instead of
      > > > > > > > > > cyklus,
      > > > > > > > > > > we have *cykel.
      > > > > > > > > > > For one reason, in many other languages, the cognates have lost the
      > > > > > > > > > > Latin case endings. And even among the Germlangs, we'd find
      > > > > > > > words where
      > > > > > > > > > > the cognates in some languages have lost the endings, but not in
      > > > > > > > > > others.
      > > > > > > > > > > eg En cube, cycle vs Nl kubus, cyklus. English thesis, crisis vs De
      > > > > > > > > > > These, Krise.
      > > > > > > > > > > For another, the latin case endings are redundant baggage on the
      > > > > > > > end of
      > > > > > > > > > > the root, which carries the true content of the word. In the word
      > > > > > > > > > > "globus". the root and meaningful part of the word is glob-
      > > > > > > > which is
      > > > > > > > > > why
      > > > > > > > > > > the derived adjective is "global" and not *globusal
      > > > > > > > > > > For another, it would make the stress patterns for Latin borrowings
      > > > > > > > > > > easier to learn. The normal stress rule for romance/latin borrowings
      > > > > > > > > > > should be the stress on the final vowel before the final
      > > > > > > > consonant. But
      > > > > > > > > > > these -um/-us/-is words break that rule, because they shouldn't be
      > > > > > > > > > > stressed on the meaningless case endings. "forum" should be
      > > > > > > > ["fo:rUm],
      > > > > > > > > > > not [fO"ru:m]. Having these -us/-um/is type endings is another
      > > > > > > > lot of
      > > > > > > > > > > exceptions to be learned.
      > > > > > > > > > > For another, it means we don't need to violate Latin pluralization
      > > > > > > > > > > rules, with uncouthe plural forms such as *fokussen or *museummen or
      > > > > > > > > > > *forums, when people of sophistication, education and refinement
      > > > > > > > will
      > > > > > > > > > > know that the plurals should be *foki, *musea, *fora.
      > > > > > > > > > > Frenkisch does have these -us/-um/-is type endings, and it also
      > > > > > > > has a
      > > > > > > > > > > whole lot of extra rules that go with them. I have to write
      > > > > > > > exceptions
      > > > > > > > > > > to the stress rules to accommodate them. I also have exceptions
      > > > > > > > to the
      > > > > > > > > > > plural rules to bring them in nicely -- in frenkisch, -um nouns
      > > > > > > > make a
      > > > > > > > > > > plural with -as. eg ein museum, twei museas. -US nouns make a plural
      > > > > > > > > > > with -is. eg ein fokus, twei fokis. -IS nouns make a plural with
      > > > > > > > > > -es. eg
      > > > > > > > > > > ein tesis, twei teses. But I intend frenkisch to be far more richly
      > > > > > > > > > > textured with complexity than FS should be.
      > > > > > > > > > > Oh yeah, we should also give up the redundant Latin infinitive
      > > > > > > > endings
      > > > > > > > > > > that have come into verb borrowings in most Germlangs except
      > > > > > > > English.
      > > > > > > > > > > I'm talking about NL -er-, DE -ier-. DA/NO/SV -er-. It's just silly
      > > > > > > > > > > having the Latin/French infinitive as part of the verb stem and then
      > > > > > > > > > > also grafting on the Germanic verb inflections. It's about as
      > > > > > > > dumb as
      > > > > > > > > > > if the French borrowed German "strafen" as *strafener. (je
      > > > > > > > strafene, tu
      > > > > > > > > > > strafens, il strafene, noun strafenons, vous strafenez, ils
      > > > > > > > strafenent)
      > > > > > > > > > > English doesn't do it like the continental Germlangs, but frequently
      > > > > > > > > > > does something even weirder, it often borrows Latin verbs in the
      > > > > > > > past
      > > > > > > > > > > participle form. eg EN integrate versus DE integrieren. Would it
      > > > > > > > not be
      > > > > > > > > > > more logical to borrow a stem such as integr- and make the FS
      > > > > > > > verb be
      > > > > > > > > > > *integre
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > OTOH, I just don't regard that forcing FS to give up -us/-um/-is
      > > > > > > > > > endings
      > > > > > > > > > > on all Latin borrowings that have them is worth the artificial and
      > > > > > > > > > > unnatural quality it would bring to the language, even with the
      > > > > > > > small
      > > > > > > > > > > benefits that I list above. It's a well-intentioned idea, but
      > > > > > > > it's not
      > > > > > > > > > > worth picking a fight over.
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > On 14/10/2010 18:13, chamavian wrote:
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > But was Folkspraak meant to be easily learnable for speakers of
      > > > > > > > > > > > Germanic languages except for English, or did we want it to be
      > > > > > > > easier
      > > > > > > > > > > > than the real Germanic languages especially for speakers of
      > > > > > > > English
      > > > > > > > > > > > and non-Germanic languages such as e.g. Spanish, Russian, Arabic,
      > > > > > > > > > > > Chinese etc? In the last case, there's no real justification for
      > > > > > > > > > > > having both -ell and -al without any logical reason.
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > For speakers of Germanic languages, I don't seem much problem
      > > > > > > > > > except
      > > > > > > > > > > > for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > English speakers. Well an English speaker can just take a
      > > > > > > > guess.
