tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-332455642024-03-18T10:20:00.752+01:00bulbulistanbulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.comBlogger103125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-38564337409879994062019-03-09T10:25:00.003+01:002022-08-23T12:51:49.670+02:00in which I ponder the passage of time<span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true">Y'all, I am getting old. If the high blood pressure, the creaking knee and other assorted ailments weren't a strong enough sign, earlier this week, I had and took the opportunity to call a 20-something person a <i>sopliak</i> (a Slovak derrogatory term for a young person, literally "runny-nose-haver") to their face and ... well, I actually felt a perverse sense of pleasure doing so. I swear to God, I am one condescending <i>fiam</i> (Hungarian for "my son") away from becoming my grandfather, Lord rest his soul. And the more I realize this, the more it weighs on my mind that perhaps I will not be able to learn all languages that there are (or at least the real interesting ones, because life is too short to learn Japanese). This morning's Youtube feed was a stark reminder of that fact: in addition to the usual assortment of media criticism (these days mostly of the "Star Trek: Discovery </span></span><span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true"><span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true">sucks</span></span>" variety because hell yeah it does), US late night comedy, cooking shows and - for some damn reason - relationship advice, the almighty algorithms served me up this:</span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IrBOiLFpBN0/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IrBOiLFpBN0?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true">Now unlike those relationship advice videos where I am baffled - BAFFLED I say! - as to why anyone would think I would be in need of or even interested in such a thing <span style="font-size: xx-small;"><i>hastilyclickssubscribe</i></span>, I know where this comes from: earlier this month, I had been made aware of the existence of a (predominantly) Afrikaans-language South African soap opera (or <a href="https://www.thesouthafrican.com/most-watched-south-african-soapies/"><i>soapie</i></a>, as they are apparently referred to in South African English) called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7de_Laan">7de Laan</a> and having found a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHOaLErLvmI&list=PLXrsKQAVbGqF3SoeJ0Y7QuIrPy2k8wQCK">channel</a> with the latest episodes, I binged the hell out of them. So it did not surprise that the allpowerful and wise Google thought I would be interested in its sister show, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muvhango">Muvhango</a>. What surprised me, however, is that - heavy code-switching with English notwithstanding - this show is not primarily shot in Xhosa or Zulu, the major Bantu languages of South Africa, but rather in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venda_language">Venda</a>, a Bantu language with some 3 million speakers total. Now this is my first exposure to Venda (save perhaps for a mention in Routledge's <a href="https://www.routledge.com/The-Bantu-Languages/Nurse-Philippson/p/book/9780415412650">Bantu Languages</a>, but I honestly don't recall) and in situations like this, my first instinct is to find a grammar or a textbook of said language and try to at least get a handle on the basics. Not this time, though: first, it would appear there are very few resources for Venda available (<a href="https://www.math.lsu.edu/~zgersh2/tshivenda.pdf">this</a> is essentially the only usable grammar guide I was able to find) which makes me wonder about the whole social and economic context of the language (e.g. interesting how a nation of less than 2 million L1 speakers has this many pretty decent actors and more than decent creative people). Secondly and most importantly, while I could spend a few days trying to attain at least some level familiarity with the language, I can't afford to spend any more time than that and ultimately, it would just end up on the metaphorical pile of all the other languages I will probably never learn to any usable level (hello Tagalog, Korean, Tamil and Lithuanian) and that just wouldn't be fair. So it's for the best to just walk away without wondering what might have been and just accept that I will never learn to speak Venda or maybe even any Bantu language at all. Sucks, but c'est la vie.<br />Then again, I do want to find out how Marang's engagement turns out...</span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="975k9-0-0"><span data-text="true">P.S.: Check out timestamp ~8:27-8:30 and the glorious <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejective_consonant">ejective</a> [kʼ] in the second [k] in the <b>English</b> word "conclude".</span></span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com281tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-74692936682753945962015-09-18T22:45:00.000+02:002015-09-18T22:52:29.125+02:00in which I harvest jamI often give Slovak translators, especially those working on dubs and subtitles, a hard time for their stilted language (where "motherfucker" is commonly translated as something akin to "ruffian"), stupidity (I still recall episodes of Babylon 5 where the term "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyer">destroyer</a>" was translated as "ničiteľ" - i.e. someone who destroys - instead of the proper nautical "<a href="https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torp%C3%A9doborec">torpédoborec</a>") and general lack of creativity. This time, however, I want to highlight some inspired work translating the English idiom "to be up shit creek" in the 2003 version of <i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0317740/?ref_=nv_sr_1">The Italian Job</a></i>. When I first caught it on TV some time ago I could not believe my ears and so I resolved to record it next time it airs and check whether I indeed heard what I heard. Luckily, I had the opportunity to do so recently - and even had the proper equipment ready to go - and so I present you with the clip in question (don't forget to turn on the subtitles).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ft1kBzw31TY/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ft1kBzw31TY?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
The Slovak version used in this scene is "do X lekvár kosiť" which translates as "to go harvest/reap (as in 'using a scythe') jam/preserves/fruit spread to X" where X is a location. The most common version goes "do Kambodže lekvár kosiť" with X = Cambodia and it is in itself somewhat rare - indeed this was only the second time I had heard this phrase, hence my initial disbelief. The translator is therefore to be commended to have the guts to use such this colorful phrase, but that apparently wasn't enough for our intrepid friend, because they then replaced Cambodia with Jackson for the final "do Jacksonu lekvár kosiť." Why Jackson (and which Jackson), I don't know and probably never will, but damn, mad props.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com61tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-36288992700147688882014-08-25T11:22:00.002+02:002014-08-25T13:29:09.422+02:00in which I consider the way in which English profanity is borrowed into Slovak and Danish<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}">On or about July 23rd, as I made my
way through the local supermarket, I passed a guy about my age with a
daughter who was about five or six. They were apparently engaged in the
usual "buy me this - no, I won't" tug of war and just as I got within
earshot, the dad concluded the discussion by saying the following:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}">"... pretože je
strašne <i>šitné</i> a hneď sa zlomí." </span><br />
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}">because is terribly <i>šitné</i> and
immediately REFLEXIVE break.FUT. </span></blockquote>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}">Yes, you are quite ri<span class="text_exposed_show">ght:
"šitný" [</span></span><span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show"><span class="IPA" title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)">ʃitni:</span>] (of which the form given above is the neuter) is an adjective derived from "shit". I guess we can now add it
to the growing list of English borrowings which made it into mainstream
Slovak (as opposed to geek speak), but what's more interesting is the pragmatic aspect: by using
the word with his pre-school daughter, the dad apparently doesn't
consider the adjective vulgar or profane, it's just another way of
saying "of bad quality".</span></span>
<br />
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">I was reminded of this incident last week when I was visiting Copenhagen*. Being who I am, I naturally intended to partake of the offerings of local bookstores, however, due to time constraints I only had the time to visit <a href="http://www.boghallen.dk/">Politikens Boghal</a> and only for a few minutes. This turned out to be enough, because just as I entered (and passed <a href="http://www.tomrachman.com/">Tom Rachman</a> discussing his latest book), I ended up right under the "New arrivals" section which included a book titled <a href="http://gad.dk/dansk-i-skred"><i>Dansk i skred</i></a><i><a href="http://gad.dk/dansk-i-skred">. 52 sproglige opstrammere</a> </i>(roughly: "Danish in a downward spiral. 52 linguistic eye-openers"). "Linguistic and current, perfect, even if happens to be just your standard peevology tome," I thought and proceded to the counter to make the purchase with just enough time to make the flight home. When I finally sat down to read it, I quickly found out that my fears about the nature of the book were unfounded. First, its <a href="http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B8rn_Lund">author</a> is an actual linguist and and an accomplished one at that - someone who wrote <i>Udtaleforskelle i Danmark: Aldersbestemte, geografiske, sociale</i> ("Pronunciation variation in Denmark: Age-determined, geographic, social") just knows too much to be a peevologist. Second, the <a href="http://issuu.com/gads-forlag/docs/dansk_i_skred_issuu">Foreword</a> includes this explanation of the title:
</span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show"><span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">Bogen hedder “Dansk i skred”, ikke fordi sproget er ved at miste fodfæste, men fordi det hele tiden tilpasser sig nye udtryksbehov og derfor må udvikle sig.</span></span></span></span>
</br>
</br>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">This book is called "Danish in a downward spiral" not because the language is losing its footing, but because it constantly keeps adapting to new needs for expression and therefore must evolve.</span></span></blockquote>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show"></span></span>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show"></span></span>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">And in fact, the same Foreword includes this example of such an adaptation and its effects (pardon my translation) that has direct bearing on the </span></span><span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show"><span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">"šitný"</span></span> incident described above:</span></span>
<br />
</span></span>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">... For både sproget, stilen og tabuerne ændrer sig. Danmarks Radio laver temaudsendelser i <i>primetime </i>med titler som <i>Kussen</i>, <i>Pikken </i>og <i>Røven</i>, uden at nogen tilsyneladende tager anstød af det. På den måde afmonterer man tabuerne, men man støder også en hel del fra sig, og de grænsesøgende må søge nye veje, fx gennem import af kraftudtryk som <i>fuck</i> og <i>shit</i>, som heller ikke har bevaret deres kraft i moderne sprogbrug. Når en 13-arig pige til sine bedsteforældre kan sige "fuck, hvor er jeg glad for den kjole", har det for barnet samme valør, som når man tidligere sagde “nej, hvor er jeg glad” eller "gud, hvor er jeg glad." Men sådan opfatter de ældre generationer det ikke.
