Iversen's second multiconfused log thread

[AlOlaf]

For sprognørder kan det herudover være interessant at vide at han skabte henved 2000 danske ord for at udrydde fremmede lån. Ikke alle slog an, men når vi danskere siger "brint" (for 'hydrogen') eller "ilt" (for 'oxygen') er det takket være H.C.Ørsted at ingen andre aner hvad vi taler om.

Det er godt at vide. Jeg har ofte spekuleret på, hvorfor ilt ikke hedder "surstof" eller sådan noget lignende, efter germansk mønster.

Men er der en særlig grund til, at han valgte ordet ilt? Eller brint?

[Iversen]

Svaret står i den danske version af Wikipedia:

Ordene ilt og brint diskuterede han [Ørsted] med den førende sprogforsker Rasmus Rask via brevveksling, og Rask var ikke umiddelbart begejstret og kritiserede ordene med følgende:

"Mod Il(d)t (dannet af substantivet ild) taler, at der i dansk ikke findes fortilfælde for, at et navneord dannes af et andet navneord ved at sætte –t på. Sådanne ord er enten tillægsord (her tænkes på et eksempel som Kløgt af klog) eller af udsagnsord, og de betegner en abstrakt egenskab eller virkning, ikke noget så konkret som grundstof."

"Mod Brindt (dannet af verbet brænde) taler, at en afledning af verbet betyder handling, virkning o.l. (f.eks. flugt til flygte, ridt til ride)."

(...)

Af andre ord han indførte kan nævnes: autoritetstro, brugskunst, klangbund, mindretal, sammendrag og tidevand

BU: В друга нишка споменах българския език, и дойдох да мисля, че съм пренебрегвал този език от месеци. Така че сега отпечатах дългата статия за черна материя в космологията от българската Уикипедия (с превод на италиански език, което почти не ми трябва) и аз го ще чета сега.

EO: La bildo sube reprezentas la kvardimensian tempospacon ... kaj iujn papiliojn. Kompreneble, la alluma materio ne povas esti vidata ĉar kiel konata ĝi estas nevidebla.. Mi ankaŭ ne havis lokon por la lastaj 7 aŭ 8 dimensioj de la kordoteorio. Jam estis sufiĉe malfacile pentri kvar dimensiojn sur ebena tolo.

Kunst155.JPG

[Iversen]

SP: He escuchado una emisión de TVE llamada "Aqui la Tierra" que se dice "magacine de información meteorologica" - però hay poca meteorología (un pronóstico breve al final) y mas clips cortos sobre todo lo que pudiera interesar a los turistas y otras personas - como de ejemplo el pescado, vento y degustación de raias y cómo cultivar arándanos en las montañas. Hay como de costumbre en TVE música de fondo, pero generalmente no tanto molesta como normalmente en este canal. Y después un fragmento de programa sobre las torres humanas en Barcelona - però por desgracia, no en catalán.

EN: After that program TVE continued to one of its usual nauseating music polluted romance programs... so I fled. Instead I'm now watching a program from Discovery World with a slightly curvy elderly gentleman on a culinary tour through Madrid. He eats jamón (with its fat) and claims that Madrid is the place where they eat most seafood in all of Europe - right now an immense stone crab is disappearing into his bottomless inner regions. Most of us would stick to the meaty parts, but he gulps down all the juicy guts inside the critter. Bwwwwadr.

It is estimated that only 4% of the univers is filled with visible matter - some 22% is black matter which only can be measured through the effects of its gravity on visible stuff, and the rest is allegedly black energy, which apparently is necessary to explain that the expansion of the univers accelerates in spite of all the junk (including the black stuff) you find in it. But that black energy to me (a complete amateur in these things) doesn't look like energy, but more like a systematic calculation error. Maybe the speed of the light isn't constant after all, or maybe the black matter interacts with it self but just not with us and it hates itself which provokes repulsion... nobody knows. Or maybe there is a lower limit for distance and if it grows the univers also grows ... Yesterday I printed some 6 pages of text in Bulgarian about black matter from the corresponding Wikipedia, and no, I haven't read all of it yet. I did the first couple of pages as a bilingual text (with an Italian translation) with the intention of doing some intensive copying/studying, but it seems that I can read most of it without problems. Speaking the language is so far not an option, and I need to look many words up to write in it, but after months of near-total neglect it has survived rather well.

