In the last three centuries there have been many isolated scholars who have emphasized the possibility that the Basque outside the base material of several languages, including Latin, and also of Spanish place names, but they have always been quarantined or ridiculed. In the earliest times the disqualification was based on the simple path difference between the language of the empire and the one was talking about thousands of villagers, shepherds, blacksmiths and sailors, during the nineteenth century, arguing that they were feelings of nationalistic fever and in recent decades, deterring them or buying them with proffesorships and greedy representations … posh little effort.
This latest version, the current is very serious because it is giving as a product, generations of young graduates and doctors who have lost the interest in the most valuable of this language after being a vehicle of communication and essential part of the Basque soul: It’s ability to help science to “recreate” the prehistoric world.
The initial Mental bias was due to the mystical-humanistical and Roman-Grecian component of monks and chroniclers that later percolated by means of the strength of business and power, because in fact, that central “force idea” that those outstanding men the important and powerful man puts names to places, has led them to believe and teach that the names ( ofkings, leaders, saints, villains …) it has been determined most of the place names.
The truth is that neither men nor celebrated anniversaries have left big traces in the intended place names, names between that few of those mentioned were claimed for Basque as they asured they had the intuition that in “this language meant other things.”
Indeed, when straddling the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the fact that several national scholars (Larramendi, Mogel, Astarloa, Erro, Hervás …) and some prominent foreign as W. Humboldt launched a movement to promote the study and asked to go deepening on Basque (who had never been studied scientifically), the reactionary forces accused it of political intentionality until get its desprestige, almost before the actual start that could have provide valuable and abundant evidences pointing to a new area and a wide horizon.
The anthropocentric drift quoted above becomes ridiculous as soon ay you can have thousands of place names and lexemes belonging to several languages (that group called Indo-European) with a matching genetic instead of some tens of city names or names in tombs or on a commemorative writing (Ascoli) and as soon as instead of conjectures and rather than hundreds of “laws of evolution of phonemes” tailored to meet the final product there is a suitable tool for the translation as the Proto Euskera, the Basque of many roots, which I call “Eukele”.
W. Humboldt used to say ” it has to deepen the Basque roots.. ” because that was the key to reach consistent translations.
It was since always known that the ability of aggregation, agglutination of Euskera, was based largely on the availability of simple roots with unambiguous meanings, marking a clear difference with those (roots) of Celtic and Sanskrit. But only a few were available.
In the recently published in Spanish “The 1,500 DNA particles of Euskera” you can find until 1541 roots , being very clear that there rest many more to rescue. It is said that Sanskrit has 1,700 of these lexemes and morphemes. Euskera is sure to surpass it as soon as an organized and systematic research that multiply the productivity of the work of an isolated person with limited means, could start.
These Euskeran roots are incredibly specific, unambiguous and precise, contrasting with the mother languages like Sanskrit or Celtic, whose basic particles are “ill-defined” and open to various interpretations.
Returning to the historical process, in a way it is understandable that a bishop of the sixth century or even a Jesuit of the XVI arrived not knowing-as it is feasible today, that there are a long-dozen of names “Zaragoza” in Spain or that there can be found once and again across different regions many “Madrid”, “Lacoruña”, “Larrioja”, “Iglesia”, “Gallego”, “Miguel” and a thousand more that can provide after a quick search in databases of the National Geographic Institute, names and sounds that remain crimped in local little place names that remains less altered as they had been maintained through oral transmission until the Count of Floridablanca and successors began to fix them into maps.
It is because that small modifications suffered that are true fossils, archaeological pieces with a great deal of information not limited to a few dozens of the above oulined names from the writings of the Roman historians and geographers.
Understandably, (I said) that the burden of prejudice, with the limited data ammount and the previous conditioning to which they were subjected by (archi copied) the previous literature, the “not great” scholars were content to confirm the previous -and-in some case – to expand a bit more on the same line.
This has lead to the absurd situation in which a Latin which is probably the most recently about the called “Latin Languages ”, is considered older than Castilianwho can precede it bay millennia and then, laws of phonetic evolution are invented it suit to an alleged flow Latin – Castilian, when the flow can be the reverse.
So we can say without blushing that all made so far with the Ibero, is practically zero.
The Spanish place names, as well as with its natural wealth, its physiography, is varied, richer and more complex than that of neighboring countries and infinitely more than the one of Nordic countries who were forbidden to human occupation until eight or ten thousand years.
VN:F [1.8.8_1072]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