</span></span><br />
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show"><br /></span></span>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">... Because both the language and style as well as taboos change. The Danish Broadcasting Corporation makes primetime shows with titles like <i>Cunt</i>, <i>Cock</i> and <i>Ass</i>, apparently without anybody batting an eye. In this way, taboos are destroyed but, one also removes a large part of oneself. Those wishing to push boundaries must then look for new ways to do so, such as importing profanities like <i>fuck </i>and <i>shit</i>, which, however, did not retain their vulgar status in modern use. When a 13-year old girl says to her grandparents "fuck, I'm so happy about the dress", to the child it is the same as when one used to say "oh I'm so happy" or "God, I'm so happy." But the older generation doesn't see it that way.</span></span></blockquote>
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="text_exposed_show">
This has happened before, this will happen again and I suspect only more so once English is spoken as widely in Slovakia as it is in Denmark.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span class="userContent" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="text_exposed_show">* If you ever go, make sure to wear comfortable shoes and visit <a href="http://www.laglace.dk/en/">La Glace</a> for a piece of HC Hat.</span></span></span></span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com33tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-26774534578252764842013-12-03T13:16:00.001+01:002013-12-03T13:16:07.609+01:00in which I try to recover from an hour-long motivation sessionAs you may or may not now, dear readers, I am employed by a certain large corporation chiefly known for its hardware, but actually offering a wide range of IT and other related services for other enterprises, large and small. Recently, the HR department of our corporation launched a new initiative, something about culture or engagement or some such nonsense I usually don't pay attention to because I'm, you know, busy doing actual work and creating value for our shareholders*. This time, however, there was a bit that made me sit up and listen and that bit is the name of the initiative: Arete. According to the initiative website:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Arete is pronounced [ahr-i-tey].</blockquote>
and
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Arete is a Greek word and it means “being the best you can be” or “reaching your highest human potential.”. </blockquote>
And there it was, a subtle but unmistakeably new note in the usual deluge of corporate bullshit which my finely-atuned nose could not miss. My Greek may leave a lot to be desired, but a) this sounds way too lofty and b) I don't trust corporate types when it comes to anything, especially language (<a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1212">danger + opportunity</a>, anyone?). So right after the meeting, I opened my copy of Liddell-Scott, fired up Perseus and soon came up with what I think is the actual word: <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=a%29reth&la=greek#lexicon">ἀρετή</a> = "goodness, excellence, virtue". The Perseus Project's <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0054:book=2:chapter=pos=16&highlight=#note1">first citation</a> leads to Aristotle's <i>Nicomachean Ethics</i>, Book 2 and the translator's remark that "<i>ἀρετή </i>is here as often in this and the following Books employed in the limited sense of ‘moral excellence’ or ‘goodness of character,’ i.e. virtue in the ordinary sense of the term."<br />
Of course, I don't think our management reads Aristotle on a regular basis, so I would expect that the direct source of the term can be found in one of those idiotic management guides. And indeed a cursory search on Google Books found one <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=YcgBFoMbWVIC&pg=PA423&dq=arete+management&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KsSdUtvRO8qMqAHy9YGgBg&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=arete%20management&f=false">example</a>, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=oMBhsS19JiMC&pg=PA111&dq=arete+management&hl=en&sa=X&ei=isadUp7ZDMPL2gWR-oCgAQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=arete%20management&f=false">another one</a> and I'm sure there are more. None of them, however, provide the definition given above. That can be found, verbatim, in the Wikipedia <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arete">entry for the word</a>. I will leave the assessment of that definition to those more competent in Greek, I just wish they would have stuck with - as the <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=YcgBFoMbWVIC&pg=PA423&dq=arete+management&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KsSdUtvRO8qMqAHy9YGgBg&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=arete%20management&f=false">first book</a> put it - functional excellence. That way, they would at least say what they mean without having to pretend they care about me.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*Pardon me while I throw up.</span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com59tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-84476223881974041492013-10-28T20:02:00.001+01:002013-10-29T16:22:35.695+01:00in which I briefly ponder the morphology of greetingsLately, for reasons that I may or may not explain in due course, I've been thinking a lot about the classification of words (parts of speech et al.). Normally what I do is consider the more nebulous categories (indefinite pronouns, quantifiers and alike), but today somehow I got to thinking about verbs and how - at least in Standard Average European and immediate surroundings - they tend to be easily identifiable based on morphological criteria only. And then I thought of "čau".<br />
To explain: In addition to all the formal<span style="font-size: x-small;">[1]</span> and semi-formal<span style="font-size: x-small;">[2]</span> options, there are basically three standard informal greetings in Slovak: "ahoj", "čau" and "servus". The etymology is of course obvious and interesting in itself, the use of the first one tends to baffle German and English-speaking visitors to no end, but these are otherwise unremarkable interjections (Pauliny 1981:207). Well, not entirely unremarkable. You see, unlike with most other interjections in Slovak, when you use these to greet a group of people, you can add a suffix "-te", ending up with "<a href="http://www.pluska.sk/magazin/zaujimavosti/zaujimavosti/ahojte-volam-asimo-bratislavu-navstivil-unikatny-robot.html">ahojte</a>", "<a href="http://www.birdz.sk/webka/hildegarda9/stavy/servuste-d/645204-mikroblog.html">servuste</a>" and "<a href="http://hokej.pravda.sk/ostatne/clanok/258122-caute-chalani-dakujem-a-drzte-sa/">čaute</a>". What is that suffix, you ask? Why it's none other than the suffix of the second person plural imperative, i.e. a verbal suffix. This would fit nicely into the paradigm where second person singular imperative lacks overt marking for some verb classes (e.g. "rob" = do.2SG.IMP, "robte" = do.2PL.IMP), so one could argue that some Slovak interjections actually take some verbal suffixes.<br />
Hang on, is that the only explanation? Well, no. One could for example consider the influence of analogy where these <span style="font-size: small;">forms would be based on greetings like "maj(te) sa" which is a honest-to-Ninurta verb in the imperative: the full form is "maj(te) sa dobre" = "be well"</span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[3]</span> "mať", lit. "to hav</span>e", metaphorically "to be in a X condition"<span style="font-size: x-small;">[4]</span>. The absence of the reflexive pronoun might "sa" would have to be explained, but surprise surprise, "<a href="http://www.birdz.sk/webka/mrspunk/fotoalbum/uzivame-si-teple-slniecko-caute-sa-/791187-foto.html">čaute sa</a>" and "<a href="http://www.porada.sk/archive/index.php/t-8272.html">ahojte sa</a>" do indeed frequently occur and from there, it's just one step to the forms we've seen, so that's plausible enough. We would thus have greetings formulas formed by analogy with an existing one and I don't think it matters that "maj(te) sa" is exclusively a farewell greeting, while the rest are universal.<br />
But here's the thing: in addition to 2PL.IMP suffix "-te", there is also a 1PL.IMP suffix "-me" (Pauliny 1981:178). And guess what? Yes, you got it, "čau" and "ahoj" take "-me", too, to form "<a href="http://www.bmwklub.sk/bmw7/chcem-tv-tuner-do-svojho-auta-t64120.html">čaume</a>" and "<a href="http://www.birdz.sk/forum/ahojme-nemate-prosim-nejaky-osvedceny-recept-proti-vypadavaniu-vlasov-/107664-tema.html">ahojme</a>" and there is even one instance of "<a href="https://www.facebook.com/florbalvseredi/posts/10151865142712459">servusme</a>" on teh intert00bz. These definitely cannot be explained by simple analogy with the "maj(te)" greeting, since appears to be no greeting formula "majme sa (dobre)"<span style="font-size: x-small;">[5]</span>. And so even if the 2PL imperative forms of "čau" and "ahoj" arose in analogy with "maj(te) sa" (which is possible, but in no way certain), they developed in their own way: first, they dropped the reflexive (which is not possible for "maj(te) sa" since the verb would then lose its idiomatic meaning) and once they could take one imperative suffix, nothing prevented them from taking the other one.<br />
So, to sum up: some Slovak interjections take the full set of imperative suffixes. Now that is some awesome shit.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Notes:</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">1. "Dobrý deň", lit. "good day".</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">2. "Zdravím", lit. "I greet".</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">3. </span><span style="font-size: x-small;">See Swedish/Norwegian "ha det bra".</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">4. Note that in Slovak, one can inquire about other person's well-being by simply asking "Máš sa?". Normally this type of sentence would require a sentence-final adjective (for a simple question), a sentence-final interrogative particle (for focus on the particle) or a different word order (interrogative particle - reflexive - verb), but "Máš sa?" is perfectly cromulant, if informal, Slovak.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">5. The main reason could be that the 1PL.IMP form of "mať" is not specific enough to facilitate a pragmatic interpretation as a greeting. In other words, when I hear "majme sa", I expect the next word to be the next part of one of the multiword expressions "mať" often features in, like "majme sa radi" ("let's like each other") or "majme sa na pozore" ("let's be careful"). Also, the imperative of "mať" is fishy in general.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">References:</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Pauliny 1981: Pauliny, Eugen. <i>Slovenská gramatika: Opis jazykového systému.</i> Bratislava: SPN. </span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com37tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-79187112875511380252013-01-03T22:12:00.000+01:002013-01-03T22:12:18.181+01:00in which I offer a not entirely serious review of a post by timothy michael law<b><a href="http://www.timothymichaellaw.com/a-missing-element-in-academic-book-reviews">A missing element in academic book reviews?</a></b><br />
by Timothy Michael Law<br />
<br />
A not entirely serious review by me<br />
<br />
This opinion piece examines the question of whether criticism of “author's style” should become a standard part of reviews of academic works. Paragraph 1 lays out the context in which these musings came about (i.e. the impending launch of the long-awaited <a href="http://themarginaliareview.com/">Marginalia: A Review of Books in History, Theology & Religion</a>) and defines the problem. Paragraphs 2 through 4 examine why the evaluation of author’s style is currently largely absent from reviews of academic literature while paragraphs 5 through 7 offers some general remarks on why it could be beneficial or indeed desirable. The closing paragraph invites the readers to offer their review of the piece, which is what we are doing here.<br />
<br />
First, let us address the unspoken assumptions on which Dr. Law’s remarks are based:<br />
<ol>
<li>There is something wrong with academic writing in terms of style ("Academic writing can be horrible") ... </li>
<li>... vis-a-vis a certain standard ("a brilliant example of prose") … </li>
<li>... and it’s entirely the author’s fault. </li>
<li>Nearly everyone is guilty of it at one point or another ("But is this not what *we* need in order to improve ourselves?"). </li>
<li>This needs to be remedied ("But is this not what we need in order to *improve ourselves?*"). </li>
</ol>
As for (1), even assuming that a definition of ‘style’ were provided (which it was not) and could be agreed upon (which we doubt), Dr. Law offers no evidence whatsoever of what he terms horrible academic writing. Without a working definition of the term ‘style’, one cannot even endeavor to guess what that horrible writing could be. Is it overuse of rhetorical questions? Or perhaps paragraphs of one sentence? We couldn’t possibly know, though it would appear that whatever horrible writing is, it can’t be as bad as poor argumentation, especially of the sort displayed here.<br />
<br />
Assumptions (4) and (5) are essentially corollaries of (1) and should be replied to in the same manner (and the voice of <i>Law and Order</i>’s Jack McCoy, if possible): “Assuming facts not in evidence, your honor!” Assumption (3) ignores the crucial role of editor in the publishing process, but that’s just a minor quibble.<br />
<br />
Fortunately for those of us who are still troubled by the question of what bad writing is, there is assumption (2) which presumes the existence of a gold standard for writing. Judging by its description using the adjective ‘brilliant’ and the noun ‘prose’ which often feature in reviews of fiction, it is there that one must look for model of great writing. Unfortunately, there is very little consensus on what it actually is. Every time the issue comes up, this reviewer is reminded of <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/07/a-readers-manifesto/302270/">B. R. Myers’ “Reader’s Manifesto”</a> where he examines the writing of some of the prize-winning American authors of recent decades. He finds the praise heaped on them more than undeserved and as a result, casts doubt on the validity or indeed utility of reviews of fiction. It would therefore appear that no clear standard of good, let alone brilliant, prose exists. And without such a clear standard, one would run the risk of academic reviews turning into the sort of vapid wankfest Myers rightly criticizes reviews of fiction for.<br />
<br />
Or, Lord help us, it could get even worse: with no definition of ‘style’, reviewers (who like most people, even educated ones, <a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3985" languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu.="languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu.">don’t know shit about language</a>) could take it to mean what non-linguists refer to as “grammar”. Soon, copies of Strunk and White would be pulled out and we would be subjected to the sort of uninformed outrage about leaving out adjectives and adverbs and not ending sentences with prepositions that makes Geoff Pullum very angry. And you don’t like him when he’s angry…<br />
<br />
