Latin, the Enlightenment, and science
in [Math]
|
Prev: Latin, the Enlightenment, and science
Next: question on Artwork and what is legal in altering a signed painting #24 South Dakota cat laws
From: Mahipal7638 on 25 Dec 2009 19:22 On Dec 25, 6:59 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > On Dec 25, 2:01 pm, James Hogg <Jas.H...(a)gOUTmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > > On Dec 25, 11:43 am, Yusuf B Gursey <y...(a)theworld.com> wrote: > > >> On Dec 25, 10:45 am, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >>> Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > >>>>> The third explanation is that English is more versatile. IOW, > > >>>>> people can make up new words easily. I did this as part of > > >>>>> my job. > > >>>> I take it you don't know Arabic? > > >>> Her 'explanation', if true, is just a variant of my first i.e. the > > >>> classicists that control Latin insist on purity over accepting new > > >>> words like any living language must. > > >>> Andrew Usher > > >> I read that the Latin of the Vatican continuously makes up new words, > > > > There's a Latin radio station in Finland. > > > >> as well as the Latin used for taxonomy. ditto for Modern Standard > > >> Arabic, which is very closely based on Classical Arabic, and spoken > > >> Arabic is quite divergent from it. there is also Neo-Syriac. Israeli > > >> Hebrew is rather more deviant from Biblical Hebrew though. > > > > What does Neo-Syriac (or any form of Modern Aramaic) have to do with > > > the creation of modern scientific vocabulary? > > > > Israeli scholars do publish in Hebrew, but they realize that if > > > they're going to get an international hearing, they have to publish in > > > English (or maybe French -- when Israel was founded in 1948, its third > > > official language was French rather than English). > > > >> why isn't this cross-posted to a medical or biological NG? Latin based > > >> coinages are AFAIK more alive in those fields. philosophy tends, AFAIK > > >> towards german. particle physics is inovative: quark (a fundamental > > >> particle, IIRC from a type of german cheese, but based on a miss- > > > > Did Gell-Mann ever claim any connection with Ger. Quark?? > > > >> quotation from James Joyce) and "color" and "flavor",(characteristics > > > > Joyce _didn't_ write "three quarks for Mister Mork"? > > > Strictly speaking, he wrote "Three quarks for Muster Mark!" > > Yeah, that's how I've seen it. So what's the misquotation? Obviously, there's no misquotation given the "_didn't_" in your line. Get over it, and thanks for not being a regular in sci.physics for you would be a visual, given Usenet is the medium it is, pain. Enjo(y)... -- Mahipal
From: Robert Bannister on 25 Dec 2009 19:31 Andrew Usher wrote: > bert wrote: > >> I think that this adoption of national languages had >> more to do with rising national pride than with any >> consensus about the shortcomings of Latin. > > This is kind of my point. My question was why this happened when one > would think that the Enlightenment would lead to more internationalism > among scholars - yet all the major Enlightenment figures wrote in > their vernacular. Moreover, particularly in Germany, many of them translated their names into Latin or Greek. -- Rob Bannister
From: Yusuf B Gursey on 25 Dec 2009 20:01 On Dec 25, 1:54 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > On Dec 25, 11:43 am, Yusuf B Gursey <y...(a)theworld.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 25, 10:45 am, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > > > > The third explanation is that English is more versatile. IOW, > > > > > people can make up new words easily. I did this as part of > > > > > my job. > > > > > I take it you don't know Arabic? > > > > Her 'explanation', if true, is just a variant of my first i.e. the > > > classicists that control Latin insist on purity over accepting new > > > words like any living language must. > > > > Andrew Usher > > > I read that the Latin of the Vatican continuously makes up new words, > > There's a Latin radio station in Finland. > > > as well as the Latin used for taxonomy. ditto for Modern Standard > > Arabic, which is very closely based on Classical Arabic, and spoken > > Arabic is quite divergent from it. there is also Neo-Syriac. Israeli > > Hebrew is rather more deviant from Biblical Hebrew though. > > What does Neo-Syriac (or any form of Modern Aramaic) have to do with > the creation of modern scientific vocabulary? > I was talking about classical languages that have been revived for everyday use, including terms for new technology, not neccessarily at that point about scientific vocabulary, which I get into later. > Israeli scholars do publish in Hebrew, but they realize that if > they're going to get an international hearing, they have to publish in > English (or maybe French -- when Israel was founded in 1948, its third > official language was French rather than English). > > > why isn't this cross-posted to a medical or biological NG? Latin based > > coinages are AFAIK more alive in those fields. philosophy tends, AFAIK > > towards german. particle physics is inovative: quark (a fundamental > > particle, IIRC from a type of german cheese, but based on a miss- > > Did Gell-Mann ever claim any connection with Ger. Quark?? no, he didn't. > > > quotation from James Joyce) and "color" and "flavor",(characteristics > > Joyce _didn't_ write "three quarks for Mister Mork"? > > > of quarks, it is said that inspired by ice-cream types that came in > > different colors and flavors while the theoretician was musing over > > the theory). ironically, the man responsible for these coinages is > > seriously interested in linguistics. > > Unfortunately he fell in with a "linguist" who is not taken seriously.
