New Atheist

Ridiculous. Proskairos is simply the masculine of proskairo, like proskaira is the plural. It's as if you're telling me if I'm discussing with somebody what the meaning of the word 'houses' is, it's a big deal if I write something like “the word 'house' means .....” instead of houseS.

Well its either that or not writing anything at all, so its obviously accepted. That means nothing.

I very much doubt there's a single Greek scholar who even knows what those schemes are. Transliteration is looked down upon by Greek scholars in any case who consider it a bastardisation of the language not to use the original characters. That's not the point. Is this a thread about what the proper transliteration of words is? Perhaps those who really know the language don't find it a big deal.

No JG, I'll tell you what the issue is. You want to appear as if you are a pseudo-intellectual specialist scholar in Greek. Are you trying to impress me with mentions of 'the dipthong ai' or “the masculine accusative plural poetic form of the word AIWN”. Can you even point out to me which are the dipthongs and the sounds they make, without going back to your dictionary, just out of your own head? Or are you just copying and pasting staff to appear an expert in things you are not?

Let’s get things into perspective. Some posts ago you mentioned:

and
That was after I mentioned a number of very widely used and very well known phrases
Such as:
OR
Your transliteration point that aeonas should be better written as aiwnas I’ll concede. Yet this is beyond the point. The phrases are so widely used and well known, as is the fact that the common usage of the word aiwnas –in modern Greek only, I may concede again, though that point is still up in the air- is a 100 year period, that any person who actually knows the language could never have made such a huge mistake as thinking that the word I was talking about was aenaos, which is a completely different word. To make an English analogy, if a poster comes and consistently types ‘somebonty’ instead of ‘somebody’, then from the context of the sentences, anyone who has the vaguest idea of English will know what word he was talking about. A pseudo intellectual scholar with no idea of the English language will think he is talking about “some bounty”, and go on to make a big fuss out of it. Of course the analogy is not correct since English is an actual language and somebonty is not a word in that language, while aeonas or aionas or aiwnas mean absolutely nothing and are not written in any specific language.

The issue is, if you were actually familiar with the language you’d simply have pointed out that the word was not used to mean century in the ancient Greek. That you confused the word with aenaos, or proskairos with proxero and thought I was talking about something different, simply points out to me you have no idea of the language.

I doubt you can speak Greek
I dount you can write Greek
I doubt you can read Greek

I doubt you have any kind of familiarity with the language. You’re just a guy with a Greek-English dictionary, copying and pasting out huge definitions of words, and thinking you are an expert.

That’s what the problem is. I can’t converse meaningfully with you, because your knowledge is so small you make a fuss out of transliteration points. If you actually knew the language you’d know what words I’m using. You think that ‘transliteration schemes’ are important for somebody who knows Greek? You, a person who sees the phrase

‘is ton aeona ton apanta’

and doesn’t immediately realise that the word I’m talking about is αιωνας, but instead confuses it with aeonios?

Here’s what I saw,

The word αιωνας used to mean a 1000 year period. I pointed out that the word is actually used to indicate a 100 year period not 1000, but can be used in general to point out to an age or more general period of time.
The word αιωνιος used to mean anything other than eternal. I pointed out this was not the case.
The word προσκαιρα being used to mean something completely different than what it meant in the passage. I pointed out this was not the case (and yes if you copy and paste from a dictionary, which is apparently where your knowledge of Greek begins and ends, it’ll point out lots of meaning, many Greek words can be used in a variety of circumstances, but the meaning of the word in the context it was given was what I pointed out).

You accused me of not knowing Greek because:
You thought I was talking about a completely different word aenios, which is something anybody who knows the language would not have been confused about.
You said that there is no usage of the word aiwnas to mean century. I very much suspect that you didn’t even know the meaning of the word in modern Greek since you confused the word with aenaos, but I’ll give you the point that you did, and that the word was used with a different meaning in ancient Greek. Anyone who actually knows the language would simply have pointed out that the word was not used in that context in ancient Greek, but only in modern Greek. In fact your original quote of

Any person with the slightest REAL knowledge of the language, would point out that the word means century in Modern Greek only. You’re failure to aknlowedge at that early point that the word does means century in modern Greek, shows you’re unfamiliar with even the moden usage of the word. In fact had you been familiar you would not have made the mistake of confusing the word with aenaos.

Yet even assuming you knew the meaning of the word all along, and knew what it meant in modern Greek and what in ancient Greek, and that in ancient Greek it was not used to mean a century, that was beside the point, the main point being that “αιωνιος’ means eternal.

You’re confusion when I typed prosxera or prosxeros instead of proskaira again points out your unfamiliarity with the language, and your dependence on proper transliteration schemes and on dictionaries. Any actual user of the language would have known immediately I was talking about the same word as Tony, and would not be trying to tell me that in debating the meaning of proskairos it matters whether we define proskairos, or proskaira or proskairo (which as I pointed before is equivalent to telling me there’s a difference in the general definition of “houses” if I give the definition of “house”- you’re going to reply now that one is plural the other is not, which is not the point, the point being they’re both referring to the same kind of thing).