In short, Dr. Law has failed to demonstrate that (as he assumes) there really is a problem with bad writing in academic literature and if, that it is indeed pervasive and that it indeed needs to be addressed, if only in passing as a part of a review. And as to the central question of his piece, i.e. whether judgments on author’s style should be routinely included in reviews of academic literature? The simple answer is no. First, as we hope this review has demonstrated, reviewers of academic literature have enough on their hands dealing with conceptual and factual failings of reviewed works (and even that seems like too arduous a task for some). Second, if indeed everyone is guilty of bad writing, then criticizing somebody else’s bad writing would be not only a waste of time, but also a prime example of blind leading the blind and without a clear idea what good writing is, it would soon devolve into the sort of pointless quibblefest academics are known to sometimes engage in and routinely - and justifiably - mocked for. And finally, let us once more return to the issue of the gold standard for good writing: Even if there were one (and we hold that Myers above has shown that it isn't), it would only apply to fiction the purpose of which is to paint a picture with words and evoke emotions and all that other jazz fiction is good for. The purpose of academic literature is to convey information, argue points, outline theories. To insist that this be done in a brilliant prose (whatever that may be) is not only to put an extra burden on the author, but also to elevate form over content. To which I say, fuck that shit.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com33tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-30915092642520810532012-09-30T13:36:00.001+02:002012-09-30T18:35:05.937+02:00tahimeUnless you've been living under a rock these past weeks, you know about the Gospel of Jesus' Wife (GJW), so no intro, just the basic overview: <a href="http://news.hds.harvard.edu/files/King_JesusSaidToThem_draft_0917.pdf">this</a> is the draft PDF of the paper by Karen King, Alin Suciu has some <a href="http://alinsuciu.com/2012/09/26/on-the-so-called-gospel-of-jesuss-wife-some-preliminary-thoughts-by-hugo-lundhaug-and-alin-suciu/">great comments</a>, <a href="http://ntweblog.blogspot.com/">Mark Goodacre</a> links to detailed textual analysis by Francis Watson (but see <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2012/09/timo-s-paananen-on-methods-of-forgery-detection-and-the-gospel-of-jesus-wife.html">Timo Paananen</a> for a rebuttal) and a video by <a href="http://ntweblog.blogspot.sk/2012/09/christian-askeland-on-gospel-of-jesus.html">Christian Askeland</a>; and Jim Davila is, as always, your <a href="http://paleojudaica.blogspot.com/">go-to guy</a> for the complete picture of the debate. Before I venture any further, let me offer a disclaimer: I have no dog in the fight over the historical Jesus and my faith (such as it is) is not threatened by the very idea of Him being <a href="http://forbiddengospels.blogspot.com/2012/09/whos-afraid-of-married-jesus.html">married</a>. To me, this whole debate is first and foremost a wonderful example of how scholarship works and it's a great thing to watch it more or less live. Well, mostly watch, because (disclaimer continues) I am no expert on either Coptic or any aspect early Christianity and thus I cannot and will not offer any opinion as to the authenticity of the GJW fragment. I did, however, leave one <a href="http://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/francis-watsons-introduction-and.html">comment</a> on Mark Goodacre's blog where I essentially wondered aloud about some usage in GJW I found peculiar. As it so happened, <strike>yesterday</strike> earlier this week on Charles Halton's blog, Gesine Robinson offered <a href="http://awilum.com/?p=2216">her view</a> of the whole affair and her remark #8 addresses the same point, except of course in a much more detailed and better articulated manner. I'm reproducing it below with one modification - I've changed the <a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/c/Coptic_transliteration.pdf">transliteration scheme</a><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span> to something that I find a little easier on the eyes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
Therefore, the rather rare phrase PEDžE IS* (though frequently used in
the Gospel of Thomas since we have to do there with a collection of
Jesus’ sayings) is used even in both instances of speaking, instead of
the form PEDžAF (+ pronominal/nominal object) + NQI + subject that is
more common in dialogues or other literary texts. Here in the first
instance one would expect something like PEDžAU NIS* NQI NMAThÉTÉS, and in
the second instance PEDžAF NAU NQI IS*, or since Jesus answers the
disciples, even AFOUÓŠB<span style="font-size: xx-small;">[2]</span> NQI IS* PEDžAF NAU DžE. It seems a cautious and
perhaps unsure modern Coptologist was at work here.</blockquote>
<br />
To actually understand what's going on, first, PEDžE. Translated as "(pronoun) said", PEDžE belongs to a funny little class of words Layton (2000:297-314) refers to as verboids. Semantically, they are like verbs, and they can even take some of the verbal affixes, but there are a few important aspects in which they differ from actual verbs. In case of PEDžE, they are as follows:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>1. PEDžE cannot be negated or converted, i.e. it cannot take the relative, circumstantial, preterit or focalizing prefix (Layton 2000:321-322).</li>
<li>2. PEDžE only expresses the past tense.</li>
<li>3. PEDžE can only be conjugated sufixally.</li>
<li>4. PEDžE can appear in two forms: </li>
<ul>
<li>independently (PEDžE), in which case it must be immediately followed by the subject noun or pronoun (Layton's 'prenominal state').</li>
<li>suffixed (conventionally written as PEDžA=) where the suffix marks the subject of the action of speaking (Layton's 'prepersonal state'). In this case, if the 3rd person subject is also expressed by a noun, the noun is preceded by the preposition NQI.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<br />
In GJW, PEDžE (i.e. the prenominal state) appears twice: first on line 2 (PEDžE MMAThÉTÉS NIS* DžE ... = "The apostles said to Jesus: ...") and then of course on line 4 (PEDžE IS* NAU TAHIME = "Jesus said to them 'My wife...'"). The objection Dr. Robinson raises is that this is unlikely since PEDžE in its prenominal state is rare and seeing it twice in such a short text even more so when there are other (presumably more frequent) constructions that could have been used. We have very little reason to doubt Dr. Robinson's intuition and experience. But what we also have is a way to actually check whether she's right. Distribution and probability, that's all we're dealing with here, and that is a familiar theory NLP territory where a corpus and some math is all you need. The questions to be asked can be reformulated as follows:<br />
<br />
1. Is the prenominal state of PEDžE indeed rare?<br />
2. What is the probability of one prenominal PEDžE following another?<br />
3. What about the frequency of other constructions?<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
First, the data: I decided to use the gospels for both theoretical (we are looking at Jesus' words after all) and practical reasons (Coptic translation of the canonical gospels is readily available from a number of sources online). So I cobbled together a little Perl script to retrieve the text of the canonical ones from <a href="http://unbound.biola.edu/">The Unbound Bible</a> website. I only used the version they refer to as "Coptic: Sahidic NT" which, according to their information, ultimately comes from <a href="http://sahidica.warpco.com/">Sahidica</a>. To the canonical gospels I added the Gospel of Thomas (GThom) which gets mentioned a lot in this context and which I retrieved from <a href="http://www.metalog.org/files/th_interlin.html">metalog</a>. After some minor cleanup, I ended up with 4 UTF-8-encoded <a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/c/Coptic_gospels_txt.zip">plain text files</a> (plus one for <a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/c/GThom_UTF8.txt">GThom</a>) which I then fed into <a href="http://www.antlab.sci.waseda.ac.jp/software.html">antconc</a>. One of the cool features of antconc is the ability to define custom fonts which is particularly handy for Coptic. For best results, use <a href="http://apagreekkeys.org/NAUdownload.html">New Athena Unicode</a> and for replicability, my <a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/c/coptic.ant">original settings</a>.<br />
<br />
And now the procedure: for the first question, let's go with something simple. The null hypothesis is that the distribution of the prenominal state on one hand and all the forms of the prepersonal state on the other is roughly equal. In other words, there is no particular reason why an author or a translator should prefer one to the other. So when searching for all possible forms of PEDžE (PEDž.* in regex terms) - of which there are only a handful - we would expect to find PEDžE about 50% of the time. The table below sums the actual findings for the corpus consisting of the four canonical gospels:<br />
<br />
<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 434px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 5156; mso-width-source: userset; width: 106pt;" width="141"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col span="2" style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt; width: 106pt;" width="141">Total
wordcount</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66" style="width: 46pt;" width="61">59100</td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Total PEDž.*</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">776</td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;"></td>
<td class="xl66"></td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
</tr>
<tr height="58" style="height: 43.5pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td class="xl65" height="58" style="height: 43.5pt;"></td>
<td class="xl66"></td>
<td class="xl69" style="text-align: right; width: 87pt;" width="116">% of PEDž.*</td>
<td class="xl71" style="text-align: right; width: 87pt;" width="116">Observed relative frequency (per
1000)</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl67" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">PEDžE</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">140</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">18,04%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">2,37</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl67" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">PEDžAF</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">501</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">64,56%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">8,48</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl67" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">PEDžAS</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">20</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">2,58%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">0,34</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl67" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">PEDžAU</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">113</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">14,56%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">1,91</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl67" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">PEDžÉTN</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">0,26%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">0,03</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl68" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Total</td>
<td align="right" class="xl68">776</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">100,00%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">13,13</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;"></td>
<td class="xl66"></td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
<td class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Prenominal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">140</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">18,04%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">2,37</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Prepersonal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">636</td>
<td align="right" class="xl72" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">81,96%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">10,76</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl68" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Total</td>
<td align="right" class="xl68">776</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">100,00%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl73" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">13,13</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
Though the definition of 'rare' may vary, these figures clearly show that in the canonical gospels, the prepersonal state PEDž= is preferred to the prenominal stage. This becomes even clearer when one looks at the synoptic gospels only:<br />
<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 496px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 6656; mso-width-source: userset; width: 137pt;" width="182"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 5010; mso-width-source: userset; width: 103pt;" width="137"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="67" style="height: 50.25pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td class="xl65" height="67" style="height: 50.25pt; width: 137pt;" width="182">Matthew</td>
<td class="xl65" style="width: 46pt;" width="61"><br /></td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 87pt;" width="116">% of PEDž.*</td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 103pt;" width="137">Observed relative frequency (per
1000)</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prenominal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">1,20%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">0,12</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prepersonal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">165</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">98,80%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">9,72</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl66"><br /></td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Mark</td>
<td class="xl66"><br /></td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prenominal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">12</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">10,62%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">1,19</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prepersonal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">101</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">89,38%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">10,02</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl66"><br /></td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Luke</td>
<td class="xl66"><br /></td>
<td class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prenominal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">55</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">20,37%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">3,19</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prepersonal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">215</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">79,63%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">12,47</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
With John, the prenominal form makes up almost a third of all forms of PEDžE. Moreover, more than a half of all instances of the prenominal form in the four canonical gospels can be found in the Gospel of John:<br />
<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 496px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 6656; mso-width-source: userset; width: 137pt;" width="182"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 5010; mso-width-source: userset; width: 103pt;" width="137"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="60" style="height: 45.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="60" style="height: 45.0pt; width: 137pt;" width="182">John</td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 46pt;" width="61"><br /></td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 87pt;" width="116"> % of PEDž.*</td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 103pt;" width="137">Observed relative frequency (per
1000)</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prenominal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">72</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">31,72%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">4,86</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prepersonal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">155</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">68,28%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">10,47</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
