Hi there!.. I'm just curious by your recent entry in the Philology introduction. "The commonality, not the origin or age, of any studied languages, is important, thought those factors are important."... Could you add maybe one more line to define what you mean by 'commonality'? Do you mean: commonality of academic opinion? agreed upon terms of what the a particualr word might mean in a historical context? And I'm guessing that the factors you indicate that are important are the origin and age of any given word. I really cant quite see what you might think was insulting about the introduction... (I didnt write it by the way)... I think the point of the intro was to define where the word 'philology' came from... In latin it means 'grammatica'... Greek? I recall that 'philo' means love, and 'logo' ... well i dont know... But the origin of the word i imagine can have a number of sources... That is what makes words interesting and vibrant to me. I hope you can help clarify my question. I just think your entry could open a whole other line of questioning about the nature of philology. It is why i entered the concept that Nietzsche was a radical philologist... Anyway, some food for thought... User talk:Drakonicon