Georgian

[nairi]

The suffix -eren is not Armenian.

 

As we go along, it becomes clearer and clearer that there is no such thing as the Armenian language. If we were to strip away all the loanwords, all the loan-suffixes and prefixes, all the loan-grammar rules, we would be left with nothing original. Hence, Armenian as a language, from the perspective of our purists, doesn't even exist.

[shaunt]

As we go along, it becomes clearer and clearer that there is no such thing as the Armenian language. If we were to strip away all the loanwords, all the loan-suffixes and prefixes, all the loan-grammar rules, we would be left with nothing original. Hence, Armenian as a language, from the perspective of our purists, doesn't even exist.

 

Some people look at language and see its formal aspects, e.g. grammar and syntax. I look at our language, the words of our language, and in these words I see the residue, the stains of subjugation. And there is one example I always use, the word "Azat," which denotes "freedom." There is something ironic in using a word imposed by foreigners to express ones freedom.

 

And yes, it appears to be the case that the "Armenian" (see, I even put quotations around it, ) language does not exist, if by "Armenian" we mean the language originally spoken by our Indo-European ancestors. But that should not discourage us. Complete purification of our language is not possible, but it does make sense to speak of a language as being more pure, or less pure, does it not?

[Johannes]

Yes, I mean from the beginning you confused the "ik" (Parsik) with "atsi" (Vratsi(.

(You do not expect babies to read Classical Armenian, do you?).

Shall we stay always babies in the Armenian language?

Classical Armenian is not so far from us. 7 Million Armenians learn many foreign languages, but you are refusing to teach our kids better Armenian language.

We cannot specialize in the Armenian Language if we do not learn its all components (eastern and western dialects, standards, old scripts). I am just trying to tell some thing in unification of the Armenians, here in the unification of communication devices (media, language, orthography).

Who is armenologist here? You may in grammar better than me, but you did not satisfy me in your replies, about Vratseren, Angliatseren.

There is no right or wrong, in my personal view of language. Once it is used regularly by a group of people (small or large), it becomes part of the language by definition.

Here is the difference between my way of thinking and yours. I am not thinking about a group of people, but the all Armenian people.

This is nothing more than a dialect, group of people. But I am discussing you about the language of the education, about the language of communication and media.

Language is a living thing, and an evolving thing. It changes with the people.

I agree with you if we were 35 million, or we were not Genocided if we were not banished out of our homeland.

In addition, if there were not many communities of our people, spread all over the world from Papua New Guinea to Trinidad and Tobago.

First of all, we have absolutely no way of knowing how Armenian was spoken by Mashtots

Are you talking about Urartian language or the language that employed to translate a great literary book as the holy bible?

Although we have an idea of how Mashtots and his school used to write, we have no idea how they pronounced the words in speech.

Linguists know how Indo Europeans before 5000 years spelled hundreds and hundreds of words, but you say that we can not know, before 1600 years our Armenian ancestors how spelled the words, and read a clerkship as the newly translated holy bible?

Yes, Soviet Armenian was standardized to simplify the language, but that standardization corrupted our language, so now when we write with soviet orthography the word ser (love), and ser (cream) has the same dictation but in Mesropean, they are different words.

Thirdly, Mashtots' Armenian was already highly "contaminated" with foreign words, from Greek, Persian, Assyrian, Georgian, and god knows what else

With this phrase above, you declare that.-we the Armenians, after our alphabet creator death, we began to purify our language systematically! Alternatively, we loaned more and more words, idioms, and way of speech from foreigners.

However, my problem is not with loaned words but with those half-educated Media officials who use foreign words when we have many Armenian clone words.

By the time Mashtots recorded our language for the first time, it was already very far removed from its origins.

Yes, you are right, but what you want to say with this phrase? With Mashtots our language born again. Nevertheless, we cannot abjure him, because he had not any Armenian ancient literal sources, but we have his alphabet, and 1600 years old literature.

Now. You want to bring back an extinct language that we can no longer revive in speech, because we have no idea what it sounded like.

No, I do not want to bring back to speech, but I wish to teach our children that language, that is not extinct at all with the meaning of the extinction that we know. It is very beautiful and noble language. In addition, I am hearing it many years in the churches, and any Armenian that knows the language well, can understand it. If you do not have idea what it sounded, I can tell you that I have idea.

At the same time, you want to revive a language that was artificial to begin with.

