Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
Copyright (C) HIX
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 Hungarian born, (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
2 Re: Hungarian Diminuitives (mind)  7 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: Hungarian Diminuitives (mind)  20 sor     (cikkei)
4 Re: Magyars, Sumerians, and Uygurs (mind)  118 sor     (cikkei)
5 Re: Magyars, Sumerians, and Uygurs (mind)  25 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: Magyars, Sumerians, and Uygurs (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: WWI (mind)  13 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: WWI (mind)  121 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: Hi (mind)  45 sor     (cikkei)
10 Re: Hayek, Keynes (mind)  48 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: The burden's on Durant (mind)  97 sor     (cikkei)
12 Re: HUNGARY Digest - 23 Feb 1996 to 24 Feb 1996 (mind)  39 sor     (cikkei)

+ - Hungarian born, (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Hungarian born, Canadian businessman-accountant   will travel to Budapest
during the summer,1996 for three weeks.

   Will take on assignments to look for business opportunities,  do
investment and business evaluations and audits.

Robert Gelb, Robert Gelb and Associates Inc.
12 Bradenton Drive,Willowdale,Ontario M2H 1Y5, Canada
(905)940-2380, (905)946-1734 FAX
- Investment Specialists
- Business Plan Preparations and Evaluations,                           -
Business Management and Financial Consulting
- Mergers and acquisitions
+ - Re: Hungarian Diminuitives (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I think the point is, that you may call yourself
what you like, but to call other people
their "petnames" you have to be a childhood
acquaintence/good friend or out to insult...  Permission
is necessary in most cases.

Eva Durant
+ - Re: Hungarian Diminuitives (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

SorG Farkas wrote:
> Hungarian is a much more formal language and culture than the American  one.

Isn4t it too much to try to label the language and the culture together
as "formal"? I mean, we are not at a shooting championship. While I
would heartily concur with qualifying the culture as somewhat inflexible
I would not consider the freedom, for example, of throwing words in a
sentence almost any way you like as a sign of formality.

> Szia to you too (I think this originates from the English "see you"),

Well, I4ve heard about two other theories. One of them says that it
evolved from the "servus" while the more credible one maintains it to be
an import from gipsy slang.


+ - Re: Magyars, Sumerians, and Uygurs (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Sam;

Good reply, but here's some additional food for thought.

At 01:26 PM 2/18/96 -0500, you wrote:
>In article >, "Johanne L. Tournier"
> writes:
>>3) Perhaps the theory of the Sumerian-Magyar kinship is a crock, but
>>apparently there is a pretty definite linguistic connection. It seems to
>>that if there is a connection, it can only be because the two languages
>>descended from the same root, or the peoples lived in close proximity to
>>another for a considerable period of time. Perhaps the Magyars migrated
>>through Sumerian lands, or perhaps they lived close together in Central
>>and then diverged.
>For what it's worth, I looked up Sumerian in my copy of Merrit Ruhlen's "A
>Guide to the World's Languages: Vol. 1, Classifications" (1991) and he has
>it listed as a language isolate along with Basque, Burushaski and a
>smattering of other languages.

What's Ruhlen's basis for his claims?  How old are _his_ sources?  Some
authors just keep citing the same old stuff, in lots of fields, without
updates or any new materials.  I'm sure if you think about it, you can
remember many un-updated textbooks, encyclopedias (or parts), or modern
"popularizations," for many subjects.

 Given Ruhlen's academic orientation in
>favor of nostraticist linguistic classifications, it seems to me he would
>have identified a relationship between Finno-Ugric and Sumerian if he
>thought one existed.

Again, however, upon what is he basing his thoughts--old material or new.
Has he checked out the proceedings of the Society of Sumerologists at the
Sorbonne in 1975, for instance?
>I also leafed through my copy of Bjorn Collinder's "An Introduction to the
>Uralic Languages" (1965). Collinder examines possible ties between Uralic
>languages and Yukaghir, a Siberian isolate, the Indo-European family of
>languages and the Altaic family of languages. He also notes in a
>concluding paragraph that Uralic shares some similarities with the
>Chukchean languages of the Soviet Far Eastern Pacific coast and Eskimoan.
>No mention of Sumerian. Uyghur would fall under the Altaic language family
>under the classification scheme currently used by most scholars of
>comparative linguistics. By the bye, the concept of linguistic ties
>between members of what is now called the Uralic family of languages
>predates the discovery of the Indo-European languages. The classification
>argument currently raging among most professional linguists is what
>position within Uralic the Samoyed languages have, not whether Hungarian
>is a member or not.

