Re: Breton, Cornish & French

Chess One wrote:
> "Renia" <renia@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:fqcocp$m2d$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Chess One wrote:
>>
>>> Of course, if you are personally interested in 'onomastics' and I am 
>>> talking ontologies, then you will become confused and wonder if
English 
>>> is my first language, et cetera, which is entirely understandable,
given 
>>> the cir***stance and general nature of newsgroup contributions.
>> Ontology is the philosophical study of conceptions of reality.
> 
> The process of investigation of things worked backwards towards their 
> root? - less a concept than a trail and what is observed. From /ontos/
and 
> /logos/, to discuss on origins?

No, ontology is not "things worked backwards towards their root".

Ontos is the genitive of eimai - to be [ontos - of being]
Logia is the Greek for science, or knowledge

So, the knowlege of being.

I think, therefore, I am.

>> Onomastics is the study of the origins of names.
> 
>> I thought we were talking about the latter.
> 
> And hence: the how we know [which is an ontological factor] relates to 
> names, which you will agree [?] we perceive usually only as result, not
any 
> process of knowing how the name came about, or indeed, of other names, 
> previous names, nor even the semiological aspect of what the names mean.

I'm going to try and sub-edit what you have just written:

Therefore, . . .

No, I can't do it. You have written nonsense. Onomastics is not an 
ontological factor. Ontology does not relate to the names of things. I 
thought you'd moved on to philosophy: ontology.

But you're still on onomastics - how the names for things came about.


> 
> But given that we seem to be in some sort of agreement about origins of 
> names - are there some names you think right which perhaps you have
noticed 
> I claimed otherwise? Or is it my naming that you do not think right?

We are not in any agreement about the origins of names. I haven't 
noticed your specifics. Mostly, I just can't understand the way you write.


> Let's just talk about either of those if you wish.

You'd better make it clear what you actually want to discuss.

The origins of names and words.

Or philosophical studies of the nature of being.