• BookTalk.org News will soon go out via email in HTML format. The goal will be to keep people posted on our current book discussions and other relevant news items.
• Contest #2: "On The Importance of Reading" has started. Visit the Contests forum - the very top thread.
Please support our free community by making a credit card donation through our secure PayPal account. We appreciate and depend on the generosity of our members. Thank you!
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:35 pm Post subject: national anthems
Today's thoughts take me to national anthems.
As often, President Sarkozy makes the news, and one of the things he keeps repeating, as an example of teaching stricter and patriotic values to the young, is that French children should learn the national anthem at school.
The two things he keeps repeating I find appalling, not because they're bad ideas, but because it shows once more that politicians have no idea what is happening in schools.
Idea 1: The Marseillaise is already taught in schools, no use making a fuss.
Idea 2: (that would be a bit long) is impossible to put into practice. It was probably last used in Catholic schools when Sarkozy was a student and classrooms did not yet contain anything students might want to steal.
So, La Marseillaise: It dates back to the French Revolution, and was composed as a war march for one of the factions.
Having a national anthem that goes back to the Revolution is fitting, it would be difficult to oject to that.
There are two problems with the Marseillaise though:
1- The lyrics.
It's a very gory war song, and I often envy countries that have something peaceful and beautiful instead.
The Marseillaise is fine when it is instrumental only, for occasions like the Olympics.
The lyrics are about torrents of blood, about enemy soldiers who are going to strangle your wife and children in your very arms... In US terms, those fine feelings got a lot of mileage in the past, and now it would be nice to sing about something else.
2- Unless you are a trained singer, it is impossible to sing La Marseillaise in tune, as it is extremely difficult. So here are all your well-meaning citizens, singing out of tune (but together though).
This is solved, more or less, by singing it very loud. Well, it's not a lullaby, and "at the top of your voice" will do for the rivers of blood and the blood-thirsty enemy.
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:12 pm Post subject: European Union.
As I often do, I then wondered about the European Union.
They have an anthem, and it's beautiful: Beethoven's "Ode to Joy", from his ninth symphony.
It's been the EU anthem since 1985, but I don't remember hearing it played, it must only be used for officuial EU circumstances, such as perhaps an opening session of the Parliament (?).
Anyway, there we are, beautiful and uplifting tune.
Then I realized I had no idea what the lyrics were, and needed to check it up on Wiki.
What follows is "EU business as usual".
The EU nations amazingly agreed on a common piece of music, although that meant choosing a composer of A particular nationality, which could not well be avoided, unless they had a new piece composed especially (I wonder why they didn't).
Anyway, then , lyrics: they should have followed the music, as here once again, everything was perfect.
In 1785, Friedrich Schiller composed his "Ode to Joy" poem which later inspired Beethoven's piece of music, and is about peace, freedom and unity.
But then the EU members could not agree: the song was definitenly in A European language, rather than polyglot, and why should it be German, and so on, and so forth.
So, someone composed a suitable poem for the EU anthem, on the same theme, but, so as not to hurt anyone's feelings, in Latin!!!
You can read this work of art in its English version on the link I'll give later. About as inspiring as reciting the railway schedules of all 27 member states. God forbid one should sing Schiller when a politically correct nonentity is at hand!
And, surprise, surprise, it's never been used, or even adopted.
So there you are Ophelia, which do you prefer, the rivers of blood in French or the lukewarm brotherly couplets in Latin?
This is what the EU has been doing all the time, for example with the euro notes (not that I care much what notes look like, but they're a good example).
I would think we could be symbolic by using various items from the very rich cultures member states offer, but they want to make sure it doesn't look like anyone's culture in particular, and everything is as bland as possible. In the end, Europe = Eurodisney.
And in case it sounds like I'm angry: I'm not, I'm very tolerant of EU quirks-- we've come a very long way.
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:46 pm Post subject: Latin, and languages.
Latin takes me to languages in Europe.
Languages in EU official business are , in my opinion, one of those policies that made sense when they were adopted and that people senselessly cling to long after they have become outdated.
We thus have 27 member states and 24 official languages, all given the same status. What follows is, I think, a lot of waste of time and money (translating, duplicating documents, etc...).
When the EU was first formed in the early 1970's, it was very important to show that no single country was given any privileges, and that included languages. I'm sure they would have dearly loved to use Latin or Esperanto, except that very little Latin (if any) is taught in our schools and nobody took to Esperanto (because it was not needed).
So any EU meeting is like a United Nations meeting, with headsets and translators, irrespective of whether the representatives really need them.