      > > > > > > > > > It's
      > > > > > > > > > > > > bound to be one or the other... Also as far as the matching the
      > > > > > > > > > > > prono of
      > > > > > > > > > > > > English -al words, unlike continental languages the -al is
      > > > > > > > > > unstressed,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > so is a [@] sound, it still would be if it was *-el
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Another challenge for English speakers will be to teach them
      > > > > > > > > > when to
      > > > > > > > > > > > NOT
      > > > > > > > > > > > > use -al at all! English seems to add -al to adjectives with
      > > > > > > > not good
      > > > > > > > > > > > > etymological basis -- especially after a Latin -icus ending. For
      > > > > > > > > > > > example
      > > > > > > > > > > > > EN chemical versus FRench chimique, DE chemisch
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > In fact the practice seems to be very consistent among the other
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Germlangs -- eg when it's -ell in German, the cognate will be
      > > > > > > > > > -eel in
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Dutch. When it's -al in German, the cognate will be -aal in
      > > > > > > > > > Dutch. And
      > > > > > > > > > > > > French seems to agree most of the time with the continental
      > > > > > > > > > > > germlangs --
      > > > > > > > > > > > > in fact their usage of -ell/-el/-eel seems to come directly
      > > > > > > > from
      > > > > > > > > > French
      > > > > > > > > > > > > and not directly from Latin practice.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Also the -ell type endings are very strongly correlated with
      > > > > > > > usage
      > > > > > > > > > > > as an
      > > > > > > > > > > > > adjective. ie a word with -ell should always be an adjective.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > With the -al kind of endings, they are both nouns and
      > > > > > > > adjectives
      > > > > > > > > > ending
      > > > > > > > > > > > > in -al. But the point is, there are no Nouns ending in -ell.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Using -ael here would cause some mongrel words such as *lokael,
      > > > > > > > > > where
      > > > > > > > > > > > > none of the cognates have an "e" type of vowel in the suffix
      > > > > > > > -- so
      > > > > > > > > > > > where
      > > > > > > > > > > > > is the justification of using it for such a word? also
      > > > > > > > federal (no
      > > > > > > > > > > > > instances of *federell), global (no instances of *globell),
      > > > > > > > > > nacional
      > > > > > > > > > > > (no
      > > > > > > > > > > > > instances of *nacionell). Surely just lokal, federal, global,
      > > > > > > > > > nacional
      > > > > > > > > > > > > are going to be more recognizable to everyone.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Also applying a hybrid -ael to nouns is less justified when the
      > > > > > > > > > cognate
      > > > > > > > > > > > > nouns will very likely never end in -eel/-ell/-el etc.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Although it's a bit inconsistent in application, I like
      > > > > > > > having a
      > > > > > > > > > mix of
      > > > > > > > > > > > > -al and -ell. It gives a way of marking adjective versus noun.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > For speakers of of continental Germlangs (and French), the
      > > > > > > > > > correlations
      > > > > > > > > > > > > would be quite easy to teach and reliable:
      > > > > > > > > > > > > eg
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NL -eel = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NL -aal = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DE -ell = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DE -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DA -el = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DA -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NO -ell = ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NO -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > SV -ell = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > SV -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > FR -el = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > FR -elle = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > FR -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > For English, it's a bit harder
      > > > > > > > > > > > > EN -al = -al if word is noun, -al or -ell (when EN word is an
      > > > > > > > > > > > > adjective), nothing sometimes (most likely after -ic-, in
      > > > > > > > which case
      > > > > > > > > > > > > change the -ical to -ish)
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Other Big "Western" languages such as Spanish, Portuguese,
      > > > > > > > Italian,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Russian, a little easier than English:
      > > > > > > > > > > > > -al = al if word is noun, -al or -ell (when the word is an
      > > > > > > > > > adjective).
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, words cognate to EN incidental and NL incidenteel don't
      > > > > > > > seem to
      > > > > > > > > > > > > feature prominantly in any other of our source languages. So
      > > > > > > > > > > > > *incidentael is perhaps not a good potential FS word.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm still pro one suffix -AEL, instead of having two -ELL
      > > > > > > > and -AL.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > So both "incidentael" and "lokael". How would English, and
      > > > > > > > > > also for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > instance Russian, Spanish or other non-Germanophone
      > > > > > > > speakers know
      > > > > > > > > > > > when
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's -ell and when -al?
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > Far too complicated and unnecessary to have two different
      > > > > > > > > > suffixes
      > > > > > > > > > > > for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly the same thing...
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > -ael combines it both in sound as in spelling
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>, David Parke <parked@>
      > > > > > > > wrote:
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AKTUELL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = actual, current, present, topical, effective, live,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > present-day, real, timely, true, contemporary, up to date
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > adv. = actually, presently, currently
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. =aktuell; gegenwärtig; heutig; derzeitig;
      > > > > > > > > > zeitgemä�Y"; jetzig
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En actual, actually; Nl actueel; De aktuell; Da
      > > > > > > > aktuel; No
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > aktuell; Sv aktuell; Fr actuel, actuellement; Ru
      > > > > > > > > > > > ак�,�fал�OEн�<й
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > / aktual'nyj
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. L actualis
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LOKAL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = local, regional, here and there, native, sectional,
      > > > > > > > topical
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En local; Nl lokaal; De lokal; Da lokal ; No lokal; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > lokal; Fr
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > local; Ru локал�OEн�<й / lokal'nyj
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. late L localis
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm still pro one suffix -AEL, instead of having two -ELL
      > > > > > > > and -AL.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > So both "incidentael" and "lokael". How would English, and
      > > > > > > > > > also for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > instance Russian, Spanish or other non-Germanophone
      > > > > > > > speakers know
      > > > > > > > > > > > when
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's -ell and when -al?
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > Far too complicated and unnecessary to have two different
      > > > > > > > > > suffixes
      > > > > > > > > > > > for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly the same thing...
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > -ael combines it both in sound as in spelling
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > For speakers of Germanic languages, I don't seem much problem
      > > > > > > > > > except
      > > > > > > > > > > > for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > English speakers. Well an English speaker can just take a
      > > > > > > > guess.
