In First Corinthians 13:5, what do you think Paul had in mind when he uses the word ‘unbecomingly’ to describe what love isn’t like?

Vote #1 Colin Jensen and Joe Fessenden, who have nailed it.

To add a bit.

It is the height of arrogance to fast forward to Modern Greek. But I’ll do so anyway.

In Modern Greek, the adjective askhimos < askhēmōn means ‘ugly’.

The etymology of askhēmōn is ‘un-shape-ish’. So unshapely, not with a nice shape. Deformed, as Thayer’s Lexicon put it. Not pleasant to look at.

The verb askhēmonein means ‘to act in an unshapely manner’. To act ugly. In a way that is not pleasant to experience.

You need to dig beneath the Olde English of unbecomingly, unseemly. They are correct, but you may well miss the connotations because they are Olde English. To act unbecomingly mean acting in a socially unacceptable way. It is a socially ugly way.

From the Byzantine usage I’ve seen, I’m pretty sure that includes behaviour which society (at the time) condemned as lewd, sexually ill-disciplined. But it’s not just about the sex, it’s about the ugliness.

FWIW, the LSJ (Classical Greek) definition of the verb is ‘behave unseemly, disgrace oneself’.

Is “Anya” an ugly name?

Preamble:

I AM NOT SAYING THIS JUST TO IMPRESS User.

Ahem.

Um, nah. It’s not objectively ugly. What name is? It’s just a bunch of phonemes. Is Melanie ugly, because it sounds like melanoma? Is Mycroft ugly, because it sounds like Microsoft?

Any ugliness we associate with names is cultural. And what’s an Anya ever done to you?

I could put in an anecdote about an Anya my wife studied with; but Quora is googleable, so I’ll pass.

What Anya is though, is unfamiliar in an English-language environment. If an English-speaking shmuck in high school hears an unfamiliar name, of course they’re going to scramble to find things about it to make fun of. Because they’re shmucks.

Now, pronouncing it as “Awnya” instead of “Ahnya”: that, I might take issue with…

What is it like to be a kabeinto? What was it like to leave Esperantujo?

My bio for Esperanto says Kabeinta Esperantisto, lingvisto: “Esperantist who has done a Kabe, linguist” (for explanation on Kabe, see question details). So I guess I qualify to answer.

I have been corresponding with Clarissa Lohr a fair bit in Esperanto recently. I don’t think that means I’ve un-Kabe’d though; Clarissa is hardly a verda batalanto. She is a Green Warrior, but that’s Green as in hair colour, the environment, and Social Justice, not Green as in Sub la sankta signo de l’ espero (La Espero).

So, how does it feel to have abandoned the Esperanto movement?

Guilt, mostly. Not debilitating guilt like I feel for Lojban (where I was a much bigger deal, as it was a much smaller group). But guilt. They were my people, and I did not stick by them.

Also: Surprise, when I see the language has moved on past me. I Kabe’d in the 90s, distracted by shinier objects (Lojban, then Klingon); Esperanto went off and coined new Esperanto slang. Without my permission. The nerve!

But Esperanto made me, in a lot of ways. Not least of which was poetics. And I’m grateful for that, forever.

What is the Latin translation of “Don’t let the past ruin today.”?

I got thunderstorm asthma (who even knew that was a thing?), so I sympathise, Chad.

But not enough not to come up with my own parasitic rendering. Ha!

I’m going with your initial instinct:

Ne heri hodie destruat.

Subjunctives. They are cool.

Are there any aspects of your native culture / country that foreigners hardly ever understand?

This has been mentioned several times elsewhere here, and it’s not just Australian, it’s a British inheritance. Though I think we here have ramped it up to eleven. And it certainly disconcerts visitors. Hell, it’s disconcerted me.

If Australians like you, they will make merciless fun of you.

If they’re being civil to you, that’s when you worry.

This has been brought up here as a partial explanation for Australians’ casual racist sounding banter: that the emphasis is on the banter, and the racism is not malicious. Maybe, maybe not; it’s complicated. But we certainly aren’t a nation to tiptoe about race relations, for better and worse.

But yeah. I did a launch of our department’s Working Papers, which I’d coedited, when I was 25.

I was heckled.

That was apparently a show of affection and respect. Who knew.

I aspire to play in a pit orchestra. Can you say anything to crush my dreams?

Inexplicably, OP, you’ve A2A’d me.

I played in school orchestra, and gave that up for university. I did have my dreams crushed later, with academia.

And for all that it’s the worst thing to have happened in my life, I would not take it back. It’s made me who I am.

So I don’t know about pit orchestras, although I am grateful for what they do, but I do know about dreams being crushed.

Allow me to say some avuncular shit per your request. Some of it will crush your dreams. Some of it should. None of it means you should not pursue the profession.


  • Even the dream job is still just a job.
  • With petty admin shit, with office fights, with jealousies, with long hours, and with not enough personal validation. There’s group validation, as part of a team; but that too is fleeting. It’s work.
  • The pay is shit, and you gotta eat. Expect to be doing a day job. If you’re lucky, it’s a day job with its own set of fulfillments. If you’re unlucky, it’s like your night job, but even worse. Work out whether you’d be cool teaching or not.
  • It’s not a soloist gig, but it’s still a gig to which many are called and few are chosen. (Unless you’re a violist; they’re always in demand, and it’s worth the lameass viola jokes.) Have a plan B. And C, and D. In fact, that applies now for any job ever, but it especially applies to the performing arts.

You know what I’d tell starry eyed kids wanting to do a PhD in linguistics? Do it, only if you can’t imagine yourself doing anything else in life. Otherwise, spare yourself the heartache.

I’m proud that I talked my best student out of it, and I hope she’s got a fulfilling career as a psychologist somewhere.

If your inmost soul craves being in a pit orchestra, Hayley, make it happen. But please go into it with your eyes open.

The fact you’re asking this suggests you will. Good luck!

*checks profile*

Oh and OP? You’re 16. You’re British, which means your uni situation is not as dire as in the US, so you still have time to dip your toe in and change your mind.

Identify how linguistic is related with historical linguistics?

Well, linguistics is the scholarly discipline whose subject matter is language.

Historical linguistics is the scholarly discipline whose subject matter is the development of language through time. It explains language in terms of how it historically developed to get to this point (its diachrony).

Up until the 1920s, historical linguistics was the mainstream of linguistics. Saussure, himself an important historical linguist, identified that language is a system which needs to be made sense of on its own terms, as a contemporary phenomenon (its synchrony).

This led to Structuralism, which uncovered a lot of the structures of language that Historical Linguistics had missed, because they were treating language as a process and not a system. Historical Linguistics for example did not really differentiate phones and phonemes; it didn’t need to. The distinction is essential to phonology. And after Structuralism, other approaches to linguistics have continued to be synchronic.

Historical linguistics has been marginalised in all of this, and is very much niche now. Historical linguistics has been enriched by our better understanding of synchronic linguistics, sociolinguistics, and pragmatics. But it is unfortunately out of fashion, with a lot of shortsighted linguists thinking it’s boring and old hat.

Fashion. Never forget that all of scholarship—not just the squishy humanities, but the sciences as well—are about fashion. There are fields of inquiry that fall out of fashion, and it’s not always for objectively sound reasons.

In which country have you discovered after spending some years that local citizens are chauvinists? Not racists but extreme nationalists?

What you’re after is a country with an exaggeratedly strong nationalism, to the point of chauvinism, but not spilling over into racism. So you want a maxed out civic nationalism.

France invented civic nationalism, but they asssimilated all their indigenous minorities aggressively, and they’ve botched their assimilation of the Beurs, so that’s not a good example.

I’ve lived in three countries, Australia, America, and Greece, all with healthy chauvinism.

Greece.

