Join Date: May 2006
Actually ESTCRH, I don't see two completely different objects when I look at the two daggers that share the same name, I see two daggers that are the same, one of which has a blade variation.
However, I must admit, my weapons study is based in anthropology, sociology and language study, I can no longer regard myself as a true collector of weapons, rather I collect information on one particular type of weapon.
So when I see your "kard", or your "karud" I do not ask what collectors in New York, London or Patagonia call this dagger, I ask what the people who own the culture that generated this weapon call it.
It appears that these people had only one name for both varieties of the dagger.
This brings us back to common English usage. The original word has generated two spellings for the same word and object, and starting from the same root. As a general rule, the way the English language--- and many other languages --- handles this matter, when a variation in the object occurs, is to use a descriptor, an adjective, to differentiate one from the other.
So my question then is whether this is an English Language Forum, or whether we have our own jargon?
Perhaps we really do have our own jargon, as demonstrated by previous reference to the "kris/keris" matter. Now that was handled by the taking of an administrative decision. Possibly if it can be demonstrated that the bulk of people who are members of this Forum want two different words to describe two varieties of the same dagger, then a punitive system could be put in place to ensure that the correct jargon was used at all times.
Or maybe the matter is of such vital importance that a couple of new sub-forums could be set up, one for discussion of kards, one for discussion of karuds.
But on second thought, maybe that would not be such a good idea, because then all those troublesome Keris People might want all manner of sub-forums to discuss the vast variety to be found in keris forms.Straight blades in one forum, 3 wave blades in another, 5 wave blades in another, a separate forum for keris sajen, another for keris budo. The possibilities are endless.
A workable alternative for the kards and karuds would be to simply stick with the practices that govern common English usage.
Language is a tool that is used to vocalise thought.
Script is a tool that is used to present the vocalisation of thought in a graphic form.
Where two objects are thought of in the same way by the culture that owns those objects, the transliteration of the name shared by those objects should ideally remain true to the graphic representation of the original thought.
Where transliteration of one graphic representation to a different graphic representation results in more than one graphic representation of the original script, then it can be recognised that those additional graphic representations are equally true to the original for the new users of that word.
Thus, kard = karud, and if there is a variation in form of the object that is the owner of the name, it should be identified by use of an adjective together with the noun.
I apologise for the long winded comment. I find this subject fascinating, and it appears that for English Language professionals it is no less fascinating. What I have given above is a precis of a couple of hours discussion with an English Language academic