Mr. Collinder's material is dated--1965.  The work's I'm most familiar with
are 1975 and post 1991.  (Even Ruhlen's book is older than my newer sources,
even had he been familiar with the Sorbonne's conclusions.)

 On the whole, Peter Hidas is the only one to offer
>competent testimony in this case so far, your honor. Footnotes do not a
>valid argument make, at least on their own.

No mere footnote, here, Sam, but an entire book, of 302 pages:  Here goes,
the third or is it the fourth repeat for this group.  Please note I'm
capitalizing everything for easier reading, since it keeps being overlooked:



The book was submitted in 3 segments to the Society of Sumerologists 1971-1973.

In the epilogue (pg. 263), the principal author notes:

"Thus we succeeded in proving that the Sumerian language did not die out but
in fact, did survive in the scattered Hungarian language remains in the
Latin Chronicles Literature of the 10-12th centuries A.D."

This _book_ also has a large chapter on archeological connections, also.

Noam Chomsky's two articles didnt' appear until after 1991--1992 and 93, if
I recall correctly.  Unfortunately my husband's work on the computer and
some additional havoc in the garage is blocking too many of my magazines
with too much stuff that's heavier than what I can yet lift.

>The political motivation for claiming Hungarian as a descendant of
>Sumerian is pretty easy to suss out. It creates a brilliant new claim as
>the cultural survivor of one of the world's oldest civilizations instead
>of being a Johnnie-come-lately from the steppe north of the Black Sea. It
>also trumps those snooty Romanians and their claims as descendants of the

Not to mention the Jews as the "only chosen people of God" who ought to be
protected by everyone, even from their own follies--if either the ridiculous
idea of anyone's ought to be able to be trumping anyone--or the equally idea
of any "specially-chosen" people existing at all should be considered by anyone

However, I wouldn't recommend a discussion about any of this--pro or
con--with Buchanan or a large segment of the religious right, conservatives,
or whatever, lately.  He also got over 25% of the California vote, recently
also...  I hate to say it, but unless some other candidate gets his act
together, soon, we may all well be looking at President Buchanan soon--and
won't be laughing as we might wish now...  We're taking him deadly seriously
out here, and are darned worried about stopping him--and the related
nonsense.  It's worse than originally thought.

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: Magyars, Sumerians, and Uygurs (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 3:45 PM 2/26/96, Tony and Celia Becker wrote:
>Dear Sam;
>Good reply, but here's some additional food for thought.

>"Thus we succeeded in proving that the Sumerian language did not die out but
>in fact, did survive in the scattered Hungarian language remains in the
>Latin Chronicles Literature of the 10-12th centuries A.D."

No Hungarian document survived from these centuries. Hungarian language
remains of the following centuries are Hungarian language fregments and not
Sumerian. Their grammatical structure is Finno-Ugric and so is their
>Not to mention the Jews as the "only chosen people of God" who ought to be
>protected by everyone, even from their own follies--if either the ridiculous
>idea of anyone's ought to be able to be trumping anyone--or the equally idea
>of any "specially-chosen" people existing at all should be considered by

Now you are in strange company Cecilia, the company of those emigre
Hungarians who swear on the Sumerian connection.

Peter I. Hidas, Montreal

+ - Re: Magyars, Sumerians, and Uygurs (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I  am sorry but  I only saw this in a reply:

>>The political motivation for claiming Hungarian as a descendant of
>>Sumerian is pretty easy to suss out. It creates a brilliant new claim as
>>the cultural survivor of one of the world's oldest civilizations instead
>>of being a Johnnie-come-lately from the steppe north of the Black Sea. It
>>also trumps those snooty Romanians and their claims as descendants of the

As far as I know, no one disputes the Romanians' claims of being the
descendants of the Romans (as a matter of fact the Romanian language is very
close to Latin and the territory was occupied by the Romans). What is being
disputed by some is the Dac descendence.

Gabor D. Farkas
+ - Re: WWI (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Janos;

At 08:13 PM 2/18/96 -0500, you wrote:

>You see Sam, that is a sad truth. This means that the propaganda worked
>very well.

Thank you, very very much!  I whole-heartedly agree.

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: WWI (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Sam;
Pretty good, but just a couple of thoughts you might consider.