Gospel of Thomas, however, is another story altogether:<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 496px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 6656; mso-width-source: userset; width: 137pt;" width="182"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 5010; mso-width-source: userset; width: 103pt;" width="137"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="60" style="height: 45.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="60" style="height: 45.0pt; width: 137pt;" width="182">Gospel
of Thomas</td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 46pt;" width="61"><br /></td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 87pt;" width="116">% of PEDž.*</td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 103pt;" width="137">Observed relative frequency (per
1000)</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prenominal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">101</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">71,13%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">25,63</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">Prepersonal state</td>
<td align="right" class="xl66">41</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">28,87%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl70" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">10,41</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
Here Dr. Robinson's intuition is proven correct once again: GThom clearly prefers the prenominal state of PEDžE. Moreover, the relative frequency (per 1000 words) of this state is much higher than even the relative frequency of all forms of the verboid in any of the canonical gospels or all of them combined.<br />
<br />
So much for the first question, now on to the second one. The problem is a trivial one: calculate the probability of one prenominal PEDžE following another prenominal PEDžE. In other words, given the probability of two complementary events (i.e. the probability of either state ocurring), we need to calculate the probability of one of those events occurring twice in a row. Let P(N) be the probability of prenominal state being selected as determined above - i.e. in a situation where the author has already decided to use a form of PEDžE, P(N) expresses the probability of this form being the prenominal state. The probability of event P(M) (the prenominal state occuring twice in a row) is calculated as follows:<br />
<br />
Canonical gospels: P(M) = P(N) * P(N) = 0,18 * 0,18 = 0,032<br />
Gospel of Thomas: P(M) = P(N) * P(N) = 0,71 * 0,71 = 0,504<br />
<br />
The probability of PEDžE ocurring twice in a row is therefore 3,2% for the canonical gospels and 50,4% for the Gospel of Thomas. If GJW is a narrative similar to the canonical gospels rather than a sayings gospel like GThom, then one would be fully justified in raising a brow over the two prenominal PEDžE in a row - doubly so when one takes into account the relative frequency of that state. For the canonical gospels, it's 2,37 (from 0,12 for Matthew to 4,86 for John), for GThom, the figure is 25,63. Compare that to the figures for GJW (calculated assuming a total word count of <a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/c/GJW.docx">31 words</a>):<br />
<br />
<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 496px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 6656; mso-width-source: userset; width: 137pt;" width="182"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 5010; mso-width-source: userset; width: 103pt;" width="137"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl63" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt; width: 137pt;" width="182">GJW</td>
<td class="xl63" style="width: 46pt;" width="61"></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl71" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Total wordcount</td>
<td align="right" class="xl64">31</td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl71" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">Total PEDž.*</td>
<td align="right" class="xl64">2</td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl71" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;"><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td class="xl70" style="width: 87pt;" width="116"><br /></td>
<td class="xl71" style="width: 103pt;" width="137"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="49" style="height: 36.75pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td class="xl64" height="49" style="height: 36.75pt;"></td>
<td class="xl64"></td>
<td class="xl66" style="text-align: right; width: 87pt;" width="116">% of PEDž.*</td>
<td class="xl68" style="text-align: right; width: 103pt;" width="137">Observed relative frequency (per
1000)</td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt;">PEDžE</td>
<td align="right" class="xl64">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="width: 87pt;" width="116">100,00%</td>
<td align="right" class="xl67" style="width: 103pt;" width="137">64,52</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
<br />
And finally, question no. 3. Here the issue is a little more complicated (it involves variations in word order and information structure) and as such, the answer hard to arrive at without a decently tagged corpus. What I can do, however, is throw a few regular expressions around looking at what structures are used to refer to Jesus speaking (in absolute numbers):<br />
<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 436px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 10349; mso-width-source: userset; width: 212pt;" width="283"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 3364; mso-width-source: userset; width: 69pt;" width="92"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.75pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.75pt; width: 212pt;" width="283">Jesus
speaks</td>
<td class="xl64" style="text-align: right; width: 46pt;" width="61">Canon</td>
<td class="xl64" style="text-align: right; width: 69pt;" width="92">GThom</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl63" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDžE IÉSOUS / IS*</td>
<td align="right">53</td>
<td align="right">85</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl63" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDŽAF * NQI IÉSOUS / IS*</td>
<td align="right" class="xl63">20</td>
<td align="right" class="xl63">0</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl63" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">AFOUÓŠB NQI IÉSOUS / IS*</td>
<td align="right" class="xl63">18</td>
<td align="right" class="xl63">0</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
Interestingly enough, the second structure is used four times in GThom, but only for other people speaking (Peter, Matthew and twice Thomas). Based on this, it would not be that unreasonable to expect PEDžE with Jesus as the subject to occur in any text similar to the canonical gospels, let alone to GThom.<br />
<br />
When it's the apostles' turn to speak to Jesus, the picture is even more complicated: the apostles can be referred to as MMATÉTÉS ("the apostles") or NEFMATÉTÉS ("his apostles"), Jesus can be referred to by his name, by the <i>nomen sacrum</i> IS* (I counted those together) or by NAF ("to him"). A few more quick regular expressions and voila:<br />
<br />
<center>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 436px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 10349; mso-width-source: userset; width: 212pt;" width="283"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2230; mso-width-source: userset; width: 46pt;" width="61"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 3364; mso-width-source: userset; width: 69pt;" width="92"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl66" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt; width: 212pt;" width="283">Apostles
speak</td>
<td class="xl66" style="text-align: right; width: 46pt;" width="61">Canon</td>
<td class="xl66" style="text-align: right; width: 69pt;" width="92">GThom</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDžE MMATÉTÉS</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">0</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">4</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDžE NEFMATÉTÉS</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">0</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">0</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDžAU NIÉSOUS / NIS* NQI
MMATÉTÉS</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">0</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">0</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDžAU NAF NQI MMATÉTÉS</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">1</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">0</td>
</tr>
<tr height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">
<td class="xl65" height="20" style="height: 15.0pt;">PEDžAU NAF NQI NEFMATÉTÉS</td>
<td align="right">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl65">5</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
<br />
These are by no means all possible constructions, just the ones that seem to be relevant for this discussion. So the first is the one that occurs in GJW and, no surprise there, it crops up in GThom as well, but not in the canonical gospels. The second one is just a check - it struck me that NEFMATÉTÉS crops up roughly twice as much as MMATÉTÉS in both the canonical gospels and GThom - but as you can see, it really doesn't matter since this structure cannot be found in either. The third construction is the one Dr. Robinson would expect instead of the first one. As it turns out, this would be an unreasonable expectation, as it doesn't appear in either the canonical gospels or GThom. Two of its variations do - in both cases the target of speaking (=Jesus) is expressed by means of NAF and in one of them, the subject is NEFMATÉTÉS which is not surprising considering the relative frequency of the two forms of this noun.<br />
<br />
Of course, all these figures mean very little. GJW is a small fragment, the corpus of material I used is limited in both size and scope and chances are some of my math is wrong (<a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/c/">check</a> for yourself), just to give a few objections that might legitimately be raised. Nevertheless, with a decently sized and properly tagged corpus of Coptic, this is an example of what Coptologists could do to check whether their intituition regarding the distribution of certain morphological or syntactic forms is correct, not to mention all the other cool stuff.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] I borrowed the table from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_alphabet">Wikipedia</a>; the asterisk marks a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomen_sacrum"><i>nomen sacrum</i></a>.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] At least I think that's what Dr. Robinson meant.</span>
bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-15239392419337057422012-02-14T19:46:00.002+01:002012-02-14T19:46:51.753+01:00liradiA while back over at Lameen's place, we <a href="http://lughat.blogspot.com/2011/11/meaningless-morphemes-from-malta-to.html">discussed</a> the mystery morpheme <i>-ij-</i>/<i>-iyy-</i> that is used in Maltese and Siwi Berber with the plural suffix <i>-at</i>/<i>-iet</i>. Lameen argued that in both cases, it seems to be employed chiefly with nouns whose form is atypical for the given language. For Maltese, this would definitely make sense, since many of Maltese nouns with plural ending in <i>-ijiet</i> are borrowings. In fact, of the 20 most frequent nouns of this type in the <a href="http://mlrs.research.um.edu.mt/index.php?page=31">MLRS Corpus</a>, only three are of Arabic/Semitic origin: <i>xogħlijiet</i> = "works", <i>mistoqsijiet</i> = "questions" and <i>aħbarijiet</i> = "news". Sounds straightforward enough, especially in the context of Maltese where there is a separate conjugation paradigm for borrowed verbs, thus the existence of a noun suffix used predominantly with borrowed nouns with their strange and unusual syllable structures and vowel patterns is not that surprising.<br />
This, however, cannot be the full story. For one, the question of 'what is a typical noun form' is one that is not that easy to answer. Secondly, Maltese is notorious - well, at least among us melitists - for applying some creative broken plurals to borrowed nouns. Thus we get <i>forma</i> / <i>forom</i>, <i>storja / stejjer</i>, <i>spiża / spejjeż</i> ("cost"), <i>rotta / rotot</i> ("routes") and so on, even though, say, <i>storja</i> with its four consonants or <i>spiża </i>with its very un-Semitic initial consonant cluster are not exactly, um, typical. At the same time, Romance borrowings of the honest-to-El Semitic CCVC / CVCC type (see <a href="http://books.google.sk/books?id=IiXVqyEkPKcC&lpg=PP1&dq=lipi%C5%84ski%20semitic%20languages&pg=PA217#v=onepage&q=noun%20forms&f=false">Lipiński 2001:216</a>) like <i>skop</i> or <i>post </i>form their plurals by means of the suffix <i>-ijiet</i>.<i> </i>Obviously there are other factors here at play, like perhaps the age of the borrowing or even the place and manner of articulation of root consonants, which would all have to be taken into account if a more detailed explanation is to be provided.<br />
And then there's the whole semantic aspect. As Lameen notes in a reply to my comment where I wondered why we get <i>art / artijiet</i> ("earth, land") instead of *<i>arieti</i> (< Ar. <i>'arāḍī</i> with presumed imāla, depharyngealization and devoicing) or <i>żmien / żminijiet</i> (instead of something like <i>*azmina</i>):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
... "earth", "time", and for that matter "mother" are all words that are
very rarely pluralised, increasing the pressure to adopt some commoner
plural type.</blockquote>
This makes perfect sense - so in the evolution of Maltese, the original *<i>arieti </i>or something similar fell into disuse and <i>artijiet</i>, formed most likely by analogy, took over. And as I was reminded this morning by Charles Briffa's new book <span><i><a href="http://www.di-ve.com/Default.aspx?ID=71&Action=1&NewsId=86512">Iż-Żmien fuq Sider Malta</a></i>, we actually have evidence for this shift. Not just any evidence, mind you, the mother of all evidence: <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_Cantilena">Il-Kantilena</a></i>. If you're reading this and you don't know about <i>Il-Kantilena</i>, feel free to consult Wikipedia for more details (I recommend the <a href="http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il-Kantilena">French version</a> which seems to offer the most comprehensive account, and <a href="http://files.maltina.webnode.com/200000009-0bf460cee5/ts.jpg">this image</a> for the actual text). Suffice it to say that it is the oldest literary text in Maltese composed by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pietru_Caxaro">Pietru Caxaro</a> and dates back to the late 15th century (terminus ante quem 1485). We find what we're looking for on line 18:</span><br />
<span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoYHrgRoGlrqKQmeHdXITr_1AjDVW5MRBlIu8wOMOdA8uN2N1jZz8RUt3g-KaOCkjpSeZndbZFe7RqRVRJ6JELC9FV_KLqzVHwJp8UwuA23bw7VyxknqFMucQGuHpVVbOhJftaWg/s1600/liradi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="64" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoYHrgRoGlrqKQmeHdXITr_1AjDVW5MRBlIu8wOMOdA8uN2N1jZz8RUt3g-KaOCkjpSeZndbZFe7RqRVRJ6JELC9FV_KLqzVHwJp8UwuA23bw7VyxknqFMucQGuHpVVbOhJftaWg/s640/liradi.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span><span style="font-size: x-small;">Transcription (Wettinger and Fsadni 1968): </span></span><br />
haliex <b>liradi </b>’al col xibir sura<br />
<br />
<span><span style="font-size: x-small;">Modern orthography:</span> </span><br />
Għaliex <b>l-iradi</b> għal kull xiber sura:<br />
<br />
<span><span style="font-size: x-small;">Gloss: <span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></span><br />
