Language

[Haipule]

I loved the Doctor Doolittle books when I was a kid.  There's a pertinent passage early on in the first book where Polynesia (a very wise parrot) tells the Doctor that learning the language of animals has precious little to do with speech.  The way a dog tilts its head or how a cat twitches her whiskers can convey as much information as speech. 

Language doesn't appear to be an exclusively human concern.

Boru

 What animals do is less a language and more of demonstrating, power, position, survival and ect. A dog will give a man a warning other than vocally and expect us to understand exactly what was demonstrated. man will make certain motions around a dog and it will believe it understands what you were demonstrating when you have no idea what you did. This is a total lack of understanding between to different animals. We learn what dogs mean by observing their actions and dogs never learn our language, There is a huge difference in what animals do and what man does, yes both communicate but one is for existence the other can derive pleasure through it's communication. True language is a special thing that is exclusive to man. We like to infer our feelings and understanding upon animals and they just do not see it as we do.

GC

The way the bible puts it is that animals have the ability of psuchE(soo-kay) and humans have also the ability of pneuma(new-ma). Both words mean: breath. However, psuchE means natural breath, breathing, and figuratively means instinctive intellect. Whereas, pneuma means a breath of intellect from an exterior source viewed from it's state or, effect. logos means: intellect revealed through words.

Most unfortunately, psuchE is translated as "soul" and pneuma is translated "spirit". So when the bible says that "animals have a soul but do not have a spirit" really means that your cat has an instinctive intellect but it cannot read a book or process a sentence beyond "bad kitty". The verb form of psuchE is psuchO. Can a "soul" be a verb? Humans have both the abilities of psuchE and pneuma which the writer of Hebrew talks about in Hebrews 4:12. I will PM my translation of Hebrews 4:12 to you if you wish to read it.

[Haipule]

A part of language is etymology. I read an interesting book written by the linguist John McWhorter, frequent guest on fox news, titled, "The POWER of BABLE". In it he states:

"In Old English, the word that became silly meant “blessed.” Just as wanting to do something implies that one will do it, blessedness implies innocence. That kind of implication led people to gradually incorporate innocence into their conception of the word, and through time innocence ended up becoming the main connotation rather than the “definition 2” one, just as one sound gradually becomes another one through shades of the new sound gradually encroaching on the original one. Thus, by the Middle Ages silly meant “innocent”: about 1400, we find sentences such as Cely art thou, hooli virgyne marie. If one is innocent, one is deserving of compassion, and this was the next meaning of the word (a 1470 statement: Sely Scotland, that of helpe has gret neide), but because the deserving of compassion has a way of implying weakness, before long the meaning of silly was “weak” (1633: Thou onely art The mightie God, but I a sillie worm). From here it was a short step to “simple” or “ignorant,” and finally silly came to mean “foolish”- having begun meaning “sanctified by God”!"-- The POWER of BABLE, by John McWhorter, page 32

---

There is know freakin way Bruddah, that man could even somehow invent intellect, or language! I think, therefore, I am! It's not I am and therefore I think! Your bass ackwards! And yes, I think OP is a good, valid question.

Yes, I agree. How humans acquired language, is a valid question. There are scientists in several applicable fields studying the subject.

I probably also agree that humanity did not 'invent' intellect or the ability to use language. They were acquired through natural evolutionary mechanisms.

What is not valid, however, is your claim that we must have been given language. Unless you can support it with demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument, that we were indeed 'given language'.

Who is the language giver? What is your evidence?

Thank you! I think it was a valid question and so wrote it as a question. The statement that man cannot think beyond his vocabulary is also valid. Yet, I do understand that geniuses like you and I need to invent more vocabulary in order to think beyond the written. Yet, I also use mind pictures instead of words when necessary. The Greek language of the bible is very mind picturedly(word invention). But, your right, I should have posted this on the Science thread. But, since we are on the Christian thread, biblically, God formed Adam and gave him a breath. Adam's job was to name the animals which would require a genius intellect from the start.

Then we have the tower of Babel where the language became languages. It says God did this or nothing would be impossible for man. Yet, now we have the internet and nothing is impossible for us now! Ha Ha Ha!

I can give you no scientific evidence for a Giver and you can give me no evidence of "natural evolutionary mechanisms". To say, "I am here, I can think, I can speak" does not prove an evolutionary process of human life nor the ability to even say it proves it was a process of evolution just because you said it. Evolution, when it comes to mankind and man things, drives me ape! Beyond that, go for'em Cuz!

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Because it is impossible to think beyond your vocabulary; I would say that man could not, and did not invent language. It must have been given to him from the start. Any thoughts?

The French language only has about 50,000 words.  The English language has the most words of any language.  So English speakers must be able to out think the French speakers, right?

[Haipule]

Because it is impossible to think beyond your vocabulary; I would say that man could not, and did not invent language. It must have been given to him from the start. Any thoughts?

The French language only has about 50,000 words.  The English language has the most words of any language.  So English speakers must be able to out think the French speakers, right?

Because of the grammatical inflection, Greek has even fewer. Yet, we have Homer, Plato and Aristotle. Yes, English has the largest dictionary in the world. It's not a bad thing, we just need more words to express a thought.

My main problems with English is we tend to transliterate our borrowed words and then give them new meanings. We also tend to generalize specifics and specify generals.

Greek has four specific words translated as "love" that the English generalized into one.

Greek has a general word for deliverance, preservation, kept safe, etc. That the English speaking clergy translates as "salvation(a French word)" giving it a specific meaning the bible never intended complete with a "Gospel(Old English)" never stated in the Greek.

[Fireball]

The French language only has about 50,000 words.  The English language has the most words of any language.  So English speakers must be able to out think the French speakers, right?

