On 9-Jul-2004, James Cownie <jcow...@etnus.com> wrote:
> One of the "teach yourself a foreign language" companies here in the UK > has been running adds which state "All our tapes are made by native speakers", > and the list of languages includes Latin...
> I don't know where they found this native Latin speaker ;-)
. Am 09.07.04 schrieb jcow...@etnus.com (James Cownie) auf /COMP/LANG/COBOL in JosHc.1780$ko3.16540...@news-text.cableinet.net ueber Re: Dead languages?
JC> One of the "teach yourself a foreign language" companies here in the JC> UK has been running adds which state "All our tapes are made by JC> native speakers", and the list of languages includes Latin... JC> JC> I don't know where they found this native Latin speaker ;-)
Maybe they gave a Latin Lover just a little twist ...
docdw...@panix.com writes: > In article <40edfa9c.13003...@news.optonline.net>, > Robert Wagner <robert.deletet...@wagner.net> wrote: > >Richard is correct....
> Mr Wagner, this is confusing... Mr Maine wrote 'I'd *SWEAR* I remember > this as 'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est' in response to my stating > 'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres!'... how does what you cite here > support his reminisce as 'correct'?
I was wondering the same myself. The closest I can come up with is that I was correct to think that the version I recalled was wrong, since I had come to that conclusion... But I'll agree that's pretty unclear.
Looked last night. As expected, no sign of my old high school text. And no way that I'd remember what text it was. So I guess I can't determine whether the failure was in my memory or in that text...though I can make a guess. Sigh. :-(
-- Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience; email: my first.last at org.domain | experience comes from bad judgment. org: nasa, domain: gov | -- Mark Twain
>> In article <40edfa9c.13003...@news.optonline.net>, >> Robert Wagner <robert.deletet...@wagner.net> wrote:
>> >Richard is correct....
>> Mr Wagner, this is confusing... Mr Maine wrote 'I'd *SWEAR* I remember >> this as 'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est' in response to my stating >> 'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres!'... how does what you cite here >> support his reminisce as 'correct'?
>I was wondering the same myself. The closest I can come up with is >that I was correct to think that the version I recalled was wrong, >since I had come to that conclusion... But I'll agree that's >pretty unclear.
Seemed that way to me, too... but what is Life without a bit of Uncertainty?
>Looked last night. As expected, no sign of my old high school >text. And no way that I'd remember what text it was. So I guess >I can't determine whether the failure was in my memory or in that >text...though I can make a guess. Sigh. :-(
Can't remember the quote, can't remember where the book is, can't remember... a whole bunch of other forgotten stuff ('Airman, I've forgotten more than you'll ever learn!' as my Drill Sergeant... errrr, Technical Instructor exclaimed, e'er-so-long ago)... hard to believe that some call the ability to forget the Most Blessed, neh?
''I have done that,' says my memory. 'I cannot have done that,' says my pride, and remains inexorable. Eventually - memory yields.' - Nietzsche
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 08:09:13 GMT, James Cownie <jcow...@etnus.com> wrote: > Howard Brazee wrote: >> On 8-Jul-2004, "Michael Metcalf" <michael.metc...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> But did that dictionary get rid of the word "Latin", to make way for "Java"? >> CoBOL is much more commonly used than Latin is.
> One of the "teach yourself a foreign language" companies here in the UK > has been running adds which state "All our tapes are made by native speakers", > and the list of languages includes Latin...
> I don't know where they found this native Latin speaker ;-)
-- Mike Prager, NOAA, Beaufort, NC Address spam-trapped; remove color to reply. * Opinions expressed are personal and not represented otherwise. * Any use of tradenames does not constitute a NOAA endorsement.
>>>>>Oh dear! My high school Latin text must have had a bowdlerized >>>>>version or something. I'd *SWEAR* I remember this as >>>>>'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est'. But a quick google >>>>>check doesn't find it in that form.
>>>>Richard is correct. Caesar actually wrote: "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes >>>>tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua >>>>Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur.
>>>Mr Wagner, this is confusing... Mr Maine wrote 'I'd *SWEAR* I remember >>>this as 'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est' in response to my stating >>>'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres!'... how does what you cite here >>>support his reminisce as 'correct'?
>>Even more confusing is the Original Latin I remember as "Omnes Galii est divista >>in tres partes."
>What's Life without a bit of Mystery?
