Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
THREE-sided obelisk
501 views
Skip to first unread message
GARYWC
Jan 8, 2016, 2:22:14 PM1/8/16
to
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary, Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an "obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
Peter Young
Jan 8, 2016, 2:45:55 PM1/8/16
to
search. Could it also be a stele, like the ones in Axum, which have
four sides, with the width being a lot longer the sides? In other
words, a thin obelisk.
Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Os)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
David Kleinecke
Jan 8, 2016, 3:51:42 PM1/8/16
to
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 11:22:14 AM UTC-8, GARYWC wrote:
> The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary, Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an "obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
>
> What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
Tetrahedron?
> The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary, Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an "obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
>
> What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
GARYWC
Jan 8, 2016, 4:01:19 PM1/8/16
to
The Robba Fountain (Robbov vodnjak) in Ljubljana, Slovenia has a THREE-sided "obelisk".
The Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi in the Piazza Navona in Rome, Italy has a FOUR-sided obelisk.
The Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi in the Piazza Navona in Rome, Italy has a FOUR-sided obelisk.
Horace LaBadie
Jan 8, 2016, 4:40:37 PM1/8/16
to
In article <88c71125-40ab-4b92...@googlegroups.com>,
Trylon.
They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
Perisphere.
They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
Perisphere.
GARYWC
Jan 8, 2016, 4:53:50 PM1/8/16
to
The Trylon is mentioned in the 1939 Yip Harburg song "Lydia the Tattooed Lady", made famous by Groucho Marx in "At The Circus".
Richard Tobin
Jan 8, 2016, 8:30:03 PM1/8/16
to
The OED says:
1
a. A tapering, four-sided, usually monolithic pillar or column of
stone with a pyramidal apex, set up as a monument or landmark
(originally in ancient Egypt).
b. A column or pillar having some other form or function.
I was not previously aware of
2
b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
references, footnotes, etc.
and the note
Post-classical Latin obeliscus is used for obelus to denote a type
of diacritical mark by analogy with post-classical Latin asteriscus
asterisk n., with which it generally occurs in juxtaposition.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 8, 2016, 9:18:07 PM1/8/16
to
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 8:30:03 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <88c71125-40ab-4b92...@googlegroups.com>,
> GARYWC <gcot...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary,
> >Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an
> >"obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
> >
> >What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
>
> An obelisk.
>
> The OED says:
>
> 1
> a. A tapering, four-sided, usually monolithic pillar or column of
> stone with a pyramidal apex, set up as a monument or landmark
> (originally in ancient Egypt).
>
> b. A column or pillar having some other form or function.
>
> I was not previously aware of
>
> 2
>
> b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
> references, footnotes, etc.
Usually "obelus" (or "dagger"). I've never seen it called "obelisk." It also
> In article <88c71125-40ab-4b92...@googlegroups.com>,
> GARYWC <gcot...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary,
> >Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an
> >"obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
> >
> >What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
>
> An obelisk.
>
> The OED says:
>
> 1
> a. A tapering, four-sided, usually monolithic pillar or column of
> stone with a pyramidal apex, set up as a monument or landmark
> (originally in ancient Egypt).
>
> b. A column or pillar having some other form or function.
>
> I was not previously aware of
>
> 2
>
> b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
> references, footnotes, etc.
marks death dates.
Mark Brader
Jan 9, 2016, 1:12:24 AM1/9/16
to
Gary Cotter:
The dictionary on the oxforddictionaries.com has a less restrictive
definition:
# A tapering stone pillar, typically having a square or rectangular
# cross section, set up as a monument or landmark.
Note the word "typically".
Horace LaBadie:
> Trylon.
No.
> They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
> Perisphere.
That was *the* Trylon, a proper name. Some sources do describe it as
an obelisk, although it was not made of stone, but just finished so as
to look something like stone.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pedantic and
m...@vex.net that's just as good." -- D Gary Grady
My text in this article is in the public domain.
>> The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary, Thefreedictionary
>> and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an "obelisk" as being a tall,
>> slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
>>
>> What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
I'd say it's still an obelisk, the same as you just did (implicitly).
>> and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an "obelisk" as being a tall,
>> slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
>>
>> What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
The dictionary on the oxforddictionaries.com has a less restrictive
definition:
# A tapering stone pillar, typically having a square or rectangular
# cross section, set up as a monument or landmark.
Note the word "typically".
Horace LaBadie:
> Trylon.
No.
> They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
> Perisphere.
an obelisk, although it was not made of stone, but just finished so as
to look something like stone.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pedantic and
m...@vex.net that's just as good." -- D Gary Grady
My text in this article is in the public domain.
James Hogg
Jan 9, 2016, 5:04:44 AM1/9/16
to
Mark Brader wrote:
> Gary Cotter:
>>> The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary,
>>> Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an
>>> "obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
>>>
>>> What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
>
> I'd say it's still an obelisk, the same as you just did (implicitly).
> The dictionary on the oxforddictionaries.com has a less restrictive
> definition:
>
> # A tapering stone pillar, typically having a square or rectangular
> # cross section, set up as a monument or landmark.
>
> Note the word "typically".
>
>
> Horace LaBadie:
>> Trylon.
>
> No.
>
>> They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
>> Perisphere.
>
> That was *the* Trylon, a proper name. Some sources do describe it as
> an obelisk, although it was not made of stone, but just finished so
> as to look something like stone.
There's a sculpture in Narvik in Norway in the form of a three-sided
> Gary Cotter:
>>> The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Wikipedia, Yourdictionary,
>>> Thefreedictionary and the Cambridge English Dictionary define an
>>> "obelisk" as being a tall, slender, FOUR-sided stone pillar.
>>>
>>> What is the correct term for a THREE-sided obelisk?
>
> I'd say it's still an obelisk, the same as you just did (implicitly).
> The dictionary on the oxforddictionaries.com has a less restrictive
> definition:
>
> # A tapering stone pillar, typically having a square or rectangular
> # cross section, set up as a monument or landmark.
>
> Note the word "typically".
>
>
> Horace LaBadie:
>> Trylon.
>
> No.
>
>> They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
>> Perisphere.
>
> That was *the* Trylon, a proper name. Some sources do describe it as
> an obelisk, although it was not made of stone, but just finished so
> as to look something like stone.
obelisk. It's called the Trinigon, but that's an invented name, just
like Trylon.
--
James
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 9, 2016, 5:37:06 AM1/9/16
to
Richard Tobin
Jan 9, 2016, 6:50:03 AM1/9/16
to
In article <5f944bcf-f8be-46e9...@googlegroups.com>,
tell us whether it is used in French.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> I was not previously aware of
>>
>> 2
>>
>> b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
>> references, footnotes, etc.
>Usually "obelus" (or "dagger"). I've never seen it called "obelisk."
Presumably Goscinny had. Perhaps one of our French speakers could
>> I was not previously aware of
>>
>> 2
>>
>> b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
>> references, footnotes, etc.
>Usually "obelus" (or "dagger"). I've never seen it called "obelisk."
tell us whether it is used in French.
-- Richard
J. J. Lodder
Jan 9, 2016, 7:13:24 AM1/9/16
to
(en forme de broche en Francais)
and
Obélisque for the Egyptian stone column.
So no.
Obelix doesn't produce obelisques btw,
what he produces is called a 'menhir',
Jan
Peter Young
Jan 9, 2016, 7:36:54 AM1/9/16
to
Peter
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 9, 2016, 7:41:09 AM1/9/16
to
RH Draney
Jan 9, 2016, 7:43:32 AM1/9/16
to
On 1/9/2016 3:04 AM, James Hogg wrote:
> Mark Brader wrote:
>> Gary Cotter:
>>
> Mark Brader wrote:
>> Gary Cotter:
>>
>>> They had one at the 1939 World's Fair in New York, paired with the
>>> Perisphere.
>>
>> That was *the* Trylon, a proper name. Some sources do describe it as
>> an obelisk, although it was not made of stone, but just finished so
>> as to look something like stone.
>
> There's a sculpture in Narvik in Norway in the form of a three-sided
> obelisk. It's called the Trinigon, but that's an invented name, just
> like Trylon.
If it were stubbier, they could have called it the Tryramid....r
>>> Perisphere.
>>
>> That was *the* Trylon, a proper name. Some sources do describe it as
>> an obelisk, although it was not made of stone, but just finished so
>> as to look something like stone.
>
> There's a sculpture in Narvik in Norway in the form of a three-sided
> obelisk. It's called the Trinigon, but that's an invented name, just
> like Trylon.
Richard Tobin
Jan 9, 2016, 9:00:03 AM1/9/16
to
In article <e22c64a6-efa5-4b76...@googlegroups.com>,
the OED. But perhaps it's not so well known in the US.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >> I was not previously aware of
>> >> 2
>> >> b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
>> >> references, footnotes, etc.
>> >Usually "obelus" (or "dagger"). I've never seen it called "obelisk."
