Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Interresting DOS forum in german (Announce)

posted by marcov(R), 19.09.2018, 16:37

(sorry, I replied twice, but the post got lost due to problems with inlogging)

> Bud Spencer and Terence Hill:

They are indeed staple. Just like Louis de Funès movies and Don Camillo. (the original B/W with Fernandel, not the reimaging with Terence Hill)

These are like movie series that were rerun annually before cable, probably because the contracts between state broadcasters made it cheap.

The German dubbing is indeed sometimes funny. NL doesn't dub but subtitle except maybe a few things aimed at the very youngest (like Disney films).

The joke is always that dubbing countries are illiterate, but in reality it is just the size of the language area. Dubbing is simply more expensive.

> India is supposedly very multilingual, at least in some major parts (Tamil
> Nadu?). But I guess you can always find exceptions.

Afaik in India there is a very large monoligual Hindi segment of the populace, and likewise in China with Mandarin.

> There are of course "English only" advocates here, which I don't
> necessarily agree with. I agree that we don't really need more
> fragmentation, for its own sake, but a little courtesy (interoperability?)
> sometimes helps.

It depends. Specially it is hard on shared institutions (schools, healthcare, social workers and -security), which often can't reject people (but have to provide treatment etc)

> We have slang, but I swear it gets worse over the Internet, which amplifies
> (or even reinvents) everything. What you read online or see in movies is an
> exaggerated (or faux/new/trendy) version.

Slang is maybe a bit bigger in English, but happens in other languages too.

But a dialect (like mine, in the Limburg region) is nearly (wholly?) a separate language. There is a wikipedia division for it even.

> There are certainly many native Spanish speakers, but most of them are in
> Texas, California, etc.

Maybe a few in Miami too.:-D But point taken, it is no uniform distribution.

> > Frisian is Ingvaeonic,
>
> Ah yes, Malmsteen, famous Swedish (now American?) guitarist. :-P j/k


Ah, I assumed that known, since it includes English. Basically it is a subgroup of Western European that had similar soundshifts as English.

Similarly Southern German (and Swiss) dialects that are Allemanisch in nature are called Irminonic, and the less affected dialects, usually Franconian in origin are Istvaeonic,

Standard German is a mix of various dialects, Dutch developed from the Old Frankish language, but there are variants of that language in Germany too, that underwent the soundshifts and thus sound very differently.

Linked to that group is the other Franconian derived language recognized by a country, Luxembourgish

Note that these are all West Germanic languages, iow English' group. Norse (Daenish/Norwegian/Swedish) is a tad further away

> You mean Luther's translation or others? Apparently he also had a big
> influence on Sweden (et al).

Luther on German, Staten Bible on Dutch, King James on English. Before there were hardly books in the vernacular, mostly just Latin and/or French.

Which is why as first written (and widely read+distributed) work, they had enormous influence on the formation of standard languages.

> But has the widespread Internet helped or hurt?

TV and Internet makes it easier to keep skills current. I don't think it really helps much learning languages. Maybe a bit of pronunciation.

You still need education (or immersion) to really learn the language.

> I guess
> I have to be a bit cautious not to overhype it (since it's not exactly an
> absolute authority on anything, even if they think they are, but even they
> often can't agree amongst themselves).

It is less of a problem. International sites are only a fraction of the sites a person visits, and usually from big firms that translate the site anyway.

DVD/BD Movies sold here universally come with subtitling and or dub tracks for most major West European countries. TV stations are dubbed or subtitled.

It is different if you are in IT, but otherwise IMHO it shouldn't be overrated.

> AFAIK, only their mother (Eugenia) was from Indonesia, and she died in
> 2005. I've never seen much acknowledgement about her (or even the father,
> Jan, who died in 1986). I'm almost surprised I even know that much, but I'm
> a nerd, heheh, I like trivia. (I'd be good on Jeopardy.)

Yeah, but I assumed the parents met, married and lived there for a while. Seems to have been only quite short.

> It just boggles my mind, even after having watched a ton of Britcoms and
> whatnot, it's still noticeably different in many many ways. It's a true
> culture shock, and it certainly wouldn't be easy for me to adjust to such a
> place. (Not impossible but certainly confusing.) There is little in common
> due to such a vast distance and divergence of history. The pattern of
> thinking is entirely different.

