Wednesday, 4. March 2009, 22:39:49
languages
As is, indeed, my national culture. And, yes, my nation.
Read more...


Saturday, 8. October 2005, 20:13:55
psychology, languages, literature
Lots of texts are - for lots of different reasons - not very precise in saying whatever it is that they have to say. This means that the reader meets the problem of having to interprete such a text. In some cases you can ask the author for a clarification. In other cases you cannot. (Or will not. Or dare not. Or the author will not tell you.) Sometimes you can ask other readers about their opinions and other times you can't, meaning that you are on your own with your attempts to interprete.
In imaginative litterature ambiguity very often is part of the game and adds an extra richness to the text. The possibility of different interpretations can make a poem or a novel very much more exciting to read.
But in non-fiction - or in fiction that happens to contain an important factual message - you will need to find an interpretation as precise as your abilities allow you. You will need to read the text carefully and find as many other sources of information as you can. This may be quite a bit of a job.
And then there are the problems that you create yourself. There are loads of different kinds of prejudices that may skew your understanding of a text. You need to have a really good understanding of yourself to know which prejudices you tend to have. This may actually be the very hardest part of making good interpretations.
Sunday, 2. October 2005, 22:06:42
languages
The most significant feature of words is that they can be used to tell lies. At an early age I reached the opinion which I have never since then let go, that my life would have been much simpler and more pure if I had never learned about words. And you can be quite certain that I would have been able to communicate the really important things without words.
On the other hand the meaning of human life apparently is not that it should be simple and easy.

Sunday, 2. October 2005, 20:39:11
languages, psychology
Some people are true virtuosos in the art of sending complicated messages in their way of saying one single word. I believe it can be done with virtually all words, but it seems that some words are used more than others.
Interjections can be used by everybody because they so to speak are built for the purpose. There is generally one problem with them in that they are rather specific and one-dimensional. It is not easy to use them to say something else or more. But it can be done.
I remember a brillant performance many years ago by a colleague who wanted to express her strong disappointment with a decission I had made while at the same time carefully stressing that her negative feelings were directed at my decission and not at me as a person. How did she do that? Very simple, really: She turned her head away and uttered a heartfelt
Øv!, the Danish interjection used to express dissatisfaction.
Words like
yes or
no or
well are also much used. Once again the real virtuoso can put many different and in some cases very complicated meanings into one word.
And then of course there are people's names. I do not know how common such a usage is, but I myself happen to have a name that is very flexible in several different dimensions and has been used to tell me the most amazing things. The same may be true for very few other people, but the true artist can always find a way to put complicated meaning into a name.

Monday, 19. September 2005, 22:59:38
Opera, languages

I just read in
this article that a cartoon character named
Øpera-tan is supposed to personify the Opera browser?

Øpera? There is nothing new in non-Scandinavians fumbling cluelessly around in the alphabet when they try to somehow deal with Scandinavian names, but usually the replacements of letters go the other way around.
What might be the purpose of changing an
o into an
ø? To make the name look Scandinavian? It doesn't.

Thursday, 15. September 2005, 17:04:15
languages, cats
Almost every day I learn something more about the intricacies of the English language. In
this thread at Webmaster World about some legal problems that Google have with their Gmail brand we are told that Gmail originally was supposed to mean Garfield Mail.
Read more...
Tuesday, 13. September 2005, 16:56:23
languages
I used to be an editor at
Danish Wikipedia. When I left there had for some time been
a completely absurd discussion about the Danish naming of a neighbouring country which by its own inhabitants is called
Nederland. The most peculiar aspect of that wrangle was the fact that some Dutchmen who
do not speak, write, read nor understand the Danish langauge still felt called upon to lecture the Danes about the correct use of our native language!
For the sake of truth and balance it should also be said that some Dutchmen expressed a pragmatic and relaxed attitude to the question and explicitly stated that what is correct Danish should be decided by the Danes.
I know very well that some Dutchmen feel offended by the way that their country is named in some other countries, mine included. I'm afraid that they will just have to live with it and hope for a gradual change. Naming practices in any given language are decided by a lot of different factors. Some of those factors are only really understandable to people who know those languages very well.
I am willing to listen to people if they tell me that I hurt their feelings by doing what I do, saying what I say or writing what I write. In my view it is important to respect other people's feelings, no matter who is "right" and who is "wrong".
I also like to learn from people who know about some of those many topics where I feel that my knowledge is insufficient. But I am not particularly inclined to letting myself be lectured by people about what is "correct" in a field that I happen to know very much better than they do.
Showing posts 1 -
7 of 11.