Fall in love (phrase)
started by Seva 3 days agoReplies
denice _menace posted Re:Fall in love (phrase) on 3 days ago- Reply
- Report Abuse
In
the mystical tradition of love, without complications of sex etc. people never "fall" in love, these folks just love god in the Nike mode ( just do it).
English as such, has most of it's refined ideas drawn from french and latin; word husband has been more significant than lover; as far as I know , the saxon words for romance are all drawn from "Animal Husbandry" which was the main passion of saxons before Normans civilized them a little bit.
Love between a Roman soldier and a druid woman (early AD) in Opera called Norma is definitely about love but it is not clear that saxons are druids. Druids are closer to Gauls, Spanish , Irish if I remember correctly, very little of English history that I know.
Love is regarded as a FALL in Christian tradition, because Adam and Eve fell from a semi- heavenly state due to carnal interests associated with their love.
_____
I have not heard that one before...but, that is an interesting association with Adam and Eve in a different context (Woman was said to have been "made for a Man") so I assume that included satisfying carnal needs- since the "one flesh" is emphasized in Christianity:)
Perhaps "fallen/disgraced"...can be seen as "giving into temptation"...well, these are just different interpretations.
From the psychological perspective..."fallen" perhaps means "weak/vulnerable"...and that is okay..."ALL is fair and *inclusive in love"....
*Inclusive as in- a whole lot of contradictory emotions..of falling/rising over and over again..
Can't help but think about the King- Elvis and his song..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq-ZMVkJDJ0&feature=related
M
 |
||
Frequently Asked QuestionsWord Origins
The word love goes back to the very roots of the English language. Old English lufu is related to Old Frisian luve, Old High German luba, Gothic lubo. There is a cognate, lof, in early forms of the Scandinavian languages. The Indo-European root is also behind Latin lubet 'it is pleasing' and lubido 'desire'. The word is recorded from the earliest English writings in the 8th century. |
Printer Friendly Version
That is interesting...a whole discussion on "falling" in love:-)
Just reading all the comments...will post soon again!
M
In terestingly in Sanskrit love ("snih") is a special verb. The object of love is always mentioned in saptami (7th) vihakti which is used for "locational" purposes (in, on, within etc.). Every other object in a sentence is always in 2nd vibhakti, but not the object of love.
For example:
raamah seetaayaam snihyati (literally "Rama - in Seeta - loves") is the correct way of saying Rama loves Seeta.
By locational, I mean place. In Sanskrit each noun is terminated in 7 different ways based on what you want to do with it. When you want to show the location of a noun the 7th type of termination is used. For example, the following is the usual terminatons for noun like Seeta:
When Seeta is the subject -------------------------------- seetaa ---------------- 1st
When Seeta is the object ---------------------------------- seetaam --------------2nd
When Seeta is used as an instrument ---------------- seetayaa--------------3rd
For or to Seeta ------------------------------------------------ seetaayai ------------ 4th
By Seeta -------------------------------------------------------- seetaayaah --------- 5th
Of Seeta -------------------------------------------------------- seetaayaah --------- 6th (same as 5th)
In / on Seeta -------------------------------------------------- seetaayaam --------- 7th
Seeta addressed ------------------------------------------- hey seete ------------- not a vibhakti
One would expect to see "seetaam" when Seeta is the object in the sentence. But when the verb is "love" you must use the 7th termination "seetaayaam." When Seeta is the object and the verb is not "love" you must use the 2nd termination. For example Rama wants Seeta translates as "raamah seetaam icChati."
Unkil, in school I was taught that "Hey Seete" is an offshoot of the 1st vibhakti, known as Sambodhana Pratama Vibhakti. Should I ask for my money back??
Yeah, that's what I was taught as well. But I also remember hearing it's not a "true" vibhakti by itself in that it does not change with gender and number.
I don't want to mess with Seeta, so here are the different vachanas for sambodhana pratama vibhakti for Rama:
Hey Ramah, Hey Ramou, Hey Ramaah.
Can you start a 'Sanskrit for dummies" thread once in a while? I will have time after July to learn Sanskrit.
http://speaksanskrit.com/
4 years ago I started learning sanskrit at my local temple, but then I also enrolled in another school, so sanskrit learning was put on hold. I shall pick up my sanskrit lessons, after finishing my school in august. Thanks for the link.
http://speaksanskrit.org/index.shtml
if you know Hindi / Devanagari, then Sanskrit learning is particularly easy. Just remember one thing - Sanskrit requires a very systematic approach - it's like learning in a mathematics course (the topics are intertwined and there is a certain hierarchy in the way course should proceed).
By the same coin, if you know the English alphabet, then quantum mechanics should be a snap. Nahi?
PS: Actually it's more like Yahoo search sucks. You gotta switch.