Over the years, it became obvious to the general population that the inhabitants of the EU already had one common language that they use to communicate with each other, but officially the fact has not yet been recognized.
You will see the French and the German delegates speaking in their national languages on television when they meet -- the hypocrites!
A lot of the talks that lead to decisions take place in the corridors, in very small meetings etc, and when it's important, do you want to be bothered with a translator?
I'm not saying we only need one language in Europe -- I learnt three foreign languages at school and consider this to be a privilege, and also essential to understand culture.
But leaders should lead, or at least in this case follow when the people have already made a languistic choice for international transactions.
I saw just one more example of this on TV a few days ago.
They were showing EU firemen from three countries (France, Portugal and Spain) doing common exercises in preparation for the coming summer- Mediterreanean countries always have a lot of summer fires).
They needed to take practical steps so that the three countries would be ready to help each other if necessary. They found, for example, that some of their equipment was not compatible... Anyway, those firemen were communicating in English. They were not making speeches for our benefit, and were not carrying their translators on their backs down the mountain slopes, they needed to get the work done.
In the early 1980's I often wondered why they were going through all this nonsense.
Did the leaders fear the national languages would disappear if they used the same language on and off cameras? That made no sense.
Did they fear English would be favouring the British?
It also made no sense. The British were not a very influential member state (since they did not much want to be in the EU anyway), they just happened to have spoken English first, no one had been forced to follow suit.
One day I asked a history teacher in my school who knew much more about those things than I did.
His explanation did make sense-- and that's one of those things that I could never have figured out on my own.
He said that when the EU was created, one of their main concerns was to create an entity that would balance the power of the US-- economically, because business was what it was all about-- but also symbolically.
The new EU was not in any way to give the impression that it was dependent on American choices, and choosing their language would have been giving the wrong signal!
Anyway, this is over 30 years later, the EU has proved what it could do, but doesn't it feel good to cling to the principles of the Founding Fathers?
Of course, all member states strongly encourage everybody to learn English, for the purpose of doing business with Canada and spending one's holidays in Australia.
Except this is not really true any more. Unless, you are a white American.
I could never see the French giving up French. Isn't there a rule about importing English words into the French vocabulary? It just is not done?
Do you know that there is a significant number of people in America who believe the EU and the stars represent part of the fullfillment of the prophecy regarding the "end times?"
Can you see an example of French being "given up" in the examples given
above?
Having a language for international relations does not mean the national languages are any less used (nationally) than before.
Having a EU official language is not being pro English or anti-French: as I said with the example of the firemen, this is what people are already doing spontaneously, and they're unlikely to switch to Latin to be PC.
Quote:
Isn't there a rule about importing English words into the French vocabulary? It just is not done?
This is independent of whether a European common language is felt to be needed. French will go on and l'Académie Française makes sure that it stays pure. I am not opposed to this.
What it means in practise is that whenever a new electronic gadget is invented we first learn the English word because that's all there is. The Academie may be a little slow to give the word that they have chosen for official French, but when they announce it, you've got to use it in shops and on French internet sites to buy the object.
Very often it's a variant of the English word, sometimes not.
For example: e-mail became "mèl" or "courriel" 'courrier électronique"
So they just don't want new words to be taken into French without their thinking about it.
For daily life people mostly go on using the English word because they learnt it first. But very often they're close, for example, most people think that "mail" is prononced "mèl" so you can't telll which one they are using, and , apart from some purists, nobody cares much, and it's not such a big load of words.
I don't mind, one way or another.
I had never heard of the prophecy you referred to, I'm sure the number of Europeans who know about it must be very small.
So, here is the kind of nonsense some people choose to study during their free time:
Quote:
The European Union’s influence is growing at a phenomenal rate. Soon its economy will, it is predicted, eclipse that of the U.S. in almost every category. It is a beast just about to be released upon an unsuspecting world.
I don't know whether to laugh or feel sad when faced with the amount of ignorance and stupidity shown in the site below. Oh well, let's laugh:
Yes, that site does a good job of explaining the scourge that the EU will be. My guess is our President probably has given it serious consideration also.
No, I don't see French being given up, but I always thought to truly understand a language, one has to speak it, even dream in it. That is a level of immersion that I would not see happening in France. Yet your point is correct in that a basic comprehension is all that would be needed for basic technical conversations such as firemen. I do not think high level diplomatic discussions in English would work out very well.
