>Eugene Oh wrote:
>>2007/9/13, R A Brown <ray@...>:
>>
>>>Isn't the modern Hebrew for 'electricity' derived from a Biblical Hebrew
>>>word for _amber_? And the Chinese is certainly non-Greek-based, namely
>>>dian4 (which IIRC is also the word for 'lightning').
>>>
>>
>>Technically wouldn't the mod. Hebrew word be counted then as sort of
>>"Greek-based",
>
>It depends how loosely you define the term, I
>guess. I understood John Vertical's question to
>refer to derivations from the actual Greek
>language, i.e. from _electron_ (amber).
>
>>given that presumably it was one of those words that
>>Eliezer Ben-Yehuda or one of the Haskalah-ites (what do you call the
>>people of the Haskalah?) calqued from the major European tongues of
>>the time?
>
>Oh, yes, if I've remembered it correctly, it is certainly a calque.
>
>>Or I may just be thinking too much. :-p
>
>Not at all. It's worth pointing out. We have, in
>fact, three categories of language, so to speak,
>i.e.:
>(a) Those like the majority of European
>languages that derive the word for 'electricity'
>etc. from the Greek ÐɊɈɻÉ-ÉÕÉÀ (e:lektron)
>"amber."
>(b) Those that are calqued from the major
>European languages, i.e. derive their words from
>their own (possibly archaic) word for "amber",
>e.g. Icelandic and IIRC modern Hebrew.
>(c) Those which derive their word for
>electricity from a quite different source, e.g.
>Finnish & Chinese and .....
>
>Welsh: trydan <-- tân "fire" with the prefix
>_try-_ (plus soft mutation) "through, inner".
>Thus 'electricity' is, so to speak, 'the fire
>within things.'
>
>Breton similarly has _tredan_.
>
>--
>Ray
>==================================
>ray@carolandray.plus.com
>
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
>==================================
>Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
>There's none too old to learn.
>[WELSH PROVERB]