At 07:34 AM 2/19/96 -0500, you wrote:
>In article >,
>Janos Zsargo > writes:
>> 'we are about to
>>enter the war on the side of the triple antante because we think it is
>>more benifitiuos than on the side of Germany'(USA). I was talking about
>>who sent the soldiers to the battlefield. I am not so sure they were
>>about such ideas like 'western civilization' when they decided about the
>Undoubtedly, given the conduct of some of the Allies during the Versailles
>Treaty talks, it's easy to think the most cynical worst of their
>leadership. In doing this, you do a grave disservice to the American
>people and to President Wilson in particular. Much as Trianon broke the
>dream of an independent greater Hungary, Versailles broke Wilson's dream
>of a comprehensive peace in Europe.

Good, very good.  However, please remember the tenets of Trianon didn't just
happen.  French, British, and Italian people wrote them and insisted upon them.

You are not so sure about the motives
>of the American leadership because it's a lot easier to blame a faceless
>international conspiracy for some of the hard knocks Hungary has received
>in this century than it is to accept that simple bad luck -- the country's
>geographical proximity to a belligerent, expansionist Germany in two world
>wars -- and repeated failures in statesmanship -- allowing Hungary to be
>drawn into two world wars as a client of Germany -- led to the
>fragmentation of a greater Hungary.

What about an equally belligerent and expansionist Russia on the other side?
My grandparents used to refer to the situation as "being caught between
Satan and Beelzebub."
>The Magyar minorities living in adjacent states are not a result of
>American imperialists somehow stepping in to keep the poor Hungarians
>down. They are a direct result of the failure of Hungary's political
>leadership for most of this century to articulate and implement a
>rational, realistic foreign policy.

Try this one:  "the situation of the Latin American peoples is not a result
of American imperialists somehow stepping in to keep the peones down.  It is
the direct result of the failure of the Latin Americans' political
leadership for most of this century (and last) to articulate and implement
rational, realistic policies."  Or try, "the situation of the peoples in the
Indian subcontinent vis-a-vis the British, or the situation in Southeast
Asia vis-a-vis the French, Dutch and British, or the situation in Africa
vis-a-vis the French, Belgian, Portuguese, and English.

An old college textbook of mine, _Intervention in Latin America_ edited by
C. Neale Ronning, 1970, Alfred Knopf Publishers, New York, listed in the
beginning a "chronology" prepared by the U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Foreign Affairs of over 100 armed force interventions sponsored
by the U.S. government in Latin America between just 1798 and 1945.  This
says nothing about the known clandestine operations, such as Guatemala in
1954 that also toppled or otherwise influenced governments to become as they
are.  In 1973, the U.S. Navy helped topple Allende, and the Nixon government
looked away when even several young Americans were killed by the Pinochet
forces--tortured and shot while unarmed and unresisting in a soccer stadium.

Finally, for what it is worth, I do believe my late grandparents when they
say they did know who betrayed them and the Hungarian, Austrian and Croatian
reformers--and caused those who survived the firebombings, ambushes, and
various assasination attempts to flee Austria-Hungary.  It was those they
admired most, whom they considered their best foreign friends, whose
government they thought a new Austria-Hungary should emulate--and whom they
even lauded in numerous writings that still exist.  I found one set at
Stanford university.  My grandfather spent a year tracking down his
betrayers, and enlisted the help of several others.  They traced them to
England...  But the English were not alone.

In 1990, the French vice-consul of San Francisco, Jacques Coquillat
confirmed, in writing, a discovery made in France, in 1988, by the Mitterand
government and because of which the French government did indeed make a
formal, public apology to both the governments of Austria and Hungary in
1989 for "wrongfully blaming them for starting World War I."  The discovery,
in an old locked desk or safe, during a building renovation, was of French
government documents that had been hidden during World War I.  Included in
the stack were: "a telegram clearly indicating that French government
officials had helped arrange for--and paid for--the assasination of Archduke
Ferdinand," and other items indicating they had been involved in other
assasinations, and "telegrams from the French government urging the Triple
Entente forces to mobilize first--and that this fact would be concealed--and
confirmation telegrams indicating that this did happen."  "The Russian
forces  (for instance) mobilized a full 24 hours before Franz Josef sent his
own first order out."

Sam, you like to think our American culture is very similar to that of our
mostly West European ancestry.  Is it not argueable, then, that our mid-20th
century leaders were/are no different in their attitudes and behaviors than
their British and French relations?  When we know, how much the U.S. has
influenced Latin America, and how much Africa and Asia have been influenced
by the machinations of French, British, Dutch, etc., why should we believe
that East Central Europe would be somehow spared what the great powers or
really the great leaders within them were so willing to do to anyone else
they considered weak--or able to be weakened?  Do you really think what the
U.S. did in Guatemala and Chile was without precedent elsewhere?

