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

Be careful with the NL

Expand Messages
  • Bruce R.Gilson
    There are a lot of entries in the NL that can cause problems. In some cases I don t know whether it is because Jespersen was translating into British English
    Message 1 of 15 , May 12, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      There are a lot of entries in the NL that can cause problems. In some cases I don't know whether it is because Jespersen was translating into British English or simply because the language has changed since 1930. In other cases it is clear.

      Thus the equivalences "hano = cock" and "gayi = gay" were probably perfectly good in 1930. but both of the English words in question would never be used in 2013 American English with the meanings intended in the NL entry. (I believe "cock" can still be used in British English to mean what I would call a "rooster," but we need someone like James to confirm this. "Gay" in the sense of "happy" is technically possible now, but is definitely not the normal meaning of the word in present-day American English!)

      One that totally baffles me is his "hanyune = chicken." The word "chicken" to me has no connotation of "young" or "baby," which clearly is implied in "hanyune." The word I would translate "hanyune" by is "chick," though the English word also has some other meanings (it can have the more general meaning of "fogleyune," for example). And the meaning of "chicken" in English (at least American English, from the 1940s to 2013!) is, in Novial terms, "hane," not "hanyune." I don't know if "chicken" in British English implies "baby" or "young"; again perhaps James or someone whose first language is British English can illuminate me. Or it could be a change since 1930. Or both -- It could never have had that meaning in AmE, but had it in 1930 BrE and has lost it since.
    • Rosto
      May be I am not an expert in English, but I have impression, that International English is more conservative, more close to British than to American. I never
      Message 2 of 15 , May 12, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        May be I am not an expert in English, but I have impression, that International English is more conservative, more close to British than to American. I never had such a doubts using things like NL, although I know what is "cock" in American, but for me it means rooster too. May be it is because I studied English reading Dickens or Agathe Cristie.

        Rosto.

        --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce R.Gilson" <brg1942@...> wrote:
        >
        > There are a lot of entries in the NL that can cause problems. In some cases I don't know whether it is because Jespersen was translating into British English or simply because the language has changed since 1930. In other cases it is clear.
        >
        > Thus the equivalences "hano = cock" and "gayi = gay" were probably perfectly good in 1930. but both of the English words in question would never be used in 2013 American English with the meanings intended in the NL entry. (I believe "cock" can still be used in British English to mean what I would call a "rooster," but we need someone like James to confirm this. "Gay" in the sense of "happy" is technically possible now, but is definitely not the normal meaning of the word in present-day American English!)
        >
        > One that totally baffles me is his "hanyune = chicken." The word "chicken" to me has no connotation of "young" or "baby," which clearly is implied in "hanyune." The word I would translate "hanyune" by is "chick," though the English word also has some other meanings (it can have the more general meaning of "fogleyune," for example). And the meaning of "chicken" in English (at least American English, from the 1940s to 2013!) is, in Novial terms, "hane," not "hanyune." I don't know if "chicken" in British English implies "baby" or "young"; again perhaps James or someone whose first language is British English can illuminate me. Or it could be a change since 1930. Or both -- It could never have had that meaning in AmE, but had it in 1930 BrE and has lost it since.
        >
      • Bruce R. Gilson
        ... Europe, by and large, study British English, as do people in former British colonies like India. People in Latin America or former American colonies
        Message 3 of 15 , May 12, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Rosto <rostislav-levchenko@...> wrote:
           

          May be I am not an expert in English, but I have impression, that

          International English is more conservative, more close to British than to American. I never had such a doubts using things like NL, although I know what is "cock" in American, but for me it means rooster too. May be it is because I studied English reading Dickens or Agathe Cristie.

          There is no such thing as a unified "International English." People in Europe, by and large, study British English, as do people in former British colonies like India. People in Latin America or former American colonies (though we don't like to use the term) like the Philippines generally study American English.
           
          If you ever used "cock" in the sense of "rooster" in the USA, or to an audience including Americans, you would quickly be put down. There are a number of words that differ between the two -- it was pointed out that BrE "bum bag" = AmE "fanny pack," and *each* uses a word the other would would find objectionable, though I think "fanny" in BrE is much worse than "bum" in AmE! 



