Philosophical Vegan Forum

The term 'Croatia' has a wide and varied etymology, and by directing the meaning of the term, I will be able to conclusively prove once and for all that the supposed country of "Croatia" is nothing more than a mere myth.

The first meaning of the ethnonym listed on Wikipedia is 'tree' or 'sword.' Have you ever seen a tree holding a sword? I haven't. Those don't exist in nature. Hence, Croatia doesn't exist.

Also it can mean 'Highlander' but 'Highlander' was just a movie. More proof that Croatia can't be real.

More evidence is that I've never met anyone from Croatia in real life, and I think most people haven't. Those who say they have are either lying or have been lied to by someone who likely came from Italian or Greek descent. Also, most people in the US and Canada don't even know what Croatia is. If Croatia were real, then more people would know about it, right?

Most supposed Croatians are also very dumb. My dad knew someone who said he was from Croatia, and he was too stupid to even repair my basement stairs properly! The term 'Croat' is a homonym for 'Crote' which means either clod (dumb person) or dung.
https://www.wordgamedictionary.com/dict ... 20a%20noun

If Croatia were real, why would they name themselves this? Is it not self defeating? Also why would a country be made of stupid people?

Remember all of this the next time someone tells you they're from Croatia. Anything that may hint that Croatia exists, such as maps, people saying they're from the country, history books and other historical records, or papers and articles written about the subject should be automatically discarded as pure fiction. You have just read irrefutable proof that Croatia can not exist.

Red wrote:The term 'Croatia' has a wide and varied etymology, and by directing the meaning of the term, I will be able to conclusively prove once and for all that the supposed country of "Croatia" is nothing more than a mere myth.

Well, many people here will agree that Croatia that tens of thousands of young men died for in the war 25 years ago is a myth.

Red wrote:The first meaning of the ethnonym listed on Wikipedia is 'tree' or 'sword.' Have you ever seen a tree holding a sword? I haven't. Those don't exist in nature. Hence, Croatia doesn't exist.

Also it can mean 'Highlander' but 'Highlander' was just a movie. More proof that Croatia can't be real.

I am not sure what you mean exactly. Yes, almost every toponymastic scholar studying Croatia has felt compelled to suggest the etymology of Croatia, and there is no consensus about it. Maybe it's a good thing that they all suggested different etymologies, rather than openly admitting they have no idea where that name comes from, because it makes it even more obvious that linguistics today can't convincingly explain that name.
This incentive to explain important toponyms, created by non-linguists, is, in my opinion, significantly slowing the linguistics down. What the name Croatia means is irrelevant to what toponyms inside Croatia mean. The name Croatia most likely doesn't come from any language that has contributed to the toponymy in Croatia. That name is first mentioned in the 2st century as a name of some (perhaps Scythian) tribe on the Tanais Tablets, far away from modern-day Croatia.
Linguistics should focus not on providing etymologies for important (because of the current political situation) names, but on providing as many grounded etymologies. For instance, the claim that the river names Karašica (appearing two times in Croatia), Krka, Korana, Krapina and Krbava are related is a pretty grounded claim, since the p-value of that pattern is (according to my calculations) around 1/10'000.
There are common words with unclear etymology in just about any language. Where does the English word are (as in they are) come from? It's not obvious. Where does the English word they come from? Maybe it was borrowed from Old Norse, but that sounds quite a bit implausible. Where does the Croatian word for fire, vatra, come from? Probably from Illyrian and related to the Albanian word "vater" meaning "fireplace", but it's far from clear. Where does the Croatian word for lock, brava, come from? Perhaps from Illyrian.

Red wrote:Also, most people in the US and Canada don't even know what Croatia is. If Croatia were real, then more people would know about it, right?

The people in the US don't tend to know much about geography. So much so that a significant portion of the population can't even show their home country on the world map.

Red wrote:Most supposed Croatians are also very dumb.

Most people in every country are not very smart.

Red wrote:If Croatia were real, why would they name themselves this?

The name "Croatia" is millennia older than that word. Also, in Croatia, the name "Croatia" is pronounced "Hrvatska" (HUHR-vahts-kah), not remotely similar. And even if it does share the same etymology (maybe indeed Croatia comes from the Indo-European root meaning crust, who knows), that would be like wondering why would somebody call their country Nigeria, if negro is an offensive term for people with darker skin. That word happened to have that meaning in English, it meant something completely different originally.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 am Well, many people here will agree that Croatia that tens of thousands of young men died for in the war 25 years ago is a myth.

Well obviously nothing that was stated to be in Croatia ever happened. It's either just trolls or historical revisionists.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 am

Red wrote:The first meaning of the ethnonym listed on Wikipedia is 'tree' or 'sword.' Have you ever seen a tree holding a sword? I haven't. Those don't exist in nature. Hence, Croatia doesn't exist.

Also it can mean 'Highlander' but 'Highlander' was just a movie. More proof that Croatia can't be real.

I am not sure what you mean exactly.