<span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: small;">because <b>DEF-land.PL</b> for every</span> </span></span><span>span [1] shape</span><br />
<br />
<span><span style="font-size: x-small;">English:</span> </span><br />
<span></span>for each (piece of land) has its own shape (features)</blockquote>
<span>And here it is: it would seem that ca. 1470, the noun <i>art</i> still formed a broken plural. One might consider - especially in the light of the genre - the possibility that Caxaro deliberately chose an archaism for both effect and reasons of metrics, but as for the latter, the number of syllables is the same for <i>l-artijiet</i> and <i>l-iradi</i>. In any case, it seems Lameen's hypothesis is correct and by 1796, the publication of Vassalli's <i>Lexicon Melitense-Latino-Italum</i>, <i>art </i>only had the suffixed plural form, in Vassalli's spelling <i>Ardijyt</i>. </span><br />
<span>By the way, if you're wondering why it's <i>iradi</i> and not my hypothetical </span>*<i>arieti</i>, it's because I forgot to account for the emphatic <i>ḍ </i>which, at least in most cases, inhibits imāla.<br />
Finally, if you want hear what Il-Kantilena might have sounded like try the video below. The performer, Dr. Martin Zammit, is an Arabist and it kinda shows - for example in verse 18 (1:32) where the first word has <i>-<b>ie</b>-</i>, Martin reads [hal<b>ā</b>š]. Nevertheless, I think it is a pretty good approximation.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<object width="320" height="266" class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="http://0.gvt0.com/vi/CspK-S8_6-Q/0.jpg"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CspK-S8_6-Q&fs=1&source=uds" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" />
<embed width="320" height="266" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CspK-S8_6-Q&fs=1&source=uds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object></div>
<br />
<span><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] span = "the space between thumb and forefinger". Cachia (1994:89) glosses <i>għal kull xiber</i> as <i>għandhom</i> = "they have".</span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com34tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-30908968981843580742011-12-27T01:45:00.000+01:002011-12-27T20:45:48.782+01:00publishedHow is this for a belated Christmas present: I have just learned that the paper I presented at the 2009 SBL International Meeting (<a href="http://bulbul.sk/writings/Judgments.of.Solomon-PREPUB.pdf">prepub PDF</a>) has been published by Peter Lang in the proceedings volume from the session titled <i><a href="http://peterlang.com/index.cfm?event=cmp.ccc.seitenstruktur.detailseiten&seitentyp=produkt&pk=54331&concordeid=311035">The Canon of the Bible and the Apocrypha in the Churches of the East</a></i> (full bibliographical info below).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihnuY82eOPFv1B3q73-smfa_DWKYqaGaScECKL_uGnusgjDz6rIclAF6oExCuHBKObW4Xzskjbg9tMnBievxdaWad76SbwV7evCFju-wy5iCBPvzCcyu-1uVyRPteqrSYhkIaBBQ/s1600/311035_cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihnuY82eOPFv1B3q73-smfa_DWKYqaGaScECKL_uGnusgjDz6rIclAF6oExCuHBKObW4Xzskjbg9tMnBievxdaWad76SbwV7evCFju-wy5iCBPvzCcyu-1uVyRPteqrSYhkIaBBQ/s320/311035_cover.jpg" width="206" /></a></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Hovhanessian, Vahan S. (ed.):<br />
<b>The Canon of the Bible and the Apocrypha in the Churches of the East</b><br />
Series: Bible in the Christian Orthodox Tradition - Volume 2<br />
Peter Lang Academic Publishers<br />
New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt am Main, Oxford, Wien, 2012. VIII, 113 pp.<br />
ISBN 978-1-4331-1035-1 hb. </blockquote>
As a budding (if not young) academic, I guess I should be proud, but truth be told, I'm not. On one hand, I'm somewhat surprised that besides from submitting the manuscript, I had no input in the editing process, which would have enabled me to correct some serious translation errors. On the other, had I had some say in the publishing process, I might have withdrawn the paper from publication completely. As I found out only a few weeks ago, the Arabic text which I thought I had rediscovered had already been published in a critical edition (<i>Testamentum Salomonis arabicum</i>, Córdoba: Servicio de Publicaciones Universidad de Córdoba, 2006) by Juan Pedro Monferrer-Sala, who is a much more competent scholar than I am. Now true, I did make a few connections he did not plus it's the first time the subject has been presented to the English-reading public, so the paper is not a complete waste of cellulose, but then again, I did make a few horrible translation errors which shall now forever live in print and on Google Books and then there's the total embarassment of the whole thing. I wonder if that's ever happened to anyone else and how they dealt with it.<br />
And the worst part is that this seems to be a constant theme accompanying my academic endeavors - every time I invest time, energy and money into a project that seems worthvile, just as a tangible result is about to be produced, I find that someone, somewhere has already done it, only better. Used to be one of those long dead Russian motherfuckers (and they still remain the most likely suspects), now it's just about everybody. This happens three or four times and you start seriously doubting if you have what it takes to, well, make a contribution and if you and the world at large would not be better off if you just packed it in, called it a day and went off to harvest jam in Cambodia* or build power plants in Yakutia**.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">* The Slovak equivalent of being up shit creek without a paddle.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">** A real option available to me.</span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-21804378258265887232011-09-09T11:04:00.004+02:002011-09-09T11:26:08.148+02:00scrollI received the following message this morning:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisipeWL_Nrl9DRICLry7c41w69YoLWsiKMAIhW6EE390_pLwpJa4lI_AidbKZl5wX0wFs2yFJkUYq3k96JybnwxEODvSG3bI9iIRAuWaGTG7IRi4eGtn2Fbb7c0kZ7tla0vhj1UA/s1600/mail.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 218px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisipeWL_Nrl9DRICLry7c41w69YoLWsiKMAIhW6EE390_pLwpJa4lI_AidbKZl5wX0wFs2yFJkUYq3k96JybnwxEODvSG3bI9iIRAuWaGTG7IRi4eGtn2Fbb7c0kZ7tla0vhj1UA/s400/mail.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5650283359398128914" border="0" /></a><br />I sure like the 15% discount, but I love their language policy. However, it appears to be a new one, as this message from a while ago confirms:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJARrCHcP5HDCd0MQysp93tDfpJBEe1d0zcoC0oqxTdmnLSmoqWPDtLXO5Iayh3gqHKylX_JdhMWuQwTsX0Tk-J_dKmh8E1KEY3e8eal4vKBfNz1lvBpNr8sk3dwcR4r5nEIcCAA/s1600/mail2.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 376px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJARrCHcP5HDCd0MQysp93tDfpJBEe1d0zcoC0oqxTdmnLSmoqWPDtLXO5Iayh3gqHKylX_JdhMWuQwTsX0Tk-J_dKmh8E1KEY3e8eal4vKBfNz1lvBpNr8sk3dwcR4r5nEIcCAA/s400/mail2.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5650287748729866290" border="0" /></a><br /><br />I wonder what they thought the point of the transliteration was...bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-79556000319581022322011-04-08T15:09:00.013+02:002011-04-10T21:59:07.342+02:00liveblogging GHILM 3<strike>... 'cause the hell why not.</strike><br /><strike>... while the battery lasts.</strike><br />... theme of the day: "Work in progress" (is there any other kind)?<br /><br />- Intro by Thomas Stolz and Ray Fabri.<br />Highlight: all future publications by GHILM will be handled by Akademie-Verlag Berlin, proceedings from GHILM 2 should be finished by the end of the month. And there will be a electronic corpus of Maltese going live by the end of the month. Dammit, beaten to the punch again.<br /><br />- Invited speaker 1: Thomas Stolz. A lively talk on group formation ('we three' etc.), all of it based on Thomas' <a href="http://archive.maltatoday.com.mt/2001/1111/l3a.html">bedtime reading</a> (with statistics!). Note to self: get it.<br /><br />- Ray Fabri on clitic and definite NPs in Maltese that's bound to knock the socks of Balkanologists (spoiler alert: clitic doubling with indefinite NPs. Take that!). A lot if it overlapped with my talk and the ensuing discussion actually spoiled parts of it. Great minds etc., I guess.<br /><br />- Me.<br />Highlight 1: I didn't shit myself.<br />Highlight 2: Neither did the audience.<br />I screwed up an example (that'll learn me to make last-minute changes), but otherwise went pretty well.<br /><br />- Maris Camilleri on restrictive relative clauses. Crammed full of information and - needless to say - excellent.<br /><br />- Chris Lucas on negatives from the point of view of dynamic syntax. First time I've ever heard of dynamic syntax and Chris' explanation of the principles actually made sense. Plus some interesting asides on polarity items and interrogative vs. negative 'x' in Maltese.<br /><br />Lunch.<br /><br />- Invited speaker 2: Frans Plank on the direction of derivation, mostly nouns<-> adjectives and comparison of direction of derivation with English and German within specific semantic classes. Poor (present) Michael Spagnol got blamed for most of errors.<br />A comment (from the discussion) by Frans Plank a propos basic vs. derived forms: "In Proto Indo-European, what we see as basic is actually derived. Etymological dictionaries of Indo-Euroean list roots as verbs which is probably more science-fiction than science."<br /><br />- Michael Spagnol and Albert Gatt on labile verbs (see Haspelmath 1993). Michael did the theory and described Haspelmath 1993 as his favorite paper evah. I almost yelled "Nerd!". Albert presented the results of an online / corpus study examining the use (transitive vs. intransitive) of labile verbs in Maltese and put together a list of verbs biased either way. Very nice. Note to self: need to steal their methodology.<br /><br />Battery died. Crap.<br /><br />- Thomas Mayer (et al., but he was the one standing there) with a pretty awesome talk on finding the formula for forming the broken plural in Maltese.<br />- Phyllisienne Gauci and Maris Camilleri again on the dual. Next time somebody claims there are no dialects in Maltese, play them the recording of all the native speaker disagreeing on this seemingly minor point. OT: "thallasanejn" = "two seas". Archaic, but still awesome.<br /><br />One last item before the poster session: Albert Gatt officially announced the launch of the Maltese Language Resource Server Corpus (http://mlrs.research.um.edu.mt/index.php?page=3). Going live soon, this will be the big ass (over 72 million word tokens) you've always dreamed about. This surely beats the 48 million words I put together over the last few months, but at least a part of it can and will be integrated into MLRSC.<br /><br />And finally, the poster session. My favorite part was the statistical analysis of possible tri- and quadriliteral roots by Mike Spagnol and Thomas Mayer (busy as bees, the Konstanz guys) and the comparison between possible and attested roots. Pretty cool stuff with wide-ranging implications.<br /><br />So that's it for day 1. I'm off to bed, wouldn't wanna miss Bernard Comrie's talk at 8:30.<br /><br />DAY 2<br />... aka "Membership drive for the International Federation of the Sleep Deprived."<br /><br />Invited speaker 3: Bernard Comrie on the typology of Maltese loanwords. The data was of course obtained within the scope of the <a href="http://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/files/lwt.html">Loanword Typology</a> project (see also <a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1008">this LanguageLog post</a> and the links therein). It turns out Maltese is pretty high on the list with 37.00% of the lexical items borrowed, so slightly less than 39% for English. Surprisingly enough, the ratio of borrowings from English is very low (2-3% or something like that).<br />- Next up, Marie Alexander with a talk on the mixing of English and Maltese in children. Fascinating data on language choice for both parents and children.<br />- Sandra Vella et al. on the distribution, function and pragmatic properties of pauses and breaks.<br />- Matt Wolf of Yale with a very heavy and very technical optimality-theory-related talk.<br />- Another very technical paper by Gilbert Puech analyzing the fundamentals ofMaltese phonology.<br />- And yet another heavily technical, but in a different way, talk by MarkBorg describing in great detail the methods he and his team are using to create a speech synthesis engine for Maltese (it's all in the diphones). Once completed, the engine will be freely available and so will the methodology.<br /><br />DAY 3<br />... why am I up at 7:30 on a Sunday?<br /><br />Invited speaker 4: Elisabeth Hume with another experiment-based analysis, this time of word-final geminates in Maltese. It turns out that not only are the geminates kept geminated (which is rare), there is also a lengthening of the preceding vowel. This has implications for the way information is transferred in terms of redundancy vs. robustness. Work in progress, but definitely a fascinating matter.<br />- Next up, Adam Ussishkin and Kevin Schluter with a talk on auditory root and binyan priming. The overall question is whether the roots and patterns (binyanim) are a part of the mental lexicon. If they are, then priming should be possible - in other words, if you are presented with a word with a certain root/pattern, recognizing another word with the same root/pattern should go much faster. Test like these are usually done visually which is problematic with Hebrew and Arabic script. So the Arizona guys developed an auditory test for both superliminal and subliminal priming. Superliminal means the priming element is played as it is. Subliminal - and this is where shit gets really weird - but in the best way possible - involves playing the priming element backwards, time-compressed. It turns out that there is no priming effect on patterns and there is one for root. The really surprising part is that that effect is roughly the same for supraliminal AND subliminal priming. Really awesome work.<br />- Mike Spagnol with a re-analysis of Maltese derived stems. Bottom line: there aren't 10 (or 9, minus IV), but actually only 4.5, seeing as there are mutually exclusive pairs (say, if a root occurs in VII, it doesn't occur in VIII) and there are only a few verbs in X.<br />- Martin Zammit with a much needed reevaluation of some of Aquilina's etymologies using newly published material on Tunisian Arabic. The fun part for me was that I recognized about half of the lexical items from Tunisian Judeo-Arabic.<br />- Another talk on etymology by Daniele Baglioni where he offers the thesis that at least some of the Romance loandwords didn't come to Maltese directly from Sicilian/Italian, but from a variety of Italian he terms 'Levant Italian' - a variety used as an international language in the late-medieval Levant and beyond.<br />- Jan Joachimsen with one more OT-related paper, this time focusing on Maltese orthography and its acquistion by children.<br />- And last, but not least, L. Brincat with a report on a study of how chatting (not texting) influences the spelling habits of Maltese teenagers. Executive summary with a bunch of caveats: there is some correlation between the amount of time spent chatting and relatively low testing scores. The real interesting part was the examination of chat Maltese, which shows a bunch of really familiar features, such as using numbers for syllables ("4c" = "forsi" = "perhaps, 8 = '-ejt', the 1SG/2SG perfect suffix for defective and loan verbs), the total absence of the word "iva" = "yes" ("ehe", "ija" and forms like that are used) and so forth. Work in progress or not, it was a fine conclusion to what I can only describe as best conference evah.<br /><br />Now let's catchup on some shuteye. Tomorrow, I'm going book shopping.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com29tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-64397870825403849362011-03-31T11:11:00.004+02:002011-03-31T11:22:20.943+02:00overheard... about three minutes ago here at the office, a wonderful example of Slovak-English code mixing so typical of corporatespeak:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><blockquote>Ísť <span style="font-weight: bold;">go live </span>s <span style="font-weight: bold;">environmentom</span>, kde nevieme <span style="font-weight: bold;">restorovať produkciu</span><span>,</span><span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span>je <span style="font-weight: bold;">suicide</span>.