Because of the grammatical inflection, Greek has even fewer. Yet, we have Homer, Plato and Aristotle. Yes, English has the largest dictionary in the world. It's not a bad thing, we just need more words to express a thought.

My main problems with English is we tend to transliterate our borrowed words and then give them new meanings. We also tend to generalize specifics and specify generals.

Greek has four specific words translated as "love" that the English generalized into one.

Greek has a general word for deliverance, preservation, kept safe, etc. That the English speaking clergy translates as "salvation(a French word)" giving it a specific meaning the bible never intended complete with a "Gospel(Old English)" never stated in the Greek.

Are you familiar with the saying, "Fucked up like a soup sandwich"? Well, now you are. You pretend to know some sort of information from ancient Greek. Lay down a trail of etymological clues that we can follow to get to some truth that you are alleging. Bring it.

Truly, why do I bother with it? This guy is so full of shit that he sprays it all over this site.

[Godscreated]

 What animals do is less a language and more of demonstrating, power, position, survival and ect. A dog will give a man a warning other than vocally and expect us to understand exactly what was demonstrated. man will make certain motions around a dog and it will believe it understands what you were demonstrating when you have no idea what you did. This is a total lack of understanding between to different animals. We learn what dogs mean by observing their actions and dogs never learn our language, There is a huge difference in what animals do and what man does, yes both communicate but one is for existence the other can derive pleasure through it's communication. True language is a special thing that is exclusive to man. We like to infer our feelings and understanding upon animals and they just do not see it as we do.

GC

The way the bible puts it is that animals have the ability of psuchE(soo-kay) and humans have also the ability of pneuma(new-ma). Both words mean: breath. However, psuchE means natural breath, breathing, and figuratively means instinctive intellect. Whereas, pneuma means a breath of intellect from an exterior source viewed from it's state or, effect. logos means: intellect revealed through words.

Most unfortunately, psuchE is translated as "soul" and pneuma is translated "spirit". So when the bible says that "animals have a soul but do not have a spirit" really means that your cat has an instinctive intellect but it cannot read a book or process a sentence beyond "bad kitty". The verb form of psuchE is psuchO. Can a "soul" be a verb? Humans have both the abilities of psuchE and pneuma which the writer of Hebrew talks about in Hebrews 4:12. I will PM my translation of Hebrews 4:12 to you if you wish to read it.

 you can if you wish, but by what I read we are on the same page.

GC

[Haipule]

Because of the grammatical inflection, Greek has even fewer. Yet, we have Homer, Plato and Aristotle. Yes, English has the largest dictionary in the world. It's not a bad thing, we just need more words to express a thought.

My main problems with English is we tend to transliterate our borrowed words and then give them new meanings. We also tend to generalize specifics and specify generals.

Greek has four specific words translated as "love" that the English generalized into one.

Greek has a general word for deliverance, preservation, kept safe, etc. That the English speaking clergy translates as "salvation(a French word)" giving it a specific meaning the bible never intended complete with a "Gospel(Old English)" never stated in the Greek.

Are you familiar with the saying, "Fucked up like a soup sandwich"? Well, now you are. You pretend to know some sort of information from ancient Greek. Lay down a trail of etymological clues that we can follow to get to some truth that you are alleging. Bring it.

Truly, why do I bother with it? This guy is so full of shit that he sprays it all over this site.

Your crazy! The only evidence I have is biblical Greek and the bible itself! Do you really want me to translate verses of the bible for you on Atheist Forums? I am so full of shit my guts ache but, I'm not stupid.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Are you familiar with the saying, "Fucked up like a soup sandwich"? Well, now you are. You pretend to know some sort of information from ancient Greek. Lay down a trail of etymological clues that we can follow to get to some truth that you are alleging. Bring it.

Truly, why do I bother with it? This guy is so full of shit that he sprays it all over this site.

Your crazy! The only evidence I have is biblical Greek and the bible itself! Do you really want me to translate verses of the bible for you on Atheist Forums? I am so full of shit my guts ache but, I'm not stupid.

The Greek language Bible is a translation from other Bibles written in different languages.  You can't produce a legitimate Greek language Bible written before the year 700 A.D. if doing so made you the emperor of the whole planet.

[Haipule]

Your crazy! The only evidence I have is biblical Greek and the bible itself! Do you really want me to translate verses of the bible for you on Atheist Forums? I am so full of shit my guts ache but, I'm not stupid.

The Greek language Bible is a translation from other Bibles written in different languages.  You can't produce a legitimate Greek language Bible written before the year 700 A.D. if doing so made you the emperor of the whole planet.

The OT was written in Hebrew and Aramaic and translated into Greek, the Septuagint, BCE complete with an Apocrypha. The NT was written in mostly KoinE Greek in the mid to late first century. As far as 700 AD, we have some earlier manuscripts copies of some books and partials since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. However, all Greek was the Codex Vaticanus which is paleographically dated to the fourth century.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

The Greek language Bible is a translation from other Bibles written in different languages.  You can't produce a legitimate Greek language Bible written before the year 700 A.D. if doing so made you the emperor of the whole planet.

The OT was written in Hebrew and Aramaic and translated into Greek, the Septuagint, BCE complete with an Apocrypha. The NT was written in mostly KoinE Greek in the mid to late first century. As far as 700 AD, we have some earlier manuscripts copies of some books and partials since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. However, all Greek was the Codex Vaticanus which is paleographically dated to the fourth century.

Despite the claim that there's such a thing as Koine Greek no one has been able to produce such a Greek alphabet.  Can you do it?  And there was no comprehensive Bible until around 690 A.D.  BTW, the Apocrypha was included from the start and was in almost every version.  Do you know when someone got a bug up his butt and deleted it?  I'll tell you if you want to know.