Furthermore you pointed out that:
And still have not told me what the data is.



So let me sum up. You’re a pseudo scholar with an inflated view of your self worth, who can’t read or write the language, who is dependent on a dictionary and proper transliterations of words, probably so he can put in said dictionary. You probably can’t even pronounce the words, yet you make a fuss out of me not using a proper transliteration scheme. I should guess that would be important for me to learn though, when dealing with people who have no REAL knowledge of the language and depend on transliterations and dictionaries. Your accusations of me not being familiar with the language are laughable. Get away from your computer and tell me if you’d be able to recognize a single Greek word.


IF you've actually studied the language, or have any kind of passing familiarity with it, your knowledge of it and your skill at recognizing phrases and words is extremely bad, so I recommend you leave that dictionary behind and get back into the classroom.

I’m wasting my time. I’ve got better things to do. Perhaps go and talk with somebody who actually knows the language, and understands the words I’m saying.

New Atheist

I'll give you that, I'm not familiar with the English translations of noun forms. I've actually read what you said here, and it just betrays your ignorance of the language, and your attempt to sound as if you're an expert in something you are not. To put the above description for the word αιωνας simply shows that you just copied and pasted whatever your dictionary gave you. Had you had any knowledge of greek you'd have known αιωνας is also the masculine nomimative singular form of the word, yes, αιωνας, which is the context in which the word is much more commonly used instead of the plural accusative. but you probably don't even know that Greek nouns can be used in a different form and context, but still be spelled the same.

Even with the excuse that in ancient Greek the singular nomimative would have been spelled αιων there is no excuse for somebody familiar with the language not to recognise the much more commonly used form of the noun today as αιωνας, which is how I was using the noun in my post as it should be obvious to somebody familiar with the language. Α real scholar would have simply pointed out that αιωνας would have been spelled as αιων in ancient Greek because he would ave been familiar with the usage of the word. He would not consider the plural accusative. And he would definitely not confuse the word with aenaos....

Do you even know how to form the different forms of nouns or how to use them? How can come to the conclusion that αιωνας is a plural accusative form when I was using it as a word that means century? Could it be that you don't really have an actual grasp of noun forms, but just put αιωνας in your little dictionary and copied and pasted whatever came out?

The Evil One

Not saying that anyone here is in this camp, but it is not uncommon in Western Europe and America for people to be familiar with Classical or Koine Greek, but to know very little about Modern Greek. This is because C.G. and Koine are very important in Classical studies, biblical studies, and history, whereas Modern G. isn't.

Classical Greek is not Koine Greek is not Modern Greek, and you can't conflate them; nor can you argue that someone who is knowledgeable about the first two must necessarily be knowledgeable about the third, when that blatantly isn't the case.

New Atheist

I won't argue, but somebody who accuses me of not knowing my own language and claims to be an expert in it, better know it and its forms really well, and be able to recognise words and their meaning and context when he sees them and not just give dictionary definitions that are irrelevant to the context in which the word was originally used and act all superior about it.

In ancient Greek studies we weren't taught all the ancient greek words in existance, or their forms in modern Greek. I'm sure a dictionary knows far more words than I do, and that consulting a dictionary you'll find words that were used in different forms in the ancient Greek than I'm not aware of. To think otherwise is to be ignorant of the volume and width of the Greek language. I would not be surprised if I did not know half of the existing words in the modern Greek language.
What we did learn was how to create and use the forms of verbs and nouns correctly. How to read and translate passages from ancient greek to modern, without obviously the use of a dictionary, and how to write passages in ancient Greek -although at the level I studied, not overtly complicated ones.

The Evil One

Classical and Koine Greek aren't your "own language". That's rather the point.

New Atheist

It shares such similarities with them though and much of the grammar is so similar that it is not really a second language. When I see a passage in ancient Greek I can read it and understand it as I would a modern Greek one. Not with the same ease, or flexibility, but it is not as if I am given a passage of French or German, or Italian, which is a completely different language.

jgibson000

So you do recognize that grammatically, morphologically, syntactically, and lexically, Modern Greek is not the same as Classical or Koine Greek?

JG

New Atheist

Well obviously. If they were they would be the exact same language.

jgibson000

So far as I can see, I have never claimed to be an expert in Modern Greek. But my or anyone's knowledge of Modern Greek is not, and has not been, the issue, now has it.

But it is clear from what you yourself have been saying that when it comes to knowledge of Ancient Greek, you don't have much. It doesn't take an expert to see that.

JG

New Atheist

Exactly why is that? Because I do not follow a transliteration scheme that has nothing to do with the language? Was I wrong about aionios? Was I wrong about proskairos? Your inability to even recognise the words, and your mistakes in confusing them with other completely unrelated ones is telling far more to me than your flawed attempts to show off through mentions of "dipthongs" and "plural accsuatives".