Absolute power corrupts absolutely--and until we get enough checks and
balances in place at every level--including at the international, as long as
we allow some to hold much greater power and privilege than others, we will
continue to have abuses.  To quote an old Peter, Paul and Mary song:

"we are free now, we can hate now,
we can kill now, now we can end the world.
we're not guilty, He was crazy--and
it's been going on for 10,000 years!"

"take your place on the great Mandella
as it moves through your brief moment of time.
Win or lose now; you must choose now,
and if you lose, you're only losing your life..."

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: Hi (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear George;

At 11:31 AM 2/19/96 +1000, you wrote:
>Cecilia Fa'bos-Becker wrote:
>> Sorry, but from what I've heard from a lot of people whom I trust, I think
>> I'll stick to visiting Hungary this year, and not add Poland just yet.
>I think that this is a bit of a logical jump after a perfectly reasonable
>comparison of the economic development records of Hungary and Poland.
>Poland has plenty of interesting sights and very nice people.  If you
>haven't been there yet, I would strongly recommend it.
Yes, well so does China, and Russia.  However the last two times my father
and friends visited China, virtually everyone on the trip (more than 100 the
first time and 300 the second time) ended up with serious respiratory
illnesses--some in the hospital.  To quote the doctor looking at my father
and step-mother's lungs: "the last time I saw lungs burnt this bad, it was
the result of a chemical factory accident."  Assuming the acid rain, smog,
fog, etc. doesn't destroy all that is lovely in China in the next 20 years,
and if the Chinese ever (and I do think this is possible) reduce air
pollution, then I will visit the monuments and other lovely sites still
left.  I do believe they'll be around for awhile longer.

Regarding Russia, my Russian American businessmen friends, including one who
has helped Bechtel to a few contracts to provide better infrastructure for
Russians, all travel around with two or three cars filled with bodyguards
and spare car parts.  I also believe that someday crime and bureacratic
chaos will subside in Russia and I will be able to visit the lovely sites
there, also without having to hire about a dozen bodyguards and pay a small
fortune in spare car parts.

I also believe it is possible that Miami will again someday be a nice
resort, and Cancun will no longer be all but swimming in and breathing raw

It's just that with so many other places that are just as lovely, and less
hazardous to one's health or pocket book, why should I visit the more
hazardous ones right now?


Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: Hayek, Keynes (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Joe;

At 09:29 AM 2/19/96 -0500, you wrote:

>At 03:23 AM 2/19/96 -0500, Andra1s Kornai wrote:
>>> Felado :  [Canada]
>>> Gabor, you are no Hayekist (or Hayekite) if you see social programmes as
>>> being desireable.  Hayekists have no tolerance for any social programme.
>>Where did you get this? Even hard-liners like Milton Friedman see *some*
>>social programs as desirable.
>Interesting that you put quotation marks around "some" and not around
>"social programs".
>(I wish Hungarian-Americans would set a good example for Hungarians who are
>using this list to improve their English language skills, by using the
>correct English spelling of words.  In English, "program" is spelled
>"programme", "color" is spelled "colour", etc..)

Joe, as a history major who asked about this long ago (too long ago), I
learned that there weren't consistent rules of spelling until after the
American revolution.  After that event, we Americans made a set of rules for
our chosen version of the English language and the British chose theirs.  If
one is in England, then by all means use the English spelling if that makes
you--and your hosts--comfortable.  If in the U.S., use the American, please.
In our university classes you will often get docked points if you use the
British-English.  I know that for a fact, because my primary school did try
to use the British English, and I occasionally still "slipped" and used it
at the American universities--and did get docked points for so doing.

While I think the British English is more elegant, and I do appreciate such
niceties as the use of "theatre" to connote the classical in-person stage
dramatics, and "theater" to connote the cinema, it is simpler and
faster--more efficient--to write American English.  Finally, since I'm
writing in the U.S., I expect you will excuse me if I'm loyal to my mother's
revolutionary American ancestors (and ancestresses) and use American English.


Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker

P.S. Let me guess; your favorite operetta is "My Fair Lady" and your
favorite song is "Why can't the English speak English?" ;-)

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: The burden's on Durant (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Doug;

At 12:21 PM 2/19/96 -0800, you wrote:
>Joe Szalai wrote:
>> At 12:39 PM 2/18/96 -0500, Farkas D. Gabor wrote:
>> >That is not true. Americans are either covered by priovate insurance or if
>> >they are too poor for that, there are government programs that cover them
>> >(Medicaid).
>I must correct Mr. Gabor in his assertion about health care in the U.
>S.  The fact is that there is a great percentage of people in the
>Unites States that do not have health car.

True.  Very good.

