EB news - Friday, February 25

[Nowake]

Talked it over with Umamma, and he told me that the "-on" ending is just modern greek, thus the matter should be dropped.

[hellenes]

Well as it was mentioned in another post the link of wich I cant recall now the time period of the game is Hellenistic and as such the Hellenistic "koine"=kini=common language ponounciation and structure wise is the base of the modern Hellenic language so one shouldnt base the language on the Archaic form but on the form of 270bc... It was transformed so the multicultural population of non Greek subjects of the Hellenistic Empires would read and pronounce it so the small fonts were introduced as the phoenetic symbols wich didnt exist in the Archaic Hellenic language...
While its highly debatable how the ancient Hellenic language was pronounced I believe that the Hellenistic kini was very similar in pronounciation to the modern hellenic language and even the Bible was written in it and is pronounced in any modern Greek Orthodox church...

Hellenes

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Well as it was mentioned in another post the link of wich I cant recall now the time period of the game is Hellenistic and as such the Hellenistic "koine"=kini=common language ponounciation and structure wise is the base of the modern Hellenic language so one shouldnt base the language on the Archaic form but on the form of 270bc... It was transformed so the multicultural population of non Greek subjects of the Hellenistic Empires would read and pronounce it so the small fonts were introduced as the phoenetic symbols wich didnt exist in the Archaic Hellenic language...
While its highly debatable how the ancient Hellenic language was pronounced I believe that the Hellenistic kini was very similar in pronounciation to the modern hellenic language and even the Bible was written in it and is pronounced in any modern Greek Orthodox church...

Hellenes

I am currently not able to speak to this specific unit's title, but we will use the same classical (I would not call it "archaic") greek terminology that provides us the information we know about these units. For example, Xenophon and Polybios and other similar period writers will provide us with names of most units and descriptions. We must use their grammar, idioms, terminology, etc. I do wish someone would write some books however on Hellenistic common greek. What I've been able to get my hands on (with a lot of searching) just doesn't seem to be that thorough.

Another thing about these unit names: they definitely aren't the final ones. We will not use "Ptolemaic" anything, as that's the modern adjectival form. We have plenty of references to be able to give anything we want the proper classical greek adjectival form in its correct number, gender, case, etc.

[hellenes]

I am currently not able to speak to this specific unit's title, but we will use the same classical (I would not call it "archaic") greek terminology that provides us the information we know about these units. For example, Xenophon and Polybios and other similar period writers will provide us with names of most units and descriptions. We must use their grammar, idioms, terminology, etc. I do wish someone would write some books however on Hellenistic common greek. What I've been able to get my hands on (with a lot of searching) just doesn't seem to be that thorough.

Another thing about these unit names: they definitely aren't the final ones. We will not use "Ptolemaic" anything, as that's the modern adjectival form. We have plenty of references to be able to give anything we want the proper classical greek adjectival form in its correct number, gender, case, etc.

The Gospels are as far as I know a "book" written in Hellenistic kini, well its moot point of arguing over something that neither sides will agree, and Erasmian "reconstruction" is up to anyones preference to adopt or not...

Hellenes

[Teleklos Archelaou]

The Gospels are as far as I know a "book" written in Hellenistic kini, well its moot point of arguing over something that neither sides will agree

I have no idea what is being offered as a complaint or alternative here. We will not be using New Testament Greek in this mod. As everyone knows it is indeed different. It does not pertain to our time period nor is it used by the people who are providing us with the information we have about these units we are using.

If someone wants to have the best information about this time period (and the game starts in 272bc), clearly he must use those authors who talk about these armies. Who would he use? He simply must use Polybios, Xenophon, and anyone who is close to this time frame, even if they date to a later period if he must (all things which I just stated). To try to turn their terms for these units and their descriptions for them into New Testament koine Greek is absolutely unthinkable (edit: and just doesn't really pertain here, as we are dealing with individual unit names almost exclusively, where koine changes don't really have an effect). Ask any professional historian, specifically any professional and Greek historian. That would be ridiculous and they would clearly agree.