It's pretty clear what I mean. These are the first meanings of the term listed on Wikipedia, so that must mean they are the right ones. I don't really see any other way around this.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 am Yes, almost every toponymastic scholar studying Croatia has felt compelled to suggest the etymology of Croatia, and there is no consensus about it.

Why should I trust the consensus if there were one?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amMaybe it's a good thing that they all suggested different etymologies, rather than openly admitting they have no idea where that name comes from, because it makes it even more obvious that linguistics today can't convincingly explain that name.

Everything you said here is just wrong. It's pretty clear what many experts say it means, I even told you.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amThis incentive to explain important toponyms, created by non-linguists, is, in my opinion, significantly slowing the linguistics down.

How do you know it wasn't created by linguists?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 am What the name Croatia means is irrelevant to what toponyms inside Croatia mean.

No, it isn't. It has everything to do with it. You're just in on the conspiracy to prove that Croatia exists, which is akin to advocating for square-circlism. It just isn't possible no matter how you present it.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 am The name Croatia most likely doesn't come from any language that has contributed to the toponymy in Croatia. That name is first mentioned in the 2st century as a name of some (perhaps Scythian) tribe on the Tanais Tablets, far away from modern-day Croatia.

Wrong, again.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amLinguistics should focus not on providing etymologies for important (because of the current political situation) names, but on providing as many grounded etymologies. For instance, the claim that the river names Karašica (appearing two times in Croatia), Krka, Korana, Krapina and Krbava are related is a pretty grounded claim, since the p-value of that pattern is (according to my calculations) around 1/10'000.

But that doesn't matter since they do focus on the important names.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amThere are common words with unclear etymology in just about any language. Where does the English word are (as in they are) come from? It's not obvious. Where does the English word they come from? Maybe it was borrowed from Old Norse, but that sounds quite a bit implausible. Where does the Croatian word for fire, vatra, come from? Probably from Illyrian and related to the Albanian word "vater" meaning "fireplace", but it's far from clear. Where does the Croatian word for lock, brava, come from? Perhaps from Illyrian.

But we know where the term Croatia comes from as I've already proved.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amThe people in the US don't tend to know much about geography. So much so that a significant portion of the population can't even show their home country on the world map.

That is incorrect, America is actually a big and notable country on a map with an iconic shape, so Americans and basically everybody abroad knows where the USA is, unlike Croatia (not that they'd be able to find it anyway since it doesn't exist).

Also, what about the popular game Plague Inc which gives a map of the world? Croatia isn't even listed as one of the countries but the USA is. Even more proof that Croatia doesn't exist.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amMost people in every country are not very smart.

But Croatians are VERY dumb, they have an average IQ of about 90 which experts say is roughly the estimate of nonexistence.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amThe name "Croatia" is millennia older than that word.

Irrelevant.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 am Also, in Croatia, the name "Croatia" is pronounced "Hrvatska" (HUHR-vahts-kah), not remotely similar.

Yeah, *in* Croatia, but we've already established that Croatia doesn't exist. Hence, your statement here is wrong by default.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amAnd even if it does share the same etymology (maybe indeed Croatia comes from the Indo-European root meaning crust, who knows),

Everyone knows, it's pretty common knowledge. Those who have heard of Croatia and believe that it's real automatically assume everyone from there is a Crote (aka Dung or unintelligent person).

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:02 amthat would be like wondering why would somebody call their country Nigeria, if negro is an offensive term for people with darker skin. That word happened to have that meaning in English, it meant something completely different originally.

Woah, that's just racist. Are you seriously trying to distract from the topic by spouting racism? Really?

@Red That's pretty compelling. Teo's response being so racist kind of invalidates it and adds more support to your claim, huh?
We'll have to await more evidence on this one. I wonder if Teo can provide any concrete evidence for the existence of Croatia.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:08 pm @Red That's pretty compelling. Teo's response being so racist kind of invalidates it and adds more support to your claim, huh?

I know! I can't believe he'd actually stoop that far just to prove something that everyone knows can't be true.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:08 pmWe'll have to await more evidence on this one. I wonder if Teo can provide any concrete evidence for the existence of Croatia.

Highly doubtful.

I'm actually 'bout to blow everyone's mind here:
The name 'Teo' can be a nickname for the name 'Theo' or 'Theodore.' 'Theo' means 'God' in Latin..
Does that mean Teo is God?

Red wrote:Well obviously nothing that was stated to be in Croatia ever happened. It's either just trolls or historical revisionists.

I didn't say I am certain there was a war in Croatia recently. But I think I can be reasonably certain at least one country named Croatia exists, I live in one. And I think you can come here if you want to without too many legal difficulties.

Red wrote:These are the first meanings of the term listed on Wikipedia, so that must mean they are the right ones.

Wikipedia is rather clear there is no consensus on what the name "Croatia" means.

Red wrote:Why should I trust the consensus if there were one?

Because you know nothing about it, and trusting the consensus is your best bet.

Red wrote:How do you know it wasn't created by linguists?

What exactly? The incentive to explain important toponyms? I think it wasn't created by linguists, since more serious linguists seem to focus on small toponyms more.

Red wrote:Wrong, again.

Are you saying Tanais Tablets were faked? By whom and why? Is there any serious scholar arguing for that?

