• TabbsTheBat@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    5 days ago

    They’re referring to proto-indo-european im pretty sure, and the similarity of the origin word for name to the sound no-men/no-man, this goes into the sovereign citizen thing that they were talking about earlier than a name is an assignment of office, so a name isn’t a man aka isn’t you

    And that feeds into their conspiracy theory that the name given to you is actually someone else’s so if you refuse your name you become a sovereign citizen, and don’t need to follow certain laws as they apply to your name not you as an individual

    • hakase@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      The ridiculous part, of course, being that Modern English isn’t special, that “no man” didn’t mean anything 6,000 years ago when PIE was spoken, and that its contemporary equivalent, smth. like “*ne dʰǵʰemṓn” doesn’t mean anything in Modern English.

      Also, the actual reconstructed form of “name”, *h₃néh₃mn̥, looks a lot less like “no-man” than they seem to think.

      • TabbsTheBat@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Ye it’s closer to latin than PIE :3… of course given how they type, and their thoughts on word relation, them not knowing the word doesn’t seem that surprising lol