4.1028 The Languages of Humanist (2/44)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Wed, 13 Feb 91 22:45:14 EST

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 4, No. 1028. Wednesday, 13 Feb 1991.


(1) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:33:36 GMT (27 lines)
From: viden@logos.class.gu.se (Gunhild Viden)
Subject: Language on Humanist

(2) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 91 10:48:00 PST (17 lines)
From: Michael_Kessler.Hum@mailgate
Subject: The Languages of Humanist

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:33:36 GMT
From: viden@logos.class.gu.se (Gunhild Viden)
Subject: Language on Humanist

If French is to be used in Humanist because it is a minority language
in Canada, where do we end? Flemish from Belgium, Basque from Spain,
Welsh from the U.K., etc. etc.? Humanist is not an exclusively North
American matter--or is it?

As a neither anglo- nor francophone I would like to give my opinion.
Some people were fortunate enough to be borne to one of the
Weltsprachen; the rest of us were not. We have to acquire the
necessary languages, and do so to different degrees. We may be
reasonably fluent in one language, less fluent in another, making our
way through a third, able to read a fourth. Whether the francophones
like it or not, English has more and more become the language which
the majority of the neither-nor's knows best. I could have written
this in French, or German, or Italian (not Spanish, shame on me!), but
with considerably more effort, and with several more mistakes in the
output. I fail to see why I should do so, just because Michel feels
oppressed or Germaine wants to practice her French (no offense, either
of you!). Sure, the anglophones are the lucky ones, but the
francophones are no worse off than the rest of us (in fact better; we
are struggling with the French irregular verbs as well as the
English!), and who said the world is just, anyway?

Gunhild Viden, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------25----
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 91 10:48:00 PST
From: Michael_Kessler.Hum@mailgate
Subject: The Languages of Humanist (5/134)

Je suis curieux de savoir comment Lenoble se permet de s'arroger le
droit de parler pour toute une communaute (NOUS ... pouvons... NOUS
feliciter...etcetera) tandis qu'il refuse le meme droit a Boissonas. (A
moins que je ne me trompe, la particule disparait sauf quand le nom n'a
qu'une syllabe--exemple: de Gaulle, mais Lafayette. "De
Tocqueville" serait une erreur anglo-americaine. Pourtant, autre
exemple general [;-)]: de Lattre de Tassigny. Mais si ce nom etait
inverser, dirait-on alors "Tassigny de Lattre," sans particule?)

Question de geographie: Le Mexique ne fait plus partie de l'Amerique du
nord?

MKessler@HUM.SFSU.EDU