Red wrote: But that doesn't matter since they do focus on the important names.

I wouldn't exactly say they focus on important names, it's just that they feel compelled to write something (be it highly implausible) about them. Valentin Putanec wrote an entire paper about meanings of the names Komiža and Premuda, arguably not very well-known names.

Red wrote:But we know where the term Croatia comes from as I've already proved.

If anything is obvious about this, it's that scholars don't agree where the name Croatia comes from.

Red wrote:America is actually a big and notable country on a map with an iconic shape, so Americans and basically everybody abroad knows where the USA is

Most Americans do know that. But around one fifth doesn't: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index. ... world-map/

Red wrote: what about the popular game Plague Inc which gives a map of the world

My guess is that it has data from before mid-1990s, when the US recognized Croatia as an independent country.

Red wrote: they have an average IQ of about 90

As far as I understand it, no serious psychologist subscribes to the idea that intelligence varies significantly between countries, and such a claim is considered racist.

Red wrote:Irrelevant.

How is it irrelevant? If you are claiming something was named after something else, then the latter needs to have that name before the former.

Red wrote:Everyone knows, it's pretty common knowledge.

It really isn't, crote is not a common word, it's not even listed in many dictionaries.

Red wrote:Woah, that's just racist.

How is it racist? Are you joking?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pm I didn't say I am certain there was a war in Croatia recently.

There literally can't be because it doesn't exist. How are you unable to grasp this?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmBut I think I can be reasonably certain at least one country named
Croatia exists, I live in one. And I think you can come here if you want to without too many legal difficulties.

Why should I trust you on this? To me it just seems as though you're just trying to convince me of something as stupid as this.

By default I don't trust anyone who says they're from Croatia.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmWikipedia is rather clear there is no consensus on what the name "Croatia" means.

Doesn't matter, there are possible definitions for it and that's all that matters.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmBecause you know nothing about it, and trusting the consensus is your best bet.

Given how absurd your arguments are here, I'm pretty sure I know far more about the topic than you do.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmWhat exactly? The incentive to explain important toponyms? I think it wasn't created by linguists, since more serious linguists seem to focus on small toponyms more.

Doesn't matter what they spend more time on, what matters are the answers they give.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmAre you saying Tanais Tablets were faked? By whom and why? Is there any serious scholar arguing for that?

No one really talks about it since it's pretty obvious. It's kinda like why an evolutionary biologist wouldn't bother debating a creationist; It's just a waste of time.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmI wouldn't exactly say they focus on important names, it's just that they feel compelled to write something (be it highly implausible) about them. Valentin Putanec wrote an entire paperabout meanings of the names Komiža and Premuda, arguably not very well-known names.

Putanec was a well known con-artist who tried to prove the existence of Croatia. He's the linguistic equivalent of any creationist or flat earther.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmIf anything is obvious about this, it's that scholars don't agree where the name Croatia comes from.

Do you still not understand how you're wrong?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmMost Americans do know that. But around one fifth doesn't: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index. ... world-map/

That's your source? Some shitty obscure forum thread?
https://www.salon.com/2007/08/30/upton/

Where is 'Croatia' supposed to be on a Map anyway? Most people who have heard of it are thinking of Greece or Bosnia on a map when they try to point to it.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmMy guess is that it has data from before mid-1990s, when the US recognized Croatia as an independent country.

But Plague Inc. was made by Ndemic Creations which is based in the UK and the game was released in 2012.

Want more proof? Watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x88Z5txBc7w

Is Croatia mentioned there? No. I'm not sure what other evidence you want. It was made in 1993, 3 years after Croatia supposedly had it's independence recognized by the USA. Even in the updated version it's not included:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYfTKVfwdjU

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmAs far as I understand it, no serious psychologist subscribes to the idea that intelligence varies significantly between countries, and such a claim is considered racist.

Yeah, as far as you understand it. Doesn't change the fact that supposed Croatians are total Crotes.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmHow is it irrelevant? If you are claiming something was named after something else, then the latter needs to have that name before the former.

Do you have any idea what you're even talking about?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmIt really isn't, crote is not a common word, it's not even listed in many dictionaries.

Yeah because you don't use the term. It's pretty common in the US and other English speaking countries.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmHow is it racist? Are you joking?

Don't tell me you don't understand how that's racist...

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmHow is it racist? Are you joking?

Red wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:35 pmDon't tell me you don't understand how that's racist...

I'm on Theo's side for once. Please explain how that is racist, especially given the context, i.e. Theo's low IQ.

Jebus wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:56 pm

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:52 pmHow is it racist? Are you joking?

Red wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:35 pmDon't tell me you don't understand how that's racist...

I'm on Theo's side for once. Please explain how that is racist, especially given the context, i.e. Theo's low IQ.

Well it's obvious isn't it?

Jebus wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:56 pm I'm on Theo's side for once. Please explain how that is racist, especially given the context, i.e. Theo's low IQ.

If Teo has a high IQ he's a racist, if he has a low IQ he's innocent.
We should let Teo answer that one, is his IQ low or is he a racist?