I am just one person in a much larger mod, but I do not think we would agree to that.

[khelvan]

Well as it was mentioned in another post the link of wich I cant recall now the time period of the game is Hellenistic and as such the Hellenistic "koine"=kini=common language ponounciation and structure wise is the base of the modern Hellenic language so one shouldnt base the language on the Archaic form but on the form of 270bc...

So, you're suggesting that Polybius (c. 200 - 118 BC) wasn't actually writing in "Archaic" Greek? What, was there some sort of conspiracy to translate his works into a form of Greek that didn't actually exist? That his documents aren't real?

[Byzantine Prince]

So, you're suggesting that Polybius (c. 200 - 118 BC) wasn't actually writing in "Archaic" Greek? What, was there some sort of conspiracy to translate his works into a form of Greek that didn't actually exist? That his documents aren't real?

Polybius would be wrinting in Hellenistic dialiect of Greek. I think there was around three or four ancient greek dialects so I'm not sure what Polybius would speak in. It's hard to tell anything about these things unles you've read and analyzed Polybius in it's original form.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Polybius would be wrinting in Hellenistic dialiect of Greek. I think there was around three or four ancient greek dialects so I'm not sure what Polybius would speak in. It's hard to tell anything about these things unles you've read and analyzed Polybius in it's original form.

What dialect do you mean? There is not a "Hellenistic dialect".
edit: I should ammend this. I see that some modern scholars do want to see different "branches" of koine greek, and one of those they do label as "Hellenistic". I can't find much on it at the time being, but it seems as though New Testament Greek is considered to be the "Hellenistic" variant of koine, by those who do wish to see a split inside koine.

[biguth dickuth]

Regarding the meaning of "Kleruchos":
"Kleros" (Κληρος) means a randomly distributed item or object.
In ancient times it was used for tracks of land provided to the soldiers by the state, like in the case of the Ptolemies. It was used to name these tracks of land as they were randomly distributed to the settlers by the state and NOT chosen or bought by them.
So the name "Kleruchos" (Κληρουχος, Κληρ-ουχος) means the obtainer of a "Kleros" thus the obtainer of a piece of land randomly provided to him by the state. Since, however, most of these people were settlers and the land was provided to them as return for their continuous military services, the meaning of Kleruchos came to be that of a military settler.

In modern greek, the word "kleros" retains it's original meaning of the randomly distributed object but it is usually used to name the "receipt" for the participation of a person into a lottary.
By the way, i think Idomeneas confused the "klerotoi" (κληρωτοι) who are non-professional soldiers who are drafted into the modern army with the "kleruchoi".

[biguth dickuth]

Talked it over with Umamma, and he told me that the "-on" ending is just modern greek, thus the matter should be dropped.

This is not so in all cases. "Kleruchos" (κληρουχος) is the singular nom., "kleruchoi" (κληρουχοι) the plural nom., "kleruchon" (κληρουχων) the plural gen.
The -on ending in this case, actually -ων in greek, is the one of the plural genitive. It is NOT the -on ending (-ον in greek) of the singular nominative which Urnamma suggests to be a modern thing.

So, as far as i'm concerned, it should be Agemata Kleruchon (αγηματα κληρουχων), as Idomeneas suggested.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Erasmian "reconstruction" is up to anyones preference to adopt or not...

Someone was asking me about this today. I should explain it here.

The pronunciation and transliteration techniques (or processes or conventions or whatever you want to call them) that EB is using aren't exactly the same. The pronunciation used in the voicemod is slightly different from the transliteration. It doesn't really have a single name either. It is not Erasmian exactly, but it is similar in a lot of respects to Erasmian pronunciation, and sometimes is classified itself as a type of Erasmian pronunciation even though it is not. It is sometimes referred to as "historical" pronunciation or sometimes as "classical pronunciation" or "philological" pronunciation. But whatever the name, the pronunciation system that we use is undoubtedly the closest approxmiation (without trying to perform tonal accents) that anyone anywhere can come up with today on how ancient classical greek actually sounded. You can see a rough presentation of it here: http://www.biblicalgreek.org/links/pronunciation.html where it is called "Historic Attic Pronunciation" (that page shows how close modern greek is to biblical greek though). It is also like the one presented in "Vox Graeca", which is found summarized here: http://www.biblicalgreek.org/links/erasmian.html .

