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

Re: [ustav] Re: geography primer

Expand Messages
  • Philip Silouan Thompson
    ... That s genuine English but a tad archaic; it s using very in its older sense of itself or in truth, as when we sing the very Theotokos or say the
    Message 1 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      gregdoug52us wrote:
      > --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, Anna Voellmecke <anna@...> wrote:
      >
      >> Sorry, but in English you cannot modify a superlative with an adverb
      >> of intensity. The original translator just made a mistake...
      >>
      >
      > Not so. Good, better, best. Best is a superlative. Don't you know
      > somebody whom you would call your "very best" friend?

      That's genuine English but a tad archaic; it's using "very" in its older
      sense of "itself" or "in truth," as when we sing "the very Theotokos" or
      say "the very thing." Here's a related note on the confusion that usage
      can cause: http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic13739.html

      We see something similar in services like the General Menaion service to
      the Fathers of the Councils - at the end of Ode 3, it says "As the
      brightest lamps of the truth of Christ unto the world have ye the God's
      instructed appeared on the earth, O truly most blessed fathers..." For
      all its flaws, this translation's "truly most" makes more sense to me
      than would "very most". http://www.ccel.org/ccel/anonymous/menaion.ix.html

      I don't know if "Our lord the truly most reverend N." would satisfy
      anyone, but I'll throw it out there.

      Silouan
    • Fr. John Whiteford
      Very best seems to be in very common use:   http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=%22very%20best%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn Fr. John Whiteford St. Jonah
      Message 2 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        "Very best" seems to be in very common use:
         
        http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=%22very%20best%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn

        Fr. John Whiteford
        St. Jonah Orthodox Church
        Parish Home Page: http://www.saintjonah.org/
        ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/
        Parish News: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
        Blog: http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/

        --- On Mon, 12/8/08, Philip Silouan Thompson <himself@...> wrote:

        From: Philip Silouan Thompson <himself@...>
        Subject: Re: [ustav] Re: geography primer
        To: ustav@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 10:54 AM

        gregdoug52us wrote:
        > --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, Anna Voellmecke <anna@...> wrote:
        >
        >> Sorry, but in English you cannot modify a superlative with an adverb
        >> of intensity. The original translator just made a mistake...
        >>
        >
        > Not so. Good, better, best. Best is a superlative. Don't you know
        > somebody whom you would call your "very best" friend?

        That's genuine English but a tad archaic; it's using "very"
        in its older
        sense of "itself" or "in truth," as when we sing "the
        very Theotokos" or
        say "the very thing." Here's a related note on the confusion that
        usage
        can cause: http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic13739.html

        We see something similar in services like the General Menaion service to
        the Fathers of the Councils - at the end of Ode 3, it says "As the
        brightest lamps of the truth of Christ unto the world have ye the God's
        instructed appeared on the earth, O truly most blessed fathers..." For
        all its flaws, this translation's "truly most" makes more sense
        to me
        than would "very most".
        http://www.ccel.org/ccel/anonymous/menaion.ix.html

        I don't know if "Our lord the truly most reverend N." would
        satisfy
        anyone, but I'll throw it out there.

        Silouan










        ------------------------------------


        Post message: ustav@yahoogroups.com
        Subscribe: ustav-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        Unsubscribe: ustav-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        CONTACT LIST OWNER: ustav-owner@yahoogroups.com
        URL to archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ustav

        More ustav information and service texts:
        http://www.orthodox.net/ustav
        http://www.orthodox.net/services
        Yahoo! Groups Links





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Fr. John Whiteford
        For that matter, Very most is used in quite a few news articles currently on Google news too:
        Message 3 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          For that matter, "Very most" is used in quite a few news articles
          currently on Google news too:

          http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&nolr=1&q=%22very+most%22

          -Fr. John Whiteford

          P.S. Ethel Merman singing "The Hostess with the Mostest" comes to
          mind in this discussion:

          http://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/t/thehostesswiththemostestonth
          eball.shtml

          :)

