baphomet

There are fourteen different words used for 'to go' on the source I reminded you that you previously posted. However, the only one that refers to 'to go' in relation to a 'year' or 'cycle' is 'an'. Look it up. Your old source may refersh your stagnated memory.

You do not seem to understand the proto IE, so let me explain.
There is "no one is year" and "one is not year", it does not work like that.
The words in IE had doubles, The meaning they represented was just what the word represented.
Romans took it from there and gave it a interpretation, not the other way around. Atnos did not mean year until the Romans gave it that interpretation.


In antiquity women were not alowed to drive in anyway, the driving if anything was done e by the male.
You can still see it today in Arab countries where women are not allowed to drive cars in some places or do other things that would put the woman incharge.


I am sorry to say but you are ignorant.
We can see this in present day english also.
HE-R, -WO-MAN, FE-MALE. They all derive from the male, R from HE, WO from MAN, FE from MALE.
Just like EL-A, A from EL, it's ela and el.


El is just like AT, to go, dive. It's where the notion of a HE came to Latin, the word already represented that in other cultures, from EL, they took it from there and gave it a representation, because EL means to go, as in a HE, to go, move is to add. Positive factor, male, action, they also took it because it had to do with Saturn, EL YHWH.



EL just like AT represents a cycle, just like AN-O, it's what it is a cycle, it's what they mean in IE.
Romans took them and gave them meanings. (AT) TO GO, does not spell year, it is only that because the Romans gave it that meaning.

This is not the thread , what they did is mix AT with AN-O, it';s why it's annus, and anus, but were off topic, and this belongs in another thread.

That is why you can not locate it in a Latin dictionary, right? Because it is so real. Goo-goo el. Goo-goo lus.

The word is right there under the suffiix, what do you mean it's not ?

ROOT+SUFFIX.

Originally posted by pepsi78
You do not seem to understand the proto IE...

I am not the one with English and Latin reading comprehension issues. Stop projecting.

There is "no one is year" and "one is not year", it does not work like that.
The words in IE had doubles, The meaning they represented was just what the word represented.
Romans took it from there and gave it a interpretation, not the other way around. Atnos did not mean year until the Romans gave it that interpretation.

Everyhting you just said is contradicted by your own source. Maybe you should take it up with them:

At: To go; the going round of the year, a period gone through

Remember, this is your source and it says you are WRONG.

The word is right there under the suffiix, what do you mean it's not ?

The word 'el' is not listed in the dictionary with its own defintion? That is what I mean. Do you know why? Because it is Ficto-Latin. Goo-goo el. Goo-goo lus. You made it up. Goo-goo anus.

You would have linked a defintion by now if you had one.

I am not the one with English and Latin reading comprehension issues. Stop projecting.

It;s not just latin, it's everywhere, the male is the begining and then comes the female, first the male then the addition, the female. ROOT+SUFFIX male + female, out of the male you get a female.
This is comun in other langueges as well, it's how it's done.

So it's EL-A

Everyhting you just said is contradicted by your own source. Maybe you should take it up with them:

There is no contradiction it's your imagination

At: To go; the going round of the year, a period gone through

At does not mean year in indo european, in indo european it means TO GO and that is it, it only means year to the Romans.

The word 'el' is not listed in the dictionary with its own defintion? That is what I mean. Do you know why? Because it is Ficto-Latin. Goo-goo el. Goo-goo lus. You made it up. Goo-goo anus.

The word is right there buried under the suffix.

You would have linked a defintion by now if you had one.

I do, it's in the dictionary, EL+Suffix.

Originally posted by pepsi78
It;s not just latin, it's everywhere, the male is the begining and then comes the female, first the male then the addition, the female. ROOT+SUFFIX male + female, out of the male you get a female

I am not particularly concerned regarding your personal opinion on language development. I, unlike you, can remain focused and on the subject. The only thing I want from you is the Latin dictionary entry that shows 'el' equalling 'him' as you orginally asserted.

There is no contradiction it's your imagination

You mean like Ficto-Latin?

At does not mean year in indo european, in indo european it means TO GO and that is it, it only means year to the Romans.

Mr. Potato Head, this is your source. It gives the translation of Proto Indo European words and their infered meanings, it has nothing to do with Latin. You used this before, did you forget? I understand if you did forget, your noggin must be overtaxed trying to manage the fictitious language you created (Ficto-Latin). It is okay, I forgive you.

The word is right there buried under the suffix.

Can you show me where in the Latin dictionary it might be buried? I want to see the entry that says 'el' equals 'him'. I want you to show me, and everyone else, how a language with no modern conceptualization of pronouns had this fabulous word. Can you show it to us? Unless of course you are just a fraud. An intellectual fraud. Are you a fraud? Hmmm?

