Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [Czechlist] Re: REALIA: Anglická vlajka

Expand Messages
  • ing.Sárka Rubková
    Nebyl to cisar, ale senator. Jmenoval se Kato a koncil sve projevy, at uz se projednavalo cokoli, vetou: ...a take mám za to, že Kartago musí být
    Message 1 of 19 , May 31, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Nebyl to cisar, ale senator. Jmenoval se Kato a koncil sve projevy, at uz se
      projednavalo cokoli, vetou: "...a take mám za to, že Kartago musí být
      zniceno".

      Sarka
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Terminus Technicus [mailto:czechlist@...]
      Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 5:15 PM
      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Czechlist] Re: REALIA: Anglická vlajka


      However, this
      > super-clear, simple English became one of my standard modes of speech


      Ha! We finally know why all those soudruzky ucitelky had problems with your
      English :) and why it annoys you so much when someone says it's not
      Breetish!!!

      Just to make sure, this IS a joke, but it may have something to do with why
      you get told off so often in this way (noone else seems to) and why you hate
      it as much as to make it an universal attitude of all non-NS speakers of
      English and an excuse to go off on a little personal crusade every time we
      get within a mile of this "problem" (or, as a matter of fact, when we
      don't) - I heard a fitting description of someone who ends every other reply
      to ANY question talking about a specific subject that has NOTHING to do with
      the question recentrly - what was the name of the Roman emperor who'd say
      "and anyway I think that Carthago should be destroyed" after any sentence he
      uttered???

      :)

      Matej








      Worth checking out:
      http://translationexchange.blogspot.com
      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • raesim
      ... Lennon was a bona fide genius as well as a seminal cultural figure. ... Even in a decade as rich in popular music as the 60s, the Beatles stood head and
      Message 2 of 19 , May 31, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, James Kirchner <jpklists@s...>
        wrote:
        >
        > The middle-aged Czechs drove me so mad with their overblown
        > reverence for the Beatles, and especially John Lennon, that I
        > cannot enjoy their music anymore.

        Lennon was a bona fide genius as well as a seminal cultural figure.

        > I mean, they were big, but they weren't gods, and there was plenty
        > of rock 'n roll before them.

        Even in a decade as rich in popular music as the '60s, the Beatles
        stood head and shoulders above everyone else -- apart from Bob Dylan.

        Simon
      • James Kirchner
        ... He himself apparently didn t agree with that assessment. I can remember one interview with him where he expressed the belief that people had been
        Message 3 of 19 , May 31, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          On Monday, May 31, 2004, at 07:10 PM, raesim wrote:

          > --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, James Kirchner <jpklists@s...>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > The middle-aged Czechs drove me so mad with their overblown
          > > reverence for the Beatles, and especially John Lennon, that I
          > > cannot enjoy their music anymore. 
          >
          > Lennon was a bona fide genius as well as a seminal cultural figure.

          He himself apparently didn't agree with that assessment. I can
          remember one interview with him where he expressed the belief that
          people had been hoodwinked. He directed the journalist's attention to
          a circus poster that contained nearly everything he'd put into one song
          on Sgt. Pepper, and pointed out that he'd plagiarized practically all
          of it. The whole Magical Mystery Tour movie was basically plagiarized
          from the life of Ken Kesey (if I have the right person), as is amply
          documented in one of Tom Wolfe's books.

          Maybe it seemed like that in Europe, but despite their popularity, the
          Beatles were basically derivative in their early years, and by the time
          they started getting "heavy", they were just one of many, not more
          creative than dozens of others. I think their lowest point was their
          bad renditions of Motown songs, in some of which they didn't even
          bother to find out they'd misunderstood the words.

          > > I mean, they were big, but they weren't gods, and there was plenty
          > > of rock 'n roll before them. 
          >
          > Even in a decade as rich in popular music as the '60s, the Beatles
          > stood head and shoulders above everyone else -- apart from Bob Dylan.

          Uh-uh. A quarter talent and three quarters hype.

          Jamie


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • coilinoc
          ... Beatles ... Dylan. ... I m sorry Jamie. This time you have gone TOO far :-) I was born years after The Beatles split up, but I would still consider them
          Message 4 of 19 , May 31, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            > >
            > > Even in a decade as rich in popular music as the '60s, the
            Beatles
            > > stood head and shoulders above everyone else -- apart from Bob
            Dylan.
            >
            > Uh-uh. A quarter talent and three quarters hype.
            >
            > Jamie

            I'm sorry Jamie. This time you have gone TOO far :-)

            I was born years after The Beatles split up, but I would still
            consider them one of the few things in this world to be above and
            beyond any sort of hype. Their "minor" songwriter George Harrison
            alone could have released a solo album that would have put most
            other "artists" from the 60s to shame. And look at their musical
            development from Love Me Do to A Day in the Life, which took less
            than four years. Pure genius (if you can apply such terms to
            popular music)
          • James Kirchner
            ... Then you re about the age of the Americans who asked my brother, Was Paul McCartney really in a band before Wings? No clue. ... He did, and he got sued
            Message 5 of 19 , May 31, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              On Monday, May 31, 2004, at 09:39 PM, coilinoc wrote:

              > I'm sorry Jamie.  This time you have gone TOO far :-)
              >
              > I was born years after The Beatles split up, but I would still
              > consider them one of the few things in this world to be above and
              > beyond any sort of hype. 