          --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John Whiteford"
          <frjohnwhiteford@...> wrote:
          >
          > "Very best" seems to be in very common use:
          >  
          > http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=%22very%20best%22&um=1&ie=UTF-
          8&sa=N&tab=wn
          >
          > Fr. John Whiteford
          > St. Jonah Orthodox Church
          > Parish Home Page: http://www.saintjonah.org/
          > ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-
          rocor/
          > Parish News: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
          > Blog: http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/
          >
          > --- On Mon, 12/8/08, Philip Silouan Thompson <himself@...> wrote:
          >
          > From: Philip Silouan Thompson <himself@...>
          > Subject: Re: [ustav] Re: geography primer
          > To: ustav@yahoogroups.com
          > Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 10:54 AM
          >
          > gregdoug52us wrote:
          > > --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, Anna Voellmecke <anna@> wrote:
          > >
          > >> Sorry, but in English you cannot modify a superlative with an
          adverb
          > >> of intensity. The original translator just made a mistake...
          > >>
          > >
          > > Not so. Good, better, best. Best is a superlative. Don't you
          know
          > > somebody whom you would call your "very best" friend?
          >
          > That's genuine English but a tad archaic; it's using "very"
          > in its older
          > sense of "itself" or "in truth," as when we sing "the
          > very Theotokos" or
          > say "the very thing." Here's a related note on the confusion that
          > usage
          > can cause: http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic13739.html
          >
          > We see something similar in services like the General Menaion
          service to
          > the Fathers of the Councils - at the end of Ode 3, it says "As the
          > brightest lamps of the truth of Christ unto the world have ye the
          God's
          > instructed appeared on the earth, O truly most blessed fathers..."
          For
          > all its flaws, this translation's "truly most" makes more sense
          > to me
          > than would "very most".
          > http://www.ccel.org/ccel/anonymous/menaion.ix.html
          >
          > I don't know if "Our lord the truly most reverend N." would
          > satisfy
          > anyone, but I'll throw it out there.
          >
          > Silouan
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          >
          > Post message: ustav@yahoogroups.com
          > Subscribe: ustav-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > Unsubscribe: ustav-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > CONTACT LIST OWNER: ustav-owner@yahoogroups.com
          > URL to archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ustav
          >
          > More ustav information and service texts:
          > http://www.orthodox.net/ustav
          > http://www.orthodox.net/services
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Molly Grabowski
          Bless Father - It seems to me that the bulk of references in the link you sent are SPORTS REPORTS. That something is in common use in the sports pages hardly
          Message 4 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Bless Father -

            It seems to me that the bulk of references in the link you sent are
            SPORTS REPORTS. That something is in common use in the sports pages
            hardly causes it to rise to the standard of acceptable grammar or
            acceptable liturgical use. Although it does sometimes seem like the
            rubrics were put together by Yogi Berra, especially when the troparia
            and kondakia are arranged alphabetically by height.

            Molly
            >
            > <http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=%22very%20best%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn>
            >
          • Meg Lark
            ... [ml] Wow, I wish I had enough time on my hands to get nitpicky about English. What do you folks *do* for a living?? Meg
            Message 5 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 9:46 PM, stephen_r1937 <stephen_r1937@...> wrote:
              > --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, Anna Voellmecke <anna@...> wrote:
              >>
              >> At 11:36 AM 12/6/2008, you wrote:
              >> >Sorry to ask such a dumb question -
              >> >
              >> >Is the new Locum Tenens
              >> >
              >> >Very Most Reverend Kyrill of Smolensk and Kalingrad
              >>
              >> Sorry, but in English you cannot modify a superlative with an adverb
              >> of intensity. The original translator just made a mistake, and
              >> apparently not enough English speakers in the Synod have enough
              >> command of their language (or just guts) to insist that this
              >> "translation" be consigned to the trash bin. No slam to Fr. Lawrence
              >> but he often follows the rules of the *original* language in his
              >> translations, rather than in the *target* language.
              >>
              >> Maybe one day we a bishop will listen and deal with this problem?
              >
              > That's probably the only way to get more very better English.
              >
              > Stephen

              [ml] Wow, I wish I had enough time on my hands to get nitpicky about
              English. What do you folks *do* for a living??

              Meg
            • Чтец Вn
              ... is similar to saying very unique, another common error. ... I have to disagree because this statement assumes a particular meaning of a word in order to
              Message 6 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, richard cooper <rrcooper@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > Not so again. This use of "best" would be considered redundant. It
                is similar to saying "very unique," another common error.
                >
                > Subdeacon Alexis


                I have to disagree because this statement assumes a particular
                meaning of a word in order to state that a grammatical rule is
                incorrect. In this case, it is assumed that "unique" means being the
                only one, which would make "very unique" seem incorrect. However,
                unique also has other commonly-used meanings, such as "unusual."
                (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unique) Of course, "very
                unusual" is a perfectly correct combination of words. In fact, "very
                unique" is given as an example in the above link.

                In other words, you need to take into account all plausible
                definitions of the words before determining whether a particular word
                combination is within the bounds of proper grammar.