DU: Ik beloofde een beetje te schrijven over het Kijk vanaf 2012 dat ik zondag op de trein heb gelezen. Het is een beetje meer sociaal georiënteerd dan bepaalde andere wetenschappelijke magazienen, en in een van de langste artikelen wordt gevraagd of de Nederlanders zich nog steeds zullen schamen voor hun kolonialtijd, waaronder ze Indonesië regeerde. Het lijkt dat ze echter niet met schorpioenen moeten worden geslagen - vooral niet vergeleken met de Japaners die hen hebben verslagen. Maar er was een bepaalde Jan Pieterzoon Coon die in 1623 de mensen op het eiland Ambon slachtde omdat ze hun muscat ook aan Engelse en Portugesen verkochte. Er is nog een ander lang artikel over pandemieën - en de conclusie is dat bacteriën en virussen niet al te effectief moeten zijn om een wereldwijde epidemie te kunnen veroorzaken. De zieke moeten lang genoeg leven om ons anderen te infecteren.

EN: Funny coincidence: right now there is a TV program about a person who visits a Philippine tribe named Calinga in order to get a tattoo which formerly only was accorded to tribal warriors who had killed somebody and taken the victim's head as a trophy - one tat line for each enemy. So now the traveller is trying to get one without murdering somebody .. oh tempora o mores.

Kunst106.JPG

[Iversen]

I recently watched a program (for the third or fourth time) about the origins of the tales of King Arthur. Well, everyone agrees that most of the details were invented by a bunch of fanciful liars some 5-600 years after the man should have been living. Well, he may have lived, but there is preciously little information about him from his own time, which would be the time immediately after the Saxon invasion - or whatever you can can call it when the invader has been invited by a foolish king. I have now read some sections of "De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae" by Gildas, which is a passionate diatribe against those responsible for the demise of the Roman culture in Britain - which of course led to incursions from the fierce Scots and Picts from the barbaric North. I actually found a site where this text is quoted with an approximate English translation (Vortigernstudies.org). It says this about the situation after the departure of the Roman soldiers:

14. exin britannia omni armato milite, militaribus copiis, rectoribus licet immanibus, ingenti iuuentute spoliata, quae comitata uestigiis supra dicti tyranni domum nusquam ultra rediit, et omnis belli usus ignara penitus, duabus primum gentibus transmarinis uehementer saeuis, scotorum a circione, pictorum ab aquilone calcabilis, multos stupet gemitque annos

The Brits who cherished the Roman heritage pleaded to Rome about help, but after a few half-hearted Roman help expeditions they were told to learn to defend themselves against intruders who weren't any bit stronger than them but just more bellicose ... or perish:

18. igitur romani (...) consuescendo armis ac uiriliter dimicando terram substantiolam coniuges liberos et, quod his maius est, libertatem uitamque totis uiribus uindicaret, et gentibus nequaquam sibi fortioribus, nisi segnitia et torpore dissolueretur, inermes uinculis uinciendas nullo modo, sed instructas peltis ensibus hastis et ad caedam promptas protenderet manus, suadentes, quia et hoc putabant aliquid derelinquendo populo commodi adcrescere,

And Gildas basically agrees: if the Roman-minded Brits couldn't learn to wield weapons against the marauding hordes then they were some despicable whining wimps who didn't deserve better. By the way, Gildas doesn't use the title "rex" (king) about Vortigern, but "tyrannus" - which basically seems to cover the same job description in his terminology. And he has these scalding words left for Vortigern and his advisors (and of course for the heathen and murderous Saxons, whom he likens to wolwes in the following quote):

23. tum omnes consiliarii una cum superbo tyranno Vortigerno caecantur, adinuenintes tale praesidium, immo excidium patriae ut ferocissimi illi nefandi nominis saxones deo hominibusque inuisi, quasi in caulas lupi, in insulam ad retundendas aquilonales gentes intromitterentur. quo utique nihil ei usquam perniciosius nihilque amarius factum est. o altissimam sensus calignem! o desperabilem crudamque mentis hebetudinem!

