Re; eesAr [sci-anon-poster]
>>>>>>_anonymous
In article<1993Jan18.1...@netcom.com>, bav...@netcom.com (Hooshyar
Naraghi) writes:
>AghA ShahrAm (mA kheyli bishtar chAkereh shomA hastim ostAd) asked me if
>'az khod gozashtegi' did not mean 'eesAr,' then what would the definition of
>eesAr be? There are two ways to address this question: from linguistic
>(read theoretical or semantical) point of view, and of course like any other
>challenge by applying some tests and experimenting with words and sentences.
doost-e bAvafA (mA chaman-e shomAeem ghorbAn):
I believe that your first suggested way of addressing the question is more
reliable. Considering how differently each person looks at the same problem
and tries to analyze it, just imagine what would happen if we made up a
sentence and based on "whether or not it makes sense", tried to find the
meaning of the words of that sentence.
So let's see what Mr. Deh-khodA says about "eesAr" [(c) Arabs 0001].
eesAr: bargozeedan, gharaz-e deegarAn rA bar gharaz-e kheesh moghaddam
dAshtan.
(dar pArsi) bargozeedegi, bakhshesh, afshAndan, atA, tarjeeh
...
Therefore, *one of* the best fArsi equivalents of the word is "bakhshesh".
Now, what kind of bakhshesh? Do you consider a wealthy person who gives
a nickle to a homeless "eesArgar"? I don't. The meaning of "eesAr" is a
very special kind of giving. Giving or giving up something which is important
or crucial to you, in order to benefit someone else (of course for a good
cause) without expecting anything in return. This is a modified version of
what you quoted from AghA rezA. This modified version shows us only one of
the many ways that we can use that word. Examples given by Deh-khodA makes it
more clear:
"be eesAr mardAn sebagh bordeh-and"
"na shab zendeh-dArAn-e del mordeh and" (Sa'di)
You may find the next example even more interesting:
"to az sar-e man va az jAn-e man aziz tari"
"bakheelam ar nakonam sar fadA _o_ jAn eesAr"
As you see in the above example, which is also from "ostAd-e sokhan Sa'di",
"eesAr kardan" and "fadA kardan" both have the same meaning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think that now anyone can argue that. (fadA kardan is the word that
you rejected first, even though it is not Persian.)
I found the way Mr. Ebrahimi used the word "eesAr" to be kind of funny and I
thought that he did it intentionally just to make his request look
pleasantly funny, because giving a computer program to someone who needs it
makes you a very nice person but not "eesAr-gar". This was until I saw the
following example in "farhang-e deh-khodA":
"naghlast ke ... bA jamAati dar tangnAye rAhi oftAd va sagi miAmad. bAyazeed"
"bAzgasht va rAh bar sag eesAr kard tA sag rA bAz nabAyad gasht."
(tazkerat-ol-oliA)
As you see, the word has different applications. Each of us thought that it
explained *one* definite concept and Mr. Deh-khodA showed us that we were all
right and wrong. Wrong because of what I wrote in the previous line and
right because each of us gave *one of* the correct meanings.
Now let's talk about "az khod gozashtan". Doesn't it have the same meaning
as "fadA kAri"? In order to be "az khod gozashteh", one does not have to
lose his life.
"nabard, bA eesAr-gari-hAye sarbAzan-e delir-e mA be peeroozi anjAmid va"
"sarbAzan sar-boland beh pAygAh-hAye khod bAzgashtand." Does it mean that
they returned to their bases dead? This example was not from deh-khodA or
sa'di or...., and I remember that I said it is not reliable to make up
sentences and.... However, I am sure that the phrase "eesAr gari-e
razmandegAn dar jebhe-hA" is familiar to most of us.
>As much as az khod gozashtegi is a very "bA-mosamA" word, it doesn't fully
>fit the expression here. shakhs majboor nist keh az khAsteye khod bogzarad
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>(or even sacrifice himself) in order to give a computer file to a friend.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Read the above paragraph and then look at your quote from amoo.
