What do you know? Heb. Eli becomes Julius in Latin

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Why would they hide the Jew in Julius? E? Should they rather called him Ali?

Let me know when you want to have a big person conversation.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You still see Caesar in words like «caesarian section» also, you see it in words like Shear and even Tsar.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

And? This has nothing to do with you not understanding the Latin alphabet.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Why would they hide the Jew in Julius? E? Should they rather called him Ali?

Let me know when you want to have a big person conversation.

«I tell you the truth, anyone who doesn't receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it.»

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I wrote Julius in common ("vulgar") Latin as IVLIVS. When stripping away what lingual migration removes, you would be left with LI in Hebrew, nearest neighbour in the dictionary of Hebrew names would be Eli.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Fabulous. When found to be wrong, quote the Bible. Makes total sense.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

No, you would not. The letters 'e' and 'i' are represented differently in both languages. Stop making things up.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Awesome. None of that has anything to do with you not understanding the Latin alphabet.

Hehe, FYI I have even added a few new alfabets to the foundry for type casting. U was also added to Ecclesiastical Latin to render the mater lectionis /u/ vowel sound the Hebrew Vav may sound like, however there were inconsistencies in the precedence so they also added W into aforementioned Ecclesiastical (Church) Latin for /o/ which is actually styled over a Greek Omega minuscule...... When we write what in the common Latin tongue was IVLIVS-- as Julius today using the modern Latin alphabet, there is quite a bit of precedence evident. Precedence to make my OP fully valid.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

All of that is irrelevant to your Original Post and does not demonstrate that Julius and Eli are the same names.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

No, you would not. The letters 'e' and 'i' are represented differently in both languages. Stop making things up.

So you go from syntax to morphology and pick on orthography treating these as one and the same? Your concept of "no J in Latin" is wrong, there were plenty of Latin dialects, the latest one is Church Latin AKA Ecclesiastical Latin.

At the time of Jesus Lat. IESVS would read something along the lines of /ie:zus/ in IPA, however, since English isn't a Latin language and nearly 2000 years of lingual migration as occurred, Eng. Jesus these days reads /ˈdʒiːzəs/ in IPA.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Your concept of "no J in Latin" is wrong, there were plenty of Latin dialects.

Show me a Classical Latin text with the letter J.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

All of that is irrelevant to your Original Post and does not demonstrate that Julius and Eli are the same names.

I have given you that explanation, and you would understand it had you only known all the alphabets involved here as well as you do Latin, which include Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic....

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
I have given you that explanation....

I do not want your opinion, I want your evidence that the letter J existed in Classical Latin like you erroneously stated above.

Cut the bull.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
I have given you that explanation....

I do not want your opinion, I want your evidence that the letter J existed in Classical Latin like you erroneously stated above.

Cut the bull.

Neither J or U existed in Classical Latin. These letters were added later into more modern Latin tongues. Julius would be carved into stone as IVLIVS in his own time. Where do you have your misconceptions from? I never claimed J or U were present in Classical or for that matter Vulgar Latin. Jod in Hebrew is used for both I, J and Y in Latin (including the modern variants). Heb. Jod would also typically replace Gr. Iota.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
I never claimed J or U were present in classical latin.

Yeah, you did:

Your concept of "no J in Latin" is wrong.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
I never claimed J or U were present in classical latin.

Yeah, you did:

[removed the quote tags here to show the evidence, Utnapisjtim wrote:]Your concept of "no J in Latin" is wrong.[end Utnapisjtim quote]

And where do I specify Classical Latin? You need to understand the concept of historical anachronism and you need to understand that our modern alphabet used for Germanic and Latin &c languages is indeed the Latin one. You keep mixing in Classical Latin in order to refute the changes made into Modern Latin. Your concerns here are arbitrary at best. Giddyup!

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
And where do I specify Classical Latin.

In your Original Post. What other Latin would they have been using in Classical times when Julius Caesar was alive? The made up Latin you seem to be using?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
I have given you that explanation....

I do not want your opinion, I want your evidence that the letter J existed in Classical Latin like you erroneously stated above.

Cut the bull.

IVLIVS would read Jod Vav Lamed Jod Vav Shin. Jod and Vav is removed in the migration into Hebrew, since they ain't making any sense in since they mean "He Will..." and since LI as a verb means Ascend, and since Julius had already ascended, adding the Ayin in front to LI and turn Julius into a Hebrew name Eli which means "Ascended" which is as true for Julius as Joseph would be for Caesarion truly being the Prince of Egypt. Isn't this here a little too damn obvious. Also the male Lat. suffix -VS would be blotted out when migrating from Latin to Hebrew.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
And where do I specify Classical Latin.

In your Original Post. What other Latin would they have been using in Classical times when Julius Caesar was alive? The made up Latin you seem to be using?

In my OP I speak English, and rendering my Latin using modern Latin alphabet and orthography. There! Satisfied?

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Why would you be using modern Latin when it wasn't used at the time? Modern Latin is about a thousand years after Julius Caeser died.

It would be like using modern English to make sense of hieroglyphics.