>> Presumably Goscinny had. Perhaps one of our French speakers could
>> tell us whether it is used in French.
>Sorry, I don't see a Goscinny anywhere in the thread above.
I assumed it would be obvious what I was referring to when I quoted
>> >> I was not previously aware of
>> >> 2
>> >> b. The [dagger symbol] chiefly used in printing for marginal
>> >> references, footnotes, etc.
>> >Usually "obelus" (or "dagger"). I've never seen it called "obelisk."
>> Presumably Goscinny had. Perhaps one of our French speakers could
>> tell us whether it is used in French.
>Sorry, I don't see a Goscinny anywhere in the thread above.
the OED. But perhaps it's not so well known in the US.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix
-- Richard
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Jan 9, 2016, 9:15:20 AM1/9/16
to
On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 11:04:41 +0100, James Hogg <Jas....@gOUTmail.com>
wrote:
Another upward-pointing-thingie was the Skylon in London. Being of
circular cross-section it had no edges or corners and therefore had just
one "side".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_%28Festival_of_Britain%29
It was designed by Hidalgo Moya, Philip Powell and Felix
Samuely,...
The name was suggested by Mrs A G S Fidler, wife of the chief
architect of the Crawley Development Corporation. Moya wrote, "We
were unimpressed at first but soon came to accept that, by combining
the suggestions of Pylon, Sky and Nylon (a fascinating new material
in 1951), it was wonderfully descriptive name which has lasted forty
years, considerably longer than the structure itself."
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
wrote:
circular cross-section it had no edges or corners and therefore had just
one "side".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_%28Festival_of_Britain%29
It was designed by Hidalgo Moya, Philip Powell and Felix
Samuely,...
The name was suggested by Mrs A G S Fidler, wife of the chief
architect of the Crawley Development Corporation. Moya wrote, "We
were unimpressed at first but soon came to accept that, by combining
the suggestions of Pylon, Sky and Nylon (a fascinating new material
in 1951), it was wonderfully descriptive name which has lasted forty
years, considerably longer than the structure itself."
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
J. J. Lodder
Jan 9, 2016, 4:52:33 PM1/9/16
to
(and a rather poor one, for the volume I have seen)
Moreover, most of the characters have different names,
(than in the English translation) for copyright reasons, it seems.
So the feeble English name jokes have been replaced
by even feebler American ones.
This doubling of most names must be annoying for fans
who have to read both English and American versions.
Asterix and Obelix do keep their names though,
but none? of the others,
Jan
pensive hamster
Jan 9, 2016, 5:25:52 PM1/9/16
to
On Saturday, 9 January 2016 14:15:20 UTC, PeterWD wrote:
> Another upward-pointing-thingie was the Skylon in London. Being of
> circular cross-section it had no edges or corners and therefore had just
> one "side".
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_%28Festival_of_Britain%29
>
> It was designed by Hidalgo Moya, Philip Powell and Felix
> Samuely,...
>
> The name was suggested by Mrs A G S Fidler, wife of the chief
> architect of the Crawley Development Corporation. Moya wrote, "We
> were unimpressed at first but soon came to accept that, by combining
> the suggestions of Pylon, Sky and Nylon (a fascinating new material
> in 1951), it was wonderfully descriptive name which has lasted forty
> years, considerably longer than the structure itself."
Actually, the name has lasted a bit longer than that. Skylon is now
> Another upward-pointing-thingie was the Skylon in London. Being of
> circular cross-section it had no edges or corners and therefore had just
> one "side".
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_%28Festival_of_Britain%29
>
> It was designed by Hidalgo Moya, Philip Powell and Felix
> Samuely,...
>
> The name was suggested by Mrs A G S Fidler, wife of the chief
> architect of the Crawley Development Corporation. Moya wrote, "We
> were unimpressed at first but soon came to accept that, by combining
> the suggestions of Pylon, Sky and Nylon (a fascinating new material
> in 1951), it was wonderfully descriptive name which has lasted forty
> years, considerably longer than the structure itself."
the name of a restaurant, situated near to where the original Skylon
was:
http://www.skylon-restaurant.co.uk/at/
'Skylon is situated on the third floor of the Royal Festival Hall in the
Southbank Centre and offers stunning views from huge floor-to-ceiling
windows. ...
'Skylon takes its name from the original iconic structure that was built
for the 1951 Festival of Britain. The restaurant's design echoes the
style of the Royal Festival Hall during the same period, with unique
contemporary touches.'
Peter Moylan
Jan 9, 2016, 8:21:06 PM1/9/16
to
On 2016-Jan-10 08:52, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Ah, now I see that there were also American translations that changed
the names yet again.
I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
Instead, the translators chose alternative wordplay that did make sense
in English.
There have been translations into many languages, and of course the
translators have needed to find suitable names for the characters. See
for example:
http://ifarm.nl/asterix/names.html
(The author of that page has made a bit of a mess of the Cyrillic
characters, and there are a few other errors I noticed, but the page is
impressively complete.) In general it seems that Asterix and Obelix keep
their names in most languages, but there have been bigger changes for
the other characters.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix
>
> Only a few volumes have appeared in an American translation.
> (and a rather poor one, for the volume I have seen)
> Moreover, most of the characters have different names,
> (than in the English translation) for copyright reasons, it seems.
> So the feeble English name jokes have been replaced
> by even feebler American ones.
> This doubling of most names must be annoying for fans
> who have to read both English and American versions.
American? The translators were English.
>> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix
>
> Only a few volumes have appeared in an American translation.
> (and a rather poor one, for the volume I have seen)
> Moreover, most of the characters have different names,
> (than in the English translation) for copyright reasons, it seems.
> So the feeble English name jokes have been replaced
> by even feebler American ones.
> This doubling of most names must be annoying for fans
> who have to read both English and American versions.
Ah, now I see that there were also American translations that changed
the names yet again.
I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
Instead, the translators chose alternative wordplay that did make sense
in English.
There have been translations into many languages, and of course the
translators have needed to find suitable names for the characters. See
for example:
http://ifarm.nl/asterix/names.html
(The author of that page has made a bit of a mess of the Cyrillic
characters, and there are a few other errors I noticed, but the page is
impressively complete.) In general it seems that Asterix and Obelix keep
their names in most languages, but there have been bigger changes for
the other characters.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Richard Tobin
Jan 9, 2016, 10:25:04 PM1/9/16
to
In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
"Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
-- Richard
"Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
-- Richard
J. J. Lodder
Jan 10, 2016, 10:21:16 AM1/10/16
to
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> On 2016-Jan-10 08:52, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix
> >
> > Only a few volumes have appeared in an American translation.
> > (and a rather poor one, for the volume I have seen)
> > Moreover, most of the characters have different names,
> > (than in the English translation) for copyright reasons, it seems.
> > So the feeble English name jokes have been replaced
> > by even feebler American ones.
> > This doubling of most names must be annoying for fans
> > who have to read both English and American versions.
>
> American? The translators were English.
>
> Ah, now I see that there were also American translations that changed
> the names yet again.
>
> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
But they did much more than that.
> On 2016-Jan-10 08:52, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix
> >
> > Only a few volumes have appeared in an American translation.
> > (and a rather poor one, for the volume I have seen)
> > Moreover, most of the characters have different names,
> > (than in the English translation) for copyright reasons, it seems.
> > So the feeble English name jokes have been replaced
> > by even feebler American ones.
> > This doubling of most names must be annoying for fans
> > who have to read both English and American versions.
>
> American? The translators were English.
>
> Ah, now I see that there were also American translations that changed
> the names yet again.
>
> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
> Instead, the translators chose alternative wordplay that did make sense
> in English.
For example, the great Dane that Idefix falls in love with
is 'Zoodvincens' in French, and 'The hunting season' in English.
It must be possible to do better than that.
Zųųųfųslų perhaps?
> There have been translations into many languages, and of course the
> translators have needed to find suitable names for the characters. See
> for example:
> http://ifarm.nl/asterix/names.html
> (The author of that page has made a bit of a mess of the Cyrillic
> characters, and there are a few other errors I noticed, but the page is
> impressively complete.) In general it seems that Asterix and Obelix keep
> their names in most languages, but there have been bigger changes for
> the other characters.
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 10, 2016, 10:21:17 AM1/10/16
to
Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >So the feeble English name jokes
>
> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
Disagree completely.
> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >So the feeble English name jokes
>
> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
Always though that this one is rather lame.
And there was no need to translate at all,
for Idefix is adequate in English.
> And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
that making a name end with -ix or -us
is by itself already very funny.
I think they overdid it,
translating far more names than necessary.
They tried to be as witty as Goscinny, and failed.
For me, on reading both,
I get a dumbed down impression for the English editions.
I'm not entirely negative, and I can appreciate
some really British finds, like Appianglorius,
but they failed also in that
by giving it away immediately.
There is one really great find to report though,
in the hard to translate Medusa scene.