Unfortunately Gildas isn't very generous when it comes to concrete names. He doesn't give the names of the Saxon leaders, but shortly later the Venerable Bede provides us with the names Horsa and Hengist, and he also writes that they commanded an army composed of Jutes, Angles and Saxons - but not a word about Frisians. I have seen elsewhere that it has been estimated that the population of the Frisian lands went drastically back between 200 AC and 400 AC or so (quoted from memory) - did they settle in Great Britain? Maybe, maybe not - they are hardly mentioned in the sources. One post-Roman warrior named Ambrosius Aurelianus did take up arms against the Saxon-led coalition, and for that flimsy reason some bold scholars have proposed that he was the model for Arthur. But no, Arthur is mentioned by among others a historian named Nennius (from the 9. century) as the victor in the battle of Mount Badon (516 AC ... maybe), and by then Ambrosius was long dead. Besides the whole univers of Arthurian lore literally reeks of Celtic mysticism - not of Roman orderliness. The outcome of this reasonably well-attested battle may indeed have been the main reason that Wales stayed Celtic. But did somebody called Arthur really lead the Celtic forces against the Saxons in that battle, as claimed by Nennius?

One explanation that Arthur wasn't named by name in the oldest sources could be that "Arthur" was a title rather than the actual name of a king or military leader who opposed the Saxons. I don't know Cymric (and definitely not its older versions), but it has been alleged that the title has something to do with bears - maybe a bear god or goddess. The alleged father of the Arthur is named by name in later legends as "Uther Pendragon", and in the TV program I mentioned above it was claimed that the epithete means "head dragon" ... and no, Arthur is NOT, I repeat NOT the same as Dracula, son-of-the-dragon ... but what was his real name then? And was he a king himself or just a war leader, as claimed by Nennius in his "Historia Brittonum" (in the 9. century)? I have sadly forgotten the name proposed in the TV program, but maybe it is on Youtube - I'll check that later.

Anyway, apart from the fulminations of poor st. Gildas - a lone "vox clamantis in deserto"* seeing his world crumble around him - there are very few historical sources which definitely date from the first couple of troubled centuries after the Saxon invasion. The preserved sources become somewhat more numerous from the 8. century and onwards, and in these later sources it seems that the name Arthur has been firmly established, with some sparse details about his actions. Sometimes it is unclear whether the informations in those later sources were culled from other now lost written sources, from oral traditions or invented post hoc. But I personally don't believe for a second that all their talk about Arthur was invented for fun - that phase came later with fanciful authors like Geoffroy of Monmouth and Chrétien de Troyes. *Isaiah 40.3

Kunst110-pars.jpg

[Iversen]

EN: My goodnight reading yesterday was a book in Spanish named "Guia para la identificación de las aves de Iguazu". Well, I didn't get through all the birdies, and the texts that describe them would also be too repetitive to read in one go (albeit probably useful for people with insomnia), but the first couple of chapters describe the whole area with the national parks on both sides of the river, and these chapters are quite interesting. It is clear that the emphasis on the Argentinian side since the book is written by Argentinians, but the same birds live on the other side of the river. There are also some details about the authors and their reasons for writing the book.

SP: Las famosas cataratas del Iguazú están cerca del punto donde Paraguay, Argentina y Brasil choquen, sólo separados por los ríos. Paraguay está al oeste de las cataratas y no tiene ninguna ventaja de la proximidad. He visitado la zona en 2002, procedente de Asunción en Paraguay, continuando a través de la provincia argentina de Misiones hasta la ciudad Puerto de Iguazú, donde pasé un par de noches. A partir de ahí crucé a Brasil, donde me había pedido algunas noches en el único hotel dentro del Parque Nacional de Brasil. Las cataratas se encuentran predominantemente en el lado argentino, y por eso una visión general se hace mejor desde el lado brasileiro- Para una vista de cerca es necesar estar en el lado argentino. En ambos lados hay un agradable parque nacional con abundante vida silvestre, y porque la ciudad de Puerto de Iguazú no es muy interesante he pasado quasi todo mi tiempo en el bosque, buscando aves y otros animales (como los coatíes, que no es permitido alimentar porque ya estan bastante traviesos).