              Then you're about the age of the Americans who asked my brother, "Was
              Paul McCartney really in a band before Wings?" No clue.

              > Their "minor" songwriter George Harrison
              > alone could have released a solo album that would have put most
              > other "artists" from the 60s to shame. 

              He did, and he got sued for plagiarism and lost. And it was a stupid
              hairspray rock song from the '60s that he plagiarized.

              > And look at their musical
              > development from Love Me Do to A Day in the Life, which took less
              > than four years.  Pure genius (if you can apply such terms to
              > popular music)

              And a lot of LSD.

              There were others writing things just as good at the time. The Beatles
              were influenced by other musicians, poets and hippies. The stuff was
              in the air. They were just so immensely popular at the time that a
              record company was willing to record and release the stuff if it came
              from them. If any of the hippie bands who influenced them had tried to
              get the same music released, they'd have been told to go to hell. It
              was the hype left over from their days recording their own good songs
              and their bad renditions of Motown and Chuck Berry songs that allowed
              them to get away with it. When I hear the Sgt. Pepper album now, as a
              middle-aged man who generally does not let nostalgia fool him, I find
              the music, and especially the lyrics, embarrassingly kitsch. Other
              people's music from the time has not faded that way for me.

              I guess the scene looks a lot different from Europe. A Czech woman who
              came to visit me a few years ago complained in disbelief that they
              didn't play any Swedish groups on the radio here. After Roxette got
              famous for about 10 minutes, nobody paid attention to those groups. On
              the other hand (and I assume things have changed, but they may not
              have), I have heard virtually no Mexican, Cuban or Colombian artists on
              Czech radio, I suppose because in those days Latin singers had not yet
              started releasing dance tunes that had one easy-to-understand English
              tagline that any European can remember. (They have begun doing it now,
              though.)

              Jamie

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • raesim
              ... You re referring to For the Benefit of Mr Kite. I don t think anyone ever made any secret of the fact that the phrases used in the song were taken from an
              Message 6 of 19 , Jun 1, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, James Kirchner <jpklists@s...>
                wrote:
                >
                > I can remember one interview with him where he expressed the
                > belief that people had been hoodwinked. He directed the
                > journalist's attention to a circus poster that contained nearly
                > everything he'd put into one song on Sgt. Pepper, and pointed out
                > that he'd plagiarized practically all of it.

                You're referring to For the Benefit of Mr Kite. I don't think
                anyone ever made any secret of the fact that the phrases used in the
                song were taken from an old fairground poster (and anyway, as Ian
                MacDonald points out in his book Revolution in the Head, the song's
                lyrics aren't a simple recital of these phrases, but a witty
                elaboration of them). The music, which Lennon certainly can't be
                accused of not writing, is an evocation of the bygone era of
                circuses and carnivals that the poster gives glimpses of. Lennon
                repudiated the song, but that doesn't mean we have to.

                Simon

                PS If we're very lucky, Pablo "Franki" Fanque might join us in
                this discussion...
              • James Kirchner
                ... Now you sound like the lit professors some of my students complain about. The prof will give them an exam that contains a famous poem. He ll ask them what
                Message 7 of 19 , Jun 1, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Tuesday, June 1, 2004, at 02:22 PM, raesim wrote:

                  > Lennon repudiated the song, but that doesn't mean we have to.

                  Now you sound like the lit professors some of my students complain
                  about. The prof will give them an exam that contains a famous poem.
                  He'll ask them what the poet was trying to say, the students summarize
                  the poet's own explanation of his meaning, and they fail that part of
                  the test. So, they show the prof the poet's OWN explanation of what he
                  meant, and the prof says, "Oh, yeah, but he was wrong about that..."

                  Jamie


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • raesim
                  ... This is an UTTERLY false comparison. Simon
                  Message 8 of 19 , Jun 2, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > > Lennon repudiated the song, but that doesn't mean we have to.
                    >
                    > Now you sound like the lit professors some of my students complain
                    > about. The prof will give them an exam that contains a famous
                    > poem. He'll ask them what the poet was trying to say, the
                    > students summarize the poet's own explanation of his meaning, and
                    > they fail that part of the test. So, they show the prof the
                    > poet's OWN explanation of what he meant, and the prof says, "Oh,
                    > yeah, but he was wrong about that..."

                    This is an UTTERLY false comparison.

                    Simon
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.