>>I remember it very distinctly. How many versions of Gaelic Wars >>did Caesar write? What the hell's going on here?
>Ahhhhh, for the Oldene Dayse... when they taught Latin quotes such as >cannot be taught by *ten* teachers, today!
Unlike English, where normal word order is SVO (subject, verb, object), Latin, along with Japanese, has no normal word order. One can rearrange the words in a sentence and it still says the same thing.
My hypothesis is that high school Latin text authors rearranged words to make it easier for English-speaking students to understand. Thus
Caesar's "Gallia est omnis divisa in parte tres." and Mr Maine's "Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est." and My "Omnes Galii est divista in tres partes."
are linguistically equivalent, are saying the same thing and are equally valid Latin.
>On 9-Jul-2004, James Cownie <jcow...@etnus.com> wrote:
>> One of the "teach yourself a foreign language" companies here in the UK >> has been running adds which state "All our tapes are made by native speakers", >> and the list of languages includes Latin...
>> I don't know where they found this native Latin speaker ;-)
>The Vatican?
When I was a teenager, I worked weekends and summers as a golf caddy. Two of my regular clients were Catholic priests who talked to each other in Latin so the dumb caddy wouldn't understand .. they thought. When I started laughing at the punch lines of their ribald jokes, they realized their cover had been blown. They requested and got a dumber caddy. :)
Their Latin was very good. I'd say they qualified as native speakers.
> I just happened to hear an editor of the new edition of the Concise Oxford > English Dictionary say on the radio that obsolete words get removed to make > way for new ones. Her two examples were Snobol and Cobol. Is this a valid > definition of a dead computing language?
OED is as authorative in matters English as Stg. (sic Schulz) Maine is in matters Fortran, secondary sources at most and best treated with the utmost suspicion.
I used to meet a retired Prof (U of Toronto) of Classics at the gym who for reasons best known to himself always spoke to me in Latin. I'd respond in English and this didn't seem to bother him. Perhaps the CLF unintelligentia who think that Latin is deader than Fortran would do well to catch up with reality at http://www.uky.edu/ArtsSciences/Classics/aestivumeng.html.
-- You're Welcome, Gerry T. ______ "The old order changeth, yielding place to new, And God fulfils Himself in many ways, Lest one good custom should corrupt the world." -- Tennyson, in Morte d'Arthur.
>>>>>>Oh dear! My high school Latin text must have had a bowdlerized >>>>>>version or something. I'd *SWEAR* I remember this as >>>>>>'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est'. But a quick google >>>>>>check doesn't find it in that form.
>>>>>Richard is correct. Caesar actually wrote: "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes >>>>>tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua >>>>>Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur.
>>>>Mr Wagner, this is confusing... Mr Maine wrote 'I'd *SWEAR* I remember >>>>this as 'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est' in response to my stating >>>>'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres!'... how does what you cite here >>>>support his reminisce as 'correct'?
>>>Even more confusing is the Original Latin I remember as "Omnes Galii est divista >>>in tres partes."
>>What's Life without a bit of Mystery?
>>>I remember it very distinctly. How many versions of Gaelic Wars >>>did Caesar write? What the hell's going on here?
>>Ahhhhh, for the Oldene Dayse... when they taught Latin quotes such as >>cannot be taught by *ten* teachers, today!
>Unlike English, where normal word order is SVO (subject, verb, object), Latin, >along with Japanese, has no normal word order. One can rearrange the words in a >sentence and it still says the same thing.
This is similar to what I was taught about Ancient Greek, where order word important is very not.
>My hypothesis is that high school Latin text authors rearranged words to make it >easier for English-speaking students to understand. Thus
>Caesar's "Gallia est omnis divisa in parte tres." and >Mr Maine's "Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est." and >My "Omnes Galii est divista in tres partes."
>are linguistically equivalent, are saying the same thing and are equally valid >Latin.
All right... let's see how much I can shame myself publically with my lack of skill; my apologies in advance for the grievous errors.
I would say not *quite* so, Mr Wagner. In Caesar's quote 'Gallia' is a nominative, in Mr Wagner's quote 'Galii' appears to be modified by 'Omnes' (which would make it an object, hence accusative, but 'Galii' appears to be a genetive). In Mr Maine's example there is the slight problem of 'Alles'.