The communications equipment from different countries not being compatible is not a surprise. Where I live they plan metro area responses to a 9/11 type incident. We all live within kilometers of each other and most of the equipment was not compatible. The US Airforce, in our adventure in Bosnia, had to use their personel cell phones to communicate with our allies and other units.
Do I have European roots. Yes, of course. I am German/English primarily. We did the National Geographic DNA analysis for my daughter on her Mothers side. Interesting, the tribal migration in Europe and how certain DNA types remain in pockets to this day.
I have a bad foto on my Amazon page if your interested.
I always thought to truly understand a language, one has to speak it, even dream in it. That is a level of immersion that I would not see happening in France
We do not need a high level of immersion for a language to function as a lingua franca. Citizens of Scandinavia, the Netherlands or Germany often have a good command of English (by which I don't mean reading Nabokov) and southern countries are still a bit behind, though (having started from a very low level) they've made great strides.
As for dreaming in a foreign language (let alone the business language of the EU) I've never read studies in which it is explained that people dream in several languages. Does this happen?
Quote:
Yet your point is correct in that a basic comprehension is all that would be needed for basic technical conversations such as firemen. I do not think high level diplomatic discussions in English would work out very well.
It's not a question of what "would" work, it's a matter of what has been happening behind the scenes since the 1970's.
As I said, do you think they speak Latin in the corridors?
Those are educated people. Their pronunciation might be dreadful (so they wouldn't want to give a speech in English) but a lot takes place in one-to-one conversations.
I read Valery Giscard d'Estaing's Memoirs, and he said that in the 70's all these important talks with Chancellor Willy Brandt were taking place informally, while driving in a car for example, and always in English.
You'd have be be very persuasive to make me believe that they've all switched to Ancient Greek since the 70's.
English is what happens naturally, for the very reason that it is EASY.
That's what individuals naturally go to, not asking themselves whether it's subserviance to the US or whether they're fluent in English.
When I first went on students' exchange to Germany in the 1970's, my German friend and I spontaneously spoke English, because it was much less effort than her speaking French or me speaking German. I spoke German with the older generations.
I've seen this happening with students ' exchanges between France and Spain, though I don't know whether English would be chosen a lot in such circumstances.
Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 7:38 am Post subject: Loving the USA?
President Carmacho said that he had read my journal, and then added "You don't like the US."
Not something I can answer in just a few sentences, so here is my long reply.
Introduction: I will end this post with my best memories from my year in California, in case the beginning looks like I'm in for a grumbling session.
Sometimes when you compare two cultures, the result is just funny: I related one such example in the fun and humour threads, as "Ophelia goes to America: the driving licence."
A lot of Europeans have a love/ hate relationship to the US. Many things frighten them (for the reason that the bad things btend not to stay in the US: two days ago we had a school "stabbing" in France when a pupil wanted to avenge himself on his classmates, having picked a few good ideas on TV from the States). Some things about the States also attract people (often what is fast and flashy, not necessarily the best the country has to offer).
As far as ideas are concerned, you have already guessed that I feel much more at ease in Europe, where I feel the average person is much more tolerant. I feel uneasy when a large number of people are ultra conservative and there is a pressure to conform.
As far as my experience of life in the US is concerned, it was shaped to a great extent by the fact that I went there to work. Those of my friends who went to visit friends or as tourists over several months got a different impression and had positive experiences.
Most of the foreign exchange terachers I met through the Fullbright programme had, like me, mixed feelings, because working in a different culture introduces a stress factor.
My experience of the US was shaped by very mundane things like:
1- The exchange stipulated that I had to live in my exchange partner's house. She lived in Oceanside, and the school was in San Diego, so I drove one hour in the morning and one hour in the evening.
I'm somebody who has always made a point of living close to my work place .
2- School in France starts at various times of the day for teachers, the earliest being 8 am, but that would only happen to you once or twice a week.
I started work at 7 am in San Diego.
I didn't feel like complaining about point 2, that was just life, although I found out that this was early even for American schools.
The part about the house was really a drag, I didn't need that house, I could easily have afforded to rent one ( I saw that houses and condos were sprouting from the earth all the time in San Diego), and Oceanside itself had no attraction for me.
So I spent most of the year adapting my inner clock, trying to go to bed at 9 pm instead of 11 or 12, and never really succeeding-- It's amazing the amount of time it takes to adjust completely. I made progress towards the end.
As a result I was often tired and a little grumpy-- I say all this because I think it must have coloured my perception of every day events .
Before I conclude this first part: the people I met in my everyday life were invariably kind and helpful.