          Rosto.



          --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce R.Gilson" <brg1942@...> wrote:
          >
          > There are a lot of entries in the NL that can cause problems. In some cases I don't know whether it is because Jespersen was translating into British English or simply because the language has changed since 1930. In other cases it is clear.
          >
          > Thus the equivalences "hano = cock" and "gayi = gay" were probably perfectly good in 1930. but both of the English words in question would never be used in 2013 American English with the meanings intended in the NL entry. (I believe "cock" can still be used in British English to mean what I would call a "rooster," but we need someone like James to confirm this. "Gay" in the sense of "happy" is technically possible now, but is definitely not the normal meaning of the word in present-day American English!)
          >
          > One that totally baffles me is his "hanyune = chicken." The word "chicken" to me has no connotation of "young" or "baby," which clearly is implied in "hanyune." The word I would translate "hanyune" by is "chick," though the English word also has some other meanings (it can have the more general meaning of "fogleyune," for example). And the meaning of "chicken" in English (at least American English, from the 1940s to 2013!) is, in Novial terms, "hane," not "hanyune." I don't know if "chicken" in British English implies "baby" or "young"; again perhaps James or someone whose first language is British English can illuminate me. Or it could be a change since 1930. Or both -- It could never have had that meaning in AmE, but had it in 1930 BrE and has lost it since.
          >




          --
                                   
                                                                               Bruce R. Gilson
                                                                               brg1942@...
                                                                        
                       
        • Rosto
          That s so silly. One need know local slang to be accepted well? I believe it s not so sad in communication between non-native English-users.
          Message 4 of 15 , May 12, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            That's so silly. One need know local slang to be accepted well? I believe it's not so sad in communication between non-native English-users.

            --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce R. Gilson" <brg1942@...> wrote:

            > > There is no such thing as a unified "International English." People in
            > Europe, by and large, study British English, as do people in former British
            > colonies like India. People in Latin America or former American colonies
            > (though we don't like to use the term) like the Philippines generally study
            > American English.
            >
            > If you ever used "cock" in the sense of "rooster" in the USA, or to an
            > audience including Americans, you would quickly be put down. There are a
            > number of words that differ between the two -- it was pointed out that BrE
            > "bum bag" = AmE "fanny pack," and *each* uses a word the other would would
            > find objectionable, though I think "fanny" in BrE is much worse than "bum"
            > in AmE!
            >
            > >
            > >
          • Bruce R. Gilson
            ... It s not a matter of knowing local slang. If the only meaning you ve ever heard for cock is a slangy word for penis, you re not going to know that it
            Message 5 of 15 , May 12, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Rosto <rostislav-levchenko@...> wrote:
               

              That's so silly. One need know local slang to be accepted well? I believe it's not so sad in communication between non-native English-users.

               

              It's not a matter of "knowing local slang." If the only meaning you've ever heard for "cock" is a slangy word for "penis," you're not going to know that it used to mean "rooster." And in AmE, the vast majority of speakers are in that category. "Cock" for "rooster" is as obsolete in the US as all the words for various kinds of horse-drawn vehicles. That's the language today.
               