      > > > > > > > > > It's
      > > > > > > > > > > > > bound to be one or the other... Also as far as the matching the
      > > > > > > > > > > > prono of
      > > > > > > > > > > > > English -al words, unlike continental languages the -al is
      > > > > > > > > > unstressed,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > so is a [@] sound, it still would be if it was *-el
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Another challenge for English speakers will be to teach them
      > > > > > > > > > when to
      > > > > > > > > > > > NOT
      > > > > > > > > > > > > use -al at all! English seems to add -al to adjectives with
      > > > > > > > not good
      > > > > > > > > > > > > etymological basis -- especially after a Latin -icus ending. For
      > > > > > > > > > > > example
      > > > > > > > > > > > > EN chemical versus FRench chimique, DE chemisch
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > In fact the practice seems to be very consistent among the other
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Germlangs -- eg when it's -ell in German, the cognate will be
      > > > > > > > > > -eel in
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Dutch. When it's -al in German, the cognate will be -aal in
      > > > > > > > > > Dutch. And
      > > > > > > > > > > > > French seems to agree most of the time with the continental
      > > > > > > > > > > > germlangs --
      > > > > > > > > > > > > in fact their usage of -ell/-el/-eel seems to come directly
      > > > > > > > from
      > > > > > > > > > French
      > > > > > > > > > > > > and not directly from Latin practice.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Also the -ell type endings are very strongly correlated with
      > > > > > > > usage
      > > > > > > > > > > > as an
      > > > > > > > > > > > > adjective. ie a word with -ell should always be an adjective.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > With the -al kind of endings, they are both nouns and
      > > > > > > > adjectives
      > > > > > > > > > ending
      > > > > > > > > > > > > in -al. But the point is, there are no Nouns ending in -ell.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Using -ael here would cause some mongrel words such as *lokael,
      > > > > > > > > > where
      > > > > > > > > > > > > none of the cognates have an "e" type of vowel in the suffix
      > > > > > > > -- so
      > > > > > > > > > > > where
      > > > > > > > > > > > > is the justification of using it for such a word? also
      > > > > > > > federal (no
      > > > > > > > > > > > > instances of *federell), global (no instances of *globell),
      > > > > > > > > > nacional
      > > > > > > > > > > > (no
      > > > > > > > > > > > > instances of *nacionell). Surely just lokal, federal, global,
      > > > > > > > > > nacional
      > > > > > > > > > > > > are going to be more recognizable to everyone.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Also applying a hybrid -ael to nouns is less justified when the
      > > > > > > > > > cognate
      > > > > > > > > > > > > nouns will very likely never end in -eel/-ell/-el etc.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Although it's a bit inconsistent in application, I like
      > > > > > > > having a
      > > > > > > > > > mix of
      > > > > > > > > > > > > -al and -ell. It gives a way of marking adjective versus noun.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > For speakers of of continental Germlangs (and French), the
      > > > > > > > > > correlations
      > > > > > > > > > > > > would be quite easy to teach and reliable:
      > > > > > > > > > > > > eg
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NL -eel = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NL -aal = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DE -ell = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DE -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DA -el = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > DA -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NO -ell = ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > NO -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > SV -ell = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > SV -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > > FR -el = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > FR -elle = -ell
      > > > > > > > > > > > > FR -al = -al
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > For English, it's a bit harder
      > > > > > > > > > > > > EN -al = -al if word is noun, -al or -ell (when EN word is an
      > > > > > > > > > > > > adjective), nothing sometimes (most likely after -ic-, in
      > > > > > > > which case
      > > > > > > > > > > > > change the -ical to -ish)
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Other Big "Western" languages such as Spanish, Portuguese,
      > > > > > > > Italian,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > Russian, a little easier than English:
      > > > > > > > > > > > > -al = al if word is noun, -al or -ell (when the word is an
      > > > > > > > > > adjective).
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, words cognate to EN incidental and NL incidenteel don't
      > > > > > > > seem to
      > > > > > > > > > > > > feature prominantly in any other of our source languages. So
      > > > > > > > > > > > > *incidentael is perhaps not a good potential FS word.
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LOKAL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = place, premises, room, site
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En locale; Nl lokaal; De Lokal; Da lokale; Sv lokal;
      > > > > > > > Fr local
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. late L localis
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LOKALITET
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = locality, district, location, place, room, site, spot
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En locality; Nl lokaliteit; De Lokalität; Da
      > > > > > > > lokalitet; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > lokalitet; Fr localité
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. L.L. localitas, localitatem
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TEMATISH
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = thematic, topical, subject, of or pertaining to a theme
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En thematic; Nl thematisch; De thematisch; No
      > > > > > > > tematisk; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > tematisk; Fr thématique; Ru
      > > > > > > > �,ема�,и�++е�?кий /
      > > > > > > > > > > > temati�?eskij
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. after Gk thematikos
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RANKE
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = bine, tendril
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf Nl rank; De Ranke; Da ranke; No ranke; Sv ranka
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. ?
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > UTLOEPER
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = foothill, offshoot, runner, spur
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf Nl uitloper; De Ausläufer; Da udløber; No utløper; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > > > utlöpare
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. UT + LOEPE + -ER
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BELYHTE
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v. = enlighten, illuminate, illumine, light up, light,
      > > > > > > > lighten,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > brighten, irradiate, provide with intellectual or spiritual
      > > > > > > > > > > > understanding
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En light, lighten, enlighten; Nl verlichten,
      > > > > > > > belichten; De
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > beleuchten; erleuchten, belichten
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. BE- + LYHT + -E
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > belychte
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OFFER
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = offering, offer, immolation, oblation, sacrifice,
      > > > > > > > victim
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En offer; Nl offer; De Opfer; Da offer; No offer; Sv
      > > > > > > > offer;
      > > > > > > > > > > > Fr offre
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. L. offerre
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BOES
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = fierce
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf Nl boos; De böse; Da bøs; No bøs
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. PG *bausa, *bausia (proud)
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FYRIG
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = fiery, ardent, passionate, fervent, flaming, glowing,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > hot-tempered, hot, impassioned, blazing hot, containing
      > > > > > > > fire, lit,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > spirited, fierce, scalding
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En fiery; Nl vurig; De feurig; Da fyrig; No fyrig
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. FYR + -IG
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LEDING
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = lead, leading, conduct, guiding, conducting, control,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction, directorship, guidance, leadership, management,
      > > > > > > > duct,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > cable, wire, circuit, conduit, pipe
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = Leitung, Führung, Anführung, Kabel
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > �?. = ведение; ди�EURек�+и�?;
      > > > > > > > > > > > лиде�EUR�?�,во;
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > п�EURавление;
      > > > > > > > > > > > п�EURедводи�,ел�OE�?�,во;
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > �EUR�fковод�?�,во; �fп�EURавление;
      > > > > > > > > > > > кабел�OE;
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > каблог�EURамма; кана�,; п�EURовод;
      > > > > > > > > > > > �,�EUR�;