The problem with using Erasmian, which was an attempt to try and get very close to ancient Greek in a modern pronunciation, is that it isn't close enough. It doesn't pronounce theta, phi, or rho quite the same as ancient classical greek did. Most modern classics departments in Europe and America follow Erasmian pronunciation, though they point out always that it is not quite accurate (but it is easy to use, so that's why they fall back on it). It probably would be fine for the mods, but since so many folks insist on it being as accurate as it can be, we use the "philological" pronunciation instead, which is more accurate.

The transliteration basically assumes an Erasmian pronunciation, and then uses K instead of C, AI instead of AE, OS instead of US, and a few other variations. Those C and AE and US transliterations have crept in through British convention following "Latinization" of the Greek. Why do we not use the exact same transliteration as pronunciation? I have never in my life seen a transliteration in an academic book of "t(h)" or just "t" for a theta. It's just not modern convention at all to do that. And it also would obscure the difference between tau and theta once it's turned into Latin letters from the Greek ones.

[Idomeneas]

Regarding the meaning of "Kleruchos":
"Kleros" (Κληρος) means a randomly distributed item or object.
In ancient times it was used for tracks of land provided to the soldiers by the state, like in the case of the Ptolemies. It was used to name these tracks of land as they were randomly distributed to the settlers by the state and NOT chosen or bought by them.
So the name "Kleruchos" (Κληρουχος, Κληρ-ουχος) means the obtainer of a "Kleros" thus the obtainer of a piece of land randomly provided to him by the state. Since, however, most of these people were settlers and the land was provided to them as return for their continuous military services, the meaning of Kleruchos came to be that of a military settler.

In modern greek, the word "kleros" retains it's original meaning of the randomly distributed object but it is usually used to name the "receipt" for the participation of a person into a lottary.
By the way, i think Idomeneas confused the "klerotoi" (κληρωτοι) who are non-professional soldiers who are drafted into the modern army with the "kleruchoi".

I must admit that since i was writing that post at speed i made mistake about the enlish translation of ''kleruchos'' the right translation is yours the obtainer of a piece of land randomly provided to him by the state, my mistake. Now to all others. Guys please understand that modern greek include 90 or more percent of all the ancient words in original form or in other words as composite. Yes we do not have words like ''porpax'' (the support were the elbow came through to get the grip of the shield) cause we dont have shields anymore etc. Thousands of other words are still here. So dont tell me that basic grammar characteristics changed like the general -ων unless you can prove it. The common hellenistic dialect isnt so mysterious as you made it sound. Its basically the attic dialect. The thing that propably Hellenes wants to point out is the invention of accent marks wich were introduced in those years along with the lower case letters. A remain of these accent points is even the ''h'' before Hellas. We pronounce it ''Ellas'' the ''H'' substitudes that accent mark that is still ''remembered'' in many european languages while we stopped use it after the 80's.
So my point is that since you are trying so hard for realism in languages lost long ago shouldnt a still living language to be completely correct in this game? You see that guys from greece are willing to help, why should you stick to a wrong word or grammar huge errors when you can avoid easily? So PLEASE listen to people who actually SPEAK the language not just reading about it. Unless offcourse if you can support your arguements with real facts and not translations of unknown quality. Many times in TV i saw documentaries where english proffessors were reading ancient greek and i was trying to figure out what possibly they might meant!

[Idomeneas]

Polybius would be wrinting in Hellenistic dialiect of Greek. I think there was around three or four ancient greek dialects so I'm not sure what Polybius would speak in. It's hard to tell anything about these things unles you've read and analyzed Polybius in it's original form.