              I'm sure there are Russian words that were perfectly common 100 years ago, possibly 50 even, which if you heard it now you would not understand.
            • Kjell Rehnström
              ... Me konsekud li germani traduktione, e tand es klar ke hanes es poultry, fowls, sekun angli-svedi vordaro. Li hano es konsekventim un rooster e li hana es
              Message 6 of 15 , May 12, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Bruce R.Gilson skrev 2013-05-12 14:54:
                >
                > There are a lot of entries in the
                > NL that can cause problems. In
                > some cases I don't know whether
                > it is because Jespersen was
                > translating into British English
                > or simply because the language
                > has changed since 1930. In other
                > cases it is clear.
                >
                > Thus the equivalences "hano =
                > cock" and "gayi = gay" were
                > probably perfectly good in 1930.
                > but both of the English words in
                > question would never be used in
                > 2013 American English with the
                > meanings intended in the NL
                > entry. (I believe "cock" can
                > still be used in British English
                > to mean what I would call a
                > "rooster," but we need someone
                > like James to confirm this. "Gay"
                > in the sense of "happy" is
                > technically possible now, but is
                > definitely not the normal meaning
                > of the word in present-day
                > American English!)
                >
                > One that totally baffles me is
                > his "hanyune = chicken." The word
                > "chicken" to me has no
                > connotation of "young" or "baby,"
                > which clearly is implied in
                > "hanyune." The word I would
                > translate "hanyune" by is
                > "chick," though the English word
                > also has some other meanings (it
                > can have the more general meaning
                > of "fogleyune," for example). And
                > the meaning of "chicken" in
                > English (at least American
                > English, from the 1940s to 2013!)
                > is, in Novial terms, "hane," not
                > "hanyune." I don't know if
                > "chicken" in British English
                > implies "baby" or "young"; again
                > perhaps James or someone whose
                > first language is British English
                > can illuminate me. Or it could be
                > a change since 1930. Or both --
                > It could never have had that
                > meaning in AmE, but had it in
                > 1930 BrE and has lost it since.
                >
                Me konsekud li germani traduktione,
                e tand es klar ke hanes es poultry,
                fowls, sekun angli-svedi vordaro.
                Li hano es konsekventim un rooster
                e li hana es li hen. In mi
                komprendo hanyune es klar, ma me
                kreda ke on ha transprenda li angli
                signifo.

                Pri gay es plu komplexi, den gay
                bli usa por homeseksuale in pluri
                lingues. Ma on pove solva li
                probleme skriptentim gey por li
                homoseksuali. Den talim on anke
                pronuntia lu in pluri lingues.

                Kjell R
              • Kjell Rehnström
                Komprendablim, nus kel aprenda anglum exter li anglimparlant landes ofte usa oldi vordaros e lekte oldatri literature. Naturalim li filmes e televisione helpa
                Message 7 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Komprendablim, nus kel aprenda
                  anglum exter li anglimparlant
                  landes ofte usa oldi vordaros e
                  lekte oldatri literature. Naturalim
                  li filmes e televisione helpa nus
                  tu komprenda li parlati anglum.

                  Kjell R

                  Rosto skrev 2013-05-12 15:24:
                  >
                  > May be I am not an expert in
                  > English, but I have impression,
                  > that International English is
                  > more conservative, more close to
                  > British than to American. I never
                  > had such a doubts using things
                  > like NL, although I know what is
                  > "cock" in American, but for me it
                  > means rooster too. May be it is
                  > because I studied English reading
                  > Dickens or Agathe Cristie.
                  >
                  > Rosto.
                  >
                  > --- In
                  > novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com
                  > <mailto:novial-discussion%40yahoogroups.com>,
                  > "Bruce R.Gilson" <brg1942@...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > There are a lot of entries in
                  > the NL that can cause problems.
                  > In some cases I don't know
                  > whether it is because Jespersen
                  > was translating into British
                  > English or simply because the
                  > language has changed since 1930.
                  > In other cases it is clear.
                  > >
                  > > Thus the equivalences "hano =
                  > cock" and "gayi = gay" were
                  > probably perfectly good in 1930.
                  > but both of the English words in
                  > question would never be used in
                  > 2013 American English with the
                  > meanings intended in the NL
                  > entry. (I believe "cock" can
                  > still be used in British English
                  > to mean what I would call a
                  > "rooster," but we need someone
                  > like James to confirm this. "Gay"
                  > in the sense of "happy" is
                  > technically possible now, but is
                  > definitely not the normal meaning
                  > of the word in present-day
                  > American English!)
                  > >
                  > > One that totally baffles me is
                  > his "hanyune = chicken." The word
                  > "chicken" to me has no
                  > connotation of "young" or "baby,"
                  > which clearly is implied in
                  > "hanyune." The word I would
                  > translate "hanyune" by is
                  > "chick," though the English word
                  > also has some other meanings (it
                  > can have the more general meaning
                  > of "fogleyune," for example). And
                  > the meaning of "chicken" in
                  > English (at least American
                  > English, from the 1940s to 2013!)
                  > is, in Novial terms, "hane," not
                  > "hanyune." I don't know if
                  > "chicken" in British English
                  > implies "baby" or "young"; again
                  > perhaps James or someone whose
                  > first language is British English
                  > can illuminate me. Or it could be
                  > a change since 1930. Or both --
                  > It could never have had that
                  > meaning in AmE, but had it in
                  > 1930 BrE and has lost it since.
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                • Kjell Rehnström
                  Kand me edukad suedum a imigrantes, mi observad ke ofte naskati parlantes non komprendad koses kel li non-naskati anglum-parlantes komprendad! E me kreda ke
                  Message 8 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Kand me edukad suedum a imigrantes,
                    mi observad ke ofte naskati
                    parlantes non komprendad koses kel
                    li non-naskati anglum-parlantes
                    komprendad! E me kreda ke James
                    raportad, ke sekun li BBC, britani
                    turistes non semper bonim
                    komprendad li anglum kel on parla
                    in turisti lokes, ma li
                    non-britanes komprendad ti anglum
                    tre bonim!