From: Androcles on 25 Dec 2009 20:06 "Yusuf B Gursey" <ybg(a)theworld.com> wrote in message news:aecefd83-1be6-41af-aace-b6773ba5c9b5(a)g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... On Dec 25, 1:54 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > On Dec 25, 11:43 am, Yusuf B Gursey <y...(a)theworld.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 25, 10:45 am, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > > > > The third explanation is that English is more versatile. IOW, > > > > > people can make up new words easily. I did this as part of > > > > > my job. > > > > > I take it you don't know Arabic? > > > > Her 'explanation', if true, is just a variant of my first i.e. the > > > classicists that control Latin insist on purity over accepting new > > > words like any living language must. > > > > Andrew Usher > > > I read that the Latin of the Vatican continuously makes up new words, > > There's a Latin radio station in Finland. > > > as well as the Latin used for taxonomy. ditto for Modern Standard > > Arabic, which is very closely based on Classical Arabic, and spoken > > Arabic is quite divergent from it. there is also Neo-Syriac. Israeli > > Hebrew is rather more deviant from Biblical Hebrew though. > > What does Neo-Syriac (or any form of Modern Aramaic) have to do with > the creation of modern scientific vocabulary? > I was talking about classical languages ==================================== That's just great, by WHY are you posting to sci.physics? Are you so fuckin' stupid that you don't realise it's off-topic?
From: Yusuf B Gursey on 25 Dec 2009 21:01
On Dec 25, 8:06 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_q> wrote: > "Yusuf B Gursey" <y...(a)theworld.com> wrote in messagenews:aecefd83-1be6-41af-aace-b6773ba5c9b5(a)g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 25, 1:54 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 25, 11:43 am, Yusuf B Gursey <y...(a)theworld.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 25, 10:45 am, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > > > > > The third explanation is that English is more versatile. IOW, > > > > > > people can make up new words easily. I did this as part of > > > > > > my job. > > > > > > I take it you don't know Arabic? > > > > > Her 'explanation', if true, is just a variant of my first i.e. the > > > > classicists that control Latin insist on purity over accepting new > > > > words like any living language must. > > > > > Andrew Usher > > > > I read that the Latin of the Vatican continuously makes up new words, > > > There's a Latin radio station in Finland. > > > > as well as the Latin used for taxonomy. ditto for Modern Standard > > > Arabic, which is very closely based on Classical Arabic, and spoken > > > Arabic is quite divergent from it. there is also Neo-Syriac. Israeli > > > Hebrew is rather more deviant from Biblical Hebrew though. > > > What does Neo-Syriac (or any form of Modern Aramaic) have to do with > > the creation of modern scientific vocabulary? > > I was talking about classical languages > ==================================== > That's just great, by WHY are you posting to sci.physics? > Are you so fuckin' stupid that you don't realise it's off-topic? OK. I didn't look at the NG's. |