> ...
>The core in the word 'eesAr' is comprised of EXACTLY what AghA Reza had said
>in his earlier post. He wrote:
>> "I am talking about living because of love [note: we would live too so no
>> need to sacrifice anybody's life - HFN], living because of others, I
>> speak of loving just because it feels good to love [he hit it right at
>> the core - HFN], with no expectations of return."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now it is clear to all of us that Mr. bAyazeed did not expect the dog to
yield to him in the future!!!
> ...
>are derived from the same root), I borrowed 'eesAr' from the Arabic language
>to put it all in one word.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Of course the challenge was not that we had one word in contrast to Shahram's
>three-word definition, hence the Arabic one was more definitive of what Reza
>was conveying. ^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
bAvafA jAn:
What you call a three-word definition, in "dastoor-e zabAn-e
fArsi" is called "masdar-e morakkab". eesAr is also "masdar"
but it is "masdar-e sAdeh" not "morakkab".
What AghA Reza was conveying is one of the definitions, not the
only one. Also Mr. deh-khodA in his examples, has shown us that
you can not put it in one word. After all, it expresses a concept
and where do you draw the boundaries of that concept?
> ...
>nothing but the permutation or at certain situations the morphism of a
>handful of _fundamental_ symbols. For example they use sun - a circle -
>to represent concepts such as light, source of abundance, and giving.
I am really sad, because in our language things other than a circle are used
to represent concepts such as light, source of abundance and giving; and it
shows that our language is not based on concepts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>The Arabic language managed to consolidate the concept of _continuous giving
>(of anything) without any expectations in return_ into one root word called
>'eesAr.' It was so conceptual, and the grammer would in years to come become
And the Persian language managed to do the same thing and call it
"bakhshandegi".
>I think it will be waste of time and energy on the part of any person to
>try to arrive at a conclusion to declare "Mine language is better than
>yours" kind of statement.
Who said that? Could you please show him to me? And please don't tell me
that you were "led to it". I did not say that my language
is *BETTER* than other languages. What belongs to me is more dear to me. My
language sounds better (of course to me). So when there is a simple word in
*MY* language that can convey the concept that *I* want, why should I
borrow it from somewhere else? If there is no word in my language that
represents a certain concept, then I would welcome any word from any
foreign language that could fill that gap, would sound "delneshin" and be
easy to pronounce for our children, students and speakers of different
dialogues of fArsi . It makes my language richer. Why shoud I be against it?
>to view both languages from one angle: the conceptual. ShahrAm of course
>approached the Persian language from its compositional aspect, which was...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, I did not. It was only one of the points that I was trying to make in
replying to your article..
>The defintion of 'eesAr' according to loghat-nAmeh dehkhodA will be posted
>next time.
As usual I am late again.
>Regards,
>Hooshyar F. Naraghi
>bav...@netcom.com
>(415) 322-8056
> (*) For alien residents [(c) Ammo 1993] : eesar = sacrifice.
Even more regards,
ShahrAm
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
|E-mail *anonymous* posts to : sci-ano...@handel.sun.com
|E-mail regular posts to : sci-p...@handel.sun.com
|E-mail anonymity checks to : sci-anon-p...@handel.sun.com
|E-mail problems to : smo...@handel.sun.com
|Anonymous posts: lines after '--' in col 1 are removed (signatures)
| >> Test before posting anonymously! <<
Hooshyar Naraghi
unasked permission I replied to his post in parts. My advance apologies
for any inconvenience.
>doost-e bAvafA (mA chaman-e shomAeem ghorbAn):
ShahrAm, bA dorood bar to bAd (mA ghatrehAye zire pAye shomA hastim)
>So let's see what Mr. Deh-khodA says about "eesAr" [(c) Arabs 0001].