                    Kjell R
                    Rosto skrev 2013-05-12 16:09:
                    >
                    > That's so silly. One need know
                    > local slang to be accepted well?
                    > I believe it's not so sad in
                    > communication between non-native
                    > English-users.
                    >
                    > --- In
                    > novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com
                    > <mailto:novial-discussion%40yahoogroups.com>,
                    > "Bruce R. Gilson" <brg1942@...>
                    > wrote:
                    >
                    > > > There is no such thing as a
                    > unified "International English."
                    > People in
                    > > Europe, by and large, study
                    > British English, as do people in
                    > former British
                    > > colonies like India. People in
                    > Latin America or former American
                    > colonies
                    > > (though we don't like to use
                    > the term) like the Philippines
                    > generally study
                    > > American English.
                    > >
                    > > If you ever used "cock" in the
                    > sense of "rooster" in the USA, or
                    > to an
                    > > audience including Americans,
                    > you would quickly be put down.
                    > There are a
                    > > number of words that differ
                    > between the two -- it was pointed
                    > out that BrE
                    > > "bum bag" = AmE "fanny pack,"
                    > and *each* uses a word the other
                    > would would
                    > > find objectionable, though I
                    > think "fanny" in BrE is much
                    > worse than "bum"
                    > > in AmE!
                    > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    >
                    >
                  • Kjell Rehnström
                    ... Tum es verum. Me memora ke un student usad shinel por un moderni mantele! Kjell R
                    Message 9 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Bruce R. Gilson skrev 2013-05-12 16:29:
                      > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:09 AM,
                      > Rosto
                      > <rostislav-levchenko@...
                      > <mailto:rostislav-levchenko@...>>
                      > wrote:
                      >
                      > That's so silly. One need
                      > know local slang to be
                      > accepted well? I believe it's
                      > not so sad in communication
                      > between non-native English-users.
                      >
                      > It's not a matter of "knowing
                      > local slang." If the only meaning
                      > you've ever heard for "cock" is a
                      > slangy word for "penis," you're
                      > not going to know that it used to
                      > mean "rooster." And in AmE, the
                      > vast majority of speakers are in
                      > that category. "Cock" for
                      > "rooster" is as obsolete in the
                      > US as all the words for various
                      > kinds of horse-drawn vehicles.
                      > That's the language today.
                      > I'm sure there are Russian words
                      > that were perfectly common 100
                      > years ago, possibly 50 even,
                      > which if you heard it now you
                      > would not understand.
                      >
                      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novial-discussion/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxMDhnZ2o0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE0MDQzMjg0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjY2NTA5NARtc2dJZAMyMDMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTM2ODM2OTAxMQ--?act=reply&messageNum=2033>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      Tum es verum. Me memora ke un
                      student usad shinel' por un moderni
                      mantele!

