Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Magyaróra
Seriously, how could I miss that Magyaróra has an English interface and that it's full of useful stuff like this? I'm currently reading about coffee, appropriately enough at my coffee job! If my hands were normal I would write loads, but they aren't so... I'll be back later with more French posts.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
AAH!
Look what I found today at the best immigrant shop in this part of town! They must be new imports, and the guy in the cash register even asked us what the гречка was used for.
Somewhat pricey, yes, but who cares, квас! Yay! (I must start making my own...)
Now, cooking suggestions?
Mes lectures
Cette fois j'aimerais, de façon tout à fait désordonnée, parler de deux de mes lectures qui me plaisent beaucoup. C'est uniquement en écrivant cela que je me rends compte qu'il s'agit en fait de deux des livres des soeurs Brontë ! Je n’y avais même pas pensé.
Quand j'avais 15 ans, j'ai lu « Les Hauts De Hurlevent » en anglais : c'était pour moi quelque chose de nécessaire, car je pensais que c'était un livre que tout le monde avait lu et dont tous connaissaient l'histoire. J’avais toujours entendu les noms des grands classiques anglais, c’était la même chose que de savoir le nom de la reine du pays. Oui, je vivais dans un tout autre monde (celui de ma mère professeur d'anglais et de suédois) et j'allais être très déçue avec l'autre monde par la suite. Je le suis toujours, et le fait que je suis un genre de misanthrope rend probablement ce livre encore plus parfait pour moi (comme tous les livres des Brontës). De toute façon, et cela est même un peu drôle, je le lisais pour la première fois quand mes mains commençaient à me poser des problèmes (tendinite), ce qui est aussi le cas maintenant.
À l'époque, je considérais que c'était très important de lire les classiques. Je ne les considérais pas comme des livres ordinaires et ce n'était pas très important qu'ils soient tout le temps super intéressants ; ils avaient le droit d'être légèrement ennuyeux ! Je me souviens que je trouvais que le livre était quelque peu lent, mais je m'attendais à cela, ce n'était rien d'étonnant. Par contre, je ne pensais jamais à la langue, je ne pensais jamais à des mots inconnus (quoiqu'il y en avait certainement), je le lisais tout simplement, et au milieu vient ce chapitre, dont certainement tous qui ont lu le livre se souviennent, qui m’a complètement emportée et qui m'emporte toujours. Par la suite, je n'ai pas pu ne pas aimer ce roman. Complètement impossible. Désormais, c'était mon livre :-)
Maintenant je lis ce livre en russe - et j'ai l'impression de le lire depuis toujours (probablement parce que je lis un grand nombre de livres en même temps et il me faut beaucoup de temps pour les finir tous) - et j'arrive de nouveau à ce passage. Je comprends très bien que cette histoire m'a impressionnée quand j'avais 15 ans ; elle me laisse toujours dans un état... je ne sais quoi.
Je ne pense pas, par contre, que ce livre serait le même en suédois. Il y a quelque chose qui le rend plus puissant en langue étrangère. Quand j'ai commencé à le lire il y plus que 7 mois, j'ai fréquemment eu besoin de consulter le dictionnaire, mais maintenant, arrivée au milieu, il me suffit de m'y tourner deux fois par page ou même pas du tout. La lecture est très agréable et je suis tellement contente d'avoir décidé de lire « Les Hauts De Hurlevent » en russe.
Depuis quelques jours, je lis aussi « Jane Eyre » en texte parallèle hongrois -- anglais. Je ne sais pas exactement quand je l'ai lu, mais probablement à l'âge de 16 ans. Je ne l'ai pas du tout aimé comme le livre d'Emily, c'était beaucoup trop romantique, parfait et, à mon avis à l'époque, ridicule. Maintenant, je suis un peu plus cultivée et je sais apprécier le livre plus – ou disons que j’apprécie l'histoire ; je n'ai lu ce livre qu'une fois, mais j'ai vu le film plusieurs fois. Mais alors, je suis maintenant en train de le lire en hongrois ! En le lisant, c'est-à-dire en lisant les premières pages car c'est un procès très long, j'ai retrouvé beaucoup du plaisir de la lecture et de l'apprentissage des langues.
