germans and slavs, celts and romans

As we all know, all European languages except for Basque, Finnish and Hungarian are part of the vast Indo-European family. Of course, some branches are more closely related than others. The Celtic and Latin peoples probably once spoke a related branch of evolved Indo-European, which eventually split into the Celtic and Italic languages (Latin, which in turn begat all the Romance tongues, is but one of several now-extinct Italic languages.) Celtophiles may be interested to know that their tongues are more closely related to that of Rome! Meanwhile, the Germanic languages probably emerged from another Indo-European dialect that also begat the Baltic and Slavic languages. (How ironic that for years the Germans beat up on the Slavs and called them "inferior", when they were kindred in both blood and culture.) As I said before, Celtophiles may gloat at the idea that their language is closer to Latin, while Anglo-Saxon is closer to Polish. However, I dearly hope it doesn't encourage any of this, although I hope it does inspire some learned talk about languages and cultures. It also reveals the fallacies in both Germany's longtime disdain for the Slavic peoples, Britain's longtime suppression of Celtic cultures, and the American's irreverent chuckling at "Polish jokes". (I don't think I have any Polish in me, but I'm pretty sure I'm part Czech.) The Slavs, of course, have contributed a bit more to European culture than many of us are willing to admit. Before their Christianization, they too had their own polytheistic religion, which included a dark god called "Chernobog" or "Black God" (he makes a key appearance in Disney's "Fantasia"). And in the last couple centuries there appeared several acclaimed Russian writers such as Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky. In conclusion, I just wanted to talk a bit about the Slavic peoples since there have been several postings about the Celts here. Both have largely been Europe's peripheral peoples, "the blacks of Europe" as, I believe it was Frank McCourt, said.

Oh, and a couple more things; if you want to find more information on the origins and development of Indo-European languages, check out the Indo-European Database at www.tied.narod.ru. And also; does anyone know how much the Slavic languages have contributed to English? The Celts seem to have given us more than we credit them for. For instance, I read that the word "iron" is actually a Celtic contribution which the Anglo-Saxons actually picked up while they were still on the continent. Did the Slavs give any words to the Anglos before they left for Britain? I've seen maps of where the tribes originally lived, and the Slavs lived not too far from the Anglo-Saxons old home in Schleswig-Holstein.

I used to be really interested in this ancient history stuff. But now, I am just mainly concerned with what major "ethnicity" I am, and then what nationality that my family and ancestors come/came from. For me, I am mainly English "ethnicity," 2/3 of my family live in England at this present moment, and most of my ancestors came from England (and most of them are still in England). But even if I was, let's say, of Romanian extraction, but my family had been in England for the last 300-400 years, I would consider myself to be "English" rather than Romanian. I would think this because my family lives in England; not Romania. I think that, for me, it is a "roots/family" thing; where ever my family are, is where I will feel more comfortable with.

This brings me back to a point I was talking about in another forum. If a person speaks a Celtic language, or a Slavic language, that does not make this person Celtic or Slavic, does it? Languages are things that are learned; we do not carry them in our genes. If a person is born in England, to Italian parents and Chinese grandparents; this person would be Chinese, but would have parents who were Italian citizens, and this person would be an English citizen.

Actually Indo-European is divided into two groups. Celtic, Latin, Germanic are all part of the same "western" half. Slavic is part of the "Eastern" half along with the Indo-Iranian languages. Interestingly remnants of a language was found in western China (Tocharian) which bore characteristics of the Western group.

I think when people say Celtic, it's a way of saying "Germanics" are boring and straight I like music, laughter and spirituality. My great grandfather was Belgian and I live in Belgium. Am I Belgian? No of course not. Beyond language, being born and living in a country, or having parents from a specific cultural background, any talk latin, celtic, or germanic is irrelevant and concerns "identification" more than anything else.

I was born and brought up in England. Am I English? At school, people tell me I'm British but I'm not English cause I'm not white. Is this true? Unless you are white, even if you family has lived in England for 300 years, you are not English?

This is false. Some people assert wrongly that English is somehow ethnic. I would say you were English (as well as British and whatever else you like). In the same way as if you lived in the Netherlands you would be Dutch whatever you're background.

You're English because of the way in which the UK works. Your British identity would largely be confined to England I would guess.

So what they tell you is wrong. I personally think English has much more potential to be multicural and broad than British does, whose traditional values of single-minded protestant christianity and imperialism are no longer valid in today's world. English is just about England and the English language, as well as the some total of what it contains.

But there is undoubtedly racism. I went to school in France for a year once. I was already more accepted (with my pidgin French-language) at the end of the year than a French-born boy of Algerian origin who held a French passport and spoke perfect French like everyone else. As Ice-T said it takes two whites to make a

...white but only one black to make a black person.

Not sure that was relevant. I just mean that a white person in a foreign white-dominated country fits in quicker than a non-white person born and bred in that country.

Not sure that was relevant. I just mean that a white person in a foreign white-dominated country fits in quicker than a non-white person born and bred in that country.

I wasn't saying that languages are ethnic, just examining some of the connections between the people who originated them. And for the record, I do know that languages tend to spread to all sorts of various ethnic groups. For instance, not everyone who speaks a Celtic or Romance language is all Celtic or Roman. France speaks a Romance language, yet most of its white establishment is Germanic, Celtic, or both, same with England. Romanian is a Romance language surrounded by Slavic ones.

I have not studied any Slavic language in depth, but I have looked at some comparisons between Russian and various Germanic languages. For instance, the Russian word for "apple" is "yabloko", for "milk" is "myolko" (compare Swedish "mjoelk"), for "he" is "an" (compare Swedish "han"). The Germanic languages are thought to have originated in the Baltic region, which I think makes the Germanic connection compelling. As for the whole Eastern-Western branch thing, perhaps the Germanic languages are the most archaic of the Western branch, and may have originated the Celtic and Italic ones. (Greek and Albanian are thought to be some of the oldest Indo-European languages spoken in Europe, far older than Slavic or Germanic or Celtic.)