Who told you that it was artificial language? Were you there in Taraun or in Vagharshapat?

Moreover, you want to revive a language that was as contaminated with foreign words as the Armenian we speak today.

I am trying to tell you that we should stop the contamination of the language as they done. First, they transliterate the word "Episcopos", and then they created the Armenian word "Tesouch", arradjnord. First, they transliterated the word "Christos", and then they noticed that they should create an Armenian word for it "Phrkich".

In addition, the creation of Armenian alphabet aimed to end or stop or slack Armenians assimilation and contamination.

Finally, you want to revive a language that was as far removed from its origins as the Armenian we speak today is from Mashtots' Armenian.

Ok, but which origin you are talking about? Did Tigran Artashesian spoke the original Armenian, or Greek? You cannot talk about any ignorant thing.

I'm also not afraid that dialects will die out.

Dialects have precious treasures for scientific issues.

Why is it that only small nations have these ridiculous fears? Why is that in the English-speaking world there are thousands of dialects living side by side with formal, media, academic language, without anyone fearing the loss of any one of them? What is our problem?

Did not you notice that you answered your question?

Small nations, big nations. In addition, it is not ridiculous at all.

becomes clearer that there is no such thing as the Armenian language. If we were to strip away all the loanwords, all the loan-suffixes and prefixes, all the loan-grammar rules, we would be left with nothing original. Hence, Armenian as a language, from the perspective of our purists, doesn't even exist.

Bravo Nairi, there is nothing as Armenian language when we strip away the all loan words...!

Ok who without us use those names for numbers?

Mek, Erkou, Ereq… In addition, thousands of other original Armenian words, suffixes and prefixes.

Even I do not need to confirm it.

Before millions of years my, your, and Nelson Mandela's grand grand grand grand grandfather was the same person, the first Homo sapiens or Adam (Eva's husband) if you want, but that does not mean that Armenian language borrowed from the Zulu, or gulu-gulu language or vice versa.

I know, you know, and every one knows that the Armenian language is very respectable, and unique, and a solo branch inside the Indo-European languages.

 

Johannes

[Eurocentric]

Well I wouldn't go as far as to say that the Armenian language doesn't exist

It's just that over 60% Armenian is composed of Iranic loanwords in four layers:Median/Scythian, Achaemenid Old Persian, Parthian Middle Persian (where most loandwords are from) and some from modern.

 

Other ancients loanwords of peculiar origin are usually associated with Urartian (artsiv, qaghak etc.)

 

We then get rid of the few Luwian and Hittite ones. Strip the Latin and Greek and find at the bottom the real Armenian

 

Some words which are not loanwords: mets, aner, djerm, yekhpayr, mayr, hayr (almost anything with -ayr) etc.

Some verbs like dnel, vertsnel, arnel, utel etc.

Edited September 20, 2006 by Eurocentric

[Eurocentric]

Mek, Erkou, Ereq…

 

Armenian numbers are the most peculiar in IE languages.

 

http://www.zompist.com/numbers.htm

 

Then there's hazar which is 100% Iranic.

[nairi]

Well I wouldn't go as far as to say that the Armenian language doesn't exist

It's just that over 60% Armenian is composed of Iranic loanwords in four layers:Median/Scythian, Achaemenid Old Persian, Parthian Middle Persian (where most loandwords are from) and some from modern.

 

And 60% or more of Old Persian was taken from somewhere else!

 

Some words which are not loanwords: mets, aner, djerm, yekhpayr, mayr, hayr (almost anything with -ayr) etc.

Some verbs like dnel, vertsnel, arnel, utel etc.

 

This is an assumption, which is not necessarily true! How do you know? How do we know that Armenians in the early days did not almost fully replace their language with Indo-European? Making Indo-European a borrowed language, and not a native one.

[nairi]

Hovanes, yes, HOVANES (because that is how I pronounce your name in my corrupted modern Armenian), I came to the conclusion quite some time ago that having discussions with purists was truly both a waste of time for me, as well as for them.

 

Let's leave the discussion here. There's no more to be said. I gave most of my arguments, and I will be repeating them again. Your arguments are all too familiar for me. I've heard them ever since my father and his brother decided to "purify" their Armenian and started teaching their kids ridiculous words like "horeghporakin."

[Eurocentric]

And 60% or more of Old Persian was taken from somewhere else!