                Rdr. Vyacheslav
              • Anna Voellmecke
                ... For decades, I have noticed that the media often have the worst English usage! Apparently competence in English is not a requirement to be a news reporter.
                Message 7 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  At 12:50 PM 12/8/2008, you wrote:
                  >Bless Father -
                  >
                  >It seems to me that the bulk of references in the link you sent are
                  >SPORTS REPORTS. That something is in common use in the sports pages
                  >hardly causes it to rise to the standard of acceptable grammar or
                  >acceptable liturgical use.

                  For decades, I have noticed that the media often have the worst
                  English usage! Apparently competence in English is not a requirement
                  to be a news reporter.

                  Anna V.
                • Anna Voellmecke
                  ... I work 10 hours a day and spend about 20 minutes on email. Why are you irritated about correcting poor English? What is offensive about working for good,
                  Message 8 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 02:18 PM 12/8/2008, you wrote:

                    >[ml] Wow, I wish I had enough time on my hands to get nitpicky about
                    >English. What do you folks *do* for a living??

                    I work 10 hours a day and spend about 20 minutes on email. Why are
                    you irritated about correcting poor English? What is offensive about
                    working for good, clear, high-quality language? If we use language to
                    express divine truths, should we not be disciplined in learning our
                    language adequately?

                    Good grief.

                    Anna V.
                  • richard cooper
                    A matter that truly bothers me about this entire exchange is that some of the respondents seem to ignore the importance of differing levels of usage. Certain
                    Message 9 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      A matter that truly bothers me about this entire exchange is that some of the respondents seem to ignore the importance of differing levels of usage. Certain words and expressions are appropriate to certain contexts and not to others. To ignore this elementary fact of good decorum puts everyone and everything on the same level, which is the lowest common denominator. And that--in a nutshell--is what is wrong with just about everything in the world today. Care about language and usage is integral to the service of the Word made flesh.

                      Subdeacon Alexis



                      To: ustav@yahoogroups.comFrom: anna@...: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 19:13:51 -0600Subject: Re: [ustav] Re: geography primer



                      At 02:18 PM 12/8/2008, you wrote:>[ml] Wow, I wish I had enough time on my hands to get nitpicky about>English. What do you folks *do* for a living??I work 10 hours a day and spend about 20 minutes on email. Why are you irritated about correcting poor English? What is offensive about working for good, clear, high-quality language? If we use language to express divine truths, should we not be disciplined in learning our language adequately?Good grief.Anna V.






                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Justin Zamora
                      Part of the problem is that the word is difficult to render into English, especially if one wants to retain the
                      Message 10 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Part of the problem is that the word <Высокопреосвященнейшем> is
                        difficult to render into English, especially if one wants to retain
                        the style of traditional English usage (e.g. Reverend, Right Reverend
                        and Most Reverend, etc.). <Высокопреосвященнейшем> contains three
                        different kinds of superlatives/intensifiers:

                        <Высоко-> - high
                        <-пре-> - most
                        <-освященнейшем> - most sanctified

                        My suggestion is "Most highly sanctified" or "Most High Reverend" or
                        something similar, but all the elements in the Slavonic word are hard
                        to fit into "proper" English.

                        Justin

                        On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Anna Voellmecke <anna@...> wrote:
                        > At 11:36 AM 12/6/2008, you wrote:
                        >>Sorry to ask such a dumb question -
                        >>
                        >>Is the new Locum Tenens
                        >>
                        >>Very Most Reverend Kyrill of Smolensk and Kalingrad
                        >
                        > Sorry, but in English you cannot modify a superlative with an adverb
                        > of intensity. The original translator just made a mistake, and
                        > apparently not enough English speakers in the Synod have enough
                        > command of their language (or just guts) to insist that this
                        > "translation" be consigned to the trash bin. No slam to Fr. Lawrence
                        > but he often follows the rules of the *original* language in his
                        > translations, rather than in the *target* language.
                        >
                        > Maybe one day we a bishop will listen and deal with this problem?
                        >
                        > Anna
                        >
                        >
                      • appalachian don_hackenberry
                        Everyone is unique, but some are more unique than others. Don [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Message 11 of 23 , Dec 8, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Everyone is unique, but some are more unique than others.