Iguazu-mapa.jpg

POR: A situação do lado brasileiro é diferente. Aqui há menos caminhos florestais, mas em vez disso é como eu disse um hotel dentro do parque nacional. A vantagem com isso é que você pode olhar para a floresta e as cachoeiras também fora do horário de funcionamento do parque nacional. Além disso, no lado brasileiro há diversas atrações fora do parque: você pode visitar um zoológico de aves apenas fora da entrada do parque e há também um jardim zoológico na cidade de Foz do Iguaçu.

Mas tem ainda un segreto na vecindad de Iguaçu: tudo o mundo sabe o que é as catarates de Iguaçu, peró os Saltos de Sete Quedas do Guaíra são quase desconocidos. Eram efectivamente as cachoeira mais grandes do mundo em volume de água, até até que a construção da barreira e usina hidrelétrica de Itaipu as destruiu. Eu visitou a barragem em um ônibus de Foz, e sim, ele foi impressionante - mas destruiu uma atração ao nível do Iguaçu. E as autoridades paraguaias e brasileiras de alli abaixo não são muito propensas a lembrar os turistas desse vandalismo único.

BU: Тази сутрин продължи четенето на българската статията за тъмната материя. Но аз вече съм писал за него.

Iguazu.jpg

[Iversen]

I have not quite stopped researching the early sources referring to king Arthur or somebody who basically played the same role in fights against the Saxons. There are two lines in the Welsh Annales Cambriae, a chronological list of events from 447 to 954 . For the year 516 it mentions The Battle of Badon, "in which Arthur carried the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ for three days and three nights on his shield and the Britons were the victors", and for 537 AD "The Strife of Camlann, in which Arthur and Medraut perished; and there was plague in Britain and Ireland.". The only problem is of course that we cannot be sure that even the oldest surviving copies (including one from the 12. century, which is assumed to be a copy of a manuscript from the 10. century) haven't been tampered with in later years, where the Arthur legends already were well established.

Somebody named Arthur is also mentioned an early 7th century poem named "Y Gododdin" by a certain Aneirin - but it just says that somebody else up North fought as bravely like Arthur (putting 'ravens on the walls'), but wasn't Arthur.

As for Nennius I now see that he supposedly lived in the 8. century, not the 9. century - my apologies for misleading the honorable reader. Of course some scholars also doubt that he existed - or at least that he wrote the book assigned to him. Sometimes I wonder whether certain scholars express doubt just to show how fundamentally sceptical they are about anything. Btw. I have read that Nennius somewhere refers to a somebody as 'the bear' (one possible root of the name "Arthur"), but so far I haven't located the passage in question.

I have also watched (or rather listened to) a couple of decumentaries on Youtube, including one in which Francis Pryor flatly denies that there even was a Saxon invasion. His first claim is that Roman Britain lived happily on despite the retreat of the Roman armies, and this is contrasted to the alleged standard conception, namely that Britain retreated into chaos and basically became an unpopulated wasteland when the Romans left . But that's not realistic. I do believe that a lot of people tried to continue living in the Roman way, but I also believe Gildas, when he states that their way of living were seriously challenged by Picts and Scots and inner strife. In one video it is stated that finds from around Tintagel showed close contact with Byzans, but this doesn't rule out that the invasion 'per invitation' described by the venerable Bede took place as he described it.

The basic facts are 1) that most Britons represent the population that was there even before the Roman conquest, 2) that most Britons switched to Anglosaxon language and habits. Why should a majority willingly choose to ditch their native language and traditional customs UNLESS somebody forced them to do it? And why did the Saxons stop short of taken the power also in Cornwall and Wales unless somebody stopped them?

[DaveBee]

I do believe that a lot of people tried to continue living in the Roman way, but I also believe Gildas, when he states that their way of living were seriously challenged by Picts and Scots and inner strife. In one video it is stated that finds from around Tintagel showed close contact with Byzans, but this doesn't rule out that the invasion 'per invitation' described by the venerable Bede took place as he described it.

The basic facts are 1) that most Britons represent the population that was there even before the Roman conquest, 2) that most Britons switched to Anglosaxon language and habits. Why should a majority willingly choose to ditch their native language and traditional customs UNLESS somebody forced them to do it? And why did the Saxons stop short of taken the power also in Cornwall and Wales unless somebody stopped them?