The pirate captain on the raft says:
'We've been framed!'
Jan
Richard Tobin
Jan 10, 2016, 1:20:03 PM1/10/16
to
In article <1mgt1vb.z2...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
nothing funny about the French name. I've been told by a French
speaker that English has much more scope for this sort of pun than
French.
-- Richard
>> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
>> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
>> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
>But they did much more than that.
>There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
But Getafix, like Dogmatix, is better. As far as I know there's
>> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
>> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
>But they did much more than that.
>There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
nothing funny about the French name. I've been told by a French
speaker that English has much more scope for this sort of pun than
French.
-- Richard
Richard Tobin
Jan 10, 2016, 1:25:03 PM1/10/16
to
In article <1mgt1vm.yq...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
They wouldn't even know how to say it.
-- Richard
J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>Disagree completely.
>Always though that this one is rather lame.
>And there was no need to translate at all,
>for Idefix is adequate in English.
Idefix would mean absolutely nothing to most English readers.
>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>Disagree completely.
>Always though that this one is rather lame.
>And there was no need to translate at all,
>for Idefix is adequate in English.
They wouldn't even know how to say it.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 10, 2016, 7:08:14 PM1/10/16
to
On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >
> > >So the feeble English name jokes
> >
> > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>
> Disagree completely.
> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> And there was no need to translate at all,
> for Idefix is adequate in English.
"I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >
> > >So the feeble English name jokes
> >
> > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>
> Disagree completely.
> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> And there was no need to translate at all,
> for Idefix is adequate in English.
they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
>
> The English translators seem to think
> that making a name end with -ix or -us
> is by itself already very funny.
Will Parsons
Jan 10, 2016, 8:00:30 PM1/10/16
to
On Sunday, 10 Jan 2016 7:08 PM -0500, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> >
>> > >So the feeble English name jokes
>> >
>> > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>>
>> Disagree completely.
>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
>> And there was no need to translate at all,
>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
>
> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>
>> > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
>>
>> The English translators seem to think
>> that making a name end with -ix or -us
>> is by itself already very funny.
>
> Wasn't that the thinking of the author in the first place?
I don't know, but surely the names in -ix were inspired by notable
> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> >
>> > >So the feeble English name jokes
>> >
>> > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>>
>> Disagree completely.
>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
>> And there was no need to translate at all,
>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
>
> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>
>> > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
>>
>> The English translators seem to think
>> that making a name end with -ix or -us
>> is by itself already very funny.
>
> Wasn't that the thinking of the author in the first place?
Gaullish names, such as Vercingetorix and Ambiorix?
--
Will
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 4:17:10 AM1/11/16
to
> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > >
> > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >
> > Disagree completely.
> > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>
> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > >
> > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >
> > Disagree completely.
> > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>
> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
> >
> > The English translators seem to think
> > that making a name end with -ix or -us
> > is by itself already very funny.
>
> Wasn't that the thinking of the author in the first place?
(immediately)
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 4:17:10 AM1/11/16
to
Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <1mgt1vb.z2...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
> >> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
> >> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
>
> >But they did much more than that.
> >There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
>
> But Getafix, like Dogmatix, is better.
Opinions may differ.
> In article <1mgt1vb.z2...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
> >> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
> >> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
>
> >But they did much more than that.
> >There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
>
> But Getafix, like Dogmatix, is better.
> As far as I know there's
> nothing funny about the French name.
> I've been told by a French speaker that English has much more scope for
> this sort of pun than French.
Any native speakers for an opinion?
Nevertheless, there is the question
of what a translator should be doing.
Should he render the original as faithfully as possible?
Or should he pretend to be a better novelist than Balzac,
or wittier dan Goscinny, or deeper than Sartre,
and try to improve on the original by rewriting it?
In my opinion the British Asterix translators have tried to much,
and with generally poor reults,
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 4:17:10 AM1/11/16
to
Part of the fun is that references may be cryptic,
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 4:17:18 AM1/11/16
to
By extension the Goth have -ic, and the Bretons -ax,
with very few exceptions.
And btw, Ambiorix was supposed to be a Belgian,
one of the greatest Belgians even,
Jan
Richard Tobin
Jan 11, 2016, 5:30:02 AM1/11/16
to
In article <1mgutec.132...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
something good enough.
>Nevertheless, there is the question
>of what a translator should be doing.
>Should he render the original as faithfully as possible?
>Or should he pretend to be a better novelist than Balzac,
>or wittier dan Goscinny, or deeper than Sartre,
>and try to improve on the original by rewriting it?
Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it. The
same jokes don't work in different languages,and there's no point
trying to produce a one-to-one correspondence of jokes.
>In my opinion the British Asterix translators have tried to much,
>and with generally poor reults,
Perhaps it works better for native speakers.
-- Richard
J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> As far as I know there's
>> nothing funny about the French name.
>Must there be?
I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
>> As far as I know there's
>> nothing funny about the French name.
>Must there be?
something good enough.
>Nevertheless, there is the question
>of what a translator should be doing.
>Should he render the original as faithfully as possible?
>Or should he pretend to be a better novelist than Balzac,
>or wittier dan Goscinny, or deeper than Sartre,
>and try to improve on the original by rewriting it?
same jokes don't work in different languages,and there's no point
trying to produce a one-to-one correspondence of jokes.
>In my opinion the British Asterix translators have tried to much,
>and with generally poor reults,
-- Richard
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Jan 11, 2016, 5:39:30 AM1/11/16
to
On 2016-01-11 10:29:47 +0000, Richard Tobin said:
> In article <1mgutec.132...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>>> As far as I know there's
>>> nothing funny about the French name.
>
>> Must there be?
>
> I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
> something good enough.
>
>> Nevertheless, there is the question
>> of what a translator should be doing.
>> Should he render the original as faithfully as possible?
>> Or should he pretend to be a better novelist than Balzac,
>> or wittier dan Goscinny, or deeper than Sartre,
>> and try to improve on the original by rewriting it?
>
> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it. The
> same jokes don't work in different languages,and there's no point
> trying to produce a one-to-one correspondence of jokes.
Nabokov gave the example of korona/vorona/korova which correspond in
> In article <1mgutec.132...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>>> As far as I know there's
>>> nothing funny about the French name.
>
>> Must there be?
>
> I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
> something good enough.
>
>> Nevertheless, there is the question
>> of what a translator should be doing.
>> Should he render the original as faithfully as possible?
>> Or should he pretend to be a better novelist than Balzac,
>> or wittier dan Goscinny, or deeper than Sartre,
>> and try to improve on the original by rewriting it?
>
> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it. The
> same jokes don't work in different languages,and there's no point
> trying to produce a one-to-one correspondence of jokes.
Russian to crown/crow/cow. More generally, he tied hard to produce
translations that retained the original wordplay.
>
>> In my opinion the British Asterix translators have tried to much,
>> and with generally poor reults,
>
> Perhaps it works better for native speakers.
>
> -- Richard
--
>> In my opinion the British Asterix translators have tried to much,
>> and with generally poor reults,
>
> Perhaps it works better for native speakers.
>
> -- Richard
athel
Peter Moylan
Jan 11, 2016, 6:16:54 AM1/11/16
to
On 2016-Jan-11 20:17, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <1mgt1vb.z2...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>
>>>> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
>>>> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
>>>> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
>>
>>> But they did much more than that.
>>> There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
>>
>> But Getafix, like Dogmatix, is better.
>
> Opinions may differ.
>
>> As far as I know there's
>> nothing funny about the French name.
>
> Must there be?
>
>> I've been told by a French speaker that English has much more scope for
>> this sort of pun than French.
>
> Depends on how clever you are.
> Any native speakers for an opinion?
Getafix and Dogmatix are excellent examples where the translation is
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <1mgt1vb.z2...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>
>>>> I've read both English and French versions, and the different names
>>>> don't bother me at all. Keeping the original French names would have
>>>> made the wordplay incomprehensible to people who didn't know French.
>>
>>> But they did much more than that.
>>> There was no real need to change Panoramix for example.
>>
>> But Getafix, like Dogmatix, is better.
>
> Opinions may differ.
>
>> As far as I know there's
>> nothing funny about the French name.
>
> Must there be?
>
>> I've been told by a French speaker that English has much more scope for
>> this sort of pun than French.
>
> Depends on how clever you are.
> Any native speakers for an opinion?
better than the French original.
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 11, 2016, 7:36:51 AM1/11/16
to
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > Disagree completely.
> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>
> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > Disagree completely.
> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>
> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
at all of <idée fixe>.
> > > > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
> > > The English translators seem to think
> > > that making a name end with -ix or -us
> > > is by itself already very funny.
> > Wasn't that the thinking of the author in the first place?
>
> Thre is more to Asterix than meets the eye.
> (immediately)
I may have seen one comic book when I was in college (BrE "at university").