Alright! I can't wait. BTW, mine is from volume 8, page 543, Tehran,
1342, publisher Tehran University, Dept. of Literature, 'loghat-nAmeh'
bureau.
>eesAr: bargozeedan, gharaz-e deegarAn rA bar gharaz-e kheesh moghaddam
> dAshtan.
> (dar pArsi) bargozeedegi, bakhshesh, afshAndan, atA, tarjeeh
Yeap, I am looking at the same page.
>Therefore, *one of* the best fArsi equivalents of the word is "bakhshesh".
Hold it, 'kojA dAdAsh? bilitet daste maneh.' Moment, moment, please.
Where did "therefore" come from? In Your Humble Opinion, it is one the
best fArsi equivalents. If you ask me I would've chosen 'bargozidegi.'
At least it carries with itself the cannotation of CHOICE. DehkhodA does
not at all specify which one is the best, perhaps because there is no
competition here.
>Now, what kind of bakhshesh? Do you consider a wealthy person who gives
>a nickle to a homeless "eesArgar"? I don't.
Me either, shahrAm jAn.
>The meaning of "eesAr" is a
>very special kind of giving. Giving or giving up something which is important
>or crucial to you, in order to benefit someone else (of course for a good
>cause) without expecting anything in return. This is a modified version of
>what you quoted from AghA rezA. This modified version shows us only one of
>the many ways that we can use that word. Examples given by Deh-khodA makes it
>more clear:
'didi hAlA!' So 'eesAr' is so vast that no one Persian word can 'jAmeAneh'
[hey, this word is Arabic too - HFN] replace it. Even DehkhodA doesn't;
not because he forgot, but because as a true researcher he couldn't. I
wonder why Dr. Moeen didn't 'tasarof' here. [eh, another Arabic word - HFN]
This was my 'lopeh kalAm.' [ah, khafeh shodam of these Arabic words - HFN]
========================== To AghA RezA only ============================
It's all your fault. You & your love without any expectation in return.
===========================================================================
To be continued,
Hooshyar
Hooshyar Naraghi
Shahram said:
>You may find the next example even more interesting:
I found the one from atAr more interesting, but never mind.
>"to az sar-e man va az jAn-e man aziz tari"
>"bakheelam ar nakonam sar fadA _o_ jAn eesAr"
>
>As you see in the above example, which is also from "ostAd-e sokhan Sa'di",
>"eesAr kardan" and "fadA kardan" both have the same meaning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I swear to God, I can't see it your way even in the above example! sheykh
shirAzi never said that. You interpreted it that way, which by the way is
one possible valid conclusion. I still don't know how you know about their
sameness.
BTW, one bang is enough, you don't want to 'moshabak' me, do you? [I'm
sick and tired of Arabic, every thing I say is Arabic - HFN].
>I don't think that now anyone can argue that.
I guess not! I am only happy that we are not in the middle of a 'bahse
dini.' [I can't believe myself - HFN]
>(fadA kardan is the word that you rejected first, even though it is not
>Persian.)
I don't recall if I said that word ought to be "rejected." I dismissed it
as a possible answer, because the puzzle (or my not-so-welcomed challenge)
asked for a Persian word. The above word was 'nokteye enherAfi' for those
friends who might have guessed 'fadA-kAri' was a pure Persian word. I am
so happy to find out that you didn't fall for it. :-)
>As you see, the word has different applications.
Eureka! Eureka! You finally said it. What is in this strange word that
can have different meanings and different applications? We now learn that
to define it almost one page of loghat-nAmeh DehkhodA would be taken.
> Each of us thought that it explained *one* definite concept and Mr.
> Deh-khodA showed us that we were all right and wrong. Wrong because of
> what I wrote in the previous line and right because each of us gave
>*one of* the correct meanings.
I like your 'akhlAgh-e mosAlem-Amiz' [oh, not again! - HFN] shahrAm khAn,
except I believed 'eesAr' was too big to be defined by one word. The whole
exercise in this challenge was to drive ourselves nuts to find ONE word in
Persian language to do the job.
To be continued,
Hooshyar
Hooshyar Naraghi
possible.
>bAvafA jAn:
jAneh bAvafA!
>What you call a three-word definition, in "dastoor-e zabAn-e
>fArsi" is called "masdar-e morakkab". eesAr is also "masdar"
>but it is "masdar-e sAdeh" not "morakkab".
Thanks for your detail grammer explanation. I knew that too. All right,
we can hence say 'eesAr kardan' is masdar-e morakkab. In Persian I haven't
seen eesAr being a sAdeh verb. I guess you are mixing fArsi with Arabic.
Let me elaborate, if I may.
You seem to be so much focused on your Persian language that you might not
have known that in Arabic there is no "masdar-e morakab." If you read
through articles in volume one of the same dehkhodA, you will learn that
one of the first scholars who began to compose morakkab terms in Persian
language was none but Avecina (Abu Ali SinA). eesAr like ALL Arabic words
is one word.
You seem to measure a word with another yardstick, not to mention your
yardstick is not correct either, i.e., you cannot find a way to use eesAr
in Persian as a sAdeh verb; it ought to be morakkab. But, as a noun you
have no problem.
>What AghA Reza was conveying is one of the definitions, not the
>only one. Also Mr. deh-khodA in his examples, has shown us that
>you can not put it in one word.
"Free at last, free at last. Thanks God Almighty, I am free at last."
>After all, it expresses a concept
'khob digeh chi!' Let me see, are you 'mA ro film kardi?' This is what I
have PAINFULLY tried to say too. Good grief! Maybe we are saying the same
thing after all.
>and where do you draw the boundaries of that concept?
Nowhere, vAllAh nowhere! bebakhshid-hA, I also alluded to the same for
an Arabic word called 'eesAr.' Remember!?
To be continued,
Hooshyar
Hooshyar Naraghi
Note: Like any other peaceful discussion at sci, there is always an element
of I vs. you. I am going to assure AghA Shahram that there was no intention
by design.
>And please don't tell me that you were "led to it". I did not say that my
>language is *BETTER* than other languages.
I won't, I won't. I am guilty, I am guilty.
Take it easy brother. Shall we take a break? BTW, I didn't say that you
said that either. I guess you were reading too much into my statement.
Peace be upon you.
>What belongs to me is more dear to me. My
>language sounds better (of course to me). So when there is a simple word
>in *MY* language that can convey the concept that *I* want, why should I
>borrow it from somewhere else?
Trivial answer just because you asked why: because Naser khosro, atAr,
molavi, sa'di, ferdowsi [oh my God he does it too! - HFN], and khAghAni
borrowed it too - just according to page 543 of the same loghatnAmeh. :-)
My kind of answer:
I understand. Stick to your language. I would never want to even suggest
anything that would infringe upon something that is so dear to you. Hell,
I am disappointed at myself that after referring to DehkhodA and so forth
you ended up feeling somebody wanted to change your language preferences.
>If there is no word in my language that
>represents a certain concept, then I would welcome any word from any
>foreign language that could fill that gap, would sound "delneshin" and be
>easy to pronounce for our children, students and speakers of different
>dialogues of fArsi.
So I was not that much off board when in seriyAle aval I said that you make
your personal interpretations (and choices) sound like a rule or conclusion.
It's OK as long as you won't extend these points beyond what they are, that
is, personal expressions.
Note about pronounciation:
BTW, not that it is important, if you were raised in China, you would have
spoken Chinease just like a 'bolbol.' So don't worry about OUR children;
they will manage in any culture and under any language. My nephew is only
raised here and she never complains that English words are not delneshin
or hard to pronounce. A stop by the liguistic dept. of a university will
not hurt either.