I read one book that said post Roman Britain was organised with an elected 'Dragon banner ?' leader, but that inter-kingdom competition increased, using anglo-saxon mercenary infantry. Then a large force of British warriors went to Gaul/France to support one faction there (romans?), lost heavily, after which the Anglo-saxon mercenaries took over in some areas, and became a social elite that others sought to emulate, adopting language and customs.

It might have been Ceawlin: The Man Who Created England by Rupert Matthews.

[Iversen]

I have read the same story. The central person here was however a certain Riothamus, who according to Wikipedia was a ..

Romano-British military leader, who was active circa AD 470. He fought against the Goths in alliance with the declining Roman Empire. He is called "King of the Britons" by the 6th-century historian Jordanes, but the extent of his realm is unclear.

The weak point in his identification is that "Britons" here could allude to the Brits who had settled in Brittany (Bretagne aka 'Armorica') rather than those who stayed in Great Britain. He was asked by the Roman emperor to help him the Visigoths, but when he arrived at Bourges the Romans were not there, and his army was routed by the Goths. He escaped and went back to where he came from .. and the few indications we have about his life there mostly point towards Armorica (including a letter concerning a slave owner, whose slaves had been abducted or fled). I personally don't think his candidature as the real king Arthur is very well founded.

The source Davebee quotes (the summary of a book by Rupert Matthews) states that ...

Rupert suggests that Romanised governmental structures managed to survive the economic collapse of the 5th century and the population collapse of the early sixth century to emerge in new and barbarianised form in the later sixth century. The key figure in this story was Ceawlin, King of Wessex in the 570s. It was he who finally smashed the old order with his ambitious grab for power and who thus opened the way to the creation of the England that we know today with its English culture, English language and English character.

Well, maybe. I have already quoted Pryor for the claim that Roman structures (and society at large) survived better in Great Britain than previously assumed. But Ceawlin, king of Wessex, rules later than the 'real' king Arthur we are looking for. Wessex is however relevant for another reason: one of Ceawlin's successors was Alfred the Great, but his plea for stardom is founded on his fight against the vikings in the 9. century, not the Anglosaxons. Actually he was an Anglosaxon himself and he fought the Welsh - but there is a problem with the chronology: The Anglosaxon chronicle gives earlier years than the 'revised' chronology:

A.D. 495. This year came two leaders into Britain, Cerdic and
Cynric his son, with five ships, at a place that is called
Cerdic's-ore. And they fought with the Welsh the same day. Then
he died, and his son Cynric succeeded to the government, and held
it six and twenty winters. Then he died; and Ceawlin, his son,
succeeded, who reigned seventeen years.
(from the Anglosaxon Chronicle in ugly anachronistic English)

PS: if I write more about this theme it will have to be in Latin, since I can't do it in Anglosaxon and most certainly not in archaic Cymric.

----------------------

EDIT: ha ha but I can quote in Anglosaxon! I found the Anglosaxon chronicle in the good old tongue here, and let's start with the first time Hengest and Horsa are named (entry for the year 450):

(4v33)Añ cccc.l. 7 On hiera dagum Hengest & Horsa from Wyrtgeorne geleaþade
(4v34)Añ cccc.li. Bretta kyninge gesohton Bretene on þam staþe þe is genemned
(4v35)Añ cccc.lii. Ypwinesfleot, ærest Brettum to fultume, ac hie eft on hie fuhton.
(4v36)Añ cccc.liii. Se cing het hi feohtan agien Pihtas, 7 hi swa dydan 7 sige hæfdan swa hwar
(4v37)Añ cccc.liiii. swa hi comon. Hi ða sende to Angle & heton heom sendan mare fultum 7 heom seggan Brytwalana nahtnesse & ðæs landes cysta. Hy ða sendan heom mare fultum. Þa comon þa menn of þrim mægþum Germanie, of Ealdseaxum, of Anglum, of Iotum. Of Iotum comon Cantware & Wihtware, þæt ys seo mæið ðe nu eardað on Wiht, & ðæt cynn on Westsexum þe man gyt hæt Iutna cyn. Of Ealdseaxon comon Eastsexa & Suðsexa & WestSexan. Of Angle comon, se a siððan stod westi betwyx Iutum & Seaxum, Eastengla, Midelangla, Mearca & ealle Norðhymbra.