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 9:01:14 AM1/11/16
to
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 9:01:14 AM1/11/16
to
Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <1mgutec.132...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >> As far as I know there's
> >> nothing funny about the French name.
>
> >Must there be?
>
> I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
> something good enough.
See? You do subscribe to the idea that translators
> In article <1mgutec.132...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >> As far as I know there's
> >> nothing funny about the French name.
>
> >Must there be?
>
> I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
> something good enough.
should try to be better than the original.
Goscinny used Panoramix, (for reasons known only to him)
there is no good reason to change it,
so Panoramix it should remain.
> >Nevertheless, there is the question
> >of what a translator should be doing.
> >Should he render the original as faithfully as possible?
> >Or should he pretend to be a better novelist than Balzac,
> >or wittier dan Goscinny, or deeper than Sartre,
> >and try to improve on the original by rewriting it?
>
> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
The British translators did a lot of rewriting
because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
> The
> same jokes don't work in different languages,and there's no point
> trying to produce a one-to-one correspondence of jokes.
> >In my opinion the British Asterix translators have tried to much,
> >and with generally poor reults,
>
> Perhaps it works better for native speakers.
This must be a Roman! Very funny, HaHa!
Jan
Adam Funk
Jan 11, 2016, 9:15:12 AM1/11/16
to
On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>> > > Disagree completely.
>> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>>
>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>
> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> at all of <idée fixe>.
Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>> > > Disagree completely.
>> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>>
>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>
> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> at all of <idée fixe>.
with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
expect many NSoEs to get it.
--
I look back with the greatest pleasure to the kindness and hospitality
I met with in Yorkshire, where I spent some of the happiest years of
my life. --- Sabine Baring-Gould
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 9:37:54 AM1/11/16
to
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > > Disagree completely.
> > > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> > > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >
> > Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>
> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> at all of <idée fixe>.
You have considered that the problem might lie
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > > Disagree completely.
> > > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> > > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >
> > Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>
> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> at all of <idée fixe>.
with your slowness in picking up suggestions?
If you consult the international name page given by PM
<http://ifarm.nl/asterix/names.html>
you'll see that Idefix remains himself
in almost all 'western' languages, English excepted.
The 'idée fixe' is part of the western cultural heritage.
> > > > > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
> > > > The English translators seem to think
> > > > that making a name end with -ix or -us
> > > > is by itself already very funny.
> > > Wasn't that the thinking of the author in the first place?
> >
> > Thre is more to Asterix than meets the eye.
> > (immediately)
>
> I wouldn't know.
(which I should have bought when in print, but didn't)
<http://www.amazon.fr/Dictionnaire-Goscinny-Aymar-Chatenet/dp/2709623137
/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1452522649&sr=8-3&keywords=goscinny+biographie>
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 9:53:19 AM1/11/16
to
Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> >> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >
> >> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> >> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >> > > Disagree completely.
> >> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> >> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> >> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> >> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> >> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >>
> >> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> >
> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no
> > suggestion at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> expect many NSoEs to get it.
Is that bad? There are things in Asterix
> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> >> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >
> >> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> >> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >> > > Disagree completely.
> >> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> >> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> >> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> >> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> >> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >>
> >> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> >
> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no
> > suggestion at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> expect many NSoEs to get it.
that I didn't get until much later.
For example, why is one of the Roman camps
guarding the village we know so well
named Babaorum? [1]
Jan
[1] Hint: it is on-topic for alt.usage.english
Richard Tobin
Jan 11, 2016, 10:30:04 AM1/11/16
to
In article <1mgv7rf.1lg...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
they are using. No doubt it will sometimes be impossible to
produce a good pun in English where there is one in French, but
in others they will be able to produce a better one.
As to to whether I "subscribe to the idea that translators should try
to be better than the original", it's not something I'd thought much
about, but I don't see why it's obvious that they shouldn't.
>> Perhaps it works better for native speakers.
>Ha! I see an -us name.
>This must be a Roman! Very funny, HaHa!
No, but English has plenty of words with similar sounding endings that
can make it funny. See The Life of Brian for a well-known example.
It seems you just don't find the English Asterix books funny. That's
fine, but so what? You aren't the target audience.
-- Richard
J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
>> something good enough.
>See? You do subscribe to the idea that translators
>should try to be better than the original.
In cases like this they should do what they can with the language
>> I am sure Goscinny would have made it funny if he'd thought of
>> something good enough.
>See? You do subscribe to the idea that translators
>should try to be better than the original.
they are using. No doubt it will sometimes be impossible to
produce a good pun in English where there is one in French, but
in others they will be able to produce a better one.
As to to whether I "subscribe to the idea that translators should try
to be better than the original", it's not something I'd thought much
about, but I don't see why it's obvious that they shouldn't.
>> Perhaps it works better for native speakers.
>Ha! I see an -us name.
>This must be a Roman! Very funny, HaHa!
can make it funny. See The Life of Brian for a well-known example.
It seems you just don't find the English Asterix books funny. That's
fine, but so what? You aren't the target audience.
-- Richard
Will Parsons
Jan 11, 2016, 12:01:47 PM1/11/16
to
--
Will
Will Parsons
Jan 11, 2016, 12:10:18 PM1/11/16
to
On Monday, 11 Jan 2016 9:13 AM -0500, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>>> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>>> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>>> > > Disagree completely.
>>> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>>> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>>> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>>> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>>> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>>>
>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>>
>> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
>> at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> expect many NSoEs to get it.
I disagree. I'm not familiar with the Asterix comics, but if I came
> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>>> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>>> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>>> > > Disagree completely.
>>> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>>> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>>> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>>> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>>> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>>>
>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>>
>> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
>> at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> expect many NSoEs to get it.
upon "Idefix", I think I'd assume it to be pronounced something like
[ˈidɛfɪks] or [ˈɪdəfɪks]. I might not get the joke immediately, but
I'm pretty sure I *would* get it. I would imagine most reasonably
educated English speakers know "idée fixe".
--
Will
Bertel Lund Hansen
Jan 11, 2016, 12:17:57 PM1/11/16
to
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev:
> Getafix and Dogmatix are excellent examples where the translation is
> better than the French original.
I only looked up "Getafix" now. He is called "Miraculix" in
Danish, and I actually had thought until now that that was
also his French name.
I like "Miraculix" better than "Panoramix" with "Getafix"
somewhere in between.
--
Bertel - stadig med Linux
> Getafix and Dogmatix are excellent examples where the translation is
> better than the French original.
Danish, and I actually had thought until now that that was
also his French name.
I like "Miraculix" better than "Panoramix" with "Getafix"
somewhere in between.
--
Bertel - stadig med Linux
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 11, 2016, 1:11:00 PM1/11/16
to
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 9:15:12 AM UTC-5, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> >> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> >> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >> > > Disagree completely.
> >> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> >> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> >> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> >> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> >> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> > at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right
But since it is not an exant word whose pronunciation you could have
> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> >> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> >> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >> > > Disagree completely.
> >> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> >> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> >> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> >> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> >> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> > at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right
learned in school, you only have the spelling to go by, and the syllable <ide>
can hardly stand for anything but /ayd/.
> *and* you're familiar
> with the term "idée fixe".
you didn't have the "French" name in front of you, which has vanished
somewhere in the snippage above, why would it even cross your mind as relevant?
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 11, 2016, 1:14:46 PM1/11/16
to
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 9:37:54 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > > > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > > > Disagree completely.
> > > > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > > > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> > > > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > > Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> > at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> You have considered that the problem might lie
> with your slowness in picking up suggestions?
What suggestions?
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
> > > > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > > > Disagree completely.
> > > > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > > > And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > > > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> > > > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > > Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
> > at all of <idée fixe>.
>
> You have considered that the problem might lie
> with your slowness in picking up suggestions?
What is PM?
> you'll see that Idefix remains himself
> in almost all 'western' languages, English excepted.
> The 'idée fixe' is part of the western cultural heritage.
and "idée fixe"?
> > > > > > And I think English lends itself better to mock Latin names.
> > > > > The English translators seem to think
> > > > > that making a name end with -ix or -us
> > > > > is by itself already very funny.
> > > > Wasn't that the thinking of the author in the first place?
> > > Thre is more to Asterix than meets the eye.
> > > (immediately)
> > I wouldn't know.
>
> There is a ±1000 page dictionary on the man and his works,
Richard Tobin
Jan 11, 2016, 1:30:04 PM1/11/16
to
In article <slrnn97ofn...@anukis.local>,
At least in Britain, the Asterix comics have been sold as children's books.
They're the sort of children's book where there are lots of jokes that
only adults will get, but I wouldn't expect a main character's name be
something that children would not even know how to pronounce.
-- Richard
Will Parsons <gyli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
>> with the term "idee fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
>> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
>> expect many NSoEs to get it.
>I would imagine most reasonably educated English speakers know "idee fixe".
At least in Britain, the Asterix comics have been sold as children's books.