Reminds me of an incident when I was stopped by a Re-born Christian on the
street:
He: You must believe in Jesus Christ. He is the only Saviour, or you will
go to hell if you do not accept him.
Me: If you were born in Saudi Arabia and in a Moslem family, would you have
known him too?
He: Yes, yes.
Me: How do you know?
He: Because Jesus said in Bible!
And finally, I 'ghalati' kardam and said:
>>The defintion of 'eesAr' according to loghat-nAmeh dehkhodA will be
>>posted next time.
which ShahrAm jAn replied:
>As usual I am late again.
Thanks for the 'choob-kAri' [joon! At last I found a Persian word - HFN]
If you were more patient. But, I thank you that took the time and copied
the meanings from 'loghat-nAmeh.' Your hands not be tired, AhgA.
Thanks for the participation. I learned more, I hope you did too.
bA dorood-e hamishegi [I'm geting better at this - HFN]
Hooshyar F. Naraghi
bav...@netcom.com
(415) 324-1055
Reza Modarres
Hooshyar Writes:
>========================== To AghA RezA only ============================
>It's all your fault. You & your love without any expectation in return.
>===========================================================================
>
>To be continued,
>Hooshyar
Dear Hooshyar,
In the words of Furough: "ParvAz ra be khater besepAr, parandeh mordaneest".
mordaneest".
P.S. With due appologies for not using the correct "alefbA".
RezA
>>>>>>_anonymous
In article<1993Jan20.1...@netcom.com>, bav...@netcom.com(Hooshyar
Naraghi) writes:
>ShahrAm, bA dorood bar to bAd (mA ghatrehAye zire pAye shomA hastim)
Bavafa, dorood bar to bAd(bA-ye avval lAzem nist!!!)
mA khAk-e zir-e pAye shomAeem(This was the first time that I saw this
expression with "ghatreh")
>>eesAr: bargozeedan, gharaz-e deegarAn rA bar gharaz-e kheesh moghaddam
>> dAshtan.
>> (dar pArsi) bargozeedegi, bakhshesh, afshAndan, atA, tarjeeh
>
>Yeap, I am looking at the same page.
>
>>Therefore, *one of* the best fArsi equivalents of the word is "bakhshesh".
>
>Hold it, 'kojA dAdAsh? bilitet daste maneh.' Moment, moment, please.
>Where did "therefore" come from? In Your Humble Opinion, it is one the
>best fArsi equivalents. If you ask me I would've chosen 'bargozidegi.'
>At least it carries with itself the cannotation of CHOICE. DehkhodA does
>not at all specify which one is the best, perhaps because there is no
>competition here.
You have the right to change your words any time you want to. The reason for
"therefore" is exactly what you have been stressing on so far(before
typing this article) about the meaning of "eesAr". You choose "bargozidegi"?
Fine with me. Now I am going to base my argument on the reason that *you*
bring for your choice.
Doesn't the word "bakhshesh" carry with itself cannotation of choice? If
someone *forces* me to do some "eesAr-gari", then will you consider me to
be "eesArgar", "bakhshandeh", "az khod gozashteh" or "bargozideh"?
I suppose that Mr. Ebrahimi should have asked netters to do some
"bargozidegi" and give him a CP. Ay ahAliyeh mohtaram, please yek adad
CP beh AghAye ebrAhimi bargozideh konid!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>The meaning of "eesAr" is a
>>very special kind of giving. Giving or giving up something which is
>important
>>or crucial to you, in order to benefit someone else (of course for a good
>>cause) without expecting anything in return. This is a modified version of
>>what you quoted from AghA rezA. This modified version shows us only one of
>>the many ways that we can use that word. Examples given by Deh-khodA
>makes it more clear:
>'didi hAlA!' So 'eesAr' is so vast that no one Persian word can 'jAmeAneh'
>[hey, this word is Arabic too - HFN] replace it. Even DehkhodA doesn't;
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I look at it differently. "eesAr" has different meanings(I do not want to
argue the degree of difference), and it takes a rich language to have a
separate word for each of those meanings. I would say that each of the
words "bakhshesh, bargozidegi, ..." are more definitive than "eesAr". You
call it "vast". I would say that it is a shortcoming of "eesAr" because it
does not explain a definite concept. Don't you think that it is better and
easier to have words that describe more specific concepts? You can call it
"jAme'" and be proud of it. You are entitled to your opinion.
