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

Re: [Czechlist] (narodni) pr'irodni rezervace, pr'irodni pamatka

Expand Messages
  • Rachel Thompson
    Monument: ... Britain too). I don t think it s as common in Britain. What do others think? ... enough, with only a little streaching, to cover most all the
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 31, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Monument:

      Todd wrote:
      >It's the term agreed on by both American and Czech institutions (perhaps in
      Britain too).

      I don't think it's as common in Britain. What do others think?

      >In fact, I find the word "monument" perhaps the only thing flexible
      enough, with only a little streaching, to cover most all the various tems of
      historical, architectural, or cultural heritage dealt with by
      preservationists: <snip>, village greens...

      Only a little stretching? No matter *how* much I stretch my mind, I can't
      get it to think of a village green as a monument! To describe
      ancient/impressive buildings as monuments isn't such a leap, and natural
      features of a landscape that are in some way "monumental" (e.g. Monument
      Valley) I can also cope with (just). But a village green? I'd go with
      Melvyn's "national heritage site" for that one. Perhaps this is partly a
      cultural difference between Britain and the US: what do you think? (But
      anyway, is a village green not an exclusively British phenomenon?)

      Melvyn wrote:
      >pr'irodni pamatka - nature monument (don't like this "monument" word at all
      but you do see it a lot at tourist spots here)

      I really don't like it in this context either, and I'm reluctant to go with
      it even if it is becoming established in tourist spots. But I can't think
      of a good term for a natural feature worthy of note - except "natural
      feature", which perhaps doesn't say enough. (?)
      But I like the rest of Melvyn's suggestions. One more suggestion might be
      the British "area of outstanding natural beauty" for a larger area - or is
      that too British?

      Kostas wrote:
      > Nothing against them, but do not forget about other possible expressions:
      for an example:
      MEMORIAL !!!!!
      (but rather for historical places, not natural)

      It's a good alternative for many things I'd describe as monuments (eg
      Edinburgh has the Scott Monument, which is also a memorial [to Walter
      Scott], and London has the Albert Memorial, which is also a monument). But
      surely memorial has to be restricted to man-made structures "in memory" of
      someone.

      Hope you all had fun at Cornucopia!
      Rachel
    • Michael Grant
      ... I m American, and I m not too crazy about the word monument either, although, like I said originally, we do have officially designated National
      Message 2 of 2 , Mar 31, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        >Only a little stretching? No matter *how* much I stretch my mind, I can't
        >get it to think of a village green as a monument! To describe
        >ancient/impressive buildings as monuments isn't such a leap, and natural
        >features of a landscape that are in some way "monumental" (e.g. Monument
        >Valley) I can also cope with (just). But a village green? I'd go with
        >Melvyn's "national heritage site" for that one. Perhaps this is partly a
        >cultural difference between Britain and the US: what do you think? (But
        >anyway, is a village green not an exclusively British phenomenon?)

        I'm American, and I'm not too crazy about the word "monument" either,
        although, like I said originally, we do have officially designated
        "National Monuments" over here (most of which, AFAIK, are either
        natural or archeological sites).


        >But I like the rest of Melvyn's suggestions. One more suggestion might be
        >the British "area of outstanding natural beauty" for a larger area - or is
        >that too British?

        Works for me.


        >It's a good alternative for many things I'd describe as monuments (eg
        >Edinburgh has the Scott Monument, which is also a memorial [to Walter
        >Scott], and London has the Albert Memorial, which is also a monument). But
        >surely memorial has to be restricted to man-made structures "in memory" of
        >someone.

        I agree.

        Michael

        --
        BLUE DANUBE international communication services
        The Central and East European Language Source!
        <http://www.bdanube.com>, <mailto:bdanube@...>
        Tel. (+1-817) 577-5239, Fax (817) 514-6413
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.