Gerry Thomas wrote: > I used to meet a retired Prof (U of Toronto) of Classics at the gym > who for reasons best known to himself always spoke to me in Latin. > I'd respond in English and this didn't seem to bother him.
Probably because he was insane.
I had a neighbor once who insisted on speaking in PIG-Latin. I shot him.
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 02:03:13 GMT, Robert Wagner <robert.deletet...@wagner.net> wrote in <40edfa9c.13003...@news.optonline.net>:
> Caesar actually wrote: "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes > tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua > Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur. Hi omnes lingua, institutis, legibus inter se > differunt. Gallos ab Aquitanis Garumna flumen, a Belgis Matrona et Sequana > dividit. Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae, propterea quod a cultu atque > humanitate provinciae longissime absunt nium fortissimi sunt Belgae. "
It's all Greek to me!
-- Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration, Brunel University. Ivan.R...@brunel.ac.uk Room 40-1-B12, CERN KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".
<gftho...@sympatico.ca> wrote: >I used to meet a retired Prof (U of Toronto) of Classics at the gym who for >reasons best known to himself always spoke to me in Latin. I'd respond in
[snip]
Is your comprehension of Latin any better than your comprehension of English? That could have been his reason.
> On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 02:03:13 GMT, Robert Wagner <robert.deletet...@wagner.net> > wrote in <40edfa9c.13003...@news.optonline.net>:
>>Caesar actually wrote: "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes >>tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua >>Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur. Hi omnes lingua, institutis, legibus inter se >>differunt. Gallos ab Aquitanis Garumna flumen, a Belgis Matrona et Sequana >>dividit. Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae, propterea quod a cultu atque >>humanitate provinciae longissime absunt nium fortissimi sunt Belgae. "
> It's all Greek to me!
Nah, it's not that hard (that must be the reason why we started with De Bello Gallico):
The whole of Gaul is divided into three parts, of which the Belgians live in one, another the Aquitani and the third those who are called Celts in their own language, [but] Gauls by us.
Well, perhaps the recent "King Arthur" movie will throw some light on the history of the Celts (especially those wbo lived in that "perfidious Albion"). However, this can never be done by a PG-13 rated Disney movie, as the Celts were wont to fight stark naked.
Toon Moene <t...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> wrote: >Well, perhaps the recent "King Arthur" movie will throw some light on >the history of the Celts (especially those wbo lived in that "perfidious >Albion"). >However, this can never be done by a PG-13 rated Disney movie, as the >Celts were wont to fight stark naked.
I'm right now watching a History Channel examination of the King Arthur movie. Scholars disagree ..what else is new? I didn't see any naked men fighting.
It's an outstanding program. If it repeats, watch it.
>>>>>>>> 'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres!'
>>>>>>>Oh dear! My high school Latin text must have had a bowdlerized >>>>>>>version or something. I'd *SWEAR* I remember this as >>>>>>>'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est'. But a quick google >>>>>>>check doesn't find it in that form.
>>>>>>Richard is correct. Caesar actually wrote: "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes >>>>>>tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua >>>>>>Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur.
>>>>>Mr Wagner, this is confusing... Mr Maine wrote 'I'd *SWEAR* I remember >>>>>this as 'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est' in response to my stating >>>>>'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres!'... how does what you cite here >>>>>support his reminisce as 'correct'?
>>>>Even more confusing is the Original Latin I remember as "Omnes Galii est divista >>>>in tres partes."
>>>What's Life without a bit of Mystery?
>>>>I remember it very distinctly. How many versions of Gaelic Wars >>>>did Caesar write? What the hell's going on here?
>>>Ahhhhh, for the Oldene Dayse... when they taught Latin quotes such as >>>cannot be taught by *ten* teachers, today!
>>Unlike English, where normal word order is SVO (subject, verb, object), Latin, >>along with Japanese, has no normal word order. One can rearrange the words in a >>sentence and it still says the same thing.
>This is similar to what I was taught about Ancient Greek, where order word >important is very not.
>>My hypothesis is that high school Latin text authors rearranged words to make it >>easier for English-speaking students to understand. Thus
>>Caesar's "Gallia est omnis divisa in parte tres." and >>Mr Maine's "Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est." and >>My "Omnes Galii est divista in tres partes."
>>are linguistically equivalent, are saying the same thing and are equally valid >>Latin.
>All right... let's see how much I can shame myself publically with my lack >of skill; my apologies in advance for the grievous errors.