So no Frisians, but 'Oldsaxons', Angles and Jutes ... as also claimed by good old Bede. So if the Anglosaxon language is so closely allied with the so far almost unattested Old Frisian, where did they diverge? Something crucial in the language history is missing here..

The tale about Hengest and Horsa continues in 455 and the next few years :

(5r1)Añ cccc.lv. Her Hengest & Horsa fuhton wiþ Wyrtgeorne þam cyninge, in
(5r2)Añ cccc.lvi. þære stowe þe is gecueden Agęlesþrep, & his broþur Horsan man ofslog; & æfter þam Hengest feng to rice & Æsc his sunu.
(5r4)Añ cccc.lvii. Her Hengest 7 Æsc fuhton wiþ Brettas in þære stowe þe is
(5r5)Añ cccc.lviii. gecueden Crecganford & þær ofslogon .iiiim. wera,
(5r6)Añ cccc.lviiii. 7 þa Brettas þa forleton Centlond 7 mid micle ege flugon to
(5r7)Añ cccc.lx. Lundenbyrg.*
*: London

So far I haven't found the battle at Badon hill (or some equivalent reference to this supposedly decisive battle), but the search continues. I did at least find the likely source for the translated section above, but with some differences (maybe it was translated from another manuscript source) - the year given as 490 AD, and the length of :

(5r35)Añ cccc.xc. (...) Her cuomon twegen aldormen on Bretene, Cerdic & Cynric his sunu, mid .v. scipum in þone stede þe is gecueden Cerdicesora & þy ilcan dæge gefuhtun wiþ Walum. (...) Her Cerdic forþferde, & Cynric his sunu ricsode forþ .xxvi. wintra;

.. and slightly later:

Her Cynric & Ceawlin fuhton wiþ Brettas æt Beranbyrg.
Her Ceawlin feng to rice on Wesseaxum, & Ęlle feng to Norþanhym

So not Ceawlin, but Cynric should according to this have ruled just after the year 500, which actually is the relevant period. The only trouble is that he was an Anglosaxon - so he was actually the opponent of whoever that spurious and slippery character known as king Arthur may have been. And he didn't rule all of Britain - not even all of the part ruled by the Saxons and their allies.

AnglosaxonchronicleManuB.jpg

facsimile of manuscript B, copied in the 10.century, also known as the ‘Abingdon Chronicle I’

[Iversen]

EO: Vendredo mi trovis libreton en plasta ĉirkaŭvolvinte en mia (fizika) leterkesto: la jarlibro 2017 de la Universala Esperanto Asocio. Mi nur rapide tralegis ĝin ĉar ĝi ne estas la speco de libro kiun vi legis de a ĝis z. Plejparto de la libreto estas senfinaj listoj de nomoj kaj fakaj asocioj, kie la asocioj de kat-amantoj, ŭombulistoj, oomotuloj, fervojistuloj kaj naturistuloj. Kelkaj asocioj havas tian ampleksan temon ke vi demandas pri tio, kion la membroj povus havi en komuna, kiel la asocioj por interesatulaj de muziko, vivstiloj kaj culturaj agadoj. Ĉu ni ne ĉiuj havas vivstilon? Estas ankaŭ longaj listoj de kontaktuloj en preskaŭ ĉiuj nacioj de la tero, kaj kompreneble ankaŭ de la reprezentantoj de ĉiuj landoj ĉe la Federacia UEA kaj estraranoj kaj oficistoj en la ĉefsidejo en Amsterdamo de la organizo mem.

Parenteze: La sekva universala Esperanto Monda Konferenco (2018) okazos en Lisboa.

IC: Ég gat notað UEA-annálinn sem háttatíma lestur, en í staðinn las ég leiðarvísir fuglunum á Ísland á íslensku. Vandamálið var ekki sjalfa texta eða orðin, þótt sumir til þeirra sem voru notaðar til að útskýra orð í orðútskýringu-listanum var of háþróaður fyrir þessa lélega ókunnuga nemanda - hið er að bókan er skrifað með mjög þröngan bókstafir sem þú færð líkamlega þreyttur í höfðinu þegar þú lest - og þa sefur þú fljótt. Viltu meira af háttatíma bók? Jæja, kannski áður margtungumáltálarnas ráðstefnu læra nöfnin allir fuglarnar á íslensku og áð lesa bækurnar sem íslendingarna skrifar á löngum dimmum vetrarkvöldum (nálægt þeir ekki fara á kaffihús eða spila skák). Ég er forvitinn um hvernig veðrið er í október í Reykjavík. Þú getur andað án þess að mynda grýlukerti undir nösum þinnar? Þarft þú ull vettlinga á meðan þú klórð rassinn þin á strætóhættirnir vegna þess að það er ís á sæti? Eða er það snjór á götum (þau götunum sem hafa ekki gólf-hita). Það var einnig snjór á götum Danmerkur í gamla daga, en börnin í dag hafa ekki hugmynd um hvað það er - þeir hafa aldrei séð ekta snjó.

