|
Post by fred on Oct 23, 2013 17:06:19 GMT -6
Fuchs,
This is my zwei pfennigs... you better not leave this board. Remember, I know where you live and I will come there and haunt you. Your posts are always marvelous, and along with "montrose's" help, I need yours, too.
Very best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 23, 2013 17:59:04 GMT -6
fuchs,
1.Would you care to substantiate YOUR claim with one example? Which native American language has a past pluperfect tense? A conditional tense? Be careful. Since white men wrote it all down, Indian languages can be standardized and brought into comparison. They do not reflect the spoken but unwritten languages of the past.
"You misunderstand me. I do not claim that any language has the same grammatical contructs, or even equivalant constructs. I do claim however, that any concept could be expressed in any language. This claim is not mine, but almost verbatim lifted from a book written by a linguist, who I asssume to be much more qualified to make such statements than you and me."
I don't misunderstand your original post. I disagreed with it. Without the tenses, you cannot explain some things with any accuracy.
I never claimed you said any language had the same grammatical constructs. Fortunate, because not true. You think "....any concept" can be expressed in any language without changing the language? How would a space shuttle be explained to stone age people in minimal detail and accuracy who have no words, no reason to have thought much about fuel and navigation and the math entailed?
2. "Lacking certain grammatical constructs will likely makes some things more difficult to express, and some nuances will get lost in translation, obviously. But this is a problem of any translation, and has likely more to do with the linguistical distance between two languages than any differences in complexity/primitivness."
No. Without the constructs some things cannot remotely be expressed, and you're aground far before nuance.
3. You substitute an assumed ability of a translator to accomplish all this. "For the illustration of the concept that a grammatical construct can be replaced when translating into a language that do not have it, take the evidential(sic)"
"You might not be familar with it, and I wasn't either before looking into books written by linguists and anthropologists." Oh, come on.
From the book I recommended yesterday:
"An English approximation would be a rule forcing historians to distinguish grammatically between “I heard that it happened,” “I saw it happen,” or “I have obtained evidence that it happened” every time they use the verb “to happen.” English, of course, has no such grammatical rule for assessing evidence. Does the fact that Tucuya has an elaborate system of evidentials predispose its Amazonian speakers to be better historians than most Englishmen?" No. But THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HISTORIANS DO in English and we focus upon here at the LBH.
"In that language, you have no means of making a factual statement without using the evidential, it's some integral part of the language." So? Because we call it evidential in English with no grammatical equivalent in English, that they do somehow would make them more truthful? What?
"To turn the tables on you, does the fact that no European language has the evidential mean that we are unable to discern the difference between hearsay, first hand accounts and evidence regarding a specific statement, or are not able to convey the difference between those different levels of "truthfulness"?" No.Again, so what?
4. "The Northern Cheyenne and Southern Cheyenne had trouble speaking to each other after a few decades.
Did they? You made that claim repeatedly, as well as the claim that East and West Germans had trouble understanding each other after 5 decades of seperation."
I've so read and, again, have friends in Frankfurt who dealt with it first hand. Did not say they have major difficulties, but the vernacular had changed and the East Germans used older constructs. They could tell an East German by the first sentence, they said.
5. "Don't you think that there is a tiny bit of difference between a language using clicks, interjections and what might be grunts in other languagess as part of the vocabulary, and one that primaryly consists of grunts and sentence fragments, i.e. Hollywood style Savage-/Tarzan-speak?"
Why yes, I do, because one is a language and one is not. Nobody was suggesting Hollywood mumbo jumbo is a language. I wasn't, anyway.
6."What makes you assume a language using clicks has to be primitive? Again, reference some linguists that have analysed such languages and come to the conclusion that those are "primitive" and I will happily concede the point." I've not said that languages using clicks are all primitive or that the clicks make them primitive, except that they are earlier tongues, have minimal verbal tenses, and are replaced by languages more referential to the modern life every day.
7. "Now lets's assume that a language were indeed "primitive" by your standards, does that mean automatically that any translaton rendering it into something less "primitive" makes the translation automatically invalid?"
No. Just that there is no way to know because translation is not code, mere substitution of words for other, but encrypted within grammar and the mental world that supports it.
8. "Again I refer to someone more qualified, Guy Deutscher..."
Proving what? There are many possible interpretations of the first paragraph regarding time. Might be correct. Probably isn't, absent an experienced translator talking to someone.
9. "At the opening of the book, I said that the available written records of any language extend at most 5,000 years into the past, and that the languages around by that time already have pretty much the full repertoire of complex features found in today's languages. The use of subordination seems to be one of the only exceptions to this claim,since the earliest attested stages of many languages do show a significant difference in this respect from what we are used to in modern written styles. The use of subordinating conjunctions in the earliest stages of ancient languages such as Sumerian, Akkadian, Hittite or Greek seems to have been much less developed...."
Written languages only, and even here there is no explanation how an exact verbal tense is applied to the translation. Unless we know that - and we do not - we don't know what the linear course of events was followed, only assumed.
10. "But how difficult would it be to translate something like "I woke up, I went to my parents willow lodge and had breakfast, and after that I went swimming"?
When did I wake up, what is the word for breakfast, and when after? Immediately? Later in the day?
11. But many, many words in German have no "static meaning" either, yet I seem to be perfectly capable of having a discussion here with you." Meaningless. NO words in Sioux language type have static meaning. Major difference. It may no longer be true, but at the time of the 19th century, no.
12. "And it is no problem whatsoever to construct compound words in German that encapsulate the meaning of a complete sentence, our language is rather infamous for it. This is the case for many, many other languages, yet there seem to be no fundamental obstacles in translating them into languages that doesn't use such compounds."
You miss the point entirely. German has many of and maybe ALL of English's verbal tenses and maybe some of its own. Indian languages do not.
11. "Grammar
Lakhota sentences can be described as consisting of a series of optional and obligatory slots, each slot filled by a particular type of word or phrase. The maximum structure is
(interjection) (conjunction) (adverb(s)) (nominal) (nominal)(nominal) (adverb(s)) verb (enclitic(s)) (conjunction)
(Parentheses imply optionality; (s) means there is no theoretical limit to the number of like elements that can occur in this position.)
Note that the only obligatory slot is that of the verb; every other position is optional.
Everything else being optionals doesn't necessarily mean every sentence would consist of only one word, on that site it looks like anything more than the most simple expressions indeed require a more complex sentence structure."
First, is this Sioux today or the Sioux of relevance in 1876, which has been 'adjusted' by European and Americans? But it does not matter. If a language does not have the verbal tenses it cannot provide an accurate translation.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 23, 2013 20:05:09 GMT -6
I have studied 6 languages where I reached a degree of proficiency. Note one of those was Latin, and I have some professors who will argue the term proficiency. I had a bad year. The 2 non European languages were Arabic and Chichewa. Chewa is relevant here, It is an African tribal tongue. It was the easiest language I ever studied. In fact, has several advantages over English, which is a mongrel language from many dead tongues. Fuchs, hope you continue to hang around here. Your posts make a lot of sense. Would be a pity to see you leave. The USA is about to publish a movie on Operation Red Wings that only use US sources. The challenge here is that there is US video footage from drones and satellites; and Taliban sources that include videotape; that prove the official narrative is wrong. A 4 man recon team fought a battle with an 8 man Taliban force. US had 3 KIA and 1 WIA; Taliban had zero casualties. A reinforcing US force in a helicopter violated more special operations principals than I can count, and all were killed with zero enemy casualties. The US media is saying the movie is historically accurate, and reflects this. I don't believe this for a second. The US media states it is accurate since it uses US media sources. Umm, all Taliban fighters survived. They videotaped the battle in progress, and gave somewhere between 60-90 interviews after. Their story is completely confirmed by US drone footage, radio intercepts,, and follow on HUMINT intel. So what is going on? The cultural lenses identified by Fuchs are in effect. The US is trying to tell a story to its own culture, knowing that the truth will not get through cultural walls. I don't mind the propaganda wars, part and parcel of modern war. The issue is the US propaganda fight is designed to fool its own people. The gross lies and distortions inflame the enemy support base. Further, the US military deceives itself. Operation Red Wings failed because of grotesque planning and leadership failures. Loading the wrong freqs on their radios is an easy example, and freaking mindboggling. In pre combat checks they are required to establish contact with outstations They lied and said they did, Since these checks are recorded, we know they did not. These are some rather profound statements Will. The problem with deceiving the people about what really happened there or anywhere else is that our present and future soldiers and leaders come from the same people. With the belief that everything is hunky dory and people/Americans are infallible, they believe they are infallible when put in the same position which leads to the sloppiness and mistakes that happen. With the Taliban there were some leadership mistakes but even a private or two could have taken some initiative to follow the same rules they were taught even if their leaders didn't say so. The leaders got sloppy with their radio frequencies like what happened to the British First Airborne at Arnhem but they don't learn. At least the movie showed that British troops can make a mistake but on reflection it probably didn't teach an American anything. A Bridge Too Far puts the blame on the First Airborne and the 30th Corps and tends to glorify the American airborne side of it. I read an article in the paper today about some officers with keys to the nuclear arsenal were disciplined for leaving the first blast door to the silo while they step outside and anyone inside was sleeping. Of course this is down underground and there are a number of other safeguards before a terrorist could get in but there are people who will make a mountain out of this mole hill. But the fact remains that these procedures were set up for a reason and the guys and gals are paid to follow the procedures even when inconvenient. I read a little about the months of preparation by Seal Team 6 for the Bin Laden mission with an actual compound like his being built. The problem I see with it is that I think you can overtrain to the point to where you miss something by mistake or complacency, etc. They all got out and I'm not sure any mistakes were made but I think the potential was there from over training. "The problem with all the technology used today is that it is too technical for most people to use." bc A couple quotes from the December True West. "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach." Aldous Huxley "If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking." George S. Patton bc
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Oct 24, 2013 3:50:44 GMT -6
The people in Britain are being led down the garden path concerning Afghanistan, now every time a soldier is killed it is reported on the news, but reports of any WIA is swept under the carpet;
U.K. Forces in Afghanistan: 445 fatalities and 2.139 wounded (another 4,748 have suffered from disease or non-battle injuries). Now to find the WIA and other totals I had to go and search on line, so it’s just another way of keeping the people back home in the dark over the real horrors that are taking place.