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > �,�EUR�fбоп�EURовод
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En leading; Nl leiding; De Leitung; Da ledning,
      > > > > > > > ledelse; No
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > ledning, ledelse; Sv ledning, ledande
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f LEDE + -ING
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BORGE
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v. = borrow, lend, loan, guarantee, vouch for
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En borrow; Nl borgen; De borgen, bürgen; Da borge;
      > > > > > > > Sv borga
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. PG *borg-
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BLEK
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = colorless / colourless, livid, pale, pallid,
      > > > > > > > sallow, wan,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > washed-out, ashen, white
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En bleak; Nl bleek; De bleich; Da bleg; No blek; Sv blek
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. PG *blaikaz
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PASSERE
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v. = pass, cross, happen, pass by, occur, go by, overtake,
      > > > > > > > > > > > reach, strain
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En pass; Nl passeren; De passieren; Da passere; No
      > > > > > > > > > passere; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > passera; Fr passer
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. med.L passare
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FLAMME
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v. = flame, blaze, flambé, burn, catch fire, drench with
      > > > > > > > > > liqueur
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > and ignite, flare, send out a bright light, shine, singe
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En flame, flambé; Nl vlammen, flamberen; De flammen,
      > > > > > > > > > > > flambieren;
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > Da flamme, flambere; No flamme; Sv flamma, flambera; Fr
      > > > > > > > flamber
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. FLAMM + -E
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FLAMMEND
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = flaming, blazing, fiery, burning, flamboyant,
      > > > > > > > passionate,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > fervent, flamy, glorious
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En flaming; Nl vlammend; De flammend; Da flammende; No
      > > > > > > > > > > > flammende;
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sv flammande; Fr flambant
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. FLAMME + -END
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LUSTIG
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. = cheerful, gay, humorous, merry, enthusiastic, amusing,
      > > > > > > > > > > > funny, jolly
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En lusty; Nl lustig; De lustig; Da lystig; No lystig; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > lustig
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f LUST + -IG
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUE
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v. = build, construct, erect, raise
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf Nl bouwen; De bauen; Da bygge; No bygge; Sv bygga
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. PG *buwan (*b�?wan)
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OVERALL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > adv. = all over, everywhere, wherever, all about, anyplace,
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > anywhere, high and low
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > adv. = überall, allenthalben, allerorten, über und über
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En overall, all over; Nl overal; De überall; Da
      > > > > > > > overalt; No
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > overalt; Sv överallt
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. OVER + ALL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OVEN
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > adv. = above, overhead, on top
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prep. = over, on top of
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En above; Nl boven; De oben; Da oven; No ovenpå; Sv ovan
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. PG *ufan-, *u�EURan-.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SPINDEL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = spindle, arbor, shaft, mandrel / mandril, small rod
      > > > > > > > with
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > tapered ends around which thread is twisted while spinning
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf En spindle; Nl spindel; De Spindel; Da spindel; No
      > > > > > > > > > spindel; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > spindel; Ru �^пиндел�OE / špindel'
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SHLAGER
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = hit, hit song
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf Nl schlager; De Schlager, Schläger; Da schlager; No
      > > > > > > > > > slager; Sv
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > schlager; Ru �^л�?ге�EUR / šljager
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. De Schlager f. source of SLAJE + -ER
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > or maybe Schlager, as a typical German loan-word.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > In Dutch, "schlager" means typically a German-language song.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > STAG
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = stay, brace, strut
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > En stay; Nl stag; De Stag; Da stag; No stag; Sv stag; Fr
      > > > > > > > > > étai; Ru
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > �^�,аг / štag
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. PG *stagan
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NAJDEL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n. = disadvantage, drawback
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cf Nl nadeel; De Nachteil ; Sv nackdel
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. NAJ + DEL
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 8.5.448 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3184 - Release
      > > > > > > > Date:
      > > > > > > > > > > > 10/08/10 06:34:00
      > > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 8.5.448 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3191 - Release Date:
      > > > > > > > > > 10/11/10 18:34:00
      > > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      > > > > > > > > > Version: 8.5.448 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3196 - Release Date:
      > > > > > > > 10/14/10 06:34:00
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      > > > > > > > Version: 8.5.448 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3196 - Release Date: 10/14/10 06:34:00
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • chamavian
      Great, Jesper, thanks for your reaction! Let s hope it will be an inspiration as well for other members with native or near native knowledge of German, Danish,
      Message 115 of 115 , Nov 4, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Great, Jesper, thanks for your reaction! Let's hope it will be an inspiration as well for other members with native or near native knowledge of German, Danish, Norwegian etc

        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, Jesper Engelbrektsson <jesper.engelbrektsson@...> wrote:
        >
        > Well, maybe I could contribute, then. Hello to you all! I joined a while
        > back but didn't know if actually could be of that much help. My name is
        > Jesper and I'm a native Swedish speaker, I live in Gothenburg since a few
        > years back but originally come from Uddevalla further up the coast. I'm very
        > interested in languages in general but the germanic languages in particular.
        > I've studied a little bit of Dutch and German in the past.
        >
        > Anyway, I guess the easiest thing to help out with is to tell you when a
        > certain word may be in the dictionary but not necessarily in active use in
        > the language people speak. For example the most common word for the noun
        > "mill" is not "mölla". Most people will probably never even have heard that
        > one. The standard word is "kvarn".
        >
        > Also, the Swedish for "feeling" is "känsla", although a fair few people will
        > probably passively know that in Norwegian it's "fölelse" (I use the ö
        > because it's on my keyboard). Helpfully though, the word "medkänsla" means
        > sympathy.
        >
        > (Lastly, the present tense of the verb "hålla" is "håller").
        >
        >
        > God natt!
        >
        >
        >
        > 2010/11/4 swartsaxon <anjarrette@...>
        >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > It is "medgefoel" not *midgefoel, we recently agreed to have "med"
        > > instead of * mid, *medd etc.
        > > >
        > > > Btw I was thinking that it would be very nice if we'd have some more
        > > German, Danish, Swedish language examples here.
        > > > Now Rob and I often give examples of Dutch words and their usage, but for
        > > this site, we should have at least someone who could do the same for German.
        > > And for Scandinavian as well.
        > >
        > > Ja, jag hållar med dig!
        > >
        > > Andreas (Andy)
        > >
        > >
        > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > "swartsaxon" <anjarrette@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > Yes, you're right, we should have many words to express the different
        > > shades of meaning of similar words. Keep <medgefoel> (or <midgefoel>: David
        > > will settle this) and something like <medliden> or <midliden>, and look at
        > > other possible formations too to express subtle differences of meaning
        > > and/or usage.