                          Don






                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • stephen_r1937
                          There are two extremes here, and the view common among professional linguists, that a native speaker cannot make a mistake in his own language, is one of them.
                          Message 12 of 23 , Dec 11, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            There are two extremes here, and the view common among professional
                            linguists, that a native speaker cannot make a mistake in his own
                            language, is one of them. The trouble with this is that (to take the
                            present instance) if "unique" is sloppily used to mean merely
                            "unusual," it becomes difficult even to talk about things that are
                            really unique. The argument that grammatical rules and definitions
                            impose an ethical issue, a right-or-wrong issue, on linguistic usage,
                            where in reality none exists, is convincing only when one does not
                            take into account literary considerations, which are mostly outside of
                            the purview of professional linguists. There is also a philosophical
                            issue here: does the truly unique exist? Apply this question to
                            theology, and you may conclude that "very unique" (or my favorite
                            example, "Pittsburgh's Most Unique Store!") is a heterodox usage.
                            Surely we have all encountered the sort of argument that this or that
                            in the New Testament must not be historically true because that wasn't
                            the usual way things went in first-century Palestine; to which the
                            reply is that if everything the NT speaks of went as things usually
                            went, the NT would not have been written and we wouldn't be having
                            this conversation. Merriam-Webster is in the odd position of priding
                            itself on having transcended the old notion of correct and in correct
                            usage while still claiming itself as the ultimate arbiter of these
                            things.

                            Stephen


                            --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, "Чтец
                            Вячеслав"
                            <off2port@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, richard cooper <rrcooper@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > Not so again. This use of "best" would be considered redundant. It
                            > is similar to saying "very unique," another common error.
                            > >
                            > > Subdeacon Alexis
                            >
                            >
                            > I have to disagree because this statement assumes a particular
                            > meaning of a word in order to state that a grammatical rule is
                            > incorrect. In this case, it is assumed that "unique" means being the
                            > only one, which would make "very unique" seem incorrect. However,
                            > unique also has other commonly-used meanings, such as "unusual."
                            > (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unique) Of course, "very
                            > unusual" is a perfectly correct combination of words. In fact, "very
                            > unique" is given as an example in the above link.
                            >
                            > In other words, you need to take into account all plausible
                            > definitions of the words before determining whether a particular word
                            > combination is within the bounds of proper grammar.
                            >
                            > Rdr. Vyacheslav
                            >
                          • stephen_r1937
                            ... Ah, Don, that is the great tragedy of my life; I alone in all the world am not unique. Stephen
                            Message 13 of 23 , Dec 11, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, appalachian don_hackenberry
                              <don_hackenberry@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Everyone is unique, but some are more unique than others.
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Don
                              >
                              Ah, Don, that is the great tragedy of my life; I alone in all the
                              world am not unique.

                              Stephen
                            • stephen_r1937
                              ... Give it a try, Meg; you may be surprised how little time it takes! Stephen
                              Message 14 of 23 , Dec 11, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, "Meg Lark" <woolfolk3@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > [ml] Wow, I wish I had enough time on my hands to get nitpicky about
                                > English. What do you folks *do* for a living??
                                >
                                > Meg
                                >


                                Give it a try, Meg; you may be surprised how little time it takes!

                                Stephen
                              • Subdeacon Stephen McKay
                                I always thought very in this context means truly - which is it s original meaning. Truly Most Reverend -- that works. Maybe we are stumbling over the
                                Message 15 of 23 , Dec 13, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I always thought "very" in this context means "truly" - which is it's
                                  original meaning. "Truly Most Reverend" -- that works. Maybe we are
                                  stumbling over the modern reduction of meaning inherent in the 20th
                                  Century vernacular use of the word "very". It's actually a word with
                                  quite a venerable history.

                                  "Very". "Verily". "Verity". Get it? Think outside the 20th Century
                                  and it starts to works nicely.

                                  I like "Very Most Reverend". I think it is an admirable construction
                                  and a beautifully poetic use of the etymological breadth of the
                                  English tongue.

                                  It *is* correct English, it is I think, better English, and it's got
                                  that lovely "old" feel to it that lets you know you are part of
                                  something established, continuing and rooted in a scale of time that
                                  extends beyond mere living memory. Like chanting "Eis Polla Eti
                                  Despota". I love all that old stuff. It makes me feel safe.

                                  :-)
                                  Sbd Stephen McKay

                                  --- In ustav@yahoogroups.com, Molly Grabowski <mookitty@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > I realize that "Very Most" is incorrect English, but when you are
                                  > specifically told by your priest to add the "very" that's what you do.
                                  >
                                  > Perhaps if we changed it to "Super-Duper-est", we might be able to
                                  > sufficiently call attention to the issue. Or hey - if we had an
                                  > OFFICIAL English translation of just about anything, as opposed to a
                                  > merely "most frequently used non-copyright infringing" version, that
                                  > might work too!
                                  >
                                  > Molly
                                  >
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.