                      Kjell R
                    • CppGuy
                      It s actually stunning to see how fast language CAN change. I remember when younger hearing my father rant about how modern homosexuals hijacked the word gay
                      Message 10 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        It's actually stunning to see how fast language CAN change. I remember when younger hearing my father rant about how modern homosexuals hijacked the word "gay" (he was actually wrong about that; "gay" had sexual overtones before he was born). Then not long ago I got to witness a rant by none other than Whoopi Goldberg about how the current generation of kids hijacked using "gay" to mean "stupid" or "bad." Take your pick now: gay = happy, homosexual, stupid. Oh, and shared TV & movies didn't stop the changes. :-)

                        --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Rosto" <rostislav-levchenko@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > That's so silly. One need know local slang to be accepted well? I believe it's not so sad in communication between non-native English-users.
                        >
                        > --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce R. Gilson" <brg1942@> wrote:
                        >
                        > > > There is no such thing as a unified "International English." People in
                        > > Europe, by and large, study British English, as do people in former British
                        > > colonies like India. People in Latin America or former American colonies
                        > > (though we don't like to use the term) like the Philippines generally study
                        > > American English.
                        > >
                        > > If you ever used "cock" in the sense of "rooster" in the USA, or to an
                        > > audience including Americans, you would quickly be put down. There are a
                        > > number of words that differ between the two -- it was pointed out that BrE
                        > > "bum bag" = AmE "fanny pack," and *each* uses a word the other would would
                        > > find objectionable, though I think "fanny" in BrE is much worse than "bum"
                        > > in AmE!
                        > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        >
                      • CppGuy
                        This is true. I don t really think there are grand issues with the NL and English words. You just need to keep 80 years in mind when using them. But I think
                        Message 11 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          This is true. I don't really think there are grand issues with the NL and English words. You just need to keep 80 years in mind when using them. But I think "hanyune" = "chicken" is in error. 80 years ago, the young offspring of a chicken was commonly known as a "chick" and "chicken" still was the name of the meat of said creature.

                          FWIW, Howard Stern once made a mockery of the FCC rules by deliberately referring to non-sexual uses of words commonly considered sexual. "Cock Robin" and "pussy willow" and "tit mouse" for example. In fact, say "pussy willow" and nobody will blink twice in the USA. But try to read the poem "My dear little Pussy" to classroom of 4th graders (as happened to my teacher in the 1970s) and you won't get to continue for all the embarrassed laughter. (And I really need to ask my British friends if the "Fannie May" candy company has stores there under that name.)