        > > > >
        > > > > Andy
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>, Rob
        > > Boender <robertpboender@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Andy, you sure have a point, and 'medgefoel' seems broader but
        > > also less intense
        > > > > > than 'medliden'. As both words seem to be composites of roots that
        > > are already
        > > > > > FS words, it can be argued that both words are already valid FS
        > > words, near
        > > > > > synonyms with a slightly different meaning.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > There is no 'rule' for keeping the FS vocabulary limited, is there?
        > > That would
        > > > > > seem dubbleplus ungood to me ;)
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Â
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > ________________________________
        > > > > > From: swartsaxon <anjarrette@>
        > > > > > To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > > Sent: Wed, November 3, 2010 5:10:55 AM
        > > > > > Subject: [folkspraak] Re: New Words
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Â
        > > > > > Well, I thought it was obvious that I meant <-gefoel> in <medgefoel>
        > > was not
        > > > > > strong enough, as opposed to <-liden> in <*medliden> (medelijden), or
        > > maybe
        > > > > > <-rewen> in <*medrewen> (= *mederouwen, if that could have existed in
        > > Dutch).
        > > > > > "Together-feeling" or "together-emotion" does not sound as strong or
        > > as
        > > > > > compassionate as "together-suffering", or maybe "together-mourning"
        > > (<*medrewen>
        > > > > > as I suggested below). But if you all think it's appropriate and
        > > best, I'll
        > > > > > definitely go along with it.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > andy
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > No, "gefoel" isn't strong enough, that means just emotion, feeling,
        > > but
        > > > > > >"medgefoel" is: "ikk willde ju anbyde min medgefoel gern" = I'd like
        > > to express
        > > > > > >(offer) my condolences/my compassion to you
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > "swartsaxon" <anjarrette@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > Rob Boender <robertpboender@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I agree with the conclusion that "medgefoel" is quite an
        > > obvious word -ÂÂ
        > > > > > >which
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > seems an important Folkspraak criterium to me.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > I just wonder whether <gefoel> = 'feeling' is a strong enough
        > > word to convey
        > > > > > >the emotion one feels at another's loss of a person they loved. I
        > > prefer
        > > > > > >medelijden's formation, as it is based on suffering, although the
        > > actual meaning
        > > > > > >in Dutch is not quite right for 'condolences' (medelijden = pity,
        > > compassion
        > > > > > >according to my dictionary). My Dutch-English dictionary says that
        > > Dutch also
        > > > > > >has <rouwbeklag> for 'condolences'. Maybe something based on the
        > > Folksprak word
        > > > > > >for 'mourn', such as *middruren (if *druren = German <trauern>; or
        > > possibly
        > > > > > >*midrewen with *rewen = Dutch <rouwen> from Germanic *hrewwan
        > > (English <rue>)).
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > FS "Lunt" does sound like "lont" to me, which I would not
        > > immediately
        > > > > > >associate
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > with a match... In Dutch, a 'lont' is the string attached to a
        > > fire cracker
        > > > > > >or a
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > dynamite stave, that is lit up to explode the thing. So, it
        > > comes close but
        > > > > > >it
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > is not the same thing. Of course, my gut feeling should not at
        > > all
        > > > > > >influence a
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > decision; I'm just saying what I would think of, as an
        > > average native
        > > > > > >speaker of
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Dutch.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > Yes, I don't think a word based on Dutch <lont> and German
        > > <Lunte> is right
        > > > > > >for 'match'. I think a formation similar to Swedish
        > > <t�ndsticka> is better.
        > > > > > >Note Swedish <sticka> = splinter, peg, little stick.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I must admit I don't exaclty know what a "fuse" is, though I
        > > guess it's
        > > > > > >part of
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > an engine or electronic apparatus. @ Chamavian: is a "fuse" a
        > > "zekering"?
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > <Fuse>: a) a wick (piece of string, sometimes immersed in a
        > > combustible
        > > > > > >liquid) or tube filled with combustible material, attached to an
        > > explosive,
        > > > > > >which is lit at one end, then burns quickly down the length of the
        > > string or
        > > > > > >tube until it hits the explosive and sets it off, causing an
        > > explosion. Thus
        > > > > > >partly the same as Dutch <lont>.
        > > > > > > > b) a safety device placed in an electrical circuit consisting of
        > > a repaceable
        > > > > > >plug or tube containing wire or metal that will melt and break the
        > > circuit if
        > > > > > >the current exeeds a specified amperage. Thus = Dutch <zekering>,
        > > <stop>.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > And I don't know the meaning of "wick"... Babelfish
        > > translates it intio
        > > > > > >Dutch as
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > "wiek", which is either one of the four arms of a windmill, or
        > > part of a
        > > > > > >bird's
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > wing... But in the context of fire I think of the cinematic
        > > "The
        > > > > > >Wickerman"...
        > > > > > > > > ÂÂ
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > <Wick>: a piece of string running through and out of a candle,
        > > used to light
        > > > > > >the candle and on which the flame burns, drawing up the wax for
        > > combustion; also
        > > > > > >a similar piece of tightly woven cloth immersed in the oil of a
        > > lantern, used to
        > > > > > >draw up the oil, and then lit so that a flame burns at the top of
        > > the wick and
        > > > > > >oil continues to be drawn up the wick to feed the flame. Thus =
        > > Dutch <pit>,
        > > > > > ><kousje>, <katoen>. My dictionary also gives <wiek> as the first
        > > translation of
        > > > > > ><wick> but then translates <wiek> as "sail, vane; wing", so clearly
        > > dictionaries
        > > > > > >can't always be trusted.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > Andy
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > ________________________________
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > From: chamavian <roerd096@>
        > > > > > > > > To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > > > > > Sent: Sun, October 31, 2010 1:02:19 PM
        > > > > > > > > Subject: [folkspraak] Re: New Words
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Well, as we can see from the discussion between Rob and me,
        > > > > > > > > "me(d)egevoel" may be in the Dutch dictionary, but we never use
        > > it and one
        > > > > > >of us
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > even didn't know the word existed at all. Maybe it is just a
        > > translation of
        > > > > > >the
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > German word, but because Dutch already has "medelijden" and
        > > "medeleven", it
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > never got into real use.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > That means it's quite obscure, isn't it?
