Why do 90% of black people vote for Democrats?

[Felch]

Do you call Marylanders (Land of Mary), Marys? Or Portlanders, Ports? Want to try again or keep digging your hole?

Maryland is the English translation of Terra Maria, which means "Land Mary". It does not mean "Land of Mary," because then Maria would be Mariae, the genitive, in order to indicate possession. If it were "Land of the Maries," it would be Terra Mariarum. Terra Maria, being nominative, is simply applying Maria as an adjective. Hence Maryland. Just as Portland is simply applying an adjective that indicates it has a port.

& you intellectually dishonest moron, Pak is the word for Pure. Paki and Pak are not the same word and in addition one of them has a derogatory racist meaning and neither are the words that group uses for themself.

I checked into other countries that use the -stan suffix. In most cases, I'm right. Someone from Afghanistan is called an Afghan, and so on. However, in Kazakhstan, they tend to reserve the word Kazakh for true ethnic Kazakhs, and use Kazakhstani for non-Kazakhs who live in Kazakhstan. That's a mouthful, but the point is this: Devout people would never see themselves as Pure (Pak). They could only say that they came from the Land of the Pure (Pakistani). Is this what you're saying, and if so, why didn't you just say so a while ago? Obviously calling me racist is a pretty poor tool of persuasion. I mean, after all, if the intention is to clarify and to make your speech more accurate, you should just say so. I'm not intellectually dishonest, I just don't want my language to be influenced by inbred chavs.

[Al B. Sure!]

It does not mean "Land of Mary," because then Maria would be Mariae, the genitive, in order to indicate possession.

Hey, Felch:

The specific name given in the charter was phrased "Terra Mariae, anglice, Maryland"

You just got sonned.

[Felch]

****.

Good work Al.

[Al B. Sure!]

****.

Good work Al.

Not really. Wikipedia is lying. I just checked the original Latin on the charter

[Lorizael]

****.

Good work Al.

This post makes you one of the best posters on Apolyton.

[Al B. Sure!]

The proceedings of the Council of Maryland references "Terrae Mariae" when saying something about the seal.

The obverse of the state seal:



That's "Mariae" on the seal. The actual charter does not say Mariae, however. It says Maria.

[Felch]

The seal isn't conclusive, since an adjective would be declined to agree with the noun. I can't find the charter in Latin, only in English. I suspect you may have been right the first time.

[kentonio]

http://www.msa.md.gov/megafile/msa/s...ml/am3--5.html

This it?

[Felch]

incorporamus Eamque terram Marie Anglice Maryland nominamus

Here it's using the French spelling of Marie, for the Queen Consort.

I suspect that it was one of those things that didn't really have a fixed spelling. Some would go with Marie, others Maria or Mariae.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Someone from Afghanistan is called an Afghan, and so on. However, in Kazakhstan, they tend to reserve the word Kazakh for true ethnic Kazakhs, and use Kazakhstani for non-Kazakhs who live in Kazakhstan.

Meaning different people have different terms they use for themselves? How novel!

Obviously calling me racist is a pretty poor tool of persuasion. I mean, after all, if the intention is to clarify and to make your speech more accurate, you should just say so. I'm not intellectually dishonest, I just don't want my language to be influenced by inbred chavs.

You were informed that the term "Paki" is offensive because it was used as slur against Pakistanis, Indians, Bengalis, etc. and you proceded to argue that it was ridiculous because of terms used by other countries to refer to themselves. Instead of stopping to consider that maybe people should have a right to determine what they call themselves, you looked for ways around it. If not racist (using racist terms is close to getting you there), then deliberately racially offensive.

And language is not yours to decide, it belongs to the society.