</blockquote><br />The items in bold are English, at least by origin. "Produkciu" is included as well - "produkcia" might be an honest-to-Shiva Slovak word, but in this context, it means "functionality" or "proper working order" and not, as it usually does, "output".bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-5329822330577476882011-03-06T21:00:00.004+01:002011-03-06T21:25:23.191+01:00conferenceFinally some good news: the programme for the <a href="http://www.um.edu.mt/linguistics/lingwistika2011">GĦILM 3rd Conference on Maltese Linguistics</a> is now <a href="http://www.um.edu.mt/linguistics/lingwistika2011/conference_programme">available online</a>. The conference, which will be held between April 8th and 11th in Malta, is jointly organized by the <a href="http://www.fb10.uni-bremen.de/ghilm/default.aspx">International Association of Maltese Linguistics (<em>Għaqda Internazzjonali tal-Lingwistika Maltija, </em>GĦILM)</a> together with the <a href="http://www.um.edu.mt/about/uom">University of Malta</a> and, as the name says, the third since the founding of GĦILM. I missed the first two, but not this time - in fact, if you look closer, you'll see my name (misspelled, as <a href="http://blog.bulbul.sk/2007/07/blog-post.html">required by tradition</a>) on the very first day with a paper on object reduplication (also known as clitic doubling) in Maltese (<a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/m/Object.Reduplication.in.Maltese.pdf">abstract</a>, PDF). I can't help but notice that my paper on syntax - which is really not my field of expertise - follows Ray Fabri who is the most likely candidate for the position of numero uno honcho when it comes to Maltese syntax. So, um, yeah, no pressure or nothin'...bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-69718830977829793482011-01-13T22:40:00.005+01:002011-01-13T23:41:31.882+01:00appAnd while we're on the subject, there is a debate currently raging on teh intert00bz concerning <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/12/microsoft-apple-app-store_n_807827.html">Microsoft's challenge</a> to Apple's attempt to patent the phrase "app store". As Chris of <a href="http://thelousylinguist.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-distinctive-is-app-store.html">The Lousy Linguist</a> reminds us:<br /><br /><blockquote>... the basic idea, as Wikipedia defines it, is distinctiveness ... While it may be the case that Apple introduced the term in 2008, it seems to have expanded to generic use in less than a year and now gets used at least semi-regularly for non-Apple products.</blockquote><br />Well, yes, but what exactly is distinctivness in this context? As many were quick to point out, there is nothing distinctive about either "Windows" or "Office". John Gruber of <a href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/01/13/app-word-of-the-year">Daring Fireball</a> argues that that's totally ok, because Microsoft isn't selling actual windows or offices, a point I fail to grasp. If "Windows" or for that matter "Apple" can be trademarked, I don't see a reason why "App Store" or "AppStore" (note the capitalization) shouldn't be.<br />Also, let's pause for a sec and consider the word "app". Yes, the American Dialect Society <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gO_3DHeXRb-b1CJCbGjRCUK1vVgQ?docId=1635c27d508b451396e873660a279cd6">word of the year</a>, defined <a href="http://www.americandialect.org/index.php/amerdial/app_voted_2010_word_of_the_year_by_the_american_dialect_society/">thusly</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>noun, an abbreviated form of application, a software program for a computer or phone operating system</blockquote><br />And this is where I say 'whoa there'. "App" certainly isn't a mere shortened form of "application". First of all, it refers specifically to applications on mobile devices with touchscreens* and applications for Macbooks (notebooks with OSX) that can be purchased through Mac App Store. Thus I have apps on my iPod touch and Palm Pre, but applications and programs on my desktop PC (Windows 7) and notebook (Vista)**. What's more, an "app" in terms of mobile devices isn't just any application for any mobile device. My venerable Palm m105 with Palm OS 5 had applications on it and they sure as hell weren't called apps. And neither are the Java applications on my trusty Siemens U600 or whatever it was I had on the iPaq I borrowed for that one trip back in '02. We all shortened words a lot even back then and yet, somehow we didn't come up with "app". Apple did, <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2097156">some time in 2008</a> with the introduction of iPhone, no doubt capitalizing on the similarity with company's name. And it's only then that "app" (and, by extension, "app store") entered public consciousness. The use of the term "app" was extended to computer applications with the introduction of Mac App Store last November, once again through concentrated effort on Apple's part.<br />And secondly, as <a href="http://www.bogost.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2160">Ian Bogost</a> points out (via <a href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/01/13/bogost-what-is-an-app">Daring Fireball</a>), an app isn't just any new application. It is, for better or worse, a new way of creating and packaging functionality:<br /><br /><blockquote>The days of the software office suite are giving way to a new era of individual units, each purpose-built for a specific function... or just as often, for no function at all. </blockquote><br />So with all due respect to Ayn-Rand-channeling <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12173224">Mr. Russell Pangborn</a>, an 'app store' isn't just a store that sells apps the same way a 'toy store' is a store that sells toys. It's a whole new platform for providing software, one that Apple invented and one that everybody else is copying. Now I'm no fan of copyright or trademarks, but if trademarks are a part of the system we use to protect intellectual property, then this one should by all rights go to Apple.<br /><br /><br />* I know, I know, but it's the best definition I can come up with.<br />** The Google Chrome OS is an outlier, as Google stuff tends to be.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-1891709853210357472011-01-12T23:04:00.003+01:002011-01-13T00:02:44.406+01:00esperantoTurning now to the world of technology, this year's <a href="http://www.cesweb.org/">Consumer Electronics Show</a> was all about <a href="http://www.engadget.com/features/tablets-at-ces-2011/">tablets</a> and boy, what a long parade of meh it was. Thanks but no thanks, I'm still waiting on iPad 2 and whatever it is HP will be announcing in February. One product, however, did stand out and it was Motorola's Xoom. It wasn't so much the specs or the promise of Honeycomb as this teaser video:<br /><br /><object width="261" height="420"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/quI2I8wLPdc?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/quI2I8wLPdc?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object><br /><br />Funny, clever (I literally lol'd at "successful Latin American distribution") and for the most part accurate. Except that one bit. With all the effort they put into getting the scripts and artefacts right, why did they have to display the English version of the Ten Commandments? How much cooler would that video be with the Decalogue in Hebrew in Paleo-Hebrew script! And they didn't even have to hire a Semitic philologist for that, all they had to do was google "charlton heston ten commandments":<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZcSYjC-E5k1NYnNzhnK8_aoaxBZBQhVn2vbI5mv0RxqE2lKf-jjaRG4XTATF4jdSWPFVgkMgTTyQHiy-isMBHgOM96jv7F3WeHxhxRtaDBLPzpK1hfVKMmzwcah_BGYAgBm1ssw/s1600/10.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 342px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZcSYjC-E5k1NYnNzhnK8_aoaxBZBQhVn2vbI5mv0RxqE2lKf-jjaRG4XTATF4jdSWPFVgkMgTTyQHiy-isMBHgOM96jv7F3WeHxhxRtaDBLPzpK1hfVKMmzwcah_BGYAgBm1ssw/s400/10.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5561431091865056850" border="0" /></a><br />The other big news item among us geeks was the <a href="http://blog.chromium.org/2011/01/html-video-codec-support-in-chrome.html">decision by Google</a> to drop support for the H.264 codec from future versions of Chrome and replace it by WebM, a move widely criticized and characterized as the final sign of Microsoftization of the formerly non-evil corporation. Ironically enough, one of the most <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/tims/archive/2011/01/11/an-open-letter-from-the-president-of-the-united-states-of-google.aspx">interesting reactions</a> came from the general vicinity of Redmon, WA. It begins with the following words:<br /><br /><blockquote>The world’s ability to communicate with one another is a key factor in its rapid evolution and economic growth. The Esperanto language was invented last century as a politically neutral language that would foster peace and international understanding. Since the launch, we’ve seen first-hand the benefits of a constructed language:<br /></blockquote><br />Go read the whole thing and follow the links. Spoiler alert: Yes, it is a satirical piece. But darn me if the parallels aren't eerie.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-668306698603124912010-12-31T17:30:00.019+01:002011-01-04T01:43:44.944+01:00qoheletThe latest issue of <a href="http://www.magnespress.co.il/website_en/index.asp?id=3308">Massorot</a> (<a href="http://www.magnespress.co.il/pdf_files/upload/45-351076.pdf">contents and abstracts</a> in English, PDF) includes, among other cool stuff, a paper by Moshe Bar-Asher on Maghribi Judeo-Arabic šarḥ of Ecclesiastes. Šarḥ of Qohelet assumes a special place among all the translations of Tanakh, Talmud and targumim made by and for the Arabic-speaking Jews of North Africa. First, it is one of the five Megillot which, as Bar-Asher notes in the introduction to the paper, were traditionally not translated. Secondly and more importantly, even if exceptions were made for the other four since they were to be publicly read at various points throughout the year,<br /><br /><blockquote><div style="text-align: right;">קהלת לא תורגמה לפי שלא נכללה מעולם בסדרי הקריאה של הציבור הרחב. למדנים שנדרשו לה יכלו להבין בעצמם פירושים שלה שנכתבו עברית, ולא נזקקו לשרח בערבית<br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><br /><div style="text-align: left;">Qohelet was not translated because it was never included in the readings for the general public. Scholars who studied it could understand its meaning even it if was written in Hebrew and they did not need a translation into Arabic.</div></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: right;"><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div></div>Nevertheless, continues professor Bar-Asher, translations of Qohelet were done as scholarly exercises where teachers would assign to their students the task of translating the book into Arabic. If I'm not altogether mistaken, Bar-Asher lists the following such instances:<br />- in Marrakech at the beginning of the 20th century on at least two occasions;<br />- in Sefrou in 1920's or 30's;<br />- and from a village near Tefilalt some time between 1924 and 1926, created by Moshe Bar-Asher's late father and recorded by professor Bar-Asher in 1983-84, the subject of the paper.<br /><br />I'm more than happy to add one more to the list, earlier than any of the above and not a manuscript, but rather a printed version dated 5657 / 1896-1897 from the famous press of Solomon Belforte & Co. in Livorno. This one is not a part of my humble collection of late Judeo-Arabic prints, but it can be found in the British Library under the shelfmark 1906.a.42. The booklet contains:<br />- Song of Songs with its targum and Judeo-Arabic šarḥ of the latter which is quite similar, but not entirely identical to the one in my collection (Livorno 5615 / 1854-55, henceforth ŠM1). The first part also contains commentary on the targum explaining "difficult words and concepts in the Targum" (המלות הקשות והענין שבתרגום);<br />- prayers for Pesakh (תפלת המחה של פסח);<br />- and finally, Qohelet with šarḥ.<br /><br />The title page as well as the introduction on the following page identify the author as Chaim Ha-Kohen The Younger (הצעיר חיים הכהן) and indicate that the work was compiled in Tripoli, Libya (טראבלס המערב). Who the author actually was is still unclear to me. With the reference to Tripoli, the first name that springs to mind is that of Mordechai Ha-Kohen (1856-1929), the author of <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=SfWgAAAAMAAJ&q=the+book+of+mordechai&dq=the+book+of+mordechai&hl=sk&ei=4t8dTY38D4b6sgaUzLjdDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAA"><span style="font-style: italic;">The Book of Mordechai</span></a>, a study of the history and customs of the Jewish population of Libya. The other possible candidate is Joseph Chaim Ha-Kohen (1851-1921) who, so his <a href="http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A3_%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D_%D7%94%D7%9B%D7%94%D7%9F">Wiki page</a> tells me, was born in Morocco, moved to Jerusalem at an early age, but then often returned to Maghrib. However, a quick search among the <a href="http://www.hebrewbooks.org/">seforim</a> would seem to indicate that either of the two used their full name and neither is identified with one of at least three seforim signed by הצעיר חיים הכהן.<br /><br />The identity of the author remains a mystery for now, but one detail deserves mentioning: this is the first šarḥ from Libya I am aware of. Whether its language reflects the Libyan dialect still remains to be seen, but I offer here some preliminary remarks, old-school style, based on the first two chapters which you can find <a href="http://bulbul.sk/writings/qohelet.html">here</a>.<br />(Abbreviations: QL - the British Library Livorno print; QM - Bar-Asher 2010)<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Writing:</span><br />- The non-assimilated definite article is transcribed without the aleph: לִכְּלָאמָאת "deeds (lit. words)" (1:8), לְכַּל "everything" (1:14). One notable exception is אַלְכַּל in 1:2.<br />- The assimilation of the definite article is indicated throughout, sometimes also by means of a dagesh (אַגָֹּאהַל in 2:15,16; אַצְּלָאם in 2:13; אַרִּיח in 1:6), but usually without it: אַסִמְס "the sun" (throughout); אַצְנָאיַע "works" (2:17).<br />- The loss of [h] found in many dialects of North Africa (and in Malta), which results in a number of hypercorrections: הָאנָא "I", הָאש "what" (throughout).<br /><br />Side note: The coolest such hypercorrection resulting from the loss of [h] has got to be the date on ŠM1. As with many Jewish books (but also everyday items) all over the world, the year is given as passage from the Tanakh with some of the letters highlighted, either through size or in some other way. Add up their numerical values (hint: final forms count as regular ones) and you get the short form year (לפ''ק = לפרט קטן), i.e. without the thousands. This is what it looks like on the title page of ŠM1:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIZ1zihXEjNnXwnOKJFfzpDuz51x_EyFhj0sn4IyX55X1bNk-DB1IfPkBc2GXFvSeUIneSX1C-Eos9DZvY7vGX5jseAJENZ9pWD7ZHxxbhDbutVbuAOIvGnjwLW4RojOdhjqvA7A/s1600/dateSM1.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 342px; height: 56px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIZ1zihXEjNnXwnOKJFfzpDuz51x_EyFhj0sn4IyX55X1bNk-DB1IfPkBc2GXFvSeUIneSX1C-Eos9DZvY7vGX5jseAJENZ9pWD7ZHxxbhDbutVbuAOIvGnjwLW4RojOdhjqvA7A/s400/dateSM1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5555845354270188050" border="0" /></a><br />This time the letters to be counted are highlighted using a little crown of dots above them, so השירה נא ליד left to right ads up to 4+10+30+1+50+5+200+10+300+5 = 615, which is the year 5615, i.e. 1854-55 CE. Except if you were to look for these three words in any copy of Tanakh, you wouldn't find them. The actual verse is אָשִׁירָה נָּא לִידִידִי ("Let me sing for my beloved"), from Isaiah 5:1. The author, compiler or printer knew that where they came from, ה was not pronounced and thought - or had been taught - it applied to the text of Tanakh as well. A wonderful example, indeed, but can we rely on the date being correct?