It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by TheSB
I'm sure that encounters were much more frequent in the distant past when there was not much difference between HF and the other humans living in the region.
My older Filipino relatives told me stories of when they were young they were told stories about the little people of the forest, much like the polynesian minehune, I think that's how it was spelled.
I'm starting to think that the extreme small size is related to living in the densest forests, where small size would be an advantage for moving through the undergrowth.
Originally posted by rickymouse
homo florensis....Why make it so hard to remember...hobbits or dwarfs sounds easier to remember. Even leprechauns.
Originally posted by Hanslune
Originally posted by rickymouse
homo florensis....Why make it so hard to remember...hobbits or dwarfs sounds easier to remember. Even leprechauns.
The heavy burden of tradition, but it would have been possible to latinize Hobbit too
Originally posted by rickymouse
Originally posted by Hanslune
Originally posted by rickymouse
homo florensis....Why make it so hard to remember...hobbits or dwarfs sounds easier to remember. Even leprechauns.
The heavy burden of tradition, but it would have been possible to latinize Hobbit too
Rats, that tradition of putting things in latin. Forgot again, should have said: Rattus norvegicus, that tradition of putting things into latin. I'm learning.
They would have us believe that Latin or Hebrew are the base
Originally posted by Hanslune
Originally posted by rickymouse
Rats, that tradition of putting things in latin. Forgot again, should have said: Rattus norvegicus, that tradition of putting things into latin. I'm learning.
It's all a conspiracy by those damn classical scholars to keep that language alive - those sus domesticus
Anybody here have the Latin knowledge to tell us how the latinized word Hobbit would be spelled?
Originally posted by Harte
Originally posted by Hanslune
Originally posted by rickymouse
Rats, that tradition of putting things in latin. Forgot again, should have said: Rattus norvegicus, that tradition of putting things into latin. I'm learning.
It's all a conspiracy by those damn classical scholars to keep that language alive - those sus domesticus
Anybody here have the Latin knowledge to tell us how the latinized word Hobbit would be spelled?
Pilosus Pede, according to Google Translate.
Harte
Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by punkinworks10
That's the basis of the problem, language was most probably invented/improved in lots of places but you could make an arguement that when and if the 'constriction' occurred a common set of concepts dealing with language were made but again - speculation. I would say that the Khoekhoe or the twenty plus Aboriginal languages and perhaps even one of the New Guinean speech might be the oldest around - but again speculation.