        > > > > > > > > So not every word that is found in the Dutch dictionary is used
        > > in real
        > > > > > > > > language. I bet that goes for the other languages as well.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > But I'm not against a FS "medgefoel", because it's a pretty
        > > self obvious
        > > > > > >word,
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > more so than "medlid" or "medleven" orso.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > David Parke <parked@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > I've found "medegevoel" in several dictionaries.
        > > > > > > > > > It's a similar construction to DE MitgefÃÆ'¼hl and DA/NO
        > > medfÃÆ'¸lelse. I
        > > > > > > > > > would have thought it makes a valid FS word -- unless it
        > > really is
        > > > > > > > > > obscure in one or more languages.
        > > > > > > > > > So i'd propose FS medgefoel.
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > For a match stick, I'd proposed "lunt" -- based in NL lont,
        > > DE Lunte,
        > > > > > > > > > DA/NO lunte. Scots English also has "lunt"
        > > > > > > > > > This word might also mean a fuse or wick.
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > On 30/10/2010 07:45, chamavian wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%2540yahoogroups.com>>,
        > > Rob Boender
        > > > > > > > > > > <robertpboender@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >"Meegevoel" also exists, but that's a kind of softy
        > > expression used
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > by social
        > > > > > > > > > > > >workers or gurus...
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > :lol: Prolly gurus only. I'm kind ofÃÆ'‚ a social worker
        > > (psych. nurse)
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > and I've
        > > > > > > > > > > > never used that word, nor seen/heard it being used by
        > > others. Looks
        > > > > > > > > > > like a
        > > > > > > > > > > > neologism to me.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > I myself work as a social worker as well, I'm a
        > > professional guardian
        > > > > > > > > > > or "youth protection worker" for minors who have no parents
        > > or who
        > > > > > > > > > > can't stay with them according to the judge... My elder
        > > sister is a
        > > > > > > > > > > psychiatrical nurse just like you. She used to live and
        > > work in The
        > > > > > > > > > > Hague, Leidschendam etc., do I remember correctly that you
        > > live there?
        > > > > > > > > > > but she moved back to the East years ago.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > I wouldn't use "meegevoel" myself either, but I think the
        > > best way to
        > > > > > > > > > > pronounce it would be with a Brabantish or Limburgish
        > > accent, with a
        > > > > > > > > > > very long monophthong EE, a "soft G", an unvoiced V and a
        > > thin L
        > > > > > > > > > > ["me::G'@vul] ;-) vs Standard Dutch ["meIx@v'uL]
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > I must admit I can easily imagine some of the 'group
        > > therapy
        > > > > > > > > > > pluggers' using it,
        > > > > > > > > > > > though.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________
        > > > > > > > > > > > From: chamavian <roerd096@>
        > > > > > > > > > > > To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:
        > > folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%2540yahoogroups.com>>
        > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 5:33:27 PM
        > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [folkspraak] Re: New Words
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%2540yahoogroups.com>>,
        > > David Parke <parked@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28/10/2010 10:57, swartsaxon wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > A better arrangement of my last posting:
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%2540yahoogroups.com>
        > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com<folkspraak%2540yahoogroups.com>>,
        > > David Parke <parked@>
        > > > > > >wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > av ond to (adv) sounds like "to and fro"?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fram tid to tid (adv) = "from time to time"?
        > > What about
        > > > > > > > > > > fan/af
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > = from?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is one area that I am unsure of how to do in
        > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Folkspraak. We have
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > certain meanings that we might want to
        > > distinguish with
        > > > > > > > > > > different
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > words.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. from as in the original location of something.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. of as in a possessed by or belonging to
        > > something or
        > > > > > >someone.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. by as in by means of, or caused by.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > German uses "aus" and "her" for 1. Maybe even
        > > "von". It uses
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "von"
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 and
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. It also uses "durch" for 3.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English uses 1. from, 2. of, 3 by. English "from"
        > > is
        > > > > > > > > > > unrelated to DE
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > von. EN of and off is related to DE ab. off and
        > > ab can have
        > > > > > > > > > > similar
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > usages but of and ab do not.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW,"nu ond dann", "av ond to" and "av/fram tid
        > > to tid" are
        > > > > > >all
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > phrases
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that I think mean "sometimes" or "occasionally"
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So will Folksprak have av, fon, fram, and ut? av =
        > > off, fon =
        > > > > > >of,
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > fram = from, ut = out of? "By = by means of" perhaps
        > > turj (or
        > > > > > > > > > > mid for
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > vehicles, like German); = caused by perhaps fram or
        > > fon (cf.
        > > > > > >German
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > von, Dutch van in this use; Swedish av, I believe).
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > kondolence (n) = condolence(s); perhaps midlid(en) or
        > > bilid(en)
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > better, cf. German Beileid
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > I think somethiing on the lines of medgefoel. med +
        > > gefoel. M
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > In Dutch, "gecondoleerd" or "condoleances" is the usual
        > > formula
        > > > > > > > > > > expressed when
        > > > > > > > > > > > someone died meaning "sorry for your loss". Or when a
        > > football club
        > > > > > > > > > > lost a
        > > > > > > > > > > > match, supporters of the winning club will say that to
        > > the losers.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > "Met oprechte deelneming" is the expression used on post
        > > cards one
        > > > > > > > > > > sends to the
        > > > > > > > > > > > relatives of the deceased.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > "Medeleven" or, more often used "medelijden" means
        > > "compassion".
        > > > > > > > > > > > "Meegevoel" also exists, but that's a kind of softy
        > > expression used
        > > > > > > > > > > by social
        > > > > > > > > > > > workers or gurus...
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > For FS I think "kondoleances" to express condolences, and
        > > "medlid"
        > > > > > > > > > > > for "compassion" will do.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > innen (adv) = within, inside
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > folkenmord (n) = genocide
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > genocid (n) = genocide. I don't see why we
        > > need two
        > > > > > > > > > > words for
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > the same thing.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see what's wrong with 2 words for the same
        > > thing. For one
        > > > > > > > > > > thing
        > > > > > > > > > > > > having synonyms is of great help in improving style
        > > literature and
        > > > > > > > > > > > > enabling rhymes in poetry. Not sure who will want to
        > > write poems
        > > > > > > > > > > about
        > > > > > > > > > > > > genocide though.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > In Dutch we have both Volkerenmoord and Genocide.