Jesus Christ man! stop comfusing everybody. What three or four? where did you read about that? The official dialect by that time was attic offcourse every region had its own like today. And not exactly dialect its a heavy word more like accent i would say. But in any case the basic grammar rules still were the same. I understand you live abroad and its a great thing you interesting about our heritage, but read alot first man most of what you say are inaccurate and people look up to you since you said youre greek. Dont get me wrong but there are things more important than you or me. Historic truth!

[Idomeneas]

Talked it over with Umamma, and he told me that the "-on" ending is just modern greek, thus the matter should be dropped.

BOINNNGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Teleklos Archelaou]

So my point is that since you are trying so hard for realism in languages lost long ago shouldnt a still living language to be completely correct in this game? You see that guys from greece are willing to help, why should you stick to a wrong word or grammar huge errors when you can avoid easily? So PLEASE listen to people who actually SPEAK the language not just reading about it. Unless offcourse if you can support your arguements with real facts and not translations of unknown quality. Many times in TV i saw documentaries where english proffessors were reading ancient greek and i was trying to figure out what possibly they might meant!

why is this so hard to understand? if there was a mod of a game about medieval england and it wanted to include recordings of voices that sounded like english did in the time period in question, and there were several french and german guys who studied old english and knew it well and were in charge of that part of the mod, and they were actually pleading for some english or american to make the recordings, provided that they either studied old english a lot or at least would abide by what are internationally known standards of how english sounded for that period, would it make sense to moan and rend hair and belittle them about the fact that it's not an english or american doing it and doing it just speaking modern british or american english? that is exactly what is being demanded here.

[Idomeneas]

We are talking about ancient greek here, maybe some of these words had different meanings or uses in the past?

Well im not just an ignirant modern greek and i dont think you can possibly know more ancint greek than me so....

[Idomeneas]

why is this so hard to understand? if there was a mod of a game about medieval england and it wanted to include recordings of voices that sounded like english did in the time period in question, and there were several french and german guys who studied old english and knew it well and were in charge of that part of the mod, and they were actually pleading for some english or american to make the recordings, provided that they either studied old english a lot or at least would abide by what are internationally known standards of how english sounded for that period, would it make sense to moan and rend hair and belittle them about the fact that it's not an english or american doing it and doing it just speaking modern british or american english? that is exactly what is being demanded here.

NO no dont get me wrong please. I dont care who will do it or where he comes from i just wanna do it right. Its very difficult to find somebody who actually knows celtic dialects of that time but is not hard at all to find somebody to advice you about some basic elementary things that never changed in thousands of years. Maybe i need to post an Iliad passage in original form to see for yourself? Im trying to set few things right, and not just me but other guys that SPEAK the language also so maybe you should listen to us just for a change? I assure you that the grammar corrections of the names stands the same for at least 4000 years.

[Sarcasm]

Well im not just an ignirant modern greek and i dont think you can possibly know more ancint greek than me so....

Well, I will not presume to know more of your language than you do, but in this case you have been proven wrong, namely the specific meaning of the word Klèrouchos in this context. biguth dickuth explained the meaning which was the one I thought was the correct one as well, so I doubted you. Sue me.

Unless you are schooled in ancient Greek do not presume to know it completely (and even then...), as I don´t presume to understand every bit of Early Medieval Portuguese. Sure I can understand 90% of it as well, but I can be wrong, and proven wrong by other people, even if they´re not Portuguese. Note that I´m not saying that you´re wrong or that they are wrong. Forgive me, but it´s just that you´re sounding way too arrogant to my liking.



oh.....and it´s ignorant.

[Idomeneas]

Well, I will not presume to know more of your language than you do, but in this case you have been proven wrong, namely the specific meaning of the word Klèrouchos in this context. biguth dickuth explained the meaning which was the one I thought was the correct one as well, so I doubted you. Sue me.