I am also aware of the societal ills that have come about when people assert the ethnicity of their language and culture. It is a great shame not only when the governments of, for instance, Spain, France and Britain, engage in wholesale efforts to wipe out any minority languages (respectively Basque, Breton, and Welsh), but also when the members of those minority groups themselves assert the "purity" and ethnicity of their language and in turn engage in somewhat racist activity.

If I remember correctly, linguists have hypothesised an influence from another language family in Germanic, presumably an extinct one, explaining some of Germanic's specific features.

But sorry, this is the last time I will say this. You can give labels to things: Celtic "languages", "music", even "culture" if you must. But people's blood is all mixed and you can't give it a specific label.

It might be argued that the continued existence of minority languages at all in the United Kingdom is proof of tolerance rather than the opposite (Breton in France, unlike Welsh in the UK, has no official status whatsoever).

Single nations tend to have one language where possible with the idea that this increases communication, efficiency, a sense of oneness and reduces inequalities (French model). Usually, where minority languages or equal majority languages exist it is because the State is unable to avoid this. Belgium with 10 million people could quite easily function (and probably better too) with just one official language instead of three. But nobody wants to abandon their mother tongue for one of the other official languages. They tried to do it with French when Belgium was first created but it didn't work.

Or the USA. Why do you think Spanish is so strong? I think it's because pressure from the Hispanic community in the US is stronger than the US English-speaking establishment's ability to impose English as the only language. I'm sure they would much rather just have English etc.

A family that plays together stays together. The English didn't wipe out other languages by spite. They just had no part in what the establishment were trying to create.

Languages are my passion and I'd much rather come from a United Kingdom with English, Welsh and Gaelic as equal official languages. But the United Kingdom has never worked like that and it never will.

Does anyone know why the attempts by Celtic language speakers to keep their languages in the new world generally failed, apart from in Patagonia (Welsh) and arguably Nova Scotia (Scottish Gaelic)?

Simon, I assume that the Welsh and Gaelic languages failed because the people wanted to conform with the rest of their new country. I watched an interview with a guy from Canada one time. He said that his father went to work in Halifax, and did not speak Gaelic there because speaking Gaelic seperated himself from being "Canadian." But even in Argentina and Nova Scotia, the languages (Welsh and Gaelic) are hardly spoken there. Most of the people speak the language of the country, and the languages are confined mainly to the older generation.

Also Simon, I think that "English ethnicity" is a real thing. Do I not have "English ethnicity" because I come from America? My ancestors have been in England for a very long time. Some of them came with the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and others; and a lot more of them came with the Danish Vikings. All of the people who came to England made this "English ethnicity." I do not really like using this term "ethnicity" (that is why I put it in quotaion marks), but I will defend the best way I can (I am not able to defend my positions well, as it is not my nature).

Amir, you are English. Just because I say how I feel towards "ethnicity" and "nationality," does not mean that I am correct. For me, I am very proud of my family. But my family live in England, and I live in America. So, I have a natural tendancy to want to conform to my "English heritage." I think that you should be proud of your heritage too!

I guess the term "heritage" would be better suited then. I am proud of my English heritage, and everyone should be proud of their heritage. For me anyway, nationality has a big thing to do with how I feel about ethnicity, nationality, etc.; because I am not so keen on being American. I like the idea of being apart of a country, but I would like to be apart of a country where most of the other inhabitants were the same "heritage/ethnicity/whatever" as I am. Please do not think that I am a racist, I AM NOT! I like diversity. I love learning about other cultures. I am even going to take an Arabic class in a couple of months. It is just that in America, one has to deal with hundreds of cultures. America is a nation of nations, and it is not like in England where you deal with a lot fewer cultures.

Another interesting fact about the Slavs- did you know that our word "slave" comes from the word "Slav"? Going back to ancient Greece, the Slavs had a long history of servitude throughout Europe. I think I read somewhere that the word "slob" also comes from the same origin, testifying that other Europeans did not think very highly of them.

I don't really like the idea of affirmative action, or thinking that one person deserves victim status. But obviously some ethnic groups have been forced to eat shit for a very long time (the blacks in America and South Africa, the Catholic Irish under British rule, the "untouchables" in India, and the Koreans and lower classes in Japan, and the Slavs). Obviously their rises from the mire are to be commemorated. Unfortunately, many of the Slavic people, I feel, have largely been mistreated by their own governments. I mean, the history of Russia, if made into a movie, could probably be directed by the creator of "thirtysomething". Centuries on end of crushing, backward rule by self-serving auto- and bureaucrats; first the czars, then the Soviets, then that inept drunkard Boris Yeltsin, then the crooked, Machiavellian Vladimir Putin. No wonder the Russians invented a drink as strong as vodka; it's the only quick way to forget about that kinda lifestyle.

Andrew J, you mention "slav" meaning slave and slob. That is funny, because the Russian word for "German," is "nyem-net-skee." This means "stupid(-person)" So, the "insults" go both ways :-P

Yes, I agree Andrew. An eye for an eye and all that.

Maybe, Clark, the best word is "roots". Where you came from. Why your ancestors came to America. What contribution they made to the country.

The English do it too. London was the New York of the nineteenth century, i.e. the centre of the universe. Lots of immigrants came to London and other British cities for many of the reasons people went to America. Irish, Chinese, Moroccans, Jews and my Belgian great grandfather (1912). In fact that's one of the reasons I came to Belgium. It always seemed to be a part of who I was.

Maybe we mean different things by "blood". For me it's that red liquid in your body.