 

Wrong. It was not taken from anywhere. It evolved from the Proto-Indo-Iranian language.

 

This is an assumption, which is not necessarily true! How do you know? How do we know that Armenians in the early days did not almost fully replace their language with Indo-European? Making Indo-European a borrowed language, and not a native one.

 

Wrong again. Because if your "Armenian" was not IE than it was NOT Armenian.

[Eurocentric]

Hovanes, yes, HOVANES (because that is how I pronounce your name in my corrupted modern Armenian), I came to the conclusion quite some time ago that having discussions with purists was truly both a waste of time for me, as well as for them.

 

Let's leave the discussion here. There's no more to be said. I gave most of my arguments, and I will be repeating them again. Your arguments are all too familiar for me. I've heard them ever since my father and his brother decided to "purify" their Armenian and started teaching their kids ridiculous words like "horeghporakin."

 

I think it's silly to call him a "purist" or whatever. I guess you haven't met those that start foaming from the mouth and say bs like how do you know Persians didn't borrow those words from us or that Ararat is pure Armenian and not the Hebrew form of the Assyrian Urartu etc.

[nairi]

Wrong. It was not taken from anywhere. It evolved from the Proto-Indo-Iranian language.

 

How are you so sure? And what the heck is proto-Indo-Iranian? Why do you take every word that some German "philologists" at the turn of the twentieth century said as if it is god-sent truth?

 

Wrong again. Because if your "Armenian" was not IE than it was NOT Armenian.

 

Or the "Armenian" we speak today is not Armenian, but a dialect of Indo-European. Why call it Armenian and not Indo-European?

 

Replacing languages/dialects is not so strange a phenomenon. Take the Irish of our days.

Edited September 20, 2006 by nairi

[nairi]

Yes, I mean from the beginning you confused the "ik" (Parsik) with "atsi" (Vratsi(.

(You do not expect babies to read Classical Armenian, do you?).

 

but you did not satisfy me in your replies, about Vratseren, Angliatseren.

 

And you confuse "ia" with "astan." I never meant to "satisfy" you with my answers. I'm asking you to question your own theories and in the least come up with a logical argument, if you want me to take your theory seriously. Seriously, btw, does not mean agree. You may well want to become an Armenologist first, before you blurt out that we should say this instead of that, without taking anything else into consideration.

[Eurocentric]

How are you so sure? And what the heck is proto-Indo-Iranian? Why do you take every word that some German "philologists" at the turn of the twentieth century said as if it is god-sent truth?

Or the "Armenian" we speak today is not Armenian, but a dialect of Indo-European. Why call it Armenian and not Indo-European?

 

German philologists? Way to go! So Indo-European studies and linguistics were pioneered by Germans and those studies have been stuck in a time warp ever since right?

Did you know that the earth was round?

I'm now not sure if you were being serious or were just ***ing around, i'm a little tired so might have missed the sarcasm...

 

Replacing languages/dialects is not so strange a phenomenon. Take the Irish of our days.

 

So? That's irrelevant. We don't care about the language replacement theory. If there was a different language spoken in the region before it was NOT Armenian but was hypothetically replaced by Armenian.

Irish Gaelic is still around and is an official language of the European Union, you were trying to say but failed to say that most Irish people speak English rather than Irish.

[nairi]

So? That's irrelevant. We don't care about the language replacement theory. If there was a different language spoken in the region before it was NOT Armenian but was hypothetically replaced by Armenian.

 

The question is: what is Armenian? Apparently, from what you are saying, it's a dialect of Indo-European spoken by a people who call themselves "Armenian." In other words, there is no difference between Armenian and German, since they are both essentially Indo-European. If we were therefore to replace "yerkir" with "land" it should not be considered a loanword, since both belong to the same language. Is that what you are saying? If not, then what are you saying?

 

Irish Gaelic is still around and is an official language of the European Union, you were trying to say but failed to say that most Irish people speak English rather than Irish.

 

I figured intelligent people would be able to deduct that without me spelling it out.

[Johannes]

This is an assumption, which is not necessarily true! How do you know? How do we know?

That Armenians in the early days did not almost fully replace their language with Indo-European.

How you can say some thing like that? Did the Armenians before 2800 years had Hübschmann's or Meillet's studies or dictionaries about Indo-European languages to do that?