Often you hear them being
>called the "working poor", etc.Medicaid/Medicair are only available to
>those on welfare, who are retired and of age to collect Social
>Security, or are disabled and collecting Social Security.  There are
>millions of citizens who work in jobs that do not have health benefits
>and are therefore without any health insurance.  These people, when in
>need of health care, often resort to the emergency room at hospitals,
>often when a medical condition has progressed to a point where more
>expensive attention is needed.  This because those without health care
>often try to "tough it out" hoping they will get better.
>These people receive care at the hospital, but the cost is passed on
>to those who have insurance or can pay out of pocket.  This is one of
>the reasons for high health care costs in America, but not the only

Also true.  Incidentally an even greater cost is due to the lack of
computerization of anything but billing records.  Almost no medical
histories are computerized, and few handwritten ones are transferred.
Because of the lack of history, the first appointment with a new doctor, for
nearly all patients is nothing more than a "get acquainted" visit involving
filling out forms answering to the best of one's memory about one's previous
health.  Then there is an interview with the doctor describing symptoms.
This is a duplicate of the phone interview conducted by a nurse-receptionist
when one first calls to make an appointment--which itself is usually a
minimum of two days after the call the for the appointment.  However the
information of the phone interview is seldom, if ever relayed to the doctor.
Then any tests needing to be done, are done _after_ the first appointment,
at labs separate from the doctor's office where they sit until enough
people's tests can be processed together.  It is then from 3 days to a week
later--after the test results have been returned to the doctor before the
first pill or shot is prescribed.  From the time a person feels ill, to the
time he or she actually begins to receive treatment is usually over a week,
and often much, much  more.  Delayed and erroneous diagnoses are the rule,
not the exception, and illnesses often worsen during the delays and errors,
requiring more appointments and longer and more extensive treatment.  It is
this very inefficient and unsafe process that is responsible for the
greatest costs.

>When Clinton came to office, one of his campaign platforms was to
>institute universal health care coverage for all Americans.  This was
>defeated, in large part due to large insurance providers (and from the
>Republican congressmen who were the recipients of their largess at
>election time) who saw the end of the obscene profits that they were
>getting from the present system.

Sorry, but there was a powerful _Democratic_ party majority well-entrenched
when Clinton's health care proposals were _first_ defeated, and just as many
of the big honchos in that party were enjoying Insurance company and AMA
largesse as the Republicans.  In fact, several books I obtained on the
subject of PAC's while in DC in 92 and 93, showed the Democrats--precisely
because they were both incumbents and in charge of the Congressional
committees--receiving more than the Republicans.

One of those books was/is _The Almanac of Federal PAC's: 1992-93_ edited by
Edward Zuckerman, Amward Publications Inc., Washington DC, 1992.
ISSN: 0886-2567  ISBN: 0-939676-09-5.

 Some states, Hawaii and Oregon to
>name two, have instituted their own type of universal coverage to
>grant at least basic coverage to those in need.
>Many people are frightened that completely socialized medicine would
>mean poor quality medicine. This has been the reality in many
>countries where medicine was centrally managed by the same people who
>did such a wonderful job with food production. Still, several have
>done a credible job of providing decent care, so I see this as showing
>that it CAN be done.

Yes, decent care can be provided, but decent care with reasonable costs and
a non-deficit ridden government?  I'm not so sure about that.  Is there
someone in this group from a state or nation that does have this combination
and would like to tell us how it can be done?  Some positive
information/experience, please?  No guessing or "I thinking."

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
San Jose, CA, USA

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: HUNGARY Digest - 23 Feb 1996 to 24 Feb 1996 (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Sun, 25 Feb 1996, Amos J.Danube wrote:

> Gabor D. Farkas
> ------------------------------
> Date:    Sat, 24 Feb 1996 16:06:38 -0500
> From:    "Amos J. Danube" >
> Subject: Hungarian diminutives -

>        If your last name means "Toronyo"r" in Hungarian, Johanne,
>     than your assumption is correct.  However,  there is  no such
>     Hungarian first name as Johanna,  as I can recall.  This name
>     is an imported one in Hungary and still considered foreign. I
>     can't think of any  Hungarian name presently  that would come
>     close to Johanne. Sorry!

According to my calander (which includes name days) there is a
(apparently not very common) name Johanna - whose name day is March 28.
My name is translated Jakab, another uncommon name, and people just
call me Dzsim (Jim).


\_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_

James D. Doepp
Department of Economic Theory
University of Miskolc

I must find a truth that is true
for me... the idea for which I
can live or die.
-Soren Kierkegaard

\_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_