View previous topic | View next topic

Talk Talk Talking...

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

CB27
1388775.  Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:45 pm Reply with quote

As you may already know, when King Henry VIII decided to get rid of his first wife, he used the argument that she had previously been married to his brother, Arthur, and that this made their marriage illegal.

Arthur was the heir to the throne, but he unfortunately died young and the line of succession passed to Henry.

From a very early age Arthur had been betrothed to Catherine of Aragon, and they started to exchange letters in Latin, a shared language they both knew well.

Their letters also showed a pleasant relationship that promised to be a good marriage.

So when they finally met, why did Arthur find it difficult to talk to his wife?

Klaxons for him being shy, ill, unable to speak in Latin, etc.

Although both could speak Latin well, it turned out that they each learned to pronounce the words so differently that they couldn't converse easily.

This may well have caused the delay in consummating their marriage, as claimed by Catherine as her argument that her later marriage to Henry was legal.

 
tetsabb
1388835.  Fri Sep 03, 2021 8:37 am Reply with quote

Vaynee, veedee, veechi
Waynay , weeday weekhay ,

 
Jenny
1388842.  Fri Sep 03, 2021 9:30 am Reply with quote

Sellars and Yeatman wrote:
Julius Cæsar was therefore compelled to invade Britain again the following year (54 B.C., not 56, owing to the peculiar Roman method of counting), and having defeated the Ancient Britons by unfair means, such as battering-rams, tortoises, hippocausts, centipedes, axes and bundles, set the memorable Latin sentence, “Veni, Vidi, Vici,” which the Romans, who were all very well educated, construed correctly.

The Britons, however, who of course still used the old pronunciation, understanding him to have called them “Weeny, Weedy and Weaky,” lost heart and gave up the struggle, thinking that he had already divided them All into Three Parts.

 
Alexander Howard
1388859.  Fri Sep 03, 2021 11:56 am Reply with quote

Sellars and Yeatman are the best historians I have read. They deserve a klaxon-fest though for associating 'veni vidi vici' with Caesar's invasions of Britain: it was the motto he displayed on a cart in a triumph celebrating victory over Pharnaces II of Pontus.

 
Brock
1388864.  Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:15 pm Reply with quote

Sorry to nit-pick, but the authors of 1066 and All That were W.C. Sellar (not "Sellars") and R.J. Yeatman.

It seems to be a long-standing error on this forum - I've found references to "Sellars and Yeatman" going back to 2003, by several different posters. Not sure how it took hold.

 
Jenny
1388908.  Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:35 am Reply with quote

Brock, to the best of my recollection you are never actually sorry to nit-pick! But in this case you are correct.

 
Brock
1388912.  Sat Sep 04, 2021 8:45 am Reply with quote

"History is not what you thought. It is what you can remember." :-)

 
Alexander Howard
1388921.  Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:38 am Reply with quote

It might be nit-picking, but isn't nit-picking what this forum is all about?

 
Brock
1388923.  Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:35 pm Reply with quote

Well, quite. Knowledge of 1066 and All That was clearly not good in the early days of this forum. This is Flash, all the way back in October 2003, commenting on a post about the Roman road network:

"And, as Sellars [sic] and Yeatman have pointed out, it stopped the Britons from hiding round the corners."

post 634

I've no idea of the source of that old joke, but Sellar and Yeatman said no such thing! What they said about Roman roads was:

"They occupied their time for two or three hundred years in building Roman roads and having Roman baths; this was called the Roman Occupation, and gave rise to the memorable Roman law, 'he who baths first baths fast', which was a Good Thing, and still is. The Roman roads ran absolutely straight in all directions and all led to Rome."

 
Alexander Howard
1389475.  Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:00 am Reply with quote

Esperantists frequently translate great works of literature into Esperanto. In the 1980s(???) William Auld turned his attention to "The Importance of Being Earnest". However he had a problem before he even turned the first page: the joke in the title only works in English, and German.

He looked around for a name and a noun used in Esperanto: the play became "The importance of Fidelity" (La graveco de la fideliĝo).

 
crissdee
1389482.  Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:04 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
"The Importance of Being Earnest"..........the joke in the title only works in English, and German.


And at a barely distinguishable level in those........

 
suze
1389487.  Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:31 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
1980s(???).


80s would be correct.

Bill Auld, as he was known to his friends, was a teacher by day. He was Deputy Rector of Lornshill Academy in Alloa, and the footballist Alan Hansen was among those whose English teacher he was.

He first became interested in Esperanto while at school in Glasgow in the 30s, and published his first volume of original poetry in Esperanto in 1952. But Esperanto apart he seems to have been really surprisingly normal, and what with working for a living, raising his own children, and a lifelong involvement with Scottish rugby, it wasn't until later years that he became a prolific translator of existing works into Esperanto.

His translations included Shakespeare, Byron, Burns (well hey, he was a Scot), Grassic Gibbon (ditto), and - perhaps slightly incongruously - Tolkien, with whom he is said to have corresponded about rugby in Esperanto!

 
AlmondFacialBar
1390093.  Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:13 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
Esperantists frequently translate great works of literature into Esperanto. In the 1980s(???) William Auld turned his attention to "The Importance of Being Earnest". However he had a problem before he even turned the first page: the joke in the title only works in English, and German.

He looked around for a name and a noun used in Esperanto: the play became "The importance of Fidelity" (La graveco de la fideliĝo).


So... Jack/ Ernest then became Fidelity in the translation? Cos that's a bloody weird name for a fella, even by Victorian standards.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar


Last edited by AlmondFacialBar on Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:07 am; edited 1 time in total

 
suze
1390103.  Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:26 pm Reply with quote

Fidelio?

Or are we to take it that Leonore had skimped a bit on her preparatory research, and thought that the name Fidelio would be nicely inconspicuous?


Meanwhile, I have discovered a review of La graveco de la Fideliĝo.

The review like the work is in Esperanto. I have little doubt that AFB can more or less read Esperanto just as I can, and I fear that the review will make her want to throw things at the reviewer.

 
AlmondFacialBar
1390121.  Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:01 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
Fidelio?

Or are we to take it that Leonore had skimped a bit on her preparatory research, and thought that the name Fidelio would be nicely inconspicuous?


Meanwhile, I have discovered a review of La graveco de la Fideliĝo.

The review like the work is in Esperanto. I have little doubt that AFB can more or less read Esperanto just as I can, and I fear that the review will make her want to throw things at the reviewer.


Fifth grade homework assignment much? Also, GT tells me the operative term for Mr Wilde's nationality is Irlandano...

And, while we're at it, have a lollie for that reference. You don't get Beethoven and Hitchhiker's in the same sentence often.



:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group