Semmelweis Schmemelweiss.

(July 26, 2023 at 2:28 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Nope. You have precisely one thing to say, the rest is noise.

What do you mean? If I have only one thing to say, that's that the k-r pattern in the Croatian river names has a p-value between 1/300 and 1/17, as that is the most scientific part of my interpretation of the names of places in Croatia.

(July 26, 2023 at 3:33 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(July 26, 2023 at 12:27 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: And yet you won’t even consider suggestion to modify your ‘experiment’. Refusal to admit even the potential of error isn’t science, it’s hidebound dogmatism.

Boru

I don't think I am being "dogmatic". I don't think Semmelweis was being dogmatic when he refused to listen to the Levy's suggestion "Why not perform a simpler and more convincing experiment, to simply stop all the autopsies?". In fact, I don't think Levy could be described as "dogmatic" either, I think Levy was a positivist, and positivism rejects seemingly-magical explanations (such as the Semmelweis'es theory of cadaverous particles in blood causing death). If anybody, Benjamin Rush was being dogmatic.

This may come as both a shock and a disappointment to you, but you’re not Semmelweis.

Boru

(July 26, 2023 at 4:10 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(July 26, 2023 at 3:33 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: I don't think I am being "dogmatic". I don't think Semmelweis was being dogmatic when he refused to listen to the Levy's suggestion "Why not perform a simpler and more convincing experiment, to simply stop all the autopsies?". In fact, I don't think Levy could be described as "dogmatic" either, I think Levy was a positivist, and positivism rejects seemingly-magical explanations (such as the Semmelweis'es theory of cadaverous particles in blood causing death). If anybody, Benjamin Rush was being dogmatic.

This may come as both a shock and a disappointment to you, but you’re not Semmelweis.

Boru

Well, both Semmelweis and I tried to apply statistics where it is usually not applied. Semmelweis tried to apply statistics to medicine, whereas I tried to apply statistics to the names of places. And both of us ran into a bunch of ridiculous objections.

To be fair, most historians of science think that the primary reason Semmelweis'es findings were rejected was because he could not provide a plausible theoretical explanation for his findings, which I don't think is going on here. I see no reason why my explanation that *karr~kurr was the Illyrian word for "to flow" (that the name Karašica comes from unattested Illyrian name *Kurrurrissia or *Kurrirrissia, that the name Krapina comes from *Karpona or, less likely, from something like *Kurrippuppona, and so on) would sound extremely implausible.

(January 24, 2022 at 10:34 am)Angrboda Wrote: Hoo boy!

What does that mean?

(January 24, 2022 at 5:13 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 24, 2022 at 2:08 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: What are "bodes"?

---

Of course name can and do mean things. But names appearing symbolic in some story, describing somebodies personality accurately, suggests the story is mythological.

It suggests nothing of the sort. For instance, Joseph Stalin's real family name was Jughashvili. 'Stalin' was a pseudonym he  gave himself, and it translates to 'man of steel' (more or less). Stalin went on to rule with an iron fist. Steel is an alloy of iron. Does this mean Stalin was a mythological figure?

Boru

How is that "Jughashvili" pronounced? Is the 'j' at the beginning pronounced as in English or as in Croatian (as 'y' in "yes")?

(August 9, 2023 at 4:39 am)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(January 24, 2022 at 5:13 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It suggests nothing of the sort. For instance, Joseph Stalin's real family name was Jughashvili. 'Stalin' was a pseudonym he  gave himself, and it translates to 'man of steel' (more or less). Stalin went on to rule with an iron fist. Steel is an alloy of iron. Does this mean Stalin was a mythological figure?

Boru

How is that "Jughashvili" pronounced? Is the 'j' at the beginning pronounced as in English or as in Croatian (as 'y' in "yes")?

Neither. More like the 'zh' sound in 'pleasure'

Boru

By the way @BrianSoddingBoru4 , you are anti-gun, but at the same time you believe Vukovar Massacre really happened, right? Don't you think that, had the civilians in Vukovar been armed, maybe Vukovar Massacre would not have happened? And, if you think that maybe civilians being armed would simply lead to more violence, don't you think the same thing can be said about the military? "How do you know what would have happened had the Tuđman administration been willing to send the weapons to the Croatian military in Vukovar? Maybe Vukovar Massacre would have still happened, but there would just be even more dead people."?

So, a forum.hr user called DarkDivider claims that Proto-Slavic phonotactics didn't allow four syllables with yers to be consecutive. If true, that would make my etymology that Karašica comes from Illyrian *Kurrurrissia (via a Proto-Slavic form *Kъrъrьsьja) invalid, as *Kъrъrьsьja contains four consecutive syllables with yers. But I cannot find any reliable source claiming that or claiming the opposite. I have asked that question on Linguistics StackExchange and have started a bounty, thus far to no avail. It sounds like a weird claim to me because phonotacticses of various languages usually do the opposite (requiring vowel harmony...).

And naturally, your first thought was to necro-bump your thread here.