I don’t know if you guys are aware of the amount of WIA your forces have suffered, you will know about the KIA though; U.S. Forces in Afghanistan: 1.760 fatalities and 19.080 wounded.
And another thing that I have noticed is the fact that Britain has a high number of Muslim communities, and early in the campaign the media always gave the number of Taliban deaths, This has led to certain Muslim clerics voicing their opinions on their fellow Muslims being killed by British forces (a number have left the U.K. to join extremist groups on the results of such news reports and being radicalised by the clerics), so now the media refrains from reporting any enemy casualties.
On a lighter note; I used to go to Europe on a regular basis, and no matter where I went a high percent of the locals seem to speak English, and a lot of them used to say that they picked up our language from listening to British pop music, so maybe Lennon and McCartney helped to teach kids the basics and things led from there.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Oct 24, 2013 6:25:06 GMT -6
Ian, you are correct that not very much seems to be said about the wounded. More the shame as many of these are horrible wounds that would have mostly led to death in previous wars. A large portion are caused by explosive devices and involve loss or mutilation of extremities. A few weeks ago I spent a Saturday working on a "Homes for Veterans" project that was building a house for a 24 yr old Marine that had lost both legs. He was there, along with a couple of others with similar injuries, and it is impressive the good spirits that most of them seem to be able to maintain.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Oct 24, 2013 7:13:31 GMT -6
Another day in paradise.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 24, 2013 8:40:08 GMT -6
yantaylor, you live in Europe. Try as England might, it is ever thus. It's geography, not politics. The wounded issue IS bad, but even liberal Boulder keeps tab of it. It's common enough that Doonesbury covers the issue, and effectively, and truthfully. There is a story line about Afghanistan and Iraq soldiers being rerun this week. This is Mondays, but follow it. This not liberal/conservative slush, it's good. doonesbury.slate.com/strip/archive/2013/10/21
|
|
|
Post by alfakilo on Oct 24, 2013 8:45:02 GMT -6
I don’t know if you guys are aware of the amount of WIA your forces have suffered, you will know about the KIA though; U.S. Forces in Afghanistan: 1.760 fatalities and 19.080 wounded. Ian. It may well depend on what TV channel Americans watch. Conservative leaning channels prominently feature advertisements by organizations such as Wounded Warriors that pull no punches about the need to be aware of and help those who come home with terrible injuries to body and soul. For a modest donation, listeners can join the effort to help these folks who gave so much. AK
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Oct 24, 2013 9:18:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 24, 2013 9:27:26 GMT -6
Truly, the president wants the Marines to look effeminate. The NYP has a 'source', so...... proof.
No President gives a flying fungo bat about uniform trivia, except Nixon designing uniforms for White House staff and guards. Even if the uniforms are being changed - and I hope not - it would have to meet with service brass approval because nobody wants festering resentment over this. Big boys reserve serious concern about major issues only. In any case, it would not originate in the Oval Office.
This is like all the ads saying 'the president is handing out money/reconfigured mortgage payments/whatever', and articles promising scandal, so buy gold. Nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 24, 2013 9:35:49 GMT -6
Somehow I don't believe that the President of the United States is directly or indirectly involved in the selection of covers for the United States Marines. Of course, according to the New York Post, when someone farts in public in the greater United States, including Alaska and Hawaii, plus associated Commonwealths and Territories it is the current President's fault. I wish these folks would grow up. After all he soundly beat his two election opponents.
DC only weak minds and un-reconstructed neo-confederates believe this tripe about the Commander in Chief. Big boys and girls know it is nonsense, a nonsense created by the likes of Murdock and his minions.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Oct 24, 2013 9:40:47 GMT -6
Personally I think the U.S. Military Personnel uniform looks just fine. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 24, 2013 9:46:11 GMT -6
Catherine Bell does wonders for anything she happens to be wearing.
When you are awarded two Medals of Honor, like Sergeant Major Daly, anything you might wish to wear, including a propeller beanie is alright with me. Mere mortals though should dress like men and women. If it ain't broke, and it ain't, don't fix it.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Oct 24, 2013 12:57:02 GMT -6
Oh no, the pain. Not my beloved Corps. Do we not thirst, if you cut us do we not bleed. This cant be. STEVE, my brother, I will come out to Arizona on Nov 10th, and we can have a last drink and leap together. Well maybe a couple of drinks, and we don't have to jump from too high a place Semper Fi Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Oct 24, 2013 15:23:26 GMT -6
Dan
I have plenty of covers and drinks so come on out. This has to be some kind of a joke.
Semper Fi
Steve
|
|