[molly bloom]

The extent of Molly's knowledge...

http://www.google.com/

I'd ask you to lick a cat's arse until it bleeds, but I can't be bothered. I do occasionally use google.co.uk, but mainly for researching the second hand vinyl and occasional first editions I buy. I don't have internet access at home, and rely on books. Much of what I've posted can be found in:

Peace, Print and Protestantism

The Mediaeval World

Byzantium

Michael Collins And The Troubles

History Today

God's Englishman

Habsburg and Bourbon Europe

A History Of Heresy

The Story Of English

The English Language

The Genius Of Shakespeare

The Thirty Years War

The Kings Peace

and so on. I'm sure you're familiar with all those books and the periodical, so I won't bother to list the authors.

[molly bloom]

Any case that relies upon the assertion that Molly Bloom is a reliable poster isn't a good theory, Flubber. He's very biased, and yes the typical atheist is extremely biased against Catholicism.

How exactly am I unreliable ? I haven't lied Ben.

I'm a lapsed Roman Catholic, so I know the religion from the inside out. I also happen to be descended from Irish Republicans, so your crack about my supposed bias for the Orangemen and Protestant terrorists had me in fits of laughter. I wonder what my great grandfather (a member of the Fenians) would have said ?

By the way- I checked. I never quoted a census on Northern Ireland. And, as regards compensation at the time of the dissolution of the monasteries, there was a sliding scale of sorts- heads of abbeys or priories received the most and were occasionally given high ranking posts in the new church order, nuns received the least (about £ 2.00 annually) and mendicants received nothing.

Oh, and the remark about me not understanding English when I quizzed you on 'how to rape a nunnery' ?

If you can show any evidence of mass rapes of nunneries at the time of the dissolution, I'll be happy to see it. Cromwell's investigators were less interested in what may be one of your fantasies and rather more interested in what nunneries were worth in cash money terms.

Have you watched Ken Russell's 'The Devils' ? Perhaps that's what you're thinking of. Or Marianne Faithfull when she dressed in a backless nun's outfit to accompany David Bowie on a performance of 'I Got You Babe...

http://www.whosdatedwho.com/tpx_1731142/david-bowie-and-marianne-faithfull/photo

[molly bloom]

Again, complete and utter nonsense. The most widely read, used and published book in the English language was published by the Jacobins. So influential that most people who learned English did so USING THAT BOOK, 300 years after publication. So no..

I think you mean the Stuarts (or a particular Stuart) The Jacobins were somewhere else, and later. As were the Jacobites. And as I've pointed out, it's not about a particular book, it's about the language as a whole changing. Look up Mulcaster and Cheke; see how many bilingual books were published in Tudor times, read about how some rejected the use of 'ink-horne' terms. The language underwent a significant change in Tudor times because it was exposed to the new Humanism and the Renaissance, and all that that entailed.

The First Folio wasn't published until 1623. Again, in the Jacobin period.

Which given that the plays were first performed in the 16th Century is irrelevant. One estimate has almost 10 000 people coming to see the war of words on stage between Talbot and Joan of Arc in Shakespeare's early histories. They were written to be performed, live, in front of an audience. Who then remembered the words and phrases used.

See when Robert Greene called Shakespeare an upstart crow.

Not so. Again, you are wrong here. Francis Bacon only became popular in Jacobin times. It was only after Elizabeth's death that the English Renaissance really took off.

Boring. Who was Erasmus ? Who was Lady Margaret Beaufort ? Who was Hans Holbein ?

Yet, the seminal publications that define the shift from middle to modern english weren't published until AFTER Elizabeth.

Spoken and heard precedes writing. Sorry Ben, but you're out of your depth.

[The Mad Monk]

Hi! I haven't been reading this thread, but I noticed it's growing at a fair clip.

Is it worth reading? If so, from what point?

Thanks!

[molly bloom]

Molly seems to be arguing that because Tyndale had influence on the KJV, that we should ascribe all the effects of the KJV to Tyndale

.

Surely easier to quote exactly what I say. I note I use a passage from Tyndale and a passage from the Authorized Version to point out how closely the latter relied on the former. I didn't need to paraphrase.