Unless you are schooled in ancient Greek do not presume to know it completely (and even then...), as I don´t presume to understand every bit of Early Medieval Portuguese. Sure I can understand 90% of it as well, but I can be wrong, and proven wrong by other people, even if they´re not Portuguese. Note that I´m not saying that you´re wrong or that they are wrong. Forgive me, but it´s just that you´re sounding way too arrogant to my liking.



oh.....and it´s ignorant.

In case you didnt read right i said i made a mistake bymyself case i was speeding to write the post and here its very late at night. I guess you never made a mistake being tired. Thanks for the correction i know its IGNORANT but i dont care much about spelling when im writing fast sue me... Im not arrogant i just know whwt i say and except my mistake on the etymology of the word the rest was all correct. Im not saying that somebody not greek is impossible to know much about ancient greek, that would make me happy as well, but i cant sit and read people with attitude of 17 cardinals to say things about greek language that even kids in elementary school knows and then justifying themselves by using ''dialect'' and ''archaic'' type of arguments. I watch people trying to find a word of a long lost celtic or sarmatian or whatever language and the most basic greek is wrong in many places. Now how does this sound to you. I started posting just ADVICES i wanna HELP since im greek and know many about ancient history and language so this mod can be more accurate. What would you think if i was naming a medieval Portuguise unit in a completely wrong way according to the most basic rules of grammar?(number, genitive etc.) Wouldnt you correct me in good will? and if i was answering in a way that has no actual basis wouldnt you protest? If you notice i also asked from Byzantine Prince to be carefull and dont comfuse people who might look up to him for an answer since he declared he is greek. That means I ve got something against him? offcourse not. But we must be carefull in what we say. I made a mistake and at first chance I admited it as i should do. That doesnt prove wrong everything i said i say and will say. If anybody here knew even basic greek would have seen the mistake long ago dont you think? Im just trying to help so the accuracy of the mod wont be in question by a small but basic detail like a unit name.

[Sheep]

Yeah so, pretty screenshots, huh?

*hopes the thread isn't locked*

[Sarcasm]

[Big_John]

news threads can't be locked silly man! any and all things go in these threads!

[Teleklos Archelaou]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index...ntry1812002139

Hopefully a little information to help explain why we are not desirous of using a totally modern greek pronunciation. Thought its relevance as a link here might not be too inappropriate given many of the posts earlier in this thread.

[hellenes]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index...ntry1812002139

Hopefully a little information to help explain why we are not desirous of using a totally modern greek pronunciation. Thought its relevance as a link here might not be too inappropriate given many of the posts earlier in this thread.

We never said that it should be 100% same pronounciation but in general terms the version of the outside Greece ancient languages pronounciation comprimises the whole modern Greek academic structure as far as the study of ancient Greek is concerned...
The whole education system starting from the 3rd grade up to the final branches of Universities reads the ancient texts: ai=e like ten, oi=i like bin, ou=u like should, ei=i...
If you read the text in the foreign version it makes 0 sense to Proffessors of ancient greek in Greece there are many examples that the literal pronounciation of dyphongs makes absolutely no sence to any modern Greek reader: einai=ine if you say it like e i n a i it sounds like some version of Japanese or something, Aishylos=eshilos now A i s h y l o s...
Its like in Greece we live in our world and the rest of the world lives out...

Hellenes

[Teleklos Archelaou]

We never said that it should be 100% same pronounciation but in general terms the version of the outside Greece ancient languages pronounciation comprimises the whole modern Greek academic structure as far as the study of ancient Greek is concerned...
The whole education system starting from the 3rd grade up to the final branches of Universities reads the ancient texts: ai=e like ten, oi=i like bin, ou=u like should, ei=i...
If you read the text in the foreign version it makes 0 sense to Proffessors of ancient greek in Greece there are many examples that the literal pronounciation of dyphongs makes absolutely no sence to any modern Greek reader: einai=ine if you say it like e i n a i it sounds like some version of Japanese or something, Aishylos=eshilos now A i s h y l o s...
Its like in Greece we live in our world and the rest of the world lives out...