Well, then brace for every Cockney, if you ever make it to London. Cabbies can seem to be unintelligible.

> (BTW, I was somewhat disappointed to hear that Australia has gone a bit
> crazy with citizenship requirements for its politicians, even contra those
> with dual British citizenship. It's already impractical that U.S. demands
> birther rights, but are others really so petty to demand such fake
> righteousness too?? Bah, politics, always complaining but never truly
> helping anybody.)

There are some constraints here too, and in the same period there was a bit of noise.

The bigger noise here was about Turks and Moroccans with dual passport returning to the other country but keeping social security based on their Dutch passport, often relating to those countries (and then specially Turkey) trying to influence their diaspora.

> (Xenophobia is dumb, but the only thing worse is when such a buzzword
> becomes so common as to label most people that unfairly, for fake political
> purposes, which then defeats the point and waters it all down. The modern
> outrage culture sucks, always looking for someone to harass.)

Yes. Definitely. Even the problems that there are (of which are dual passports are one per definition specially if such rights are inheritable since that promotes fundamental inequality) are usually totally glossed over with 18th century nationalistic sentiments.

> > Old Frankish is even worse, since even earlier, you often don't even
> > recognize anything as familar:
> > Some common simple French words come from it
>
> Does "France" come from "Franks"? Or only loosely?

Afaik from Francia, as in country ("realm") of the Franks after 800-900.
In that period the Frankish empire split, and in the end the south-western part kept the name and later became the core of France.

But it was much smaller than France now. (missing eastern third( Burgundy, Alsace-Lorraine, Provence ), as well as Narbonne. The English Plantagets also had claimes on Aquitaine.

France got only (roughly) its current borders under Louis XIV, 800 years later.

> I know it was (part of?) Gaul (Gallic?).

Gaul is basically Celtic France minus Provence plus large parts of Belgium as the Romans (JayCee!) saw it. Say around the time of Christ. (Gallic wars in the 50ties BC)

That was already pretty Romanized (as in Vulgar Latin speaking, proto-French) by the end of the Roman empire and the move of Franks south in 450 and seized control. But demographics prohibited their language getting dominance, so that's why France speeks French, which is not a Frankish language.

That's in a nutshell. Franks are divided in Ripuarian and Sallian too. The Sallian ones conquered France and were based in Metz and Bavay and later Paris. The Ripuarians had Cologne as main city.

> Well, after thousands of years, everything is half this and
> half that anyways, so the answer is probably "yes and no".

Roughly same territory, different period.

> a while back I read a biography of one famous 19th century Frenchwoman
> from Normandy. But wasn't "Norman" similar to "Norseman"? IIRC, William
> the Conqueror was of so-called "viking" descent.

Yes. Normandy was ceded as tribute to Viking/Daenish incursions in the 800 and 900 hundreds.

> Of course, what little was left 900 years later, if any??

Well, William the Conqueror was more 1066 so that is more like 200 years later, but afaik then they were already mostly frenchified.

>(For instance, Iceland is Germanic, but they
> are loosely related to Norwegians and Scottish, according to Wikipedia.)

Iceland afaik is 16th century Danish.

> So you've been to France and/or Belgium a lot?

My birth hometown (lookup city of "Roermond") is 5km from the German border, and say 15 from the Belgian border. We mostly made one day trips into Belgium, though I also stayed in Leuven, Brussels(Fosdem!) and Ghent a bit longer.

If you ever go there, I always like the Grand Place in Brussels. Very impressive.

In my teens we mostly went to France by car for our annual holiday. First handful years to the west coast, later years to Nice and surroundings, with Dordogne and ten days in Paris inbetween.

> (I had a teacher who often
> vacationed in Belgium in the summers, for no obvious reason.

I'm still planning a tour to Trappist Monasteries. Very educational.

> Immersion would probably help, yes, but nowadays you could probably learn
> online (or Rosetta Stone, Berlitz, or whatever, maybe even YouTube
> videos).

I'm beyond that level. I can understand and read anything.

(I'll move the Sleeze Bees bits to the reply of the other msg)

 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
16015 Postings in 1483 Threads, 271 registered users, 6 users online (0 registered, 6 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum