Re: Slovanik, Enamyn, and Slavic slaves

On Wednesday 07 August 2002 12:00, Thomas R. Wier wrote:
> Quoting Christopher Wright <faceloran@...>:
> > Jan van Steenbergen sekalge:
> > >--- Peter Clark wrote:
> > > > Although a case could also be made for "slava," fame, glory.
> > > > That's one theory, too. But somehow, I can't tell why, I don't
> > > > believe it.
> >
> > What nation would call itself Glorious, you mean? By their history, do
> > they seem like a tribe of megalomaniacs?
>
> If every nation or ethnic group that deemed "glory" as an inherent
> quality of itself were condemned as megalomaniacs, there wouldn't
> be enough insane-asylums for them all.  (Of course, you might have
> a point if you consider nonstandard insane asylyms like, say, the
> planet Earth.)
        Just to stoke the fires a little :), consider how many groups of people refer
to themselves as "the people" or "human beings" with the implicit
understanding that outsiders are inferior. Quoting Payne (in D.M.): 'For
example, the word e'ñapa in Panare (a Cerib language in Venezuela) means
"person" when used in opposition to the term ne'na "wild animal" or "evil
spirit." The same term means "indigenous person" when used in opposition to
the term tato "outsider"/"white person." Finally, the term can also refer
stictly to Panares, when used in opposition to terms referring to neighboring
indigenous groups. Only the context can disambiguate.'
        Of course, world history is full of tribes and nations that thought itself
better, more human, (dare I say?) more glorious than others, and acted
accordingly.
        Mind you, I don't really have much of an opinion as to the origin of the word
"Slav." Etymologies which derive it from "word" or "glory" are both plausible
and have precedent. I haven't studied Proto-Slavic, but I would not be
surprised if both are derived from the same root. What are the
reconstructions for both in PIE?
        :Peter