Hellenes

Not sure I am understanding the end result of this argument though. Does this mean that no professors of ancient greek in greece today pronounce ancient greek the way the rest of the world's scholars of ancient greek pronounce it? If that is the case, why should we use the modern greek's version of ancient greece if it goes against the rest of the world? Just because you're greek?

I live in the southern united states. If we only relied on what southern U.S. historians (and if the only historians in the southern u.s. were actually from the south-this is not the case in actuality) said about the u.s. civil war, and we ignored what the rest of the world's professional historians said about it, we would have a seriously wrong view of that war. It would be interpreted (again if we were only going by "southern" historians) as one of purely northern agression and would not have anything to do with slavery, but with states' rights. Sure, a few would get it right, but most would go with that prevelant and "southern-oriented" view. Thank goodness we don't do that.

[Trajen the 1st]

I saw your Bactrian cavelry. That is so sweet. And like i said i understand you guys want to plaese us all in one packege. it was just a suggestion.

to Ranaka: Well then. Looks like sombody got up on the wrong side of the bed that day. I wasent being rude only just informing you that GEALIC(not gallic jeez) has been in ireland for quite awhile. And im sorry i didint go into deteal about it what i ment was Gealic has evoloved and apadted in ireland into the speech it is now. The 6th century was when outsiders(normans saxons) actully discoverd Gealic. And your post didint really make much sense first you tell me soctish is Gealic then you tell me it didint exist untill the 6th century THEN you tell me its the term for all celtic languages(sp?) of western europe!
Really man gets your facts strate, litterally this time.

PS: i dont want to fight you Ranaka. Im not that kind of person who cowers behind a screen and yells at someone! if i had been telling you the above in person i would be trying to be as nice about it as i could.(i was "typing" in a joking manner ya-know)I just will not stand for you to lead this talented team into a missinformed inaccurate mod. im sorry but those are my final words of honor, take them or leave them my friend. Europa Barbarorum invicta est!

[khelvan]

to Ranaka: Well then. Looks like sombody got up on the wrong side of the bed that day. I wasent being rude only just informing you that GEALIC(not gallic jeez) has been in ireland for quite awhile. And im sorry i didint go into deteal about it what i ment was Gealic has evoloved and apadted in ireland into the speech it is now. The 6th century was when outsiders(normans saxons) actully discoverd Gealic. And your post didint really make much sense first you tell me soctish is Gealic then you tell me it didint exist untill the 6th century THEN you tell me its the term for all celtic languages(sp?) of western europe!
Really man gets your facts strate, litterally this time.

Trajen, Ranika was trying to educate you on the subject. It makes perfect sense, actually.

Here:

The word Gaelic has many meanings. The true meaning - "Gaelic" comprises the three languages of the Goidilic people: Irish, Manx, and Scottish.

Now, Scottish is currently referred to in English as Gaelic. However, Scottish is actually only one of three languages that came from the Goidilic people (or, Gaelic - these being Irish, Manx, and Scottish).

The Irish do not call their language Gaelic; they call it Irish. This "Irish Gaelic" has only existed as we know it since the 6th century AD. Before that you find the root of the three Gaelic languages: Goidilic, otherwise known as early Gaelic. It is the basis of the Goidilic languages (the three we talked about above) but it is very different in some ways.

I hope this clears up some misconceptions for you, Trajen.

Ranika, I hope I dumbed this down in a way that I haven't misinterpreted the meaning.

[Ranika]

You are still misspelling GAELIC, not GEALIC, and that makes it really hard to treat your opinion on linguistics with any respect (I'm not trying to be rude, but if you're not writing the name of the language properly, it's honestly hard to find a common ground with you). Also, I did not ever say it was the language of all western Celts (Britons and Gauls are both western Celts and niether speak a Gaelic language). I'll explain again.

Gaelic comes from Goidilic. Gaelic is TECHNICALLY three languages. Irish, Scottish, and Manx (note that Welsh, Cumbrian, Strathclyder, Bretonic, Domin, and Cornish are not there, but they are all Celtic languages, but they are of the 'P-Celt' branch). Gaelic languages are 'Q-Celtic'. So, technically, Irish, Scottish, and Manx are ALL Gaelic (so Irish-Gaelic, Scots-Gaelic, and Manx-Gaelic, are all TECHNICALLY correct).