They're the sort of children's book where there are lots of jokes that
only adults will get, but I wouldn't expect a main character's name be
something that children would not even know how to pronounce.
-- Richard
Mark Brader
Jan 11, 2016, 1:46:35 PM1/11/16
to
Richard Tobin:
Athel Cornish-Bowden:
#
# E = h nu
#
# and asked a student:
#
# "What is nu?"
# "Planck's constant."
# "And h?"
# "The length of the plank."
#
# [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
Seen in the 1973 anthology "A Random Walk in Science" compiled by
R.L. Weber, which credits it to the 1968 Soviet book "Physicists
Continue to Laugh", translated by Lorraine T. Kapitanoff.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto Don't put all your X in one window.
m...@vex.net -- Peter Neumann
My text in this article is in the public domain.
> > Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it. The
> > same jokes don't work in different languages...
Athel Cornish-Bowden:
> Nabokov gave the example of korona/vorona/korova which correspond in
> Russian to crown/crow/cow. More generally, he tied hard to produce
> translations that retained the original wordplay.
# Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> Russian to crown/crow/cow. More generally, he tied hard to produce
> translations that retained the original wordplay.
#
# E = h nu
#
# and asked a student:
#
# "What is nu?"
# "Planck's constant."
# "And h?"
# "The length of the plank."
#
# [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
Seen in the 1973 anthology "A Random Walk in Science" compiled by
R.L. Weber, which credits it to the 1968 Soviet book "Physicists
Continue to Laugh", translated by Lorraine T. Kapitanoff.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto Don't put all your X in one window.
m...@vex.net -- Peter Neumann
My text in this article is in the public domain.
David Kleinecke
Jan 11, 2016, 2:02:31 PM1/11/16
to
I think the idea that "most reasonably educated English speakers
know "idée fixe" reflects an odd view of current education.
Will Parsons
Jan 11, 2016, 2:19:23 PM1/11/16
to
On Monday, 11 Jan 2016 1:10 PM -0500, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 9:15:12 AM UTC-5, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> >> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> >> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> >> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>> >> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>> >> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>> >> > > Disagree completely.
>> >> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>> >> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>> >> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>> >> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>> >> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>> >> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
>> > at all of <idée fixe>.
>>
>> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right
>
> But since it is not an exant word whose pronunciation you could have
> learned in school, you only have the spelling to go by, and the syllable <ide>
> can hardly stand for anything but /ayd/.
Sure it can. And in fact, seeing the name for the first time, it
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 9:15:12 AM UTC-5, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> >> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> >> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>> >> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>> >> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>> >> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>> >> > > Disagree completely.
>> >> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>> >> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>> >> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>> >> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>> >> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>> >> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>> > Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
>> > at all of <idée fixe>.
>>
>> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right
>
> But since it is not an exant word whose pronunciation you could have
> learned in school, you only have the spelling to go by, and the syllable <ide>
> can hardly stand for anything but /ayd/.
would never occur to me that it might be pronounced /'aydfiks/ -
/'idəfiks/ would be my first guess. Generally one supposes an
*interior* "e" will be pronounced.
>> *and* you're familiar
>> with the term "idée fixe".
>
> This knowledge is _prior_ to guessing at the English name -- and if
> you didn't have the "French" name in front of you, which has vanished
> somewhere in the snippage above, why would it even cross your mind as relevant?
--
Will
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Jan 11, 2016, 2:47:49 PM1/11/16
to
On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> [ … ]
>> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
>
> Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
Maybe you can give us some examples of Dutch "humour" (your quotation
marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
--
athel
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> [ … ]
>> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
>
> Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
--
athel
Will Parsons
Jan 11, 2016, 2:52:32 PM1/11/16
to
Secondly, "idea fix" is not a phrase likely to be encountered in
English. I would expect that educated English speakers to have
encountered the borrowed phrase "idée fixe" in their reading, at any
rate. So, yes, I would expect them to get the joke.
> I think the idea that "most reasonably educated English speakers
> know "idée fixe" reflects an odd view of current education.
whom are comics are targeted, but it's still fun for the adult
readers.
So, with respect to the people who post on this list, for how many
would the term "idée fixe" be unfamiliar? (Of course, that wouldn't
be representative of "current education", I'm sure.)
--
Will
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 3:25:26 PM1/11/16
to
Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <slrnn97ofn...@anukis.local>,
> Will Parsons <gyli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> >> with the term "idee fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> >> expect many NSoEs to get it.
>
> >I would imagine most reasonably educated English speakers know "idee fixe".
>
> At least in Britain, the Asterix comics have been sold as children's books.
That's what I said several postings ago, 'dumbed down'.
> In article <slrnn97ofn...@anukis.local>,
> Will Parsons <gyli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> >> with the term "idee fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> >> expect many NSoEs to get it.
>
> >I would imagine most reasonably educated English speakers know "idee fixe".
>
> At least in Britain, the Asterix comics have been sold as children's books.
> They're the sort of children's book where there are lots of jokes that
> only adults will get, but I wouldn't expect a main character's name be
> something that children would not even know how to pronounce.
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 3:25:26 PM1/11/16
to
Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote:
> Richard Tobin:
> > > Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it. The
> > > same jokes don't work in different languages...
>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden:
> > Nabokov gave the example of korona/vorona/korova which correspond in
> > Russian to crown/crow/cow. More generally, he tied hard to produce
> > translations that retained the original wordplay.
>
> # Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> #
> # E = h nu
> #
> # and asked a student:
> #
> # "What is nu?"
> # "Planck's constant."
> # "And h?"
> # "The length of the plank."
> #
> # [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>
> Seen in the 1973 anthology "A Random Walk in Science" compiled by
> R.L. Weber, which credits it to the 1968 Soviet book "Physicists
> Continue to Laugh", translated by Lorraine T. Kapitanoff.
"All of you will no doubt have recognised Ohm's law,
> Richard Tobin:
> > > Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it. The
> > > same jokes don't work in different languages...
>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden:
> > Nabokov gave the example of korona/vorona/korova which correspond in
> > Russian to crown/crow/cow. More generally, he tied hard to produce
> > translations that retained the original wordplay.
>
> # Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> #
> # E = h nu
> #
> # and asked a student:
> #
> # "What is nu?"
> # "Planck's constant."
> # "And h?"
> # "The length of the plank."
> #
> # [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>
> Seen in the 1973 anthology "A Random Walk in Science" compiled by
> R.L. Weber, which credits it to the 1968 Soviet book "Physicists
> Continue to Laugh", translated by Lorraine T. Kapitanoff.
in a slightly unconventional notation."
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 3:25:26 PM1/11/16
to
Jan
--
"Voici mon ami Belge, le druide Septantesix."
(Panoramix)
Cheryl
Jan 11, 2016, 4:47:12 PM1/11/16
to
with Ideafix or Idefix. I think Dogmatix works a lot better in English
than any version of idée fixe.
--
Cheryl
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Tony Cooper
Jan 11, 2016, 4:57:54 PM1/11/16
to
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 5:43:14 PM1/11/16
to
Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
>
> > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> [ - ]
> On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
>
> > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
[non-ASCII pseudo - replaced]
> >> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
> >
> > Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> > The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> > because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
>
> Maybe you can give us some examples of Dutch "humour" (your quotation
> marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
I would have to look them up.
All I know is that they made good use of the Dutch words
'niks' = 'niets' = E. 'nothing' and
'riks' = 'rijksdaalder' = the old 2.50 guilder coin
in Dutchified -ix names.
AFAIK the Dutch translations are not aimed at six year olds,
as claimed by some here for the English ones.
I guess that the reason is that the Dutch translations are much older,
and nearly contemporary with the originals.
The Dutch 'strips' and the French BD are closely linked,
because there is a large bi-lingual industry in Brussels,
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 11, 2016, 5:43:14 PM1/11/16
to
Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:47:45 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
> >On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> >
> >> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >>> [ - ]
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:47:45 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
> >On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> >
> >> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>
[Non ASCII Sigma replaced by hyphen]
> >>> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
> >>
> >> Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> >> The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> >> because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
> >
> >Maybe you can give us some examples of Dutch "humour" (your quotation
> >marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
>
> The word "fart" seems to make them laugh.
at the amount of 'underpants humour' in British humour.
They have a long tradition,
Jan
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Newton_Bull_farts_G3.jpg>
Bertel Lund Hansen
Jan 11, 2016, 6:01:41 PM1/11/16
to
ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) skrev:
> At least in Britain, the Asterix comics have been sold as children's books.
> They're the sort of children's book where there are lots of jokes that
> only adults will get, but I wouldn't expect a main character's name be
> something that children would not even know how to pronounce.
Why should that be a problem? I doubt that many Danish kids know
what "idé fixe" means though we do have the expression "en fiks
idé" with that meaning. It's not very common.
As a child I read "The Three Musceteers" and pronounced the
hero's name as "dee ar-taw-nan". My parents laughed heartily
when they discovered that and set me straight, but it hadn't
spoiled the experience for me.