Indo-European is not a language as language we understand. Indo-Europeans are not a nation as a nation we understand. Let me give you an example; Indo-European is my and yours and some one else mother, we all learned many words from our mother, so you cannot tell me that I borrow from you or vice versa. Linguists arrived to results after years of studying and comparing languages and words of different Indo-European languages. We have her (maz) which is the same in English hair, did they loan from us or vice versa? Of course no. We never met Anglo-Saxons during our history. In addition, there are hundreds and hundreds of words we share with other Indo Europeans.

Or the "Armenian" we speak today is not Armenian, but a dialect of Indo-European. Why call it Armenian and not Indo-European?

We cannot call it a dialect because other Indo-European speakers do not understand us at all.

and you confuse "ia" with "astan."

How I confused? I was talking about names of languages.

"yerkir" with "land"

Naira khanoum; Let me to continue my theory that you call it myth. Those brothers who born from the same mother spread over thousands of kilometers, and met others whom born from other mothers. After hundreds and thousands of years, each brother began to use the words that he learned from his mother but did not forget in different accents, and each brother sometimes began to use the same word in different cases.

Discussions with purists were truly both a waste of time for me, as well as for them.

I never said that we should erasure loan words (Arian, Semitic, Latin-Greek, and Hurrian-Sumerian) from our language. I every time said that we should not use turkish words because turks conquered our land, slaughtered our kids, raped our girls and women, especially we have the clone ones for those borrowed words.

In addition, we should stop borrowing new words from European languages especially when we have the Armenian version for them.

I've heard them ever since my father and his brother decided to "purify" their Armenian and started teaching their kids ridiculous words like "horeghporakin."

I offer "Hoparkin" instead of Horeghborakin, then according with your ideas about the language as a living thing; you can call your horeghborakin as "Ammognig" or the Armenian form of Italian word "Tanto" which is "Tantig".

Then there is hazar which is 100% Iranic.

What about "Biur", is it Iranian also?

Dear Euro Centro; what you aim when you call me foam mouthed? I think you are confusing me with those blind nationalists, who believe that we have 7736 years and five months and sixty seven minutes old history, and the all indo Europeans born from the womb of Armenian nation.

[Eurocentric]

Dear Euro Centro; what you aim when you call me foam mouthed? I think you are confusing me with those blind nationalists, who believe that we have 7736 years and five months and sixty seven minutes old history, and the all indo Europeans born from the womb of Armenian nation.

 

I was not referring to you.

 

Anyway, i'm actually quite proud of the ancient Iranic loanwords in Armenian, the names we use too. We preserved more of ancient Iranian culture and language than the mongrelized inhabitants of modern Iran today. How many people from Iran do you know with names like Vartan, Bagrat, Tigran, Arshak, Vardkes, Karen, Suren etc.

I have no problem with recently introduced loanwords from Europe either. I'm opposed to semitic and turkic loanwords as they are complteley alien, but there are hardly any outside of street jargon.

[Johannes]

Ok I am sorry because of misunderstanding.

Also I respect the Iranian heritage, and agree with you about our preserving the parthian culture.

And I agree with you about our preservation the Parthian culture. However we became christians and we created our Alphabet when we were in pact or when we were under the mandate of Iran.

[Eurocentric]

Ok I am sorry because of misunderstanding.

Also I respect the Iranian heritage, and agree with you about our preserving the parthian culture.

And I agree with you about our preservation the Parthian culture. However we became christians and we created our Alphabet when we were in pact or when we were under the mandate of Iran.

 

Not really. Christianity was accepted at a time when Arsacid Armenia was nominally independent and relations with Sassanids were very sour as they despised Arsacids. Armenia was more under the mandate of Rome than anything else. In fact during the last days of the kingdom pro-Roman Mamikonians had more power than the King.

[Zartonk]

Well I wouldn't go as far as to say that the Armenian language doesn't exist

It's just that over 60% Armenian is composed of Iranic loanwords in four layers:Median/Scythian, Achaemenid Old Persian, Parthian Middle Persian (where most loandwords are from) and some from modern.

 

I have to restate Eurocentric's response: The origins of the majority of the shared words are due to the common origins of Armenian and Proto-Indo-Iranian rather then mere borrowing on the part of Armenian. That assumption tends to create somewhat of a one-sided picture of the movement of language.

[Eurocentric]

I have to restate Eurocentric's response: The origins of the majority of the shared words are due to the common origins of Armenian and Proto-Indo-Iranian rather then mere borrowing on the part of Armenian. That assumption tends to create somewhat of a one-sided picture of the movement of language.