        > > > > > > > > > > > Genocide is used more often: de Ruandese genocide, de
        > > Armeense
        > > > > > > > > > > genocide, de
        > > > > > > > > > > > genocide op de Bosnische moslims etc. but Volkerenmoord
        > > has a
        > > > > > > > > > > stronger, more
        > > > > > > > > > > > emotional connotation, and it's also more old-fashioned
        > > and used
        > > > > > > > > > > sometimes to
        > > > > > > > > > > > explain what the word Genocide means.
        > > > > > > > > > > > FS could have both words as well: "genocide" and
        > > "folkenmord".
        > > > > > > > > > > > Btw I think there are quite a lot of poems written about
        > > the
        > > > > > > > > > > genocide on the
        > > > > > > > > > > > Jews in WWII, and other genocides.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tofridenstellend (a) = German
        > > zufriedenstellend
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'satisfactory'. I don't like using a calque of the
        > > German
        > > > > > because
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > <tofriden> suggests to me putting someone at peace,
        > > pacifying or
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > assuaging, rather than satisfying. I would suggest
        > > using a
        > > > > > > > > > > derivative
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > of genog, perhaps *fergnogen (unless that means
        > > "suffice") or
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > *begnogen or *ergnogen or similar.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Well my FS vocabulary already has "tofridenstelle" as a
        > > verb.
        > > > > > > > > > > (appease,
        > > > > > > > > > > > > please, provide gratification, satisfy, suffice). So it
        > > follows
        > > > > > > > > > > that the
        > > > > > > > > > > > > present participle would make a word for satisfactory.
        > > And such
        > > > > > > > > > > > > constructions are used in NL tevredenstellend; DE
        > > > > > > > > > > zufriedenstellend; DA
        > > > > > > > > > > > > tilfredsstillende; NO tilfredsstillende; SV
        > > tillfredsstÃÆ'�'¤llande
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ferwajte (v) = Dutch verwachten 'to expect'
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > In my FS I have "wajte" which is one of the few actual
        > > > > > > > > > > "crosswords" in
        > > > > > > > > > > > > the Ingmar Roerdinkholder usage. That is, it's made up
        > > of a mix of
        > > > > > > > > > > > > similar-looking words that are mostly unrelated
        > > etymologically.
        > > > > > >It's
        > > > > > > > > > > > > based on EN wait, NL wachten, DE warten, DA/NO vente,
        > > SV vÃÆ'�'¤nta.
        > > > > > >I
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > don't
        > > > > > > > > > > > > like crosswords because they ignore genuine
        > > etymological
        > > > > > > > > > > relationships
        > > > > > > > > > > > > such as DE warten is related to EN ward and guard.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > But anyway, I've got wajte because I really can't find
        > > much else
        > > > > > > > > > > better
        > > > > > > > > > > > > as a FS word for "wait".
        > > > > > > > > > > > > But in the continental Germlangs, it seems to be a
        > > common
        > > > > > > > > > > construction
        > > > > > > > > > > > > for a ver/for-/er- type of prefix to be added to the
        > > word for
        > > > > > > > > > > "wait" to
        > > > > > > > > > > > > make a word for "expect" or "anticipate". I would
        > > strongly suspect
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > that
        > > > > > > > > > > > > these constructions are calques of one and other.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > So FS ferwajte is fer- + wajte. Based on NL verwachten;
        > > DE
        > > > > > > > > > > erwarten; DA
        > > > > > > > > > > > > forvente; NO forvente; SV fÃÆ'�'¶rvÃÆ'�'¤nta
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah... those crosswords. Btw is English "wait" the same
        > > as Dutch
        > > > > > > > > > > "wachten"? One
        > > > > > > > > > > > would expect a more etymological spelling like "weight",
        > > but then
        > > > > > > > > > > again, one can
        > > > > > > > > > > > never rely on English orthography of course.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > It's kind of the same exception as "majd" instead of
        > > "*magd"
        > > > > > > > > > > > But as far as I'm concerned, FS "wahte", "ferwahte" would
        > > be OK as
        > > > > > > > > > > well in this
        > > > > > > > > > > > case.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transvestit (n) - self-explanatory
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transsexuelle (n) - self-explanatory
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kure (v) = Dutch keuren 'test, sample, taste,
        > > inspect,
        > > > > > > > > > > etc.';
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > or = German kÃÆ'�'¼ren 'choose, elect'? Possibly
        > > either 'test,
        > > > > > > > > > > sample, try
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > out' or 'elect'.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > FS's simple and conservative vowel phonology doesn't
        > > allow the
        > > > > > > > > > > diphthong
        > > > > > > > > > > > > that this has evolved into in German and English. But
        > > this word is
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > based
        > > > > > > > > > > > > on EN cower, DE kauern and SV kura. All originally from
        > > Middle Low
        > > > > > > > > > > > > German kÃÆ'�'»ren. The meaning should be something
        > > like "crouch" or
        > > > > > > > > > > "cringe".