The writer (so I thought) of "Donald Duck" was
"vald dis-nay-ee".
> At least in Britain, the Asterix comics have been sold as children's books.
> They're the sort of children's book where there are lots of jokes that
> only adults will get, but I wouldn't expect a main character's name be
> something that children would not even know how to pronounce.
what "idé fixe" means though we do have the expression "en fiks
idé" with that meaning. It's not very common.
As a child I read "The Three Musceteers" and pronounced the
hero's name as "dee ar-taw-nan". My parents laughed heartily
when they discovered that and set me straight, but it hadn't
spoiled the experience for me.
The writer (so I thought) of "Donald Duck" was
"vald dis-nay-ee".
Bertel Lund Hansen
Jan 11, 2016, 6:06:14 PM1/11/16
to
Will Parsons <va...@nodomain.invalid> skrev:
> So, with respect to the people who post on this list, for how many
> would the term "idée fixe" be unfamiliar?
In Danish we say "fiks ide" - Danish words with the same
meaning. I have known that expression since childhood, and even
if I hadn't heard the French one, I would have guessed its
meaning.
> So, with respect to the people who post on this list, for how many
> would the term "idée fixe" be unfamiliar?
meaning. I have known that expression since childhood, and even
if I hadn't heard the French one, I would have guessed its
meaning.
RH Draney
Jan 11, 2016, 10:12:44 PM1/11/16
to
On 1/11/2016 2:47 PM, Cheryl wrote:
>>
> I know the term but I'd probably stop for a second before connecting it
> with Ideafix or Idefix. I think Dogmatix works a lot better in English
> than any version of idée fixe.
Anybody think the pistachio people missed an obvious one with this
>>
> I know the term but I'd probably stop for a second before connecting it
> with Ideafix or Idefix. I think Dogmatix works a lot better in English
> than any version of idée fixe.
commercial?
https://youtu.be/SNlIO66zPVk
Shouldn't the adverb be "chronically"?...r
Peter Moylan
Jan 11, 2016, 11:30:47 PM1/11/16
to
On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
> # Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> #
> # E = h nu
> #
> # and asked a student:
> #
> # "What is nu?"
> # "Planck's constant."
> # "And h?"
> # "The length of the plank."
> #
> # [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
According to my dictionary, Russian планка means "lath". Still, I can
> # Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> #
> # E = h nu
> #
> # and asked a student:
> #
> # "What is nu?"
> # "Planck's constant."
> # "And h?"
> # "The length of the plank."
> #
> # [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
understand a translator not knowing what a lath was.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Peter Moylan
Jan 11, 2016, 11:33:55 PM1/11/16
to
I'm a little Dutch boy
I don't swear
Shit, bugger, bastard,
I don't care.
Peter Moylan
Jan 11, 2016, 11:40:25 PM1/11/16
to
In the English translation it is Totorum.
My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do with Baba
the elephant.
bill van
Jan 12, 2016, 1:43:41 AM1/12/16
to
In article <n71vid$j3t$2...@dont-email.me>,
Sinterklaas is jarig,
Zet hem op de pot.
O wat stinkt die kerel,
doet de deur op slot.
--
bill
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> On 2016-Jan-12 08:57, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:47:45 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> > <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> >>
> >>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> [ Š ]
> On 2016-Jan-12 08:57, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:47:45 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> > <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> >>
> >>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>
> >>>> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
> >>>
> >>> Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> >>> The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> >>> because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
> >>
> >> Maybe you can give us some examples of Dutch "humour" (your quotation
> >> marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
> >
> > The word "fart" seems to make them laugh.
>
> Schoolyard humour from my days in primary school:
>
> I'm a little Dutch boy
> I don't swear
> Shit, bugger, bastard,
> I don't care.
From my days in primary school:
> >>>> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
> >>>
> >>> Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> >>> The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> >>> because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
> >>
> >> Maybe you can give us some examples of Dutch "humour" (your quotation
> >> marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
> >
> > The word "fart" seems to make them laugh.
>
> Schoolyard humour from my days in primary school:
>
> I'm a little Dutch boy
> I don't swear
> Shit, bugger, bastard,
> I don't care.
Sinterklaas is jarig,
Zet hem op de pot.
O wat stinkt die kerel,
doet de deur op slot.
--
bill
Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Jan 12, 2016, 2:35:40 AM1/12/16
to
bill van wrote:
>
> From my days in primary school:
>
> Sinterklaas is jarig,
> Zet hem op de pot.
> O wat stinkt die kerel,
> doet de deur op slot.
>
Funny. Here's another Sinterklaas doing the same:
>
> From my days in primary school:
>
> Sinterklaas is jarig,
> Zet hem op de pot.
> O wat stinkt die kerel,
> doet de deur op slot.
>
http://aman.members.sonic.net/santa-knows.jpg
--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
Mark Brader
Jan 12, 2016, 4:25:13 AM1/12/16
to
Peter Moylan:
>># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
>>#
>># E = h nu
>>#
>># and asked a student:
>>#
>># "What is nu?"
>># "Planck's constant."
>># "And h?"
>># "The length of the plank."
>>#
>># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
> According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "People say I'm a skeptic --
m...@vex.net but I find that hard to believe."
> On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
(Quoted, that is.)
>># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
>>#
>># E = h nu
>>#
>># and asked a student:
>>#
>># "What is nu?"
>># "Planck's constant."
>># "And h?"
>># "The length of the plank."
>>#
>># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
> means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
> a lath was.
A kind of plank, that is?
> a lath was.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "People say I'm a skeptic --
m...@vex.net but I find that hard to believe."
J. J. Lodder
Jan 12, 2016, 4:57:07 AM1/12/16
to
I must have seen that, but don't remember it.
> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do with Baba
> the elephant.
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 12, 2016, 4:57:07 AM1/12/16
to
bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca> wrote:
> In article <n71vid$j3t$2...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On 2016-Jan-12 08:57, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:47:45 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> > > <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> > >>
> > >>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> [ - ]
> In article <n71vid$j3t$2...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On 2016-Jan-12 08:57, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:47:45 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> > > <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 2016-01-11 14:01:11 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> > >>
> > >>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > >>>
[Nn-ASCII char removed]
> > >>>> Translating something based on language humour *is* rewriting it.
> > >>>
> > >>> Sometimes this is inevitable, often it is not.
> > >>> The British translators did a lot of rewriting
> > >>> because they were to fond of their own 'humour'.
> > >>
> > >> Maybe you can give us some examples of Dutch "humour" (your quotation
> > >> marks) so that we can judge if it works in both directions.
> > >
> > > The word "fart" seems to make them laugh.
> >
> > Schoolyard humour from my days in primary school:
> >
> > I'm a little Dutch boy
> > I don't swear
> > Shit, bugger, bastard,
> > I don't care.
>
> From my days in primary school:
>
> Sinterklaas is jarig,
> Zet hem op de pot.
> O wat stinkt die kerel,
> doet de deur op slot.
The officiial one is (with a quick translation)
Sinterklaas is jarig! It's Sint's birthday
'k Zet mijn schoen vast klaar. I'll put my shoe at the ready
Wellicht dat hij hem vol doet met, Perhaps he'll fill it
ja wist ik het maar. With if I only knew.
And so on, with many boring lines
of carrot and stick moral admonishment
for to be virtuous children.
No wonder that the kiddies revolt,
Jan
RH Draney
Jan 12, 2016, 7:22:12 AM1/12/16
to
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Jan 12, 2016, 8:07:08 AM1/12/16
to
Ma's out, Pa's out, Let's talk rude! Pee Po Belly Bum Drawers. Dance
round the garden in the nude, Pee Po Belly Bum Drawers.
(Full version at http://www.nyanko.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fas/tried_pee.html)
--
athel
LFS
Jan 12, 2016, 8:44:28 AM1/12/16
to
James Hogg
Jan 12, 2016, 8:53:51 AM1/12/16
to
--
James
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 12, 2016, 9:47:38 AM1/12/16
to
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 11:40:25 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2016-Jan-12 01:53, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> >>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> So the feeble English name jokes
> >>>>>>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >>>>>> Disagree completely.
> >>>>>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> >>>>>> And there was no need to translate at all,
> >>>>>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
> >>>>> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> >>>>> they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
I've been wondering what Jan thinks "trivial" means.
> On 2016-Jan-12 01:53, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> >>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> So the feeble English name jokes
> >>>>>>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> >>>>>> Disagree completely.
> >>>>>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> >>>>>> And there was no need to translate at all,
> >>>>>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
> >>>>> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
> >>>>> they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> >>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> >>> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no
> >>> suggestion at all of <idée fixe>.
> >> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
> >> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
> >> expect many NSoEs to get it.
> > Is that bad? There are things in Asterix
> > that I didn't get until much later.
> > For example, why is one of the Roman camps
> > guarding the village we know so well
> > named Babaorum? [1]
> > [1] Hint: it is on-topic for alt.usage.english
>
> Until you mentioned it I didn't know that it was called that in French.
