--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
> --- "Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>"
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> > --- In email@example.com, george knysh
> > <gknysh@...> wrote:
> > > GK: Quite. That was the point of my question.
> > > Would it imply something like "what a sight!!"?
> > Not really. Gk. <drako:n> can be interpreted as 'one
> > characterised by
> > staring' (cf. <drakos> n. 'eye'), presumably a
> > creature with evil
> > eyes that hurt or kill, like a cockatrice's.
> > Piotr
> > *****GK: Yes, a cockatrice (from 'crocodile' BTW?).
> And also a "basilisk" (whose breath or look kills).
> But then if the really important thing about a dragon
> (for the Greeks) is its stare should we conclude that
> the fire-breathing element comes later? I don't really
> know much about dragons. The popular notion today
> (I've just seen the British DVD "Reign of Fire") is
> that they are [imagined of course] flying lizard-like
> creatures who incinerate big time. But if that is what
> they were from the start (for the Greeks at least) why
> would they have been called 'dragons' rather than
> 'fire-breathers' or the like?*****
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.