>I would say not *quite* so, Mr Wagner. In Caesar's quote 'Gallia' is a >nominative, in Mr Wagner's quote 'Galii' appears to be modified by 'Omnes' >(which would make it an object, hence accusative, but 'Galii' appears to >be a genetive). In Mr Maine's example there is the slight problem of >'Alles'.
Modification by an adjective doesn't make Gallia an object. It is the subject of the sentence and therefore should be nominative. In my memory it was plural. What's the plural of Gallia? Galliae?
In message <40f02ce0$0$3003$4d4eb...@news.nl.uu.net>, Toon Moene <t...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> writes
>Nah, it's not that hard (that must be the reason why we started with De >Bello Gallico):
>The whole of Gaul is divided into three parts, of which the Belgians >live in one, another the Aquitani and the third those who are called >Celts in their own language, [but] Gauls by us.
>Well, perhaps the recent "King Arthur" movie will throw some light on >the history of the Celts (especially those wbo lived in that >"perfidious Albion"). >However, this can never be done by a PG-13 rated Disney movie, as the >Celts were wont to fight stark naked.
I doubt if the movie will add anything new as it is based on the hotly disputed idea that the original King Arthur was a roman soldier serving on Hadrians wall.
I pointed out in this newsgroup once before, it is unlikely that any group identified itself with the Celtic designation but rather that, even from ancient Grecian times, anyone living north of the Alps was known collectively as the Celts.
-- Alistair Maclean
Notice at an Australian wildlife park: "These animals are dangerous. Do not leave your vehicle. Entrance $5. Poms on bicycles - free".
Robert Wagner wrote: > Toon Moene <t...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> wrote: >>Well, perhaps the recent "King Arthur" movie will throw some light on >>the history of the Celts (especially those wbo lived in that "perfidious >>Albion"). >>However, this can never be done by a PG-13 rated Disney movie, as the >>Celts were wont to fight stark naked. > I'm right now watching a History Channel examination of the King Arthur movie. > Scholars disagree ..what else is new? I didn't see any naked men fighting.
"[The Celts] wear bronze helmets with figures picked out on them, even horns, which made them look even taller than they already are...while others cover themselves with breast-armour made out of chains. But most content themselves with the weapons nature gave them: they go naked into battle...Weird, discordant horns were sounded, [they shouted in chorus with their] deep and harsh voices, they beat their swords rythmically against their shields."
>>>My hypothesis is that high school Latin text authors rearranged words to make it >>>easier for English-speaking students to understand. Thus
>>>Caesar's "Gallia est omnis divisa in parte tres." and >>>Mr Maine's "Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est." and >>>My "Omnes Galii est divista in tres partes."
>>>are linguistically equivalent, are saying the same thing and are equally valid >>>Latin.
>>All right... let's see how much I can shame myself publically with my lack >>of skill; my apologies in advance for the grievous errors.
>>I would say not *quite* so, Mr Wagner. In Caesar's quote 'Gallia' is a >>nominative, in Mr Wagner's quote 'Galii' appears to be modified by 'Omnes' >>(which would make it an object, hence accusative, but 'Galii' appears to >>be a genetive). In Mr Maine's example there is the slight problem of >>'Alles'.
>Modification by an adjective doesn't make Gallia an object. It is the subject of >the sentence and therefore should be nominative.
'He is all wet'.
'All of him is wet.'
>In my memory it was plural. >What's the plural of Gallia? Galliae?
That depends on the case, Mr Wagner... nominative plural is not the same as accusative is not the same as genetive... and then there are the noun types, as well. Assuming a type 1 nominative plural 'Galliae' appears to be correct...
... but there isn't enough gall to demonstrate it.
>>>Well, perhaps the recent "King Arthur" movie will throw some light on >>>the history of the Celts (especially those wbo lived in that "perfidious >>>Albion"). >>>However, this can never be done by a PG-13 rated Disney movie, as the >>>Celts were wont to fight stark naked.
>> I'm right now watching a History Channel examination of the King Arthur movie. >> Scholars disagree ..what else is new? I didn't see any naked men fighting.
Well now, Mr Moene... one person cites an program televised in America which shows no nudity, the other cites the works of a contemporary of Caesars Julius and Augustus and who travelled through Asia and Europe to compile information for the 'Bibliotheca Historica'.
Whom to believe? Ti esti aleithia... errrr, quid est veritas?