There are fourteen different words used for 'to go' on the source I reminded you that you previously posted. However, the only one that refers to 'to go' in relation to a 'year' or 'cycle' is 'an'. Look it up. Your old source may refersh your stagnated memory.

An-o is the cycle, from latin anus with AT that became annus. Many words in the IE represent the same notion.

Really? Am I the one who had to invent a form of Latin (Ficto-Latin) that no one but you knows about where your special word 'el' hides from the prying eyes of Latin scholars everywhere? Hmmm.

What ficto-Latin, the word is made with a suffix, meaning EL is the root word.

That is why you can not locate it in a Latin dictionary, right? Because it is so real. Goo-goo el. Goo-goo lus.

It is in the latin dictionary with it's suffix.

Originally posted by pepsi78
An-o is the cycle, from latin anus with AT that became annus. Many words in the IE represent the same notion.

Who cares. I want to see the Latin word 'el' that means 'him'. Did you find a link to the defintion yet?

What ficto-Latin, the word is made with a suffix, meaning EL is the root word.

Then if it is not Ficto-Latin you can get everyone a link to the defintion. You know, where it says what you claim.

It is in the latin dictionary with it's suffix.

Really? Then why did it not say anything about the word 'el' equalling 'him'? Also, how do you justify the fact that you determined that the Romans were using modern style pronouns two thousand years ago? This is an amazing discovery. Will you document the finding using Ficto-Latin numismatic evidence or perhaps even Ficto-Latin inscriptions? Your genius continues to astound.

Really? Then why did it not say anything about the word 'el' equalling 'him'? Also, how do you justify the fact that you determined that the Romans were using modern style pronouns two thousand years ago? This is an amazing discovery. Will you document the finding using Ficto-Latin numismatic evidence or perhaps even Ficto-Latin inscriptions? Your genius continues to astound.

It does in other Langueges, Venetian included. Where it is separated ELLUM is EL LU.
It is imported from other cultures into Latin, it's why it has a suffix, because it's the word imported from other cultures. Classical Latin is not the whole Latin, it's just classical Latin. The word appears in classical latin with it's suffix. So don't forget that there is a suffix, I know you don't like it.

I don't see how it's ficto-Latin since EL is the main word from the suffix, the root.

A root is something at the bottom, then it evolves into others things by growing in time. It grows and becomes something else, it adds up.

From EL to other forms, and that is why EL has a suffix over it.

The word is imported from other cultures and given a suffix. We know from IE it has a masculine aspect.

Originally posted by pepsi78
It does in other Langueges, Venetian included. Where it is separated ELLUM is EL LU.

Sorry. No one cares about Venetian either. Everyone DOES want to see you link that dictionary entry that shows 'el' being defined as 'him' in Latin.

I don't see how it's ficto-Latin since EL is the main word from the suffix, the root.

It is Ficto-Latin because you made it up. If you did not make it up you would have posted a dictionary entry that was ultra clear by saying, 'the definition of 'el' in Latin means 'him''. But since you did not we can all infer that you invented the whole premise. Ficto-Latin from an intellectual fraud.

I see how you completely avoided commenting on how you got the Romans to use modern pronouns. Any word on that one?

Sorry. No one cares about Venetian either. Everyone DOES want to see you link that dictionary entry that shows 'el' being defined as 'him' in Latin.

EL-LUS is a him, with the root EL.

It is Ficto-Latin because you made it up. If you did not make it up you would have posted a dictionary entry that was ultra clear by saying, 'the definition of 'el' in Latin means 'him''. But since you did not we can all infer that you invented the whole premise. Ficto-Latin from an intellectual fraud.

I did not make anything up, the word is there, I do not know what you mean. EL + Suffix.

I see how you completely avoided commenting on how you got the Romans to use modern pronouns. Any word on that one?

It's not modern pronous it's old as in the begining, then comes the suffix, as in the new.
It's in your head, twisted.
This means that they were aware of the "addition" at that time. When old get's combined with new then a pair is formed. A pair=two. Formed out of two components, A+B root+suffix.

reply to post by pepsi78

No he is not, the abyss, he may reside into the Abzu, not the abzu.
Source please.

I have given you the source - go and read the tablets themselves. And, as I have said multiple times, do not mix up the references to Abzu the entity/place, Abzu the temple of Enki, and Abzu the freshwater areas of the land.

It does not state that it is the abzu, Enki lives in the abzu and comes out of it at day time, at night
he go's back to rest in it.

Yes, in his TEMPLE abzu.
This is his TEMPLE Abzu, not the entity/thing Abzu/Kur.
Don't mix them up.

He is not who you say, he does not take part in battle with the mother goddess, there is no Nubiru.