                          --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce R. Gilson" <brg1942@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Rosto <rostislav-levchenko@...>wrote:
                          >
                          > > **
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > May be I am not an expert in English, but I have impression, that
                          > > International English is more conservative, more close to British than to
                          > > American. I never had such a doubts using things like NL, although I know
                          > > what is "cock" in American, but for me it means rooster too. May be it is
                          > > because I studied English reading Dickens or Agathe Cristie.
                          > >
                          > > There is no such thing as a unified "International English." People in
                          > Europe, by and large, study British English, as do people in former British
                          > colonies like India. People in Latin America or former American colonies
                          > (though we don't like to use the term) like the Philippines generally study
                          > American English.
                        • Kjell Rehnström
                          ... You ve got to check the other translations as well. Sometimes the English will be of help, in other cases the German or the French translation. In Swedish
                          Message 12 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            CppGuy skrev 2013-05-12 20:48:
                            >
                            > This is true. I don't really
                            > think there are grand issues with
                            > the NL and English words. You
                            > just need to keep 80 years in
                            > mind when using them. But I think
                            > "hanyune" = "chicken" is in
                            > error. 80 years ago, the young
                            > offspring of a chicken was
                            > commonly known as a "chick" and
                            > "chicken" still was the name of
                            > the meat of said creature.
                            >
                            > FWIW, Howard Stern once made a
                            > mockery of the FCC rules by
                            > deliberately referring to
                            > non-sexual uses of words commonly
                            > considered sexual. "Cock Robin"
                            > and "pussy willow" and "tit
                            > mouse" for example. In fact, say
                            > "pussy willow" and nobody will
                            > blink twice in the USA. But try
                            > to read the poem "My dear little
                            > Pussy" to classroom of 4th
                            > graders (as happened to my
                            > teacher in the 1970s) and you
                            > won't get to continue for all the
                            > embarrassed laughter. (And I
                            > really need to ask my British
                            > friends if the "Fannie May" candy
                            > company has stores there under
                            > that name.)
                            >
                            > --- In
                            > novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com
                            > <mailto:novial-discussion%40yahoogroups.com>,
                            > "Bruce R. Gilson" <brg1942@...>
                            > wrote:
                            > >
                            > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:24
                            > AM, Rosto
                            > <rostislav-levchenko@...>wrote:
                            > >
                            > > > **
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > May be I am not an expert in
                            > English, but I have impression, that
                            > > > International English is more
                            > conservative, more close to
                            > British than to
                            > > > American. I never had such a
                            > doubts using things like NL,
                            > although I know
                            > > > what is "cock" in American,
                            > but for me it means rooster too.
                            > May be it is
                            > > > because I studied English
                            > reading Dickens or Agathe Cristie.
                            > > >
                            > > > There is no such thing as a
                            > unified "International English."
                            > People in
                            > > Europe, by and large, study
                            > British English, as do people in
                            > former British
                            > > colonies like India. People in
                            > Latin America or former American
                            > colonies
                            > > (though we don't like to use
                            > the term) like the Philippines
                            > generally study
                            > > American English.
                            >
                            You've got to check the other
                            translations as well. Sometimes the
                            English will be of help, in other
                            cases the German or the French
                            translation. In Swedish we use
                            chicken as well and that is the
                            only thing they generally sel in
                            stores. I suppose this is because
                            they slaughter them at a rather
                            young age. When I learnt English
                            cock was the word I was supposed to
                            use for what is nowadays referred
                            to as a rooster, which I in turn
                            would understand as a euphemism,
                            one who sits on a roost. But now
                            when I checked this out I found
                            that the word I was thinking about
                            was perch. (You learn as long as
                            you live, as they say).

                            Kjell R
                          • CppGuy
                            Here s another interesting point of confusion: kumine That s another word Jesperson thought French and English speakers would know immediately. Here s the
                            Message 13 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Here's another interesting point of confusion: kumine

                              That's another word Jesperson thought French and English speakers would know immediately. Here's the original entry: kumine FE, D Kümmel.

                              According to Google, Kümmel is caraway, but an alternate translation is "cumin." I assure you (speaking as a good cook) that you do not want to substitute these two things. Wikipedia has this:

                              "Cumin is sometimes confused with caraway (Carum carvi), another umbelliferous spice. Cumin, though, is hotter to the taste, lighter in color, and larger. Many European languages do not distinguish clearly between the two."

                              I can only assume Jesperson meant this as "caraway."

                              --- In novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com, Kjell Rehnström > You've got to check the other
                              > translations as well. Sometimes the
                              > English will be of help, in other
                              > cases the German or the French
                              > translation. In Swedish we use
                              > chicken as well and that is the
                              > only thing they generally sel in
                              > stores. I suppose this is because
                              > they slaughter them at a rather
                              > young age. When I learnt English
                              > cock was the word I was supposed to
                              > use for what is nowadays referred
                              > to as a rooster, which I in turn
                              > would understand as a euphemism,
                              > one who sits on a roost. But now
                              > when I checked this out I found
                              > that the word I was thinking about
                              > was perch. (You learn as long as
                              > you live, as they say).
                              >
                              > Kjell R
                              >
                            • Kjell Rehnström
                              As I understand it German Kümmel is caraway. As far as I know Kümmel is used in bread. Kjell R
                              Message 14 of 15 , May 12, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment
                                As I understand it German Kümmel is
                                caraway.
                                As far as I know Kümmel is used in
                                bread.