> In the English translation it is Totorum.
>
> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do with Baba
> the elephant.
Babar? He has an -r in French.
>
> Until you mentioned it I didn't know that it was called that in French.
> In the English translation it is Totorum.
>
> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do with Baba
> the elephant.
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 12, 2016, 9:50:24 AM1/12/16
to
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 8:53:51 AM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
No.
No.
Adam Funk
Jan 12, 2016, 10:00:07 AM1/12/16
to
On 2016-01-12, Mark Brader wrote:
> Peter Moylan:
>> On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
>
> (Quoted, that is.)
>
>>># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
>>>#
>>># E = h nu
>>>#
>>># and asked a student:
>>>#
>>># "What is nu?"
>>># "Planck's constant."
>>># "And h?"
>>># "The length of the plank."
>>>#
>>># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>
>> According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
>> means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
>> a lath was.
>
> A kind of plank, that is?
A lath is much thinner & needs more support proportional to the load
> Peter Moylan:
>> On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
>
> (Quoted, that is.)
>
>>># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
>>>#
>>># E = h nu
>>>#
>>># and asked a student:
>>>#
>>># "What is nu?"
>>># "Planck's constant."
>>># "And h?"
>>># "The length of the plank."
>>>#
>>># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>
>> According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
>> means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
>> a lath was.
>
> A kind of plank, that is?
it will take (usually plaster, although I have shelves made of laths
with gaps between them for storing towels).
--
Whenever communication is primarily aimed at promoting consumption or
manipulating others, we are dealing with a form of violent aggression
like that suffered by the man in the parable, who was beaten by
robbers and left abandoned on the road. --- Pope Francis
Katy Jennison
Jan 12, 2016, 10:18:35 AM1/12/16
to
Anyway, it's not him. Thus spake Wikipedie: "Babaorum (connotation
gastronomique de baba au rhum)"
--
Katy Jennison
J. J. Lodder
Jan 12, 2016, 10:59:39 AM1/12/16
to
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 11:40:25 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 2016-Jan-12 01:53, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > >> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>>>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > >>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>>> So the feeble English name jokes
> > >>>>>>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > >>>>>> Disagree completely.
> > >>>>>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > >>>>>> And there was no need to translate at all,
> > >>>>>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > >>>>> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée
> > >>>>> fixe," they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > >>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>
> I've been wondering what Jan thinks "trivial" means.
Your purely linguistic background is showing again.
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 11:40:25 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 2016-Jan-12 01:53, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > >> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>>>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > >>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>>> So the feeble English name jokes
> > >>>>>>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > >>>>>> Disagree completely.
> > >>>>>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > >>>>>> And there was no need to translate at all,
> > >>>>>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > >>>>> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée
> > >>>>> fixe," they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > >>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>
> I've been wondering what Jan thinks "trivial" means.
From Medieval Latin, Quadrivium and Trivium.
The trivium are the preporatory easy studies of little interest:
grammar, logic, and rhetoric.
Once the student has mastered those he can go on to the real things:
arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy.
Hence in math, physics and engineering:
trivial -> simple, transparent, or immediately evident.
Compare trivially easy.
And do you really believe that 'trivial' has only one meaning?
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 12, 2016, 10:59:39 AM1/12/16
to
Jan
J. J. Lodder
Jan 12, 2016, 10:59:39 AM1/12/16
to
Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote:
> Peter Moylan:
> > On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
>
> (Quoted, that is.)
>
> >># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> >>#
> >># E = h nu
> >>#
> >># and asked a student:
> >>#
> >># "What is nu?"
> >># "Planck's constant."
> >># "And h?"
> >># "The length of the plank."
> >>#
> >># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>
> > According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
> > means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
> > a lath was.
>
> A kind of plank, that is?
Yes, old Germanic, and from there in many modern languages,
> Peter Moylan:
> > On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
>
> (Quoted, that is.)
>
> >># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
> >>#
> >># E = h nu
> >>#
> >># and asked a student:
> >>#
> >># "What is nu?"
> >># "Planck's constant."
> >># "And h?"
> >># "The length of the plank."
> >>#
> >># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>
> > According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
> > means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
> > a lath was.
>
> A kind of plank, that is?
English, Dutch, German, and even by export in French and Italian.
To see it in Russian is a bit surprising.
Perhaps imported from Holland, along with 'plank',
by way of Czar Peter the Great?
Jan
Tony Cooper
Jan 12, 2016, 11:30:57 AM1/12/16
to
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:47:09 +0000, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
wrote:
>On 2016-01-12, Mark Brader wrote:
>
>> Peter Moylan:
>>> On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
>>
>> (Quoted, that is.)
>>
>>>># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
>>>>#
>>>># E = h nu
>>>>#
>>>># and asked a student:
>>>>#
>>>># "What is nu?"
>>>># "Planck's constant."
>>>># "And h?"
>>>># "The length of the plank."
>>>>#
>>>># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>>
>>> According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
>>> means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
>>> a lath was.
>>
>> A kind of plank, that is?
>
>A lath is much thinner & needs more support proportional to the load
>it will take (usually plaster, although I have shelves made of laths
>with gaps between them for storing towels).
Laths are used exclusively on vertical surfaces like lath-and-plaster
walls. Horizontal surfaces need thicker wood. Planks, in some cases.
wrote:
>On 2016-01-12, Mark Brader wrote:
>
>> Peter Moylan:
>>> On 2016-Jan-12 05:46, Mark Brader wrote:
>>
>> (Quoted, that is.)
>>
>>>># Once in Russia, in a physics exam, the professor wrote the equation
>>>>#
>>>># E = h nu
>>>>#
>>>># and asked a student:
>>>>#
>>>># "What is nu?"
>>>># "Planck's constant."
>>>># "And h?"
>>>># "The length of the plank."
>>>>#
>>>># [Astonishingly, this is translated directly from the Russian.]
>>
>>> According to my dictionary, Russian [non-ASCII characters here]
>>> means "lath". Still, I can understand a translator not knowing what
>>> a lath was.
>>
>> A kind of plank, that is?
>
>A lath is much thinner & needs more support proportional to the load
>it will take (usually plaster, although I have shelves made of laths
>with gaps between them for storing towels).
walls. Horizontal surfaces need thicker wood. Planks, in some cases.
pensive hamster
Jan 12, 2016, 11:43:57 AM1/12/16
to
On Tuesday, 12 January 2016 16:30:57 UTC, Tony Cooper wrote:
You get lath-and-plaster ceilings in older houses.
Nowadays they use plasterboard (gypsum board).
Nowadays they use plasterboard (gypsum board).
charles
Jan 12, 2016, 11:52:12 AM1/12/16
to
In article <626856ef-4f1b-4787...@googlegroups.com>,
like mine. 1911 build.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
Richard Tobin
Jan 12, 2016, 12:10:03 PM1/12/16
to
In article <1mgx7ep.1m2...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
says "see Diana".
-- Richard
J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>And do you really believe that 'trivial' has only one meaning?
The entry for "trivia" in the Oxford Companion to Classical Literature
>And do you really believe that 'trivial' has only one meaning?
says "see Diana".
-- Richard
Richard Tobin
Jan 12, 2016, 12:10:03 PM1/12/16
to
In article <1mgvaho.fa...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
French for Rum Baba?
-- Richard
>For example, why is one of the Roman camps
>guarding the village we know so well
>named Babaorum? [1]
Have you explained this? Is there something more to it than the
>guarding the village we know so well
>named Babaorum? [1]
French for Rum Baba?
-- Richard
Richard Tobin
Jan 12, 2016, 12:10:04 PM1/12/16
to
In article <seaa9bhcp1n5jlve8...@4ax.com>,
(= US drywall).
-- Richard
Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Laths are used exclusively on vertical surfaces like lath-and-plaster
>walls. Horizontal surfaces need thicker wood. Planks, in some cases.
Lath-and-plaster ceilings were common in the days before plasterboard
>Laths are used exclusively on vertical surfaces like lath-and-plaster
>walls. Horizontal surfaces need thicker wood. Planks, in some cases.
(= US drywall).
-- Richard
RH Draney
Jan 12, 2016, 12:20:34 PM1/12/16
to
Tony Cooper
Jan 12, 2016, 12:48:14 PM1/12/16
to
>Nowadays they use plasterboard (gypsum board).
Peter T. Daniels
Jan 12, 2016, 2:12:40 PM1/12/16
to
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 10:59:39 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 11:40:25 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > > On 2016-Jan-12 01:53, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > > >> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > >>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > >>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >
> > > >>>>>>>> So the feeble English name jokes
> > > >>>>>>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > >>>>>> Disagree completely.
> > > >>>>>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > >>>>>> And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > >>>>>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > > >>>>> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée
> > > >>>>> fixe," they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > > >>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > I've been wondering what Jan thinks "trivial" means.