What on Earth are you talking about!?
Let's try this again.
Marduk is a Babylonian combination of two Sumerian gods: Ninurta and Asarluhi.
There are three Sumerian myths that have "slay the dragon" type themes.
The dragon in these myths is Kur/Asag/Abzu
The most likely myth to have influenced the Babylonian epic of creation is the one involving Ninurta.
This myth of Ninurta and Kur has nothing to do with creation or the mother goddess. It is simply the backbone for the later, which leads me to:
The Babylonian tale transforms this into an epic of creation, with Marduk as the hero and Tiamat as the dragon.

Yes, but where does Nammu get slayed, and where is Marduk making children out of her in sumerian myth.
I'll tell you it does not happen, she is with enki making things.

As I have just pointed out above, Nammu does not get slayed, because she is not the dragon to the Sumerians. It is the later Babylonian tale that tells of Tiamat being destroyed.

Source please, the Abzu is a resting place

Again, I have given you the source. Read the tablets. Enki's TEMPLE Abzu is the resting place. Not the entity/place Abzu. Don't mix them up.

Originally posted by pepsi78
EL-LUS is a him, with the root EL.

Was that quote from a Latin dictionary? I did not see a link. Where is it?

I did not make anything up, the word is there, I do not know what you mean. EL + Suffix.

If that is the case where is the clear and precise dictionary defintion showing that 'el' equals 'him' in Latin? You have one, right?

It's not modern pronous it's old as in the begining, then comes the suffix, as in the new.
It's in your head, twisted.

Uh, no my deluded object of lingual scorn. This is a fact.

Tell me, where on this chart is your elusive word?

Will you ever link a definition or will you go on and on about something else? Link a definition. Stop the madness. Or maybe you like being known as the inventor of Ficto-Latin. You could patent it and sell it to all your friends, even the visble ones too!

I have given you the source - go and read the tablets themselves. And, as I have said multiple times, do not mix up the references to Abzu the entity/place, Abzu the temple of Enki, and Abzu the freshwater areas of the land.

I have red the tablets.

Yes, in his TEMPLE abzu.
This is his TEMPLE Abzu, not the entity/thing Abzu/Kur.
Don't mix them up.

The abzu is not what you say.

What on Earth are you talking about!?
Let's try this again.
Marduk is a Babylonian combination of two Sumerian gods: Ninurta and Asarluhi.

No , Marduk is only related to Babylon, the myths of marduk from babylon with the mother goddess do not match.

There are three Sumerian myths that have "slay the dragon" type themes.
The dragon in these myths is Kur/Asag/Abzu

The dragon is not the abzu, tiamat nammu is the dragon. You are mixing Nammu with the Abzu, she is in deed the serpent.

As I have just pointed out above, Nammu does not get slayed, because she is not the dragon to the Sumerians. It is the later Babylonian tale that tells of Tiamat being destroyed.

Yes, and this is why some sumerian and babylonian stories do not connect.

Again, I have given you the source. Read the tablets. Enki's TEMPLE Abzu is the resting place. Not the entity/place Abzu. Don't mix them up.

I have red them, the abzu is a resting place. Enki sleeps in it. he is woken up by the (nammu) to start creating humans. It's nothing like the enuma elish, no battle, everything is made from the abzu.

Was that quote from a Latin dictionary? I did not see a link. Where is it?

It's from the wiki link, you see LUS is special additive, it makes refrence only to persons, it's a verb for EL.
EL-LUS=HIM.

Lus
The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

It represents the main word EL.

Since it's a noun.

grammar.ccc.commnet.edu...
noun is the name of a person, place, thing, or idea. Whatever exists, we assume, can be named, and that name is a noun. A proper noun, which names a

ELLUS=HE
en.wiktionary.org...

Lus
Used to form a diminutive of a noun, indicating small size or youth.

A diminutive of a noun, meaning EL.
serving to diminish, leaving the EL word, it's almost as if it's not even a suffix, it's a blank to serve the root word.

Originally posted by pepsi78
It's from the wiki link, you see LUS is special additive, it makes refrence only to persons, it's a verb for EL.
EL-LUS=HIM.

Oh good. Can you show me where it says 'ellus' equals 'him' as well? This gets better by the minute.

Also, your infantile understanding of Latin is on full display once again. The suffix '-lus' or '-ellus' can refer to more than just people. Try looking it up. It is also not a verb, it is more of an adjective as it modifies the noun. From you own source which proves you WRONG yet again:

The suffix -ellus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Examples:
agrellus (“little field”) < ager (“field”)

Opps. Is a field a person? I think not. [/sarcasm] When will you ever learn?

It represents the main word EL.

If you acutally read your source you would see that '-lus' is the more common version of '-ellus'. They both mean the same thing, 'diminutive'.

You need to admit you made a mistake here. You are only digging a deeper hole every time you post.


Edit to add:

A diminutive of a noun, meaning EL.
serving to diminish, leaving the EL word, it's almost as if it's not even a suffix, it's a blank.