>not because he forgot, but because as a true researcher he couldn't. I
>wonder why Dr. Moeen didn't 'tasarof' here. [eh, another Arabic word - HFN]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>This was my 'lopeh kalAm.' [ah, khafeh shodam of these Arabic words - HFN]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. Naraghi, Former student of AMUT (I used to go there too),
If you read the entire article to which you are responding and pay attention
to the last part of it, you will feel sorry for childish contents of your
brackets. I am sorry for the last statement but at this stage this is the
politest thing that I can say. You claimed that there is no Persian word
that could replace "eesAr" and I was just trying to show you that there are
many Persian words that can replace it, words that are even more definitive
than "eesAr". I don't know why your heart-beat increases every time someone
uses the word "Persian". Are you being logical? Are you ok? Which part of
my article invoked you to type in those brackets?
>========================== To AghA RezA only ============================
>It's all your fault. You & your love without any expectation in return.
>===========================================================================
By the way AghA RezA, thank you very much for AftAb meeshavad. How about lunch
at Darvish some day in the near future? I especially like its Ash-e reshteh.
>To be continued,
I don't know if I should be eager or reluctant to read it.
>Hooshyar
ShahrAm
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
|E-mail *anonymous* posts to : sci-ano...@handel.sun.com
|E-mail regular posts to : sci-p...@handel.sun.com
|E-mail anonymity checks to : sci-anon-p...@handel.sun.com
|E-mail problems to : smo...@handel.sun.com
|Anon posts: lines after two dashes starting in col 1 are removed.
| >> Test before posting anonymously! <<
Reza Modarres
>
>By the way AghA RezA, thank you very much for AftAb meeshavad. How about lunch
>at Darvish some day in the near future? I especially like its Ash-e reshteh.
>
Dear ShahrAm,
I am game. Just drop me a line whenever you got the time.
RezA
P.S. I got "kocheh" by Moshiri thanks to a bunch of people. Farshid said he
might post the poem by Molavi. Can a kind soul dig up that poem by
Vahsheh Bafghe?
Shahrokh M.
>
>Note about pronounciation:
note about spelling: it is pronunciation :). dont worry, i know that
and i still miss it everyday!
reminds me of the time when i first came to the us, and the highschool
admissions office asked me to enroll in a 'writing' class.
having had several years of english back home, and having listened
to enough beatles, elton john, aerosmith, etc, i thot,
'hey, forget that! i can speak english! enroll me in a regular class!'.
me: 'can you please write my name (!) in a normal class? '
modir: 'how about writing an essay on why you have come to the
united states, so that i can determine which class you should
be enrolled in.'
me: 'ok!'
confident that i was gonna write an error free and impressive
essay on the subject, i began to scribble. with mr stevens looking
over my shoulders, before i had a chance to put a period at the end
of the first sentence, he said, much to my surprise:
'ehhh, dont bother yourself, you need to take the writing class'
afterall, all i had written so far was:
'i have come to the united states to get an ejucasion'
--
now if i can only learn to use apostrophes properly...
Hooshyar Naraghi
>In article <1993Jan20.1...@netcom.com> bav...@netcom.com (Hooshyar Naraghi) writes:
>>
>>Note about pronounciation:
>
>note about spelling: it is pronunciation :). dont worry, i know that
>and i still miss it everyday!
Thanks for the correction Shahrokh.