                                Kjell R

                                CppGuy skrev 2013-05-12 21:27:
                                >
                                > Here's another interesting point
                                > of confusion: kumine
                                >
                                > That's another word Jesperson
                                > thought French and English
                                > speakers would know immediately.
                                > Here's the original entry: kumine
                                > FE, D Kümmel.
                                >
                                > According to Google, Kümmel is
                                > caraway, but an alternate
                                > translation is "cumin." I assure
                                > you (speaking as a good cook)
                                > that you do not want to
                                > substitute these two things.
                                > Wikipedia has this:
                                >
                                > "Cumin is sometimes confused with
                                > caraway (Carum carvi), another
                                > umbelliferous spice. Cumin,
                                > though, is hotter to the taste,
                                > lighter in color, and larger.
                                > Many European languages do not
                                > distinguish clearly between the two."
                                >
                                > I can only assume Jesperson meant
                                > this as "caraway."
                                >
                                > --- In
                                > novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com
                                > <mailto:novial-discussion%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                > Kjell Rehnström > You've got to
                                > check the other
                                > > translations as well. Sometimes
                                > the
                                > > English will be of help, in other
                                > > cases the German or the French
                                > > translation. In Swedish we use
                                > > chicken as well and that is the
                                > > only thing they generally sel in
                                > > stores. I suppose this is because
                                > > they slaughter them at a rather
                                > > young age. When I learnt English
                                > > cock was the word I was
                                > supposed to
                                > > use for what is nowadays referred
                                > > to as a rooster, which I in turn
                                > > would understand as a euphemism,
                                > > one who sits on a roost. But now
                                > > when I checked this out I found
                                > > that the word I was thinking about
                                > > was perch. (You learn as long as
                                > > you live, as they say).
                                > >
                                > > Kjell R
                                > >
                                >
                                >
                              • Donald Gasper
                                Yes, cock is perfectly acceptable in British English: When the cock crows . American rooster is a euphemism. It is ironical that American speech is full
                                Message 15 of 15 , May 13, 2013
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Yes, "cock" is perfectly acceptable in British English: "When the cock crows". American "rooster" is a euphemism.

                                  It is ironical that American speech is full of so much foul (fowl?) language, yet at the same time the Americans are so squeamish.

                                  "Gay" retains its original sense, as in the adverb "gayly".

                                  "Chicken" is properly the young fowl - "chick" is merely a shortened form of this. But the meaning has shifted to encompass the adult bird too.


                                  > To: novial-discussion@yahoogroups.com
                                  > From: brg1942@...
                                  > Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 12:54:06 +0000
                                  > Subject: [novial-discussion] Be careful with the NL
                                  >
                                  > There are a lot of entries in the NL that can cause problems. In some cases I don't know whether it is because Jespersen was translating into British English or simply because the language has changed since 1930. In other cases it is clear.
                                  >
                                  > Thus the equivalences "hano = cock" and "gayi = gay" were probably perfectly good in 1930. but both of the English words in question would never be used in 2013 American English with the meanings intended in the NL entry. (I believe "cock" can still be used in British English to mean what I would call a "rooster," but we need someone like James to confirm this. "Gay" in the sense of "happy" is technically possible now, but is definitely not the normal meaning of the word in present-day American English!)
                                  >
                                  > One that totally baffles me is his "hanyune = chicken." The word "chicken" to me has no connotation of "young" or "baby," which clearly is implied in "hanyune." The word I would translate "hanyune" by is "chick," though the English word also has some other meanings (it can have the more general meaning of "fogleyune," for example). And the meaning of "chicken" in English (at least American English, from the 1940s to 2013!) is, in Novial terms, "hane," not "hanyune." I don't know if "chicken" in British English implies "baby" or "young"; again perhaps James or someone whose first language is British English can illuminate me. Or it could be a change since 1930. Or both -- It could never have had that meaning in AmE, but had it in 1930 BrE and has lost it since.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > ------------------------------------
                                  >
                                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  >
                                  > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novial-discussion/
                                  >
                                  > <*> Your email settings:
                                  > Individual Email | Traditional
                                  >
                                  > <*> To change settings online go to:
                                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novial-discussion/join
                                  > (Yahoo! ID required)
                                  >
                                  > <*> To change settings via email:
                                  > novial-discussion-digest@yahoogroups.com
                                  > novial-discussion-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
                                  >
                                  > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > novial-discussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                  >
                                  > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                  > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  >
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.