Now, in POLITE SPEECH, we (native speakers of Q-Celtic languages), refer to the Scottish language as Gaelic, when speaking English. This is a colloquialism. It comes from the Anglo-Saxon English. They called the Scots the Gaels, and their language Gaelic. The Anglo-Saxons called the Irish 'the Irish', and our language 'Irish'. So, in English, in casual speech, Gaelic means Scottish.

Also, don't know what history you're reading, but no Normans or Saxons were invading or gave a shit about Ireland in the 6th century (the only exception is that Saxons and Angles had many Irish born clergy in their kingdoms, and adopted a lot of Irish artwork into their own religious works). That was WAY later. The Irish language as we recognize it developed how it did because of the spread of Christianity. Latin grammatical influences found its way into the Goidilic language. From there, the Irish language and the language of the Dal Riatans (the proto-Scots) and Manx split off.

Additionally, non-Celts knew about Ireland for centuries. The Romans traded in Ireland, a Goidilic army under Conn of the Hundred Battles invaded Roman-held Britain, and there is a Punic tablet in southern Ireland, and trade with Carthage. I'm trying to be polite, but you clearly don't actually know what you're saying, and have a very very poor grasp of early Irish history.

So, further in depth. Celts came to Ireland between 800-500 BC. They formed into Goidils, a distinct Celtic group, by 400 BC, with distinct art styles and customs. Britons, Iberians, and Gauls continually immigrated to Ireland, bolstering the population. Contrary to popular misconception, no Celts CAME from Ireland. The people in Ireland before Celts were the beaker people, the bagmen, and the monolith builders. None of their groups were Celtic. Now, we go forward to the Christian conversions, which PRECEDE the Patrician conversions (the Patrician conversions were simply widespread). This caused a steady shift in the grammar of the Irish. The biggest shift was in the 6th century, when grammar and spelling were standardized in Irish monastaries, and made to be easier for non-Irish to learn and understand. Because nearly all Irish had to learn some basic lingual skills, and attended at least a year of school for speech and language, this caused a huge shift in what the language was like. These reforms did not occur as widely in Dal Riata (though they did to some extent, as Dal Riata did, at the time, consider itself one of the Irish kingdoms). This caused the initial split in the two languages. The Manx didn't adopt any of these reforms, and actually a lot of Cumbrian influences since about the 4th century, despite a large population of Gaels immigrating from Ireland.

Now, onto the other languages. There is the Gallic language. This is a completely seperate language from Gaelic. Gallic is the language of Gauls. Gauls come from modern France, northern Italy, and parts of modern Germany. Their language was more similar to Latin to begin with (and was absorbed swiftly into the Roman language because of that). The Gauls contributed to the language of the Irish, but not too much. The ancient Goidilic language (pre-6th century) possibly has similar grammar to Gallic, but has little else actually similar (pronunciations, most words, etc.).

I've not misled anyone, but by pretending to know what you're talking about, you are causing potential damage to the mod. You are clearly poorly educated on both Irish history and linguistics, and I would ask politely that you cease to comment on a subject you clearly have not studied at all. It's not even a slight error in your understanding, your grasp of the subject is completely false. The 6th century was when 'outsiders' discovered 'gealic'? This makes absolutely no sense and is entirely false. The Irish were Christians mostly by that time (and pagans left were small in number). That alone means that the rest of the Christian world knew that Ireland existed and the Irish were a people.

[eadingas]

You're forgetting that according to Hellenes there is a world-wide conspiracy of historians destined to destroy Greeks and their culture.

[hellenes]

You're forgetting that according to Hellenes there is a world-wide conspiracy of historians destined to destroy Greeks and their culture.

Well what can I say?
Did I EVER stated anything like that?
Can you provide a quote?
But this discussion is pointless with the amount of stuborness that it involves...

Hellenes