<br /><br />- Assimilation and dissimilation of [s] [z] and [ʃ] [ʒ] (sifflant / chuintant alternation [1]), so typical for Maghribi Judeo-Arabic writing: אַסִמְס "the sun" throughout, לִיס "is not" (1:11 and beyond), but לִיש in the first 8 verses, צַזַר "trees" (2:5, see below), וְיִזְרֶק "and rises" (1:5, see modern Maghribi Arabic šṛəq).<br />- Much more detailed analysis will be required to fully understand the system (if any) behind the transcription of the vowels using niqqudot. It would appear, however, that both patah and schva stand for [ə] (כְּבַרְתְ וְזַדְתְ "grew and added" 1:16), while qamats stands for [a]. To underscore the point, qamats is usually followed by aleph: מָאשִׁי "goes" (1:6), וַלְנסָאן "human" (2:21). There are exceptions to this, such as צָלְטָאן "the king" (1:1, 2:12) or עָלְמָא "wisdom" (1:16-17). Whether there's a method to this and just what it means (as you will note, in both cases qamats follows an pharyngealized consonant) will remain to be seen.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Phonology:</span><br />- Typical Neo-Arabic tafḵīm (pharyngealization): צָלְטָאן "king" (1:1).<br />- A particularly neat example of both sifflant / chuintant transformation and AND tafḵīm can be found in 2:5:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;">צְנַאעְת לִי ג'נָאנָת וסְוָאנִי . וַגְרַסְתְ פִיהוֹם <span style="font-weight: bold;">צַזַר</span> גְ'מִיע תְמָאר<br /></div><br />The highlighted word is a translation of hebrew עֵץ = "tree" and traces back to Arabic شجر. Except in Maghribi Judeo-Arabic, it underwent double chuintant > sifflant transformation to first סז'ר (thus for example in ŠM1 1:16 כַסַזְ'רָא) and then to סזר. Subsequently, the whole word was pharyngealized to something along the lines of ṣəẓəṛ. The translator, however, only had צ at their disposal to indicate pharyngealization, hence צַזַר.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Syntax:</span><br />- Much more literal than QM, QL often employs participles where the Hebrew original does, even if fluent native Arabic wouldn't. Thus for example in 1:5, Hebrew סֹובֵב סֹבֵב "turns and turns" is translated as דָאיֶיר דָאיֶיר, whereas QM has more idiomatic יצייר תצוויר, i.e. imperfect followed by the verbal noun, a construction which indicates intensity.<br />- QL shows preference for the preposition לְ to translate the Hebrew אֶל, whereas QM prefers אילא.<br />- Like QM, QL uses לִיס for both "is not" and the negative particle.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Word choice:</span><br />In most word choices, QL is much more conservative (i.e. less dialectal) than QM. Thus for example:<br />- QL adopts the Hebrew הֲבֵל (as הְבֵיל), whereas QM uses the Arabic חתוף (with some exceptions).<br />- QL uses אַלִנְסָאן for "human", while QM uses the typical Maghribi בנאדם.<br />- QL has יְרוּשָלָיִם for "Jerusalem", while QM uses מדינת אסלאם.<br />In one instance, it's QM that is extremely literal: in 1:6, QM uses the Hebrew דארום and צאפון for "south" and "north", respectively. Interestingly, QL has here קַבְלִי and בַחְרִי, both terms I would describe as very Egyptian.<br />- For the relative pronoun, QL uses אַלְדִי with some exceptions, like אֵלִּי in 2:9. QM, predictably, uses the typically Moroccan דדי.<br />- QL uses אַלְכַּל "everything" substantively, but - like QM - גְ'מִיע as a determiner.<br />- QM occasionally uses the Neo-Arabic רא for "to see" (e.g. 2:12) while QL sticks with the Classical נְצַֹר throughout.<br />- QL translates the Hebrew כִּי "because" as לָאייַן.<br /><br />The rest is forthcoming in the form of a paper, hopefully soon. Ah well, at least I don't have to go far for my new year's resolutions. Boldog új évet, everybody!<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">References:</span><br />[1] Sumikazu Yoda, "'Sifflant' and 'chuintant' in the Arabic dialect of the Jews of Gabes (south Tunisia)", </span><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:85%;" >Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik</span><span style="font-size:85%;"> 46 (2006): 7-25</span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-45408147733798654902010-11-19T21:55:00.010+01:002010-11-20T04:26:47.132+01:00blI just returned from London where I spent most of the last four days at the British Library. In between the usual hectic mix of manuscripts, manuscript catalogues and journal articles, I considered it my duty to squeeze in a tour through BL's exhibition <a href="http://www.bl.uk/evolvingenglish/about.html">Evolving English: One Language, Many Voices</a>. It truly is what it's advertised to be - a tour through the whole length and breadth of English with everything from Anglo-Saxon manuscripts and medieval English-French phrasebooks through audio recordings of legendary speeches and outlier dialects to recipes in Tok Pisin ("Katim tamato liklik, putim long sosipan..."), all of it right there at your fingertips.<br />But the absolute highlight of the whole exhibition were the short video vignettes starring David Crystal reading from various historical documents in their original language. With enthusiasm, passion and delivery worthy of a Shakespearean actor, Crystal really made the texts come alive. I was especially delighted to hear him recount the egges/eyren anecdote from Caxton's <a href="http://books.google.sk/books?id=pZfspJ9fX9YC&lpg=PR2&ots=xP6KGns4ya&dq=william%20caxton%20eneydos&hl=en&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q=william%20caxton%20eneydos&f=false">Eneydos</a>: "...certaynly it is harde to playse euery man / by cause of dyuersite & chauge of langage". Try this <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturevideo/booksvideo/8135302/Beowulf-reading-in-Old-English-with-translation.html">video</a> for a taste, or better yet, go see for yourself, it's definitely worth it.<br />And while your in the building, be sure to check out the British Library bookshop for all things exhibition-related, other cool stuff including most of David Crystal's recent books and, considering recent history (see <a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2780#more-2780">here</a> and <a href="http://www.davidcrystal.com/DC_articles/English132.pdf">here</a> for background), this wonderful piece of irony:<br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0gmwf7IrTKV9szk89G7WAifZX38BMso4ZdPq8ZgK06RINz2x6kJrwEylyC8svurg2Gyjud-HSSHUFiSuLx5rQ5HvoGrYXQz9hfIQhMbxrO4t9wHTwZEEAWDzcSqiFKeT2nf-WhQ/s1600/bl.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 299px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0gmwf7IrTKV9szk89G7WAifZX38BMso4ZdPq8ZgK06RINz2x6kJrwEylyC8svurg2Gyjud-HSSHUFiSuLx5rQ5HvoGrYXQz9hfIQhMbxrO4t9wHTwZEEAWDzcSqiFKeT2nf-WhQ/s400/bl.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5541370591454825074" border="0" /></a>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-15525974409318891502010-08-13T13:25:00.007+02:002010-08-13T14:59:44.211+02:00unsuckAs it usually happens with these hip cool geeky things, I got a bunch of emails from different people telling me to check out <span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><a href="http://unsuck-it.com/">Unsuck It</a>. And so I did and being the corporate drone I am, I quite liked it the idea of a business-speak (or - in their words - "terrible business jargon") to English translator. Having tried a few terms randomly culled from my Outlook inbox, I found the tool not only informative (<span style="font-style: italic;">action item = Goal or to do</span>), but also funny (<span style="font-style: italic;">rock star = adequate programmer</span>) and I literally lolled at the idea of e-mailing the douchebag who used it (too bad they're all on holiday this month). But then I tried the "I'm feeling douchey" button and got this:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;">Drink the Kool-Aid</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);">Unsucked:</span> Follow blindly.<br /></blockquote><br />Really? 'Drink the kool-aid' is a standard US English idiom and is used by all kinds of people, not just pointy-haired bosses. Same applies to 'dog and pony show', 'in spades', 'low-hanging fruit' or 'on the same page' and even phrasal verbs like 'drill down'. I'm all for desucking managerialese, but painting everyday idioms like 'win-win' (which, in case you didn't know, means 'good for everyone') with the same brush as buzzwords like 'holistic' or 'synergy' smells a lot like something you would find in Strunk and White: "Don't use adjectives, adverbs and idioms." Well, they would probably called them 'clichés', but it would be just as stupid.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-24540610224258312142010-08-03T21:49:00.014+02:002010-08-04T19:09:15.296+02:00ca****Last night's episode of NBC's <a href="http://www.nbc.com/last-comic-standing/video/week-nine/1242134/"><span style="font-style: italic;">Last Comic Standing</span></a> (a reality show where aspiring stand-up comedians compete for a money prize and the eponymous title) featured the following bit by a contestant by the name of Felipe Esparza (UPDATED: added video below):<br /><br /><object width="420" height="261"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yFdaBYkxb4o&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yFdaBYkxb4o&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="420" height="261"></embed></object><br /><br /><blockquote>My brother came out of the closet, he told everyone he was gay. My dad thought he'd (1) choke on a turkey - "Que dijó <grunts> oy Dios (1) <grunts> que dijóóóó...!" I ran behind him on a Heimlich maneuver (2). He said: "Not you too, [ka]<bleep>!"<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">(1) Doubtful.<br />(2) Accompanied by thrusting motions of the pelvic region.</span></blockquote><br />Before the bleep, only a [k] can be clearly heard, perhaps followed by a short [a] thus combining in the syllable [ka]. Now try as I might, I can't think of an English curse word starting in [ka]. The vowel in <span style="font-style: italic;">cunt</span> is different ([<span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">ɐ</span>], perhaps, though it would be difficult to tell with Mr. Esparza's accent), plus the beep was longer than would be required for [nt] and in any case, this particular word is a heavy caliber and not very likely to appear on network tv. So after careful consideration and taking into account Mr. Esparza's ethnic background and his use of Spanish in the very same routine, I'm inclined to believe that the good people at NBC actually bleeped out the Spanish word <span style="font-style: italic;">cabrón</span> [<span class="IPA">kaˈβɾon</span>] (n. m.) = 1. goat; 2. asshole, motherfucker. I have no way to confirm that (if you do, please speak up), but if it is indeed so, then this is a great stride forward for the Latino community in the United States. Having FCC (and all the TV executives who shit their pants at the mere mention of this august institution's name) cater to the sensibilities of uptight speakers of Spanish is surely a sign of recognition that Spanish is here to stay. I can't wait to hear the "English only" crowd's take on that.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-10176770341855797842010-07-02T01:46:00.004+02:002010-07-02T02:11:03.068+02:00hašekAs I have mentioned <a href="http://www.languagehat.com/archives/003912.php">elsewhere</a>, some time ago, John Emerson and I were engaged in a little project. It was the aim of this noble endeavor to translate into English one of the best, yet sadly neglected, works of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Ha%C5%A1ek">Jaroslav Hašek</a>, his "Political and Social History of the Party of Moderate Progress Within the Bounds of Law". We didn't get very far - of the 80 chapters, we only managed to translate 5 and review 3 before, well, life happened and I suddenly had neither the time, nor the frame of mind to continue. Which is a crying shame, because the "Political and Social History of the Party of Moderate Progress Within the Bounds of Law" is funny as hell and as poignant a satire on politics, literature, arts and people who engage in those pursuits now as it was at the beginning of the 20th century. Don't let yourself be fooled by the bombastic title - the "History" would be best described as a collection of short stories with Hašek's drinking buddies and other crème de la crème of contemporary Czech society in starring roles, their various faults and misadventures the main target of Hašek's wit and settling scores the chief purpose of the whole enterprise. Written in Hašek's disorganized and rambling style in sometimes colloquial and then suddenly formal Czech, the "History" is a true challenge for any translator and I'll leave it to you to judge <a href="http://www.bulbul.sk/hasek/hasek.html">how well we did</a>. If by chance you find the translation, well, good, I'm quite certain it should be ascribed to Mr. Emerson's editorial efforts. Any and all errors of whatever type are purely my fault. Enjoy and let me know if we should continue.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-45453303925291302432010-06-02T14:10:00.004+02:002010-06-02T16:38:39.783+02:00latino-punicRemember <a href="http://blog.bulbul.sk/2007/07/two.html">this post</a> from about three years back on Sabaean minuscule script and Robert Kerr's (Universiteit Leiden) dissertation on Latino-Punic inscriptions? Well some moments ago, a kind blogger user named RMK (perhaps even Robert M. Kerr himself) <a href="http://blog.bulbul.sk/2007/07/two.html?showComment=1275480377768#c1089185079654759209">dropped by</a> to let us know that the dissertation has been published by Mohr Siebeck under the title <a href="http://www.mohr.de/en/theology/reference-works/buch/latino-punic-epigraphy.html"><span style="font-style: italic;">Latino-Punic Epigraphy</span></a> (full bibliographic record below). Thanks for sharing and congratulations!<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.mohr.de/typo3temp/pics/150271_24105e69be.png"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 165px; height: 243px;" src="http://www.mohr.de/typo3temp/pics/150271_24105e69be.png" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />KERR, Robert M.: <span style="font-style: italic;">Latino-Punic Epigraphy. A Descriptive Study of the Inscriptions</span> - Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010, xvi + 253 p. (ISBN 978-3-16-150271-2, €64)bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-34202422106965530612010-05-24T23:26:00.004+02:002010-05-25T00:32:58.945+02:00theatreVia <a href="http://pocitace.sme.sk/c/5389146/tvorba-slovenskych-dramatikov-je-v-preklade-uz-aj-na-webe.html">pocitace.sme.sk</a>: The Bratislava Theatre Institute has launched a website titled <a href="http://www.theatre.sk/slovakdrama/">Slovak Drama in Translation</a> which aims to introduce those few unfortunate souls who haven't managed to learn Slovak yet to, you guessed it, Slovak playwrights and their work. To be quite honest, most of the names included don't ring a bell, but I'm happy to report that it includes the true greats, such as <a href="http://www.theatre.sk/slovakdrama/?q=l/lasica-milan">Milan Lasica</a>. To be precise, he and his long-time partner in crime Július Satinský (collectively known as <span style="font-style: italic;">Lasica a Satinský</span> or <span style="font-style: italic;">L&S</span>) fall somewhere between cabaret, stand up (<a href="http://www.theatre.sk/slovakdrama/files/Dialogues.pdf">Dialogues</a>) and theatre - absurd - proper (<a href="http://www.theatre.sk/slovakdrama/files/La_Journee_de_la_joie.pdf">Deň radosti</a>, in French), but whatever the genre, their work undoubtedly belongs to the best our small literary scene has to offer. My only worry is that in addition to what is lost in the transfer from one medium to another, a lot of the punch the original packs (including the best wordplay ever) cannot be adequately translated.