>
> Your purely linguistic background is showing again.
?
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 11:40:25 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > > On 2016-Jan-12 01:53, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> > > >> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > >>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
> > > >>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >
> > > >>>>>>>> So the feeble English name jokes
> > > >>>>>>> "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
> > > >>>>>> Disagree completely.
> > > >>>>>> Always though that this one is rather lame.
> > > >>>>>> And there was no need to translate at all,
> > > >>>>>> for Idefix is adequate in English.
> > > >>>>> "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée
> > > >>>>> fixe," they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
> > > >>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
> > I've been wondering what Jan thinks "trivial" means.
>
> Your purely linguistic background is showing again.
> From Medieval Latin, Quadrivium and Trivium.
<pedantry deleted>
> Hence in math, physics and engineering:
> trivial -> simple, transparent, or immediately evident.
it is doing where it was used above.
> Compare trivially easy.
Where have you heard that? among non-native-speaking mathematicians, physicists,
or engineers?
> And do you really believe that 'trivial' has only one meaning?
Of course you deleted the _actual_ point of my message.
Oliver Cromm
Jan 12, 2016, 5:10:42 PM1/12/16
to
* J. J. Lodder:
Oodles of technical terms in Russian are imported from German
(like this one, according to Vasmer), and possibly sometimes from
Low German.
--
"Bother", said the Borg, as they assimilated Pooh.
(like this one, according to Vasmer), and possibly sometimes from
Low German.
--
"Bother", said the Borg, as they assimilated Pooh.
charles
Jan 12, 2016, 5:17:48 PM1/12/16
to
In article <hmihj1xikcwb$.d...@mid.crommatograph.info>,
from my schooldays I remember the Russian word "tractor".
Ross
Jan 12, 2016, 8:19:18 PM1/12/16
to
at least according to Vasmer. And that (he adds) from
Med.Latin planca < ultimately Greek phalanx!
But for me a lath is certainly not a kind of plank. They
refer to lengths of wood of quite different dimensions
and purposes.
Peter Moylan
Jan 12, 2016, 9:00:11 PM1/12/16
to
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Peter Moylan
Jan 12, 2016, 9:04:34 PM1/12/16
to
On 2016-Jan-12 20:57, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do with Baba
>> the elephant.
>
> Is that the one known to the French as Babar?
Sorry, my error. The French 'r' is so discreet that sometimes I forget
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do with Baba
>> the elephant.
>
> Is that the one known to the French as Babar?
it's there.
RH Draney
Jan 12, 2016, 10:17:12 PM1/12/16
to
On 1/12/2016 7:00 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2016-Jan-13 09:19, charles wrote:
>> In article <hmihj1xikcwb$.d...@mid.crommatograph.info>,
>> Oliver Cromm <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
>>> Oodles of technical terms in Russian are imported from German
>>> (like this one, according to Vasmer), and possibly sometimes from
>>> Low German.
>>
>> from my schooldays I remember the Russian word "tractor".
>
> One Russian word that will probably stay in my mind forever is "gospital".
A couple of years ago someone here found a Russian McDonald's menu and
> On 2016-Jan-13 09:19, charles wrote:
>> In article <hmihj1xikcwb$.d...@mid.crommatograph.info>,
>> Oliver Cromm <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
>>> Oodles of technical terms in Russian are imported from German
>>> (like this one, according to Vasmer), and possibly sometimes from
>>> Low German.
>>
>> from my schooldays I remember the Russian word "tractor".
>
> One Russian word that will probably stay in my mind forever is "gospital".
posted a link...I recall being amused that all the items had their
American names transliterated into Cyrillic; surely there's an actual
Russian word for "chicken" and something corresponding to "nugget" that
they could have used...(my main interest at the time was that they
rendered "Fillet O'Fish" with an audible T)....
The sole exception to the "English in Russian letters" was the potatoes
you could get with your breakfast sandwich...there, the good Russian
word "kartoffel" was used....r
CDB
Jan 12, 2016, 11:32:09 PM1/12/16
to
>> J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>>> J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
[Appropriationdevo'ix]
>>>>> Is that bad? There are things in Asterix that I didn't get
>>>>> until much later. For example, why is one of the Roman camps
>>>>> guarding the village we know so well named Babaorum? [1]
>>>>> [1] Hint: it is on-topic for alt.usage.english
>>>> Until you mentioned it I didn't know that it was called that in
>>>> French. In the English translation it is Totorum.
>>> :-) I must have seen that, but don't remember it.
>>>> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do
>>>> with Baba the elephant.
>>> Is that the one known to the French as Babar?
>> It's also Babar in English.
>> Anyway, it's not him. Thus spake Wikipedie: "Babaorum
>> (connotation gastronomique de baba au rhum)"
> And from there on to the next question: whence Baba?
Thnk you; th*********************************at was interesting. "Baba"
>>>> Until you mentioned it I didn't know that it was called that in
>>>> French. In the English translation it is Totorum.
>>> :-) I must have seen that, but don't remember it.
>>>> My first guess for Babaorum was that it had something to do
>>>> with Baba the elephant.
>>> Is that the one known to the French as Babar?
>> It's also Babar in English.
>> Anyway, it's not him. Thus spake Wikipedie: "Babaorum
>> (connotation gastronomique de baba au rhum)"
> And from there on to the next question: whence Baba?
as in "Baba Yaga". Both dumpy, apparently.
*********************************
1767 « sorte de gâteau » (DIDEROT, Lettre à Sophie Volland, 24 sept. ds
Correspondance, éd. Roth, 1962, t. 7, p. 141 : On nous apporte tous les
jours de Champigny [...] des babas).
Empr. au polon. baba « sorte de pâtisserie » mot qui, ainsi que le
gâteau qu'il désigne, aurait été introduit en France par la cour de
Stanislas Leczinski, duc de Lorraine, anc. roi de Pologne; le sens «
gâteau » est en polon. issu de celui de « vieille femme » en raison
d'une certaine anal. de forme. Baba est en ce dernier sens un mot slave,
onomat. du lang. enfantin (M. VASMER, Russisches etymologisches
Wörterbuch, 1953; IEW, p. 91).
BBG
*********************************
http://stella.atilf.fr/Dendien/scripts/tlfiv5/visusel.exe?12;s=467974980;r=1;nat=;sol=1;
Adam Funk
Jan 13, 2016, 6:15:06 AM1/13/16
to
--
Some say the world will end in fire; some say in segfaults.
<https://xkcd.com/312/>
Adam Funk
Jan 13, 2016, 6:15:06 AM1/13/16
to
On 2016-01-11, Will Parsons wrote:
> On Monday, 11 Jan 2016 9:13 AM -0500, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>>>> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>>>> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>>>> > > Disagree completely.
>>>> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>>>> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>>>> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>>>> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>>>> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>>>>
>>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>>>
> upon "Idefix", I think I'd assume it to be pronounced something like
> [ˈidɛfɪks] or [ˈɪdəfɪks]. I might not get the joke immediately, but
> I'm pretty sure I *would* get it. I would imagine most reasonably
> educated English speakers know "idée fixe".
Well, it depends on how you define "reasonably educated".
--
Slade was the coolest band in England. They were the kind of guys
that would push your car out of a ditch. --- Alice Cooper
> On Monday, 11 Jan 2016 9:13 AM -0500, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2016-01-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 4:17:10 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 10:21:17 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> > > Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>> > > > In article <1mgs42h.17z...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>,
>>>> > > > J. J. Lodder <jjl...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > > > >So the feeble English name jokes
>>>> > > > "Dogmatix" is much better than "Idefix".
>>>> > > Disagree completely.
>>>> > > Always though that this one is rather lame.
>>>> > > And there was no need to translate at all,
>>>> > > for Idefix is adequate in English.
>>>> > "I'd fix" doesn't make sense. If they wanted to communicate "idée fixe,"
>>>> > they'd have to resort to some strange spelling.
>>>>
>>>> Why? Must every joke be trivial?
>>>
>>> Because, as someone else has also pointed out, <Idefix> carries no suggestion
>>> at all of <idée fixe>.
>>
>> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
>> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
>> expect many NSoEs to get it.
>
> I disagree. I'm not familiar with the Asterix comics, but if I came
>>> at all of <idée fixe>.
>>
>> Well, it can, but only if you pronounce it right *and* you're familiar
>> with the term "idée fixe". I agree with you, in that I wouldn't
>> expect many NSoEs to get it.
>
> upon "Idefix", I think I'd assume it to be pronounced something like
> [ˈidɛfɪks] or [ˈɪdəfɪks]. I might not get the joke immediately, but
> I'm pretty sure I *would* get it. I would imagine most reasonably
> educated English speakers know "idée fixe".
Well, it depends on how you define "reasonably educated".
--
Slade was the coolest band in England. They were the kind of guys
that would push your car out of a ditch. --- Alice Cooper
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages