Use of place names in Etymology

Submitted by Spatial Scientist (United States), Aug 21, 2006 at 16:58

My Dear dhimmi no more,

You make too many assumptions. You lessen your positions

Please re-read my statement since you seem to have missed the point. My comment was directed to your use of a place name as part of your argument. You were the only person to use this construct in this thread. You gave it time and place. I'm sure you could find a better example other than a place name.

You're assuming that a place name value it does not have. The mistake is very simple: Toponymy - the science or study of place names is not the same nor does it use the same methodology as Etymology - the study of the origins of words. Toponymy is extremely inexact and non-empirical. You make this mistake twice, once in the original post and once in your response to my comments. Your response said:

"3. So I did my research and proved to him that his argument is no argument. If a kafr really means as he claims: far, desolate and isolated" the good citizens of Kafr al-Dawwar would just drop the kafr, but they did not".

This argument is just plain silly. Your faulty assumption: place names have a direct relationship to the meaning of the words the place names contains. And the citizens of a place will always ensure that the words contained in their place name are correct and fully reflect the correct meaning. For example: Why would you assume (if Azamt is correct) that the good citizens of Kafr al-Dawwar would just drop the kafr in their place name if the conditions of existence changed? Would we remove "New" from New York City because the city is no longer new? You can not support your argument using a word used in a place name!

Your argument using "Kafr al-Dawwar" is still a real stretch and getting longer. Better that you argue within your expertise or you will lessen your overall position.

P.S. Guess what - I'm a non-Muslim geoprofiler in Washington DC

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".