Kunst120.JPG

[Iversen]

EN: Since yesterday I have reread a magazine called "Kataluna Esperantisto", which I picked up in Nitra last year. The surprising thing about this magazine is that it isn't written in Esperanto (apart from a few summarie4s) - it's in Catalan, which suits me rather well. The first main article tells about the situation of the Esperanto movement around the 1. world war, where many of the magazines eiter stopped for or a while or stopped for good. And Zamenhof died in 1917, just 100 years ago.

EO: Zamenhof kaj lia edzino estis en Germanio ĉe la ekapero de la milito kaj devis preni ĉirkaŭiron tra Danio kaj Svedio por iri hejmen al Varsovio. Krome, li havis infarkto en 2014 kaj poste nur povis labori kiel okulkuracisto du horojn ĉiutage. Unu raportisto nomita E. Privat vizitis lin en 2015, sed alie malmulton aŭdis pri siaj agadoj antaŭ post lia morto en 2017. Tiam skribiĝis naŭ paĝoj sur la mastro en la revuo Esperanto - unu el la malmultaj kiuj ankoraŭ eldoniĝis.

PO: Kolejny artykuł mówi o łużyckiego kieszeni językowej pomiędzy Niemcami i Polską.

CA: Després hi ha un llarg article anomenat "Les llengues planificades com a mètode d'investigació lingüística". L'article mentiona una sèrie d'investigadors, però no és molt específic pel que fa dels seus resultats. Se podria haver esperat que un article amb aquest nom contindria més discussió sobre l'ús de l'esperanto com a primera o segona llengua, amb amb l'objectiu de facilitar l'adquisició dels següentes llengues - però les poques observacions són majoritàriament escèptics. La capacitat de investigar qué es pot aprendre i que difícil sigui aprendre structures més o menys facils es menciona breument, però sense entrar en detalls. Es diu (com una referència a Moreno Cabrera) que llengües VSO tan diversos com les llengües semítiques i celtics comparteixen una sèrie de característiques, ho que és una reminiscència dels universals de Greenberg. Una possible àrea d'investigació és examinar si és particularment difícil d'aprendre un llenguatge artificial que sigui contrari a aquests universals. No obstant això, la possibilitat s'esmenta només breument, però la discussió mirant cap endavant a la qüestió connexa de la relativitat lingüística (l'hipòtesi Sapir-Whorf).

Hi ha diversos detalls aïllats que jo no sabia per endavant. Per exemple, el famós F.Saussure tenía un germà que era matemàtic, però que era també un dels pioners en esperanto. Però ningú sap si els germans varen discutir el tema - com diu l'article: tots dos vivien a Ginebra i per això no va ser escrit res. També s'esmenta que la majoria dels que han escrit sobre l'Esperanto ho ha fet en esperanto o en la seva llengua materna, que en general no ha estat el anglès. Per tant, hi ha lingüistes lingüisticament discapacitats (els que tans sols poden llegir l'anglès) que no saben res sobre aquestes fonts i que fins i tot no saben que existeixen.

GR: Το τελευταίο άρθρο μιλά για την ιστορία της γλώσσας ελληνικής . Φιλίππου Β (πατέρας του Μεγάλου Αλεξάνδρου) επέλεξε την αττική-ιωνική διάλεκτο ως εθνική γλώσσα της χώρας του (δηλαδή όχι το Μακεδονικό διάλεκτο), και ως εκ τούτου το σημείο εκκίνησης για τη διαμόρφωση της Κοινής κατά τη διάρκεια της Βυζαντινής εποχής.

Kat-eo.jpg