>reminds me of the time when i first came to the us, and the highschool
>admissions office asked me to enroll in a 'writing' class.
Which reminds of the time my brother's friend asked me what university I was
planning to go to and I replied san jose state university!
Regards,
Hooshyar F. Naraghi
bav...@netcom.com
(415) 322-8056
Hooshyar Naraghi
>
>>ShahrAm, bA dorood bar to bAd (mA ghatrehAye zire pAye shomA hastim)
>
>Bavafa, dorood bar to bAd(bA-ye avval lAzem nist!!!)
> mA khAk-e zir-e pAye shomAeem(This was the first time that I saw this
> expression with "ghatreh")
dorood bar to bAd, ShahrAm. Thanks for the correction. As for the ghatreh
let me explain a little. The point is there is no dogma about language
(no, I don't imply you said such a thing, not at all). Let's all repeat
the expression with 'ghatreh' everyday and in any occasion may it become
part of our expressions and then the language. I am only proposing this
to those souls who see no harm in it. Habit and repetition brings about
behaviours that we would label as right or wrong, bad or good.
>>>Therefore, *one of* the best fArsi equivalents of the word is "bakhshesh".
>>
>>Hold it, 'kojA dAdAsh? bilitet daste maneh.' Moment, moment, please.
>>Where did "therefore" come from? In Your Humble Opinion, it is one the
>>best fArsi equivalents. If you ask me I would've chosen 'bargozidegi.'
>>At least it carries with itself the cannotation of CHOICE. DehkhodA does
>>not at all specify which one is the best, perhaps because there is no
>>competition here.
>
>You have the right to change your words any time you want to.
Looks like you saw a change. I didn't see it. I am going to read on to
grasp your point.
>The reason for
>"therefore" is exactly what you have been stressing on so far(before
>typing this article) about the meaning of "eesAr".
Haven't gotten it yet.
>You choose "bargozidegi"?
>Fine with me. Now I am going to base my argument on the reason that *you*
>bring for your choice.
I see the plug now [(c) Shahrokh, 92], I hope. You thought I meant to
choose bargozidegi to fit the sentence Mr. Ebrahimi had written. Well,
I see why you are saying I am changing my word. The clarification is that
(sure, I am late again) when I read through all different meanings presented
in loght-nAmeh, I chose bargozidegi as the best word if it were the only one
word. We never disagreed about the fact that eesAr could have different
meanings under different applications in the context of the Persian
language. I was only interested in the comparison of the WAY these two
languages function. You point to it in your next paragraph too.
>>>The meaning of "eesAr" is a
>>>very special kind of giving. Giving or giving up something which is
>>important
>>>or crucial to you, in order to benefit someone else (of course for a good
>>>cause) without expecting anything in return. This is a modified version of
>>>what you quoted from AghA rezA. This modified version shows us only one of
>>>the many ways that we can use that word. Examples given by Deh-khodA
>>makes it more clear:
>
>>'didi hAlA!' So 'eesAr' is so vast that no one Persian word can 'jAmeAneh'
>>[hey, this word is Arabic too - HFN] replace it. Even DehkhodA doesn't;
The tricky word was 'jAmeAneh' in the context of the Arabic language.
You said:
>I look at it differently. "eesAr" has different meanings(I do not want to
>argue the degree of difference), and it takes a rich language to have a
>separate word for each of those meanings. I would say that each of the
>words "bakhshesh, bargozidegi, ..." are more definitive than "eesAr". You
>call it "vast". I would say that it is a shortcoming of "eesAr" because it
>does not explain a definite concept. Don't you think that it is better and
>easier to have words that describe more specific concepts? You can call it
>"jAme'" and be proud of it. You are entitled to your opinion.
I agree with you 100% in the above, but your very well presented argument
in the above does not make sense to somebody (say an Arab speaking person)
who just happens (say by act of God) not to be Iranian and hence does not
follow your line of thinking about classification of meanings. This
person's language and thought processes might have evolved over centuries
around the concept of defining a word as general as it can be and in the
course of the evolution of that culture learn (or acquire necessary tools)
to decipher what was exactly meant when somebody said "eesAr."