There is a (popular?) school of thought in Greece that is xenophobic and racist. There is an (elite?) school of thought in Greece that emphasises culture over ethnicity, and exults that as long as you embrace our culture, you’re one of us. And they trot out Isocrates, Panegyricus §50 to support that: Isocrates

I have no problem accepting what Wikipedia says—that this is not what Isocrates meant at all, and the passage was actually an assertion of Athenian cultural chauvinism. And I don’t care. It’s a valid viewpoint, not because Isocrates did or didn’t say it, but because civic nationalism is a healthy thing that the Balkans needs more of.

Historically, “people are called Greeks because they share in our education” is what’s happened with the Arvanites and the Vlachs, to mention the two “loyal minorities”. And my (elite?) heart rejoices, when I see little second generation Zaireans speaking in Greek slang. Or knowing that the Nigerian Dr. Sam Chekwas so fell in love with Greek culture while he studied there, that he ran the only Greek bookstore in Astoria NY (Greektown, America), for decades.

You know the Greek Nazis chanting Δε θα γίνεις έλληνας ποτέ, Αλβανέ, Αλβανέ? (“You’ll never be a Greek, Albanian!”)

Those fuckers will never be as Greek as Dr Sam Checkwas.

… But. That’s the elite storyline. I think the popular storyline is winning. And that Greek nationalism is contaminated with racism.

Australia

Australian nationalism was contaminated with racism from the beginning. The White Australia policy wasn’t an aberration, it was part of what defined both the Commonwealth of Australia and the Australian labour movement.

It got up-ended in the late seventies, by the elite. The elite defined Australia to have civic nationalism. That was the actual point of multiculturalism—a point lost on the masses, who think it was only about “um… cuisine?”

Once again, I rejoice in that civic nationalism. I rejoice that I can be proud to be a citizen of this country, without having to genuflect at the altar of Damper (food) and Aussie Rules. I rejoice that no fucker gets to tell me “Go back to where you came from”.

But that’s a luxury of Greeks now being pretty well assimilated (I’m an outlier generationally—my parents came here at the end of the wave, and I spent time growing up in Greece). As you may know from the news, plenty of Australians never stopped telling people to Go back to where they came from; they just have been targeting more recent arrivals. And blocking even more.

So Australia’s not off the hook either.

America.

The US, too, was founded on racism.

But you tell me, American Quorans. Can an African-American, despite the lynchings and the whips, despite the microaggressions and the macroaggressions, despite feeling besieged and occupied in their own country—look at the flag, and still say “USA! Fuck yeah!”?

If they can, Dimitris, you have your answer.

For every meme, there is an equal and opposite, except even dumber meme. But somehow…

… I think the existence of this meme means something.

Since Quora rewards populist writers, what else can be done to try and promote deserving but little-known users?

The mob will vote for what the mob likes. And the Quora Facebook feed will give the mob what it wants.

You’re Anon, which automatically makes you the enemy unless you’re that one Anon guy talking about Turkish, or that other Anon guy who is actually me; but I’ll answer.

Be the change.

Upvote the voices you like. Follow them and encourage them.

Know that they won’t get a mass readership, and that’s actually probably just as well. But for the topics you’re passionate about, curate good quality conversation. That includes A2Aing and asking good questions.

Post questions like, I dunno, Who are the 3 people you follow that have the fewest followers? How many followers do they have, and what are your reasons for following them? (Thank you again for the idea, Martin Silvertant.)

What is the etymology of “Therasia”?

The Just-So story of antiquity is as Konstantinos Konstantinides put it: Thera the island was named for its colonist Theras, and Therasia for his daughter.

Yeah, I find that too convenient too.

I’m not looking up Pauly or anything reputable like that, but I will work from the corresponding common nouns. Thēr means a wild animal, and thēra meant the hunt, hunting for wild animals, game. Thērasios is the adjective of thēra, “of or relating to the hunt”. The feminine of Thērasios is Thērasia. So “hunt” and “hunting (island)”.

Oh, and Theresa does indeed come from the similar adjective Thēresios. It started out as a synonym of Artemis, the hunter goddess.