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > garantere (v) = to guarantee
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > myler / mylener (n) = miller
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > It's from the word for "mill" and looking at the source
        > > languages,
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > it's
        > > > > > > > > > > > > not obvious if there is a big majority one way or
        > > another if the
        > > > > > >word
        > > > > > > > > > > > > should end in -n. The Latin source "molinum" did end in
        > > -en.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > cf EN miller; NL molenaar; DE MÃÆ'�'¼ller; DA/NO
        > > mÃÆ'�'¸ller; SV
        > > > > > > > > > > mjÃÆ'�'¶lnare; FR meunier
        > > > > > > > > > > > > cf EN mill; NL molen; DE MÃÆ'�'¼hle; DA/NO
        > > mÃÆ'�'¸lle; SV mÃÆ'�'¶lla; FR
        > > > > > >moulin
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Another interesting thing. Some etymologists consider
        > > that the
        > > > > > > > > > > Germanic
        > > > > > > > > > > > > -er ending, the agent suffix, may be a Latin borrowing,
        > > from L.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > -arius.And the Dutch -aar ending and SV -are ending
        > > look more this
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > way.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > Dutch does not have -er after other syllables with schwa
        > > such as
        > > > > > > > > > > -en, -el, in
        > > > > > > > > > > > that case it's -aar: -enaar, -elaar
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > Molenaar (miller), gijzelaar (hostage), pleisteraar
        > > (plasterer)
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > Sometimes after -n: winnaar, minnaar, but: beginner
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kancel (n) = German Kanzel 'pulpit; cockpit;
        > > turret' - I
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > suggest choose one of those meanings, probably the
        > > > > > > > > > > etymologically most
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct one; are we still using <c> for /ts/?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > It would perhaps have several meanings and derives from
        > > Latin
        > > > > > > > > > > cancelli.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > It's also a necessary root for word such as "kanceller"
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hymne (n) = hymn
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > psalm (n) = psalm
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lovgesang (n) = German Lobgesang 'hymn, song
        > > of praise,
        > > > > > > > > > > eulogy'
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > geologi (n) = geology
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > instyrting (n) = German Einsturz (<
        > > einstÃÆ'�'¼rzen)
        > > > > > >'collapse,
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > fall-in'?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > krah (n) = German Krach 'crack, crash' (the
        > > sound); note
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > German Absturz '(airplane) crash' as well as 'fall,
        > > plunge';
        > > > > > > > > > > abstÃÆ'�'¼rzen
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'fall, plunge' as well as 'crash' of airplanes.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > This is possibly an onomatopoeic word. But there are
        > > lots of words
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > like
        > > > > > > > > > > > > this for a crash or crack in the source languages.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > eg EN crash; NL krach; DE Krach; DA krak; NO krakk; FR
        > > krach; RU
        > > > > > > > > > > ???? / krah
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually onomatopoeia is one area where I like
        > > "crosswords". In
        > > > > > >such
        > > > > > > > > > > > > situations you have lots of similar words of often
        > > uncertain
        > > > > > > > > > > etymology.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > And they are similar because they are imitating the
        > > same sound,
        > > > > > > > > > > rather
        > > > > > > > > > > > > than because they evolved from a common source.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tandpin (n) = toothpeg??
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope the i in pin is long. Try tooth pain!
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kaotish (a) = chaotic; how about maybe
        > > > > > > > > > > wirrish/werrish/warrish
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > or ferwirrend or similar
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > I have "ferwerre" meaning "unnerve, confuse, unsettle".
        > > So
        > > > > > >ferwerrend
        > > > > > > > > > > > > might or might not mean precisely the same as kaotish.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > I also have "unordening" =disorder, mess, chaos. So
        > > something like
        > > > > > > > > > > > > *unordeningsfull or *unordeningslik would have a
        > > similar meaning
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strukturell (a) = structural; how about bulik
        > > or gebulik
        > > > > > >or
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > similar?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > neurolog (n) = Dutch neuroloog 'neurologist';
        > > how about
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > *nervkenner or similar 'nerve-expert' or
        > > *nervwitenshapman or
        > > > > > > > > > > something
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > antaste (v) = German antasten 'touch; attack
        > > (probably
        > > > > > > > > > > e.g. of
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > diseases etc.)'; Dutch aantasten 'affect, harm;
        > > attack'
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > molestere (v) = Dutch molesteren 'molest' (in
        > > non-sexual
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > senses or no?) Are we keeping -eren- as the
        > > infinitive ending of
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > romance roots?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hitsig (a) = German hitzig 'hot; heated,
        > > fierce
        > > > > > >(argument,
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > etc.)'. But shouldn't this be *hittig, after *hitt(e)
        > > 'heat'
        > > > > > like
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dutch hitte? I think Dutch hitsig is merely a direct
        > > borrowing
        > > > > > of
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > German hitzig.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > Dutch "hitsig" mean horny, especially for women ;-)
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes is unclear of the best way to do this. A schematic
        > > approach
        > > > > > > > > > > would be
        > > > > > > > > > > > > to make a calque/loan translation. -- take the word for
        > > "heat" and
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > add
        > > > > > > > > > > > > -ig. The naturalistic approach would be to treat it
        > > like FS was
        > > > > > > > > > > just one
        > > > > > > > > > > > > of the many languages that have borrowed from German
        > > hitzig.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brennend (a) = burning; ardent, fervent?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > offering (n) = offering (Dutch has offer in
        > > this sense)
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > FS isn't just a relexification of English and it's
        > > cognates won't
        > > > > > > > > > > always
        > > > > > > > > > > > > carry the exact sense as English words (or German
        > > cognates, or
        > > > > > >Dutch
        > > > > > > > > > > > > etc) It seems to be quite a common construction, after
        > > the form
        > > > > > > > > > > for the
        > > > > > > > > > > > > French offrande, to have a word meaning sacrifice, of a
        > > similar
        > > > > > > > > > > for to
        > > > > > > > > > > > > this. eg
        > > > > > > > > > > > > En offering; Nl offering, offerande; De Opferung; Da
        > > ofring; SV
        > > > > > > > > > > > > offrande; Fr offrande
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > offerte (n) = Dutch offerte '(monetary)offer,
        > > tender,
        > > > > > > > > > > quotation'
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > This would be more like an English offer. -- not a
        > > sacrifice, but
        > > > > > > > > > > a bid
        > > > > > > > > > > > > or tender or quotation.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anbod (n) = Dutch aanbod 'offer; supply'
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > illuminar (v) = illuminate? Shouldn't this be
        > > *erlyhte
        > > > > > or
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > similar, like German erleuchten? Unless 'illuminate'
        > > a book with
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > pictures?
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I got the proposed form wrong -- this is the
        > > Interlingua
        > > > > > >word.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > should be *illuminere.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > civil (a) = German zivil, Dutch civiel,
        > > English
        > > > > > > > > > > civil(ian). I
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > think this should only = English civilian; for
        > > English civil
        > > > > > >there
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be a word derived from 'citizen' (like German
        > > > > > > > > > > bÃÆ'�'¼rgerlich), and
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > another word meaning 'polite'
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrew
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 8.5.449 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3221 -
        > > Release Date:
        > > > > > > > > > > 10/26/10
        > > > > > > > > > > > >18:34:00
        > > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > > > > > > > > > > Version: 8.5.449 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3225 - Release
        > > Date:
        > > > > > >10/28/10
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >18:34:00
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.