 

Umm....

You can say that regarding words like mayr, hayr, dour, skyurik, kov, sirt etc.

You cannot say that about these oh so obvious Iranic loanwords mart, azat, drosh, dasht, karmir, vart, ashakert etc.

Actually Armenian borrowed (not a really correct word) so many Iranic words that it used to be classed as an Indo-Iranian language when linguistics was still in its infancy.

[Zartonk]

Indeed there were words borrowed in much distant antiquity and off coarse in the later historical eras (Achamedeans, Medes, Parthians, Sassanians etc.); my point is that loaning and borrowing should be regarded alongside the mutuality of two languages.

 

BTW azat and a few others are so antique that they're debateable.

Edited September 22, 2006 by Zartonk

[Eurocentric]

BTW azat and a few others are so antique that they're debateable.

 

 

Not really. Unless you're aware of a cognate of azat in another IF sub-family.

Azat is present in Iranian languages and Armenian. Armenian is not an Iranian language therefore azat is an Iranian loanword.

In addition, it's not really that old, it can be traced back to no earlier than Artaxiads. Azat probably came into Armenian along with the Parthian noble class. Other Iranian words that came into Armenian about the same time were noble titles such as sparapet (Middle Persian Spahbod), nakharar, aspet, bdeshkh etc.

 

Iranica article on Irano-Armenian relations before Arab invasions: http://www.iranica.com/articles/ot_grp5/ot...l_20041020.html

[shaunt]

An interesting fact:

 

"Ha" is Hittite for "to believe."

 

It would be interesting to find out whether the root of the Armenian words "Havatel," and "Havatka" are related to the Hittite word. Arpa, feel free to respond, .

[nairi]

This is an assumption, which is not necessarily true! How do you know? How do we know?

That Armenians in the early days did not almost fully replace their language with Indo-European.

How you can say some thing like that? Did the Armenians before 2800 years had Hübschmann's or Meillet's studies or dictionaries about Indo-European languages to do that?

Indo-European is not a language as language we understand. Indo-Europeans are not a nation as a nation we understand. Let me give you an example; Indo-European is my and yours and some one else mother, we all learned many words from our mother, so you cannot tell me that I borrow from you or vice versa. Linguists arrived to results after years of studying and comparing languages and words of different Indo-European languages. We have her (maz) which is the same in English hair, did they loan from us or vice versa? Of course no. We never met Anglo-Saxons during our history. In addition, there are hundreds and hundreds of words we share with other Indo Europeans.

 

Just because we share words with IE, doesn't mean that we didn't borrow them. There were languages before IE, you know. And proto-Armenians did not necessarily speak IE, invent IE, or even have any linguistic relation with IE whatsoever, except that their neighbors began to speak it at some point.

 

Or the "Armenian" we speak today is not Armenian, but a dialect of Indo-European. Why call it Armenian and not Indo-European?

We cannot call it a dialect because other Indo-European speakers do not understand us at all.

 

I don't understand many Armenian dialects either. Does that mean they are not speaking Armenian? My question to you once again is: What is Armenian?

 

and you confuse "ia" with "astan."

How I confused? I was talking about names of languages.

 

You assume that just because we call English "Angleren" therefore we should call Georgian "Vreren." You're forgetting that we call England "Anglia" and Georgia "Vrastan." You are also missing many other linguistic factors, which are really not that hard to study if you would take the time to go to school for a few more years, study linguistics and Armenology and then come back and argue your point. Hopefully, in a slightly more mature way, rather than an offhand, cliché sort of way.

 

"yerkir" with "land"

Naira khanoum; Let me to continue my theory that you call it myth. Those brothers who born from the same mother spread over thousands of kilometers, and met others whom born from other mothers. After hundreds and thousands of years, each brother began to use the words that he learned from his mother but did not forget in different accents, and each brother sometimes began to use the same word in different cases.

Discussions with purists were truly both a waste of time for me, as well as for them.

I never said that we should erasure loan words (Arian, Semitic, Latin-Greek, and Hurrian-Sumerian) from our language. I every time said that we should not use turkish words because turks conquered our land, slaughtered our kids, raped our girls and women, especially we have the clone ones for those borrowed words.

