There are 4 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Another Ozymandias
From: Sally Caves
1b. Re: Another Ozymandias
From: andrew
2a. Re: Second person/polite pronouns (fuit Re: Another Ozymandias)
From: Sally Caves
2b. Re: Second person/polite pronouns (fuit Re: Another Ozymandias)
From: caeruleancentaur
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Another Ozymandias
Posted by: "Sally Caves" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:33 pm (PDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 7/26/06, Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Lots of popular lyrics do that, where the music sort of makes up for it.
>
> Ah, well, if pop music does it, it must be OK. :)
I didn't say that, Mark. I was agreeing with you. It's a pop music
gimmick, and doesn't belong in "serious" poetry IMHO.
> There's at least one English-language version of Dante's _Inferno_
> that makes heavy use of slant rhyme. I mean, kudos for actually
> bothering to try and match the 121/232/343/ rhyme pattern of the
> original Italian, instead of simply declaring that it can't be done in
> English while staying true to the meaning. But when those rhymes are
> slanted, it kinda defeats the whole effort. All IMHO, of course.
Of course. I know of one terrific translation of Beowulf (Greenfield's)
that is in blank verse, his point being that it is useless to try to render
it in alliterative verse with four "beats" and a caesura without making it
clunky. I don't have Heaney's translation in front of me, but I think he
does it too.
>> Heh heh... too deliciously obscene to translate. :) I'm thinking of
>> something rather like it for a future relay.
>
> Okay. Fraga away, then. :)
Krespref. That's the imperative for "write." ;)
Sally
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Another Ozymandias
Posted by: "andrew" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:49 pm (PDT)
On Thursday 27 July 2006 00:54, Sally Caves wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Philip Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > On 7/26/06, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On 7/25/06, Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > Etonen yllefon
> >> > Amendorln mimmeslim nom;
> >> > Yry uon fraga. :( :(
> >>
> >> ... which means?
> >
> > To be
> > Or not to be
> > That is the question
> >
> > obviously; the "fraga" in the last line gives it away.
>
> LOL! I'll accept that.
>
> Bär
> oder nicht bär.
> Das ist hier die Frage.
>
> Written on a wall near the "bear pit" in Bern.
>
Would you mind parsing the Teonaht phrase. I keep thinking that the
repeated infinitive should be evident, but it doesn't say 'here I am'
to me.
- andrew.
--
Andrew Smith -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
http://hobbit.griffler.co.nz/homepage.html
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Second person/polite pronouns (fuit Re: Another Ozymandias)
Posted by: "Sally Caves" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:40 pm (PDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Benct Philip Jonsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Some languages of course have a whole different set of
> vocabulary to be used in formal/honorific situations,
> including how you refer to yourself in the presence of
> a 'honorable' person --
Right, and I think I gave you an example in Teonaht.
> yes, the language changes in the
> presence of such a person, even if s/he is not an inter-
> locutor, and often even when talking *about* them in
> their absence! The Sohlob languages (my conlang family)
> actually tends to this side of the scale. I guess
> things may get more and more complicated if I would
> write/translate texts involving such distinctions.
>> Another form of the honorific in Teonaht is to address the person by his
>> title, constantly: Does the Sir/Madam wish to examine another coat? May
>> I interest the Sir/Madam in an accompanying belt? etc. Have I offended
>> the Sir/Madam?
>
> Swedish, until some forty years ago, did that, but went
> one step further, using not only Sir/Madam, but the
> persons occupational title as a word of address.
Would a shopkeeper know that, though?
> I for instance would have been adressed as Kandidaten
> (i.e. the academic Candidate degree9 for most of
> my life. In fact _min Herre/Herrn_ or _Frun_ was used
> only with people so lowly as to not have any occupational
> tiles, although servants would address their employers
> with these titles, and _Frun_ of course was the correct
> address for a housewife, so there were proportionally
> more women addressed _Frun_ than there were men adressed
> _Herrn_ -- once you knew their occupation that is.
Interesting. Sounds like the "Sehr geerhter Herr Doktor Professor Wilhelm
Wolfgang."
Too cumbersome in T; everybody is Hmeo if you are being respectful. Although
maybe I'll adapt that for formal letters.
> One interresting aspect of this is that when the system
> eventually was abolished people started using the familiar
> second person singular pronoun _du_ to everyone. There
> had been some use of the second person plural _ni_
> with singular reference on the French model, but this
> had been associated with people who didn't wish to
> draw attention to their 'lowly' occupation, yet be
> formal towards one another, and so this usage was
> frowned upon by practitioners of the occupational
> title addressing system. FWIW the use of singular
> _ni_ has bcome in vogue in later years among younger
> people who want to affect social distance or
> 'uppity'. I and many with me frown on it as being
> stuck-up rather than polite. I usually answer such
> address in the first person plural, and AFAIK none
> of these pompous brats has understood what I was
> doing. Of course they don't know about the
> _pluralis majestatis_ any more than they know about
> the real stylistic value of the "V-forms" in Swedish.
>
> This said I have a real hard time not to perceive
> the use of polite forms in other languages as
> pompous...
Which in itself is a kind of reverse pomposity. It's still judgmental, and
raising the Du form to the "new" standard of correct speaking. When in
Germany I use Sie not out of pomposity but respect.
Sally
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Second person/polite pronouns (fuit Re: Another Ozymandias)
Posted by: "caeruleancentaur" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:21 pm (PDT)
>Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How about people's a-priori conlangs: are there any that
>have this (to me) weird syncretism of numbers in the second
>person pronouns -- apart of course from English- speaking
>conlangers' newbie relexes, or languages that simply don't
>distinguish number, of course. And what about honorific/
>polite second person pronouns?
Senjecan society is rather egalitarian, but there are a few ways to
express politness out of respect, not out of deference.
1) The subjunctive mood can be used for a command instead of the
imperative, e.g.,
tusë sêde = sit down! (Epenthetic vowel ë needed.)
tusë sêdo = Please sit down or Do sit down.
2) Titles or occupations can be used as the subject of the verb in
direct address. Since verbs are inflected only for mood, context
must give the meaning.
nááusââgus rêðom îîÿar = Does the sailor need a ride?
Context will tell us if the question is asked of the sailor or about
the sailor.
3) There are a few titles of respect:
aasnârïus (noble lord) non-noble to noble or noble to noble.
asâmas/asâpas (revered mother/father) younger to older.
cuuðsûnus/cuuðdûqus (esteemed son/daughter) older to younger.
musïârïus (my lord) anyone to a sovereign.
4)Speaking of pronouns, Senjecas has the "usual" three persons, two
numbers, but with a difference.
There are six classes of nouns in Senjecan, three of which refer to
living beings. Two of these (-us, -øs) refer to loquent beings.
When a human speaks of himself he says, "mus," addresses others
as "tus," etc.
But a mutant/aberrant loquent being (centaurs, satyrs, etc.) would
say "møs" and "tøs." (ø = /O/)
And, of course, a human would address a centaur as "tøs," and a
centaur would address a human as "tus."
Charlie
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