<br />All of the above is true, even more so, of <a href="http://www.theatre.sk/slovakdrama/?q=s/stepka-stanislav">Stanislav Štepka</a> and his more or less amateur troupe "Radošinské naivné divadlo" (aka Radošinci). While Štepka's later work may be somewhat formulaic, his two most famous plays <span style="font-style: italic;">Jááánošíííík</span> (1970, a drop dead funny and spot on deconstruction of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juraj_J%C3%A1no%C5%A1%C3%ADk">popular myth</a> rivalled only by a 1976 movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073504/"><span style="font-style: italic;">Pacho hybský zbojník</span></a> where, as chance would have it, <span style="font-style: italic;">Lasica a Satinský</span> served as screenwriters) and <span style="font-style: italic;">Človečina</span> (1973, roughly: "Human Condition", equally funny, but even more tragic and hard hitting look an average Slovak family) have become a firm part of Slovak popular culture to such extent that some (including yours truly) are able to recite large portions by heart. Neither play is, however, currently available in translation and I am not surprised. In most his plays, Štepka mixes his own Western Slovak dialect with standard Slovak and does so many wonderful things to both that I feel truly sorry for all of you who will never hear or see it the way we do. So enjoy the rest, such as it is. And learn Slovak.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-28122015226967913852010-04-18T10:03:00.018+02:002010-04-19T13:19:39.974+02:00literalese<a href="http://memiyawanzi.blogspot.com/2010/04/war-etc.html">Memiyawanzi</a> (with some help from Thomas Lambdin) makes an excellent point about Bible translations and its usefulness for comparative syntactic analysis which boils down to this: in many instances, Bible translators, regardless of language, quite often slavishly imitate the syntax of the original.<br /><br />This is true of nearly all translations of sacred texts made before the rise of linguistics in general and translation studies in particular, but even here, there are more extreme cases. One of those is šarḥ, the translation of sacred texts of Judaism into Judeo-Arabic. Ironically enough, the original meaning of the root šrḥ is "to explain, to interpret", but the šarḥ translations are anything but that. Quite the contrary - their language emulates the syntax of the original as closely as possible. In order to do so, the translators - šarḥanim - have gone so far as to introduce new grammatical features to their target language.<br /><br />One example of such feature is the use of the preposition الي [ilā] to translate the Hebrew direct object marker את or the Aramaic direct object marker ית. Old Arabic (including Quranic Arabic and Classical Arabic) marks the direct object by means of the suffix -a, while Neo-Arabic (which includes the modern colloquial varieties, but also varieties employed by the Arabic-speaking Jewish population of Middle East and North Africa) normally marks the direct object by position. There are exceptions to this, such as Maltese, Cypriot Maronite Arabic and some Syro-Palestinian dialects [1], which use some variant of the preposition <span style="font-style: italic;">l-</span>. In šarḥ Arabic, however, the direct object is marked using the preposition אלא [ilā], which is identical in function to Hebrew את or Aramaic ית. Consider the following example from the Targum to Canticles 3:5:<br /><br />Targumic Aramaic:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;">כד שמעו שבעת עממיא דבני ישראל עתידין למחסן ית ארעהון קמו כחדא וקציצו ית אילניא וסתימו ית מבועי מיא<span style="font-weight: bold;"> ו</span>צדיאו קרויהון וערקו<br /></div><br />English translation by <a href="http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/%7Ejtreat/song/targum/">Jay C. Treat</a>:<br /><br />When the seven nations heard that the Children of Israel were about to take possession of their land, they rose at once and cut the trees, stopped up the water springs, laid waste their towns and fled.<br /><br />Judeo-Arabic translation (Iraq, 19th century):<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;">לָמִּן סַמְעוּ סַבִע אֶל אוּמָם אַן בִנִין יִסְרָאִיל מִתְּוּובִדִין ליִוּורְתֹוֹן אֶלָא בִלַדְהוֹם קָאמוּ גִֹמִיעָא וּקַצוּ אֶלא אֶל סִגַֹר וּסַדּוּ אֶלָא מִנָאבִע אֶל מָאיי וכַֹרִבוּ אֶלָא קִרְיָיאתְּהוֹם ואִנְהַזְמוּ<br /></div><br />Or to highlight the phrases in question:<br /><br /><table class="MsoTableGrid zeroBorder" style="width: 432px; height: 135px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr></tr><tr style="height: 19.05pt;"><td style="height: 19.05pt; width: 135.4pt;" valign="top" width="181"><p><i><span style="font-size:85%;">Targumic Aramaic</span></i></p></td><td style="height: 19.05pt; width: 118.8pt;" valign="top" width="158"><p><i><span style="font-size:85%;">Judeo-Arabic</span></i></p></td><td style="height: 19.05pt; width: 166.75pt;" valign="top" width="222"><p><i><span style="font-size:85%;">English</span></i></p></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 135.4pt;" width="181"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">למחסן <b>ית ארעהו</b></span></p></td><td style="width: 118.8pt;" width="158"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">ליִוּורְתֹוֹן <b>אֶלָא בִלַדְהוֹם</b></span></p></td><td style="width: 166.75pt;" width="222"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center">take possession of <b>their land</b></p></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 135.4pt;" width="181"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וקציצו <b>ית</b></span> <b><span dir="rtl">אילניא</span></b></p></td><td style="width: 118.8pt;" width="158"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וּקַצוּ</span> <b><span dir="rtl">אֶלא אֶל סִגַֹר</span></b></p></td><td style="width: 166.75pt;" width="222"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center">cut <b>the trees</b></p></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 135.4pt;" width="181"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וסתימו <b>ית מבועי מיא</b></span></p></td><td style="width: 118.8pt;" width="158"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וּסַדּוּ <b>אֶלָא מִנָאבִע אֶל</b></span></p></td><td style="width: 166.75pt;" width="222"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center">stopped up <b>the water springs</b></p></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 135.4pt;" width="181"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וצדיאו</span> <b><span dir="rtl">קרויהון</span></b></p></td><td style="width: 118.8pt;" width="158"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וכַֹרִ</span>ב<span dir="rtl">וּ <b>אֶלָא</b></span> <b><span dir="rtl">קִרְיָיאתְּהוֹם</span></b></p></td><td style="width: 166.75pt;" width="222"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center">laid waste <b>their towns</b></p></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><br />And so while in most varieties of colloquial Iraqi Arabic, one would normally render these structures - V + OBJ.M + N - as Verb + Noun, in šarḥ Arabic, the translator feels compelled to produce a verbatim translation and thus translates the semantically empty direct object marker by repurposing the directional preposition אֶלָא [elā].<br /><br />There are many examples of this in translations from Hebrew and Aramaic, not only in Judeo-Arabic, but also in other Jewish languages, such as Jewish Neo-Aramaic, Judeo-Spanish [2] or Judeo-Persian:<br /><br />Ruth 4:11 Hebrew:<br /><div style="text-align: right;">... יתן יהוה <span style="font-weight: bold;">את</span>־האשה הבאה אל־ביתך כרחל ׀ וכלאה אשר בנו שתיהם <span style="font-weight: bold;">את</span>־בית ישראל ...<br /></div><br />Ruth 4:11 English (NASB):<br /><br />... May the LORD make the woman who is coming into your home like Rachel and Leah, both of whom built the house of Israel; ...<br /><br />Ruth 4:11 Judeo-Persian [3]:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;">... בי דהד כודא <span style="font-weight: bold;">מר</span> אן זן אנקי אייא בכאנה תו קון רחל וקון לאה אנקי אודאן כרדנד הר דואן אישאן <span style="font-weight: bold;">מר</span> כאנדאן ישראל ...<br /></div><br />But unlike in those languages, where the new direct object marker either expanded previous usage (as in Judeo-Spanish אה [a]) or redefined its role both historically and sociolinguistically (as in Judeo-Persian מר [mar] which is normally only found in classical Persian poetry), the Judeo-Arabic repurposing of אלא is a completely different game. Not only did the šarḥanim take a completely innocent preposition and turned it into something completely different, but consider the fourth example from Targum Canticles 3:5:<br /><br /><table class="MsoTableGrid zeroBorder" style="border: medium none; width: 440px; height: 44px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr></tr><tr style="height: 19.05pt;"><td style="height: 19.05pt; width: 135.4pt;" valign="top" width="181"><p><i><span style="font-size:85%;">Targumic Aramaic</span></i></p></td><td style="height: 19.05pt; width: 118.8pt;" valign="top" width="158"><p><i><span style="font-size:85%;">Judeo-Arabic</span></i></p></td><td style="height: 19.05pt; width: 166.75pt;" valign="top" width="222"><p><i><span style="font-size:85%;">English</span></i></p></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 135.4pt;" width="181"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וצדיאו</span> <b><span dir="rtl">קרויהון</span></b></p></td><td style="width: 118.8pt;" width="158"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span dir="rtl">וכַֹרִ</span>ב<span dir="rtl">וּ <b>אֶלָא</b></span> <b><span dir="rtl">קִרְיָיאתְּהוֹם</span></b></p></td><td style="width: 166.75pt;" width="222"><p style="text-align: center;" align="center">laid waste <b>their towns</b></p></td></tr></tbody></table><br />So while the Aramaic original does not require the direct object marker, its use has become obligatory in written Judeo-Arabic. As Benjamin Hary notes in his <span style="font-style: italic;">Translating Religion</span>: "... šarḥ created its own Judeo-Arabic grammar and structure" [4].<br /><br />And I'm thinking: isn't that true, at least in terms of syntax, for every Bible translation and, by extension, of all languages that have been fundamentally influenced by translations of sacred scriptures? How different, I wonder, were real spoken Syriac or Coptic from their varieties recorded in Christian translations and writings?<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Notes:</span><br />[1] Borg 2004:46<br />[2] Hary 1991:605-606<br />[3] Mainz 1976:21<br />[4] Hary 2009:165<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Bibliography:</span></span><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">BORG, Alexander: <span style="font-style: italic;">A Comparative Glossary of Cypriot Maronite Arabic (Arabic-English). With an Introductory Essay.</span> - Ledein: Brill, 2004, xxviii + 486 p.</span><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">HARY, Benjamin: </span><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:85%;" >On the use of 'ila and li in Judeo-Arabic texts.</span><span style="font-size:85%;"> Pages 595-608 in: KAYE, Alan S.: </span><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:85%;" >Semitic studies in honor of Wolf LESLAU on the ocassion of his 85th birthday, November 14th, 1991. Volume I.</span><span style="font-size:85%;"> - Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz, 1991, lxviii + 889 p.<br />HARY, Benjamin: <span style="font-style: italic;">Translating Religion. Linguistic Analysis of Judeo-Arabic Sacred Texts from Egypt.</span> - Leiden: Brill, 2009, 360 p.<br />MAINZ, Ernest: <span style="font-style: italic;">Ruth et le Cantique des Cantiques en judéo-persan.</span> Journal Asiatique, 264/1-2, 1976, pp. 9-34<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Sefer šir ha-širim ʿim targum ve-šarḥ arvi.</span> Baġdād, 1936/37</span></span>bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-47366263057301026742010-03-19T20:03:00.008+01:002010-03-19T21:04:26.805+01:00tdsComedy Central's <span style="font-style: italic;">The Daily Show</span> March 17th edition, in a report on what seem to be the last stages of the US health care reform broohaha, offered a video of Republican representative Steve King. In this video, the gentleman from Iowa compares the opposition to the current version of the HCR bill to the crowds on the squares of Prague during the Velvet (or as we call it here in Slovakia, the Tender) Revolution. As ridiculous as this comparison is, it wasn't the most prominent whiskey-tango-foxtrot moment in that particular segment. Take a look below, see if you can spot what caught my attention:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIeQa7cFC5wOUhy20T5PJYtnNWtv3YxscdsxYyo2BI8eC4atMA-oemEIFsFt7tHqetcoLyqX8H_A9uMkRTyFtGxOkx_NJ58o6eVLPWydMVYz19EbTzoqNke4jKxuKQFKd_YMLUtw/s1600-h/shot0098.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 226px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIeQa7cFC5wOUhy20T5PJYtnNWtv3YxscdsxYyo2BI8eC4atMA-oemEIFsFt7tHqetcoLyqX8H_A9uMkRTyFtGxOkx_NJ58o6eVLPWydMVYz19EbTzoqNke4jKxuKQFKd_YMLUtw/s400/shot0098.jpg" alt="Checkoslovakia, really?" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5450423911066177554" border="0" /></a><br />The screengrab shows that the video credit goes to <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/">ThinkProgress.org</a> or their <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/ThinkProgress2#p/search/1/NhBeJWa98dc">Youtube channel</a> (UPDATE: and ultimately, CNN), but the font is unmistakeably that used by the editors at TDS and so it is to them I direct this question:<br />Seriously? Checkoslovakia. Seriously?bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com27tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33245564.post-23518562491848056542010-02-18T23:18:00.010+01:002010-02-19T00:04:43.450+01:00slowár<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigQhhzqbRNs2SglIsgxfcbxgwQKeHAhTEofdbajSqxbeBa9PXh8dzSP-ICoZdMHYK1NPquUkh25vPcrv7KCzkypmLMRV4pEyoZWDKwq1_0Mt2VECADpSgScgwPLLC2idRnFozxUA/s1600-h/kurewski.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 273px; height: 220px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigQhhzqbRNs2SglIsgxfcbxgwQKeHAhTEofdbajSqxbeBa9PXh8dzSP-ICoZdMHYK1NPquUkh25vPcrv7KCzkypmLMRV4pEyoZWDKwq1_0Mt2VECADpSgScgwPLLC2idRnFozxUA/s400/kurewski.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5439718178209655826" border="0" /></a><br /><img src="file:///E:/Lajstra/_scanned/%21%21%21Bernolak/Slowar/KURWA/kurewski.jpg" alt="" /><span style="font-style: italic;">Jazykovedný ústav Ľudovíta Štúra Slovenskej Akadémie Vied</span>, the main body in charge of studying and regulating the Slovak language, has recently gone through the trouble of digitizing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Bernol%C3%A1k">Anton Bernolák</a>'s post-humously published magnum opus, the six-volume <span style="font-style: italic;">Slowár Slowenskí Češko-Laťinsko-Ňemecko-Uherskí</span> (<span style="font-style: italic;">Lexicon Slavicum Bohemico-Latino-Germanico-Ungaricum</span>), and putting it <a href="http://www.juls.savba.sk/ediela/bernolak/">online</a>. Get it while it's hot / still there. In what I think is a lovely touch, the text on this particular part of the JÚĽŠ website is in Bernolák's Slovak (essentially Western Slovak koine, as opposed to Štúr and Hodža's Central-dialect-based standard which eventually prevailed) and Bernolák's orthography. You will notice the German-like capitalization of nouns, 'g' for the glide [j] (<span style="font-style: italic;">ge</span> = copula.3SG) and 'ǧ' for the voiced velar plosive [g] (<span style="font-style: italic;">Pluǧin</span> = 'plugin'). And just in case you want a break from looking for the naughty words (like the one above), here's two more of Bernolák's linguistic writings from my personal collection: <a href="http://members.chello.sk/ceplo/Bernolak-Orthographia.pdf"><span style="font-style: italic;">Orthographia</span></a> (which is just what the title suggests) and <a href="http://members.chello.sk/ceplo/Bernolak-Etymologia.pdf"><span style="font-style: italic;">Etymologia</span></a> (which is actually an awesome treatise on derivational morphology and compounding followed by a Latin-Slovak glossary of linguistic terms, a list of Slovak proverbs with translations in Latin and a brief Slovak-Latin-Hungarian-German dictionary organized by semantic fields). Enjoy.bulbulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14505565281151328789noreply@blogger.com9