 

You're contradicting yourself beyond any point of return. Oh, so we should ban Turkish from our language, because the Turks are barbarians and they killed us? When you have decided to come up with a slightly more convincing argument, I may decide to take you seriously. Otherwise this ridiculous, and not to mention extremely racist, comment is completely and utterly useless to me. Not to mention that it gives linguistics a very bad name. Just to spite you, I would argue that we should keep all the Turkish words, and add a couple more, since our language is already filled with loanwords, which surprisingly you wish to "preserve." Why not add a few more?

 

In addition, we should stop borrowing new words from European languages especially when we have the Armenian version for them.

 

What Armenian versions of them? Are they not versions of the same root? Should we not study our good old German friends and revive the original IE-words? Once again: from your perspective, Armenian doesn't even exist as a language, so don't give me this sort of emotional and groundless commentary.

[Zartonk]

Azat is present in Iranian languages and Armenian. Armenian is not an Iranian language therefore azat is an Iranian loanword.

 

Point taken. I myself hold that azat, along almost all of the feudal tiltles in ancient Armenia - in fact so "nakhararian" that on the exterior, Armenia might as well have been another Satrape- is a Iranian gift to us. No other group of people have had an extended presence over cultural identity longer then they. I have merely heard it opposed, albeit unsupported. So the position -incorrectly- exists.

 

Also, since you posted that great entry from Iranica, take a look at this article on the impact of Parskahyes on modern Iran: http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v2f5/v2f5a001.html

[Johannes]

And proto-Armenians did not necessarily speak IE, invent IE, or even have any linguistic relation with IE whatsoever, except that their neighbors began to speak it at some point.

If those protos did not use a language as the indo European language we are using now, that means that they only shared in building the Armenian nation, but they were not Armenian or Hai as nowadays meaning of those two words. In addition, we know that our language is IE by the verbs of our language, plus the IE root words. Because for any people it is difficult to loan verbs and use them in sentences. I understood you, you mean that you are not Indo European and you hate the Germans. However, we are talking other issues.

I do not understand many Armenian dialects either. Does that mean they are not speaking Armenian? My question to you once again is: What is Armenian?

I knew that you would ask me that. After three days I can understand Cilician dialect, and after two days I can understand Sasountsi dialect, and after a four days I can understand Siuneats dialect, but I must learn and hear and exercise more than a year to understand Greek, Russian, Malayan... This is the differences between the dialects and languages. All Armenians and Armenian dialects users in the past and in the present times sharing tens of thousands of words and verbs and suffixes and chgitem der inch in their daily speech. Is not this enough to call this language, one language?

you're forgetting that we call England "Anglia" and Georgia "Vrastan."

Ete irar piti viravorenq khosqerov. Es akhoyan em aydpisi hartseroum. Du asoum es mi kani tari el gna varjaran, nor ari zroutsir hets. However, we call the names of languages according with the names of nations but not by the names of territories or countries.

Marastan is like Vrastan but can you call it Mratseren? Let this old name away and look for new and living languages.Lehastan is like Vrastan do we call it lehatseren? It is a mistake and I mentioned this in the beginning of my topic. You must accept this and continue in your way.

Otherwise this ridiculous, and not to mention extremely racist, comment is completely and utterly useless to me.

This is not racist comment but it is patriotic comment. Even you do not know the meaning of racist. Those loan words that we loaned before 2000 year are armenized, but you cannot tell me that the word bala (mankik, dzkouk, manouk, erekha ...) which uses those who call themselves azer is an Armenian or we can use it as an Armenian word. Yes, I have Problem with those who occupied our land and ...If you do not have problem with them, I have…

Just to spite you, I would argue that we should keep all the Turkish words, and add a couple more, since our language is already filled with loanwords, which surprisingly you wish to "preserve." Why not add a few more?

Before some of days, you said me that you are the last one who denies the national issues, like culture or language, music so on, and now as if you said, "just to spite me" you are ready to add more and more...

Thus, I can teach you turkish if you want. On the other hand, we can continue our discuss in turkish.

What Armenian versions of them? Are they not versions of the same root? Should we not study our good old German friends and revive the original IE-words? Once again: from your perspective, Armenian doesn't even exist as a language, so don't give me this sort of emotional and groundless commentary.

You hate Germans I understand you. You do not have any idea, which is called science of languages (lezouabanouthiun). I guess that you never red, even saw Kapantsians or Ajarians, or Djahoukians studies.