Holy crap. Did you really just say that?? Do you even know what a 'diminutive' means? It is like a smaller version of a larger thing, i.e. 'kitty' for a small cat. Wow, really, this tops just about all the idiotic things you have said regarding Latin.

You really, really, really need to stop this. You can not understand English well enough to even comprehend the defintions of words and you are going to lecture people on Latin?

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


They don't mean the same thing,

Used to form a diminutive of a noun, indicating small size or youth.

Indicating the root word.

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Translation the lus(addition) is added to a noun(root).
To form a diminutive of that noun, not what you state. The noun is the root

en.wikipedia.org...
In language structure, a diminutive,[1] or diminutive form (abbreviated dim), is a formation of a word used to convey a slight degree of the root meaning

So ELLUS represents "EL" it is used to represent the root, it's what it means.
ELLUS=HE
EL=HE.

The noun is the ROOT, and the diminuation is the lus.
Not what you state.

Also, your infantile understanding of Latin is on full display once again

No you got it wrong the noun is the root, not the sufiix.

The noun:
(grammar) A word that can be used to refer to a person, animal, place, thing, phenomenon, substance, quality, or idea; one of the basic parts of speech in many languages, including English.

Bad luck it seems for you. It indicates EL=HE since EL-LUS =HE. Lus represents the root word.

Originally posted by pepsi78
They don't mean the same thing,

Used to form a diminutive of a noun, indicating small size or youth.

Indicating the root word.

Dude. You are lost. Completely lost. Look:

Suffix-ellus m. (feminine -ella, neuter -ellum); first/second declension

1.Alternative form of -lus.

See the bold part? Same word.

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

To form a diminutive of that noun, not what you state.

A diminutive of the noun is a smaller version of the noun, be it a tree, boy, dog, house, mountain, etc. Not a smaller version of the word itself (less letters).

en.wikipedia.org...
In language structure, a diminutive,[1] or diminutive form (abbreviated dim), is a formation of a word used to convey a slight degree of the root meaning

It is not refering to language structure but to noun modification. That is why it clearly says, "lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun." A smaller thing. Hell, I even gave you their example about a 'field', 'agrellus', 'small field'.

You need to learn English before you are going to try and teach people here Latin. Your reading comprehension skills are abominable.

Dude. You are lost. Completely lost. Look:

Nope the suffix lus is the meaning of the root look up.

From wiki

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Translation suffix lus is added to the root to form the meaning of the (diminuation) the root


The diminuation
In language structure, a diminutive,[1] or diminutive form (abbreviated dim), is a formation of a word used to convey a slight degree of the root meaning
It represents the root meaning of the word.

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Translation: the suffix LUS not just any suffix but this one is added to the root to form the meaning of the root. Meaning it's added to represent the root word.

Meaning EL=HIM from the Suffix LUS mascuilin ELLUS meaning HE.
It means that EL stand alone means HE.

Bad luck Augustus, what can I say.

Originally posted by pepsi78
Nope the suffix lus is the meaning of the root look up.

The suffixes '-ellus' and '-lus' modify the noun so that it means a smaller version of that noun, hence a 'diminutive'. 'Porculus', 'little pig'.

From wiki

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Translation suffix lus is added to the root to form the meaning(diminuation) the root.

Wrong.

Translation, the suffixes modify the word so that it indicates a smaller version of the original noun which is why they included the word 'agrellus' which means 'little field'.

The suffixes '-ellus' and '-lus' modify the noun so that it means a smaller version of that noun, hence a 'diminutive'. 'Porculus', 'little pig'.

Nope, LUS represents the root, what the root is.

From wiky

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Translation: suffix lus is added to the root to form the meaning of the root.

Wrong.
Translation, the suffixes modify the word so that it indicates a smaller version of the original noun which is why they included the word 'agrellus' which means 'little field'.

Not LUS.

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

This suffix is added to represent the root word.
The diminutive of that noun. Translation: meaning of the root.


The diminutive is:
In language structure, a diminutive,[1] or diminutive form (abbreviated dim), is a formation of a word used to convey a slight degree of the root meaning

The root meaning of the word EL.
ELLUS=HE , EL=HE. LUS represents the root.


As I stated bad luck for you.


Here it isEL=HE

Originally posted by pepsi78
Nope, LUS represents the root, what the root is.

'-Lus' is a noun modifier and has nothing to do with the root word of anything. It indicates a small version of something.

From wiky

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

Translation: suffix lus is added to the root to form the meaning of the root.

There is no translation required. The explanation is quite clear (to someone that understands English).

Not LUS.

The suffix -lus is added to a noun to form a diminutive of that noun.

This suffix is added to represent the root word.
The diminutive of that noun. Translation: meaning of the root.

The suffixes '-lus' and '-ellus' are the same thing. The both indicate a smaller version of the noun they are modifying. The article can not be anymore clear.

How do you say 'two small twins' in Latin?