In other words, a Persian speaking person would have found it inefficient
to distinguish which meaning of eesAr was meant, perhaps because s/he
didn't know much about the culture of the other party to be able to utilize
whatever tools and guides were there to figure out EXACTLY what was meant.
Reminds me of this sci-fi story.
Earthian on Mars: I can't breathe here. Your planet is no good.
Martian: I don't know. I seem to be breathing alright!
>>not because he forgot, but because as a true researcher he couldn't. I
>>wonder why Dr. Moeen didn't 'tasarof' here. [eh, another Arabic word - HFN]
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>This was my 'lopeh kalAm.' [ah, khafeh shodam of these Arabic words - HFN]
About underlined brakets:
These were trigger brackets; they worked! As for their usage the intention
was not to confront Persian language. I was trying to signal you that while
I was writing English (or even Persian) I was inherently feeling comfortable
to use them because the Arabic words were meaningful to me. The point in
this exercise was to convey to the reader this thought that what sounds so
strange to some readers (or even intimidating at times) might not be the
case for another reader. It all depends on how much we feel in touch with
the langauge or the words within the language. There was never a competition
between eesAr and the collection of words within the Persian language to
cover the meaning of eesAr.
I am also very satisfied when you present the case of richness. Isn't that
beauty is in the eyes of the beholder? A group of people (say a culture)
may find richness in a language that has a dedicated word for each definite
concept. In contrast, another group might find vast and jAmeAneh words
so logical, pleasing, making sense, "delneshin," and ultimately stamp the
language as rich. The key here is that the richness in not independent of
the users. They decide that it is rich!
I hope ShahrAm khAn I have made it more clear to convey the thought that
when I said in my first post "let our Persian friends top this one" the
challenge, at least for me, was to LEARN how people justify their richness.
The "how" would have helped to UNDERSTAND better how those people THOUGHT.
I sincerely believe one of main obstacles before human species is its lack
of understanding of cultures on top of which stands language.
Regards,
Hooshyar
ba...@netcom.com
(415) 322-8056
Hooshyar Naraghi
ShahrAm khAn in ending wrote:
>Mr. Naraghi, Former student of AMUT (I used to go there too),
I fail to see the AMUT connection here. Why getting personal?
So the moral is two people went to the same university, but had
different views.
On the bright side, hey ham-velAyati, mamlekate AMUT chetoreh? What was
your major there and when did you go the university?
>If you read the entire article to which you are responding and pay attention
>to the last part of it, you will feel sorry for childish contents of your
>brackets.
I addressed this issue in my previous post. ShahrAm you found the brackets
childish according to your yardstick. It's perfectly alright with me. But,
ouch, why do you say *I* should feel sorry for them? You see I am the
Martian and you're the Earthian. If you visited Mars please don't blame me
to have been living (probably not by my choice!!) there. Yet, I perfectly
understand why *you* have a hard time breathing there, becuase your body
system is not accustomed and conditioned to the Martian atmosphere.
>I am sorry for the last statement but at this stage this is the
>politest thing that I can say.
Thank you for letting me know what your capacity is. BTW, which 'eesAr'
is applicable here? :-)
>I don't know why your heart-beat increases every time someone uses the
>word "Persian".
This one really takes a big ouch out of me. You really don't know my
heart-beat increased. You could only guess that was the case perhaps
if you were in the same situation you might have reacted that way. I am
positive that I have not discovered a sign of blood pressure in me.
>Are you being logical? Are you ok?
Depends whose yardstick we will measure it with. If my reacting to a
Persian word is the basis, then the answer to the above is yes. If you
ask myself I say no.
>Which part my article invoked you to type in those brackets?
No part of it. I answered this before.