Quand je lis «Jane Eyre», je procède phrase par phrase. Je regarde la phrase hongroise pour voir si je peux comprendre quelque chose. D'habitude, je comprends quelques mots, mais c'est très rare que je comprenne la phrase entière. Ensuite, je regarde la phrase anglaise et je les compare : j'essaye de faire correspondre les adjectifs, les verbes, les noms. S'il y a plusieurs, c'est-à-dire s'il y a plusieurs adjectifs, j'utilise mon dictionnaire (et ça me rend très heureuse, je ne l'ai pas acheté pour rien :-)) et pour finir je souligne les mots correspondants dans les deux colonnes. J'utilise un autre stylo fluo pour souligner les faits grammaticaux dont je m'aperçois mais qui ne sont pas toujours très évidents pour moi : les suffixes, les affixes, les infixes... Je vais peut-être faire un effort pour apprendre ces mots aussi, mais je ne sais pas encore ;-)
Quel bonheur que les soeurs Brontë aient existé ! Elles m'aident à apprendre et le russe, et le hongrois !
Quand j'avais 15 ans, j'ai lu « Les Hauts De Hurlevent » en anglais : c'était pour moi quelque chose de nécessaire, car je pensais que c'était un livre que tout le monde avait lu et dont tous connaissaient l'histoire. J’avais toujours entendu les noms des grands classiques anglais, c’était la même chose que de savoir le nom de la reine du pays. Oui, je vivais dans un tout autre monde (celui de ma mère professeur d'anglais et de suédois) et j'allais être très déçue avec l'autre monde par la suite. Je le suis toujours, et le fait que je suis un genre de misanthrope rend probablement ce livre encore plus parfait pour moi (comme tous les livres des Brontës). De toute façon, et cela est même un peu drôle, je le lisais pour la première fois quand mes mains commençaient à me poser des problèmes (tendinite), ce qui est aussi le cas maintenant.
À l'époque, je considérais que c'était très important de lire les classiques. Je ne les considérais pas comme des livres ordinaires et ce n'était pas très important qu'ils soient tout le temps super intéressants ; ils avaient le droit d'être légèrement ennuyeux ! Je me souviens que je trouvais que le livre était quelque peu lent, mais je m'attendais à cela, ce n'était rien d'étonnant. Par contre, je ne pensais jamais à la langue, je ne pensais jamais à des mots inconnus (quoiqu'il y en avait certainement), je le lisais tout simplement, et au milieu vient ce chapitre, dont certainement tous qui ont lu le livre se souviennent, qui m’a complètement emportée et qui m'emporte toujours. Par la suite, je n'ai pas pu ne pas aimer ce roman. Complètement impossible. Désormais, c'était mon livre :-)
Maintenant je lis ce livre en russe - et j'ai l'impression de le lire depuis toujours (probablement parce que je lis un grand nombre de livres en même temps et il me faut beaucoup de temps pour les finir tous) - et j'arrive de nouveau à ce passage. Je comprends très bien que cette histoire m'a impressionnée quand j'avais 15 ans ; elle me laisse toujours dans un état... je ne sais quoi.
Je ne pense pas, par contre, que ce livre serait le même en suédois. Il y a quelque chose qui le rend plus puissant en langue étrangère. Quand j'ai commencé à le lire il y plus que 7 mois, j'ai fréquemment eu besoin de consulter le dictionnaire, mais maintenant, arrivée au milieu, il me suffit de m'y tourner deux fois par page ou même pas du tout. La lecture est très agréable et je suis tellement contente d'avoir décidé de lire « Les Hauts De Hurlevent » en russe.
Depuis quelques jours, je lis aussi « Jane Eyre » en texte parallèle hongrois -- anglais. Je ne sais pas exactement quand je l'ai lu, mais probablement à l'âge de 16 ans. Je ne l'ai pas du tout aimé comme le livre d'Emily, c'était beaucoup trop romantique, parfait et, à mon avis à l'époque, ridicule. Maintenant, je suis un peu plus cultivée et je sais apprécier le livre plus – ou disons que j’apprécie l'histoire ; je n'ai lu ce livre qu'une fois, mais j'ai vu le film plusieurs fois. Mais alors, je suis maintenant en train de le lire en hongrois ! En le lisant, c'est-à-dire en lisant les premières pages car c'est un procès très long, j'ai retrouvé beaucoup du plaisir de la lecture et de l'apprentissage des langues.
Quand je lis «Jane Eyre», je procède phrase par phrase. Je regarde la phrase hongroise pour voir si je peux comprendre quelque chose. D'habitude, je comprends quelques mots, mais c'est très rare que je comprenne la phrase entière. Ensuite, je regarde la phrase anglaise et je les compare : j'essaye de faire correspondre les adjectifs, les verbes, les noms. S'il y a plusieurs, c'est-à-dire s'il y a plusieurs adjectifs, j'utilise mon dictionnaire (et ça me rend très heureuse, je ne l'ai pas acheté pour rien :-)) et pour finir je souligne les mots correspondants dans les deux colonnes. J'utilise un autre stylo fluo pour souligner les faits grammaticaux dont je m'aperçois mais qui ne sont pas toujours très évidents pour moi : les suffixes, les affixes, les infixes... Je vais peut-être faire un effort pour apprendre ces mots aussi, mais je ne sais pas encore ;-)
Quel bonheur que les soeurs Brontë aient existé ! Elles m'aident à apprendre et le russe, et le hongrois !
Monday, June 22, 2009
Another link...
For those of you interested in reading as a means of learning a language, doooo check out this thread and download all the parallel text (complete books) that are of interest to you before the person who is uploading them gets banned from the Forum again. There are lots of different languages, Spanish, Russian, Polish, Italian, German, Japanese, Hungarian, French, Chinese, Csezh...
These texts are intended for Listening-Reading, but you can just read them on their own as well ;)
These texts are intended for Listening-Reading, but you can just read them on their own as well ;)
Sunday, June 21, 2009
For those learning Russian.
In July there will be a Russian Book Club at the HTLAL Forums. We are going to read short stories by Teffi. You can read more about it here and sign up on the Forum if you are not already a member ;) You needn't be very advanced to participate!
A funny article on Swedish pronunciation.
I really recommend everyone who studies Swedish, who is thinking about studying it or who has Swedish friends who speak funny English to read this very easy going article.
Some random extracts:
"Like Chinese, but mostly meaningless"
"To master the art of applying tones correctly in Swedish is not an easy task, and incorrect tonality sounds extremely ridiculous. For a foreign learner of Swedish it is better not even to try, but to apply the "flat" tone of Finland-Swedish, which is an accepted, easily understandable and well regarded Swedish dialect."
"As good as on the job --- Ass, good ass, on the yob."
Some random extracts:
"Like Chinese, but mostly meaningless"
"To master the art of applying tones correctly in Swedish is not an easy task, and incorrect tonality sounds extremely ridiculous. For a foreign learner of Swedish it is better not even to try, but to apply the "flat" tone of Finland-Swedish, which is an accepted, easily understandable and well regarded Swedish dialect."
"As good as on the job --- Ass, good ass, on the yob."
Friday, June 19, 2009
Pronunciation & ambiguity.
Pronunciation is always a hot topic. Most people have very strong views on it, and it's often a very important and difficult part of any language. Since I'm not really a big speaker, I find pronunciation a bit tedious, not to mention boring. But, I do realize the importance of it, and just like anyone else, I like a bit of self-torture, so by no means do I ignore the matter. However, I have been thinking about how good different people are at understanding people with shaky pronunciation (and I'd really like some comments on this matter, cause these are just speculations), so that's the matter I will discuss today: pronunciation, grammar vs. no grammar and ambiguity. I will do a more hardcore Pronunciation Exclusively post later.
Let's start with English speakers. Aren't they quite good at understanding various sorts of mistreated, bastardized versions of their language? Even if a word is pronounced wrong (which can, after all, easily happen in English), don't people usually understand which word it is? Or is it just non-natives who are good at this with other non-natives? When someone says a word to me in Swedish that sounds wrong, I think I automatically rely on spelling to find out what word he/she really meant. If the person said /kyrka/ I would realize that the intended word was /shyrka/, since it is after all spelled "kyrka".
Another possible factor in this is the difference between languages that rely on grammar for meaning, and languages that rely on context for it. Are those who speak grammar poor languages and who have to look to context a whole lot more apt at analysing the entire sentence to find the sense of it, rather than relying on perfect caption of the words? Now, take Russians. Their language is extremely clear in its structure, everything has it's specific shape in a specific function, you don't go around wondering "wait, who the hell is the subject really? and whose what are we talking about??" - if the sentence is correct, it is usually all understandable to begin with. Even I can understand tricky texts! The grammar makes it all possible, whereas in Swedish (and possibly in English too, although I have the impression that it is often punctuation which muddles things in English), you have to watch your tongue and make sure not to lose your interlocutor among your subordinate clauses.
Just to not lose everyone, let's take some examples from Wikipedia on Swedish "phrase braids" ;).
Chefen tycker jag är konstig. (Word to word: The boss thinks I am weird)
This can mean "The boss thinks I am weird" and "I think the boss is weird".
Imorgon vet jag vilken dag det är. (Word to word: Tomorrow I know what day it is)
This can mean "Tomorrow I will know what day it is" and "I know what day it is tomorrow".
Or this one from another source:
En ponny äter inte mer än en schäfer per dag.
A pony doesn't eat more than a german shepherd does every day.
A pony doesn't eat more than one german shepherd a day.
So, what I am trying to get at is that people whose native languages are ambigous ones, may be more attentive to context and logic to figure out the sens of sentences, than those who speak more strict languages. What do you think?
And here of course pronunciation plays a great role as well. Do you understand a sentence in your native language if something important in it is mispronounced? If the emphasis falls on the wrong syllable of a word or if the wrong tone/vowel length (for Swedish) is used, giving a whole other word? I think English folks are good at it since English is so widely spoken and exists in so many different variants. From what I can remember of my first time in France, the French were awful at it. I had the impression that if I said [e] instead of [ə] the word was completely incomprehensible for them.
Does anyone have any interesting experiences with this? From what I remember in Russia, I think people were quite good at understanding me despite my faulty emphasises, but then I did also mostly speak with someone I knew well, and who knew "my Russian" well, so it's hard to say.
Let's start with English speakers. Aren't they quite good at understanding various sorts of mistreated, bastardized versions of their language? Even if a word is pronounced wrong (which can, after all, easily happen in English), don't people usually understand which word it is? Or is it just non-natives who are good at this with other non-natives? When someone says a word to me in Swedish that sounds wrong, I think I automatically rely on spelling to find out what word he/she really meant. If the person said /kyrka/ I would realize that the intended word was /shyrka/, since it is after all spelled "kyrka".
Another possible factor in this is the difference between languages that rely on grammar for meaning, and languages that rely on context for it. Are those who speak grammar poor languages and who have to look to context a whole lot more apt at analysing the entire sentence to find the sense of it, rather than relying on perfect caption of the words? Now, take Russians. Their language is extremely clear in its structure, everything has it's specific shape in a specific function, you don't go around wondering "wait, who the hell is the subject really? and whose what are we talking about??" - if the sentence is correct, it is usually all understandable to begin with. Even I can understand tricky texts! The grammar makes it all possible, whereas in Swedish (and possibly in English too, although I have the impression that it is often punctuation which muddles things in English), you have to watch your tongue and make sure not to lose your interlocutor among your subordinate clauses.
Just to not lose everyone, let's take some examples from Wikipedia on Swedish "phrase braids" ;).
Chefen tycker jag är konstig. (Word to word: The boss thinks I am weird)
This can mean "The boss thinks I am weird" and "I think the boss is weird".
Imorgon vet jag vilken dag det är. (Word to word: Tomorrow I know what day it is)
This can mean "Tomorrow I will know what day it is" and "I know what day it is tomorrow".
Or this one from another source:
En ponny äter inte mer än en schäfer per dag.
A pony doesn't eat more than a german shepherd does every day.
A pony doesn't eat more than one german shepherd a day.
So, what I am trying to get at is that people whose native languages are ambigous ones, may be more attentive to context and logic to figure out the sens of sentences, than those who speak more strict languages. What do you think?
And here of course pronunciation plays a great role as well. Do you understand a sentence in your native language if something important in it is mispronounced? If the emphasis falls on the wrong syllable of a word or if the wrong tone/vowel length (for Swedish) is used, giving a whole other word? I think English folks are good at it since English is so widely spoken and exists in so many different variants. From what I can remember of my first time in France, the French were awful at it. I had the impression that if I said [e] instead of [ə] the word was completely incomprehensible for them.
Does anyone have any interesting experiences with this? From what I remember in Russia, I think people were quite good at understanding me despite my faulty emphasises, but then I did also mostly speak with someone I knew well, and who knew "my Russian" well, so it's hard to say.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
A Hungarian song.
Napoleon Boulevard is a cozy old Hungarian group that I like and listen to a lot (even though I can't follow the lyrics like... at all), and I thought I'd share one song here. I also thought it would be interesting to see how many words out of the lyrics I actually know, so I have put those in bold.
Játék
Egy játék megesett, jókat nevetett rajta egy tucat ember
Falnak szegezett arccal gyerekek várták ki esik el
Jó játék, hiszen nem volt tét, csak a sorrend nem dőlt el
Ha mégis volt, az az egy szempont: milyen a színe
Göndör hajadat, ében fekete bőröd ne takard el
Sárga a kezed, játszom veled is, kérlek ne szaladj el!
Ha Lou sírna, Johny elringat, Eduard majd énekel
Ha Ráhel fél ugye megbékél vele Michael.
Refr.:
Menekülnél, játszani kell
Szól a parancs: "Hajtsd végre!"
Menekülnél, túl nagy a tét
Mondd ki marad majd élve?
Láttam sebeket, asszony kezeket fegyvernehezékkel
Hosszú sorokon, fából faragott sírokon neve sincsen
Ha Lou sírna, Johny elringat, Eduard majd énekel
Ha Ráhel fél ugye megbékél vele Michael.
Refr.
Szép tömött sorrendben jönnek a katonák, zöld színű jelmezben
Kőkemény arccal, hogy mindenki megijed, látták a filmekben.
Refr. 2x
Játék
Egy játék megesett, jókat nevetett rajta egy tucat ember
Falnak szegezett arccal gyerekek várták ki esik el
Jó játék, hiszen nem volt tét, csak a sorrend nem dőlt el
Ha mégis volt, az az egy szempont: milyen a színe
Göndör hajadat, ében fekete bőröd ne takard el
Sárga a kezed, játszom veled is, kérlek ne szaladj el!
Ha Lou sírna, Johny elringat, Eduard majd énekel
Ha Ráhel fél ugye megbékél vele Michael.
Refr.:
Menekülnél, játszani kell
Szól a parancs: "Hajtsd végre!"
Menekülnél, túl nagy a tét
Mondd ki marad majd élve?
Láttam sebeket, asszony kezeket fegyvernehezékkel
Hosszú sorokon, fából faragott sírokon neve sincsen
Ha Lou sírna, Johny elringat, Eduard majd énekel
Ha Ráhel fél ugye megbékél vele Michael.
Refr.
Szép tömött sorrendben jönnek a katonák, zöld színű jelmezben
Kőkemény arccal, hogy mindenki megijed, látták a filmekben.
Refr. 2x
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Un manque de français...
Sorry folks ! I didn't get any notifications when I got comments (I thought that was automatic), so I never noticed them. I have replied to all comments now though ;)
----
Je dois admettre que pour écrire en français ici, il faut vraiment que je fasse un effort. L'envie ne me prend presque jamais d'écrire en français et si je dois écrire quelque chose confortablement, je choisirai toujours l'anglais... C'est en fait assez curieux que j'ai commencé à étudier les langues à un tel degré, étant donné que je n'ai jamais véritablement aimé la langue française, ma première langue « apprise ». Quand je fais du russe, du hongrois, c'est souvent avec grand intérêt et avec passion ; je veux apprendre de nouveaux mots, de nouvelles tournures, je veux lire plus de textes, etc. Pour le français, ça tombe bien que je le connaisse déjà, car comme ça je peux lire des classiques français dans l'original (la littérature contemporaine française ne m'intéresse presque pas du tout) et un tas de littérature francophone. Mais je n'aime pas la langue. Je pense que je l'aimais peut-être avant de partir en France, mais dix mois dans le pays ont vite tué cette flamme ;)
Je vois très rarement des films français, je ne regarde pas la télévision française, je n'écoute pas la radio française, je ne lis pas les nouvelles en français, etc. Les Français sont mystérieusement difficiles à trouver sur Internet, c'est comme s'ils n'existaient pas. J'ai finalement fini mes études de français à l'université... alors, quoi faire maintenant ? Comment (re)trouver un intérêt pour une langue?
Tout de même, c'est comme avec les enfants, si tu en as, tu en as. Il n'y a rien à faire, et il faut faire ce que tu peux de la situation. Après tout, le français est une langue qui est largement appréciée dans le monde. Ça ne doit pas être tellement difficile que ça de s'y intéresser !
D'ailleurs, sur le Forum il y a un sujet de discussion à propos de regretter d'avoir appris une langue. Heureusement, il n'y a pas trop de personnes qui regrettent avoir appris quelque chose et ce n'est pas vraiment le cas pour moi. Sans le français je n'aurai pas un Baccalauréat et je ne pourrais pas lire mes livres!
----
Je dois admettre que pour écrire en français ici, il faut vraiment que je fasse un effort. L'envie ne me prend presque jamais d'écrire en français et si je dois écrire quelque chose confortablement, je choisirai toujours l'anglais... C'est en fait assez curieux que j'ai commencé à étudier les langues à un tel degré, étant donné que je n'ai jamais véritablement aimé la langue française, ma première langue « apprise ». Quand je fais du russe, du hongrois, c'est souvent avec grand intérêt et avec passion ; je veux apprendre de nouveaux mots, de nouvelles tournures, je veux lire plus de textes, etc. Pour le français, ça tombe bien que je le connaisse déjà, car comme ça je peux lire des classiques français dans l'original (la littérature contemporaine française ne m'intéresse presque pas du tout) et un tas de littérature francophone. Mais je n'aime pas la langue. Je pense que je l'aimais peut-être avant de partir en France, mais dix mois dans le pays ont vite tué cette flamme ;)
Je vois très rarement des films français, je ne regarde pas la télévision française, je n'écoute pas la radio française, je ne lis pas les nouvelles en français, etc. Les Français sont mystérieusement difficiles à trouver sur Internet, c'est comme s'ils n'existaient pas. J'ai finalement fini mes études de français à l'université... alors, quoi faire maintenant ? Comment (re)trouver un intérêt pour une langue?
Tout de même, c'est comme avec les enfants, si tu en as, tu en as. Il n'y a rien à faire, et il faut faire ce que tu peux de la situation. Après tout, le français est une langue qui est largement appréciée dans le monde. Ça ne doit pas être tellement difficile que ça de s'y intéresser !
D'ailleurs, sur le Forum il y a un sujet de discussion à propos de regretter d'avoir appris une langue. Heureusement, il n'y a pas trop de personnes qui regrettent avoir appris quelque chose et ce n'est pas vraiment le cas pour moi. Sans le français je n'aurai pas un Baccalauréat et je ne pourrais pas lire mes livres!
Breathe in.
In the new number of the Swedish language magazine Språktidningen ("the language magazine") there is an article on the Northern Swedish [shoo], the "yes" that is pronounced while breathing in. It's a popular thing to use when parodizing northerners, for example saying that Northerners are so silent and economize their words to such a degree that they even use their inhalations in speech, but the article explains that people all over Sweden, Scandinavia and the World speak while breathing in. It's called "ingressive speech" and there's even a website about it, made by a Swedish linguist, ingressivespeech.info.
The article explains that this feature is especially common in Scandinavia (but [shoo] is only found in the North), and they mention a sound clip on the aforementioned site with a Faroese person pronouncing the whole phrase "I don't know" while breathing in. This felt very familiar, I do the exact same thing! And, being from the north, I have always used [shoo] (although mostly when I am in that environment), and it should really be written .jo.
Further, the article explains that .jo is really a variant of ja (Swedish "yes"), since Northerners use jo (equivalent of French "si", a "yes" reply to a negative question -- I find languages that lack that word really odd!) when they really mean ja. I had no idea I was doing this until a person from Stockholm remarked that I used the wrong word! But in the end, it's normal, it's dialect. And thus sacred, of course; dialects are like religions.
So:
ja = yes, reply to a positive question ("Do you like soup?")
jo = yes, reply to a negative question ("Don't you like soup?")
.jo = yes, reply to a positive question, and a little bit more...
However, it's not really that simple. You can't use .jo in all places where you could use ja, since it simply isn't powerful enough of a word. It's a word (or sound) that is used to show that you are listening, that you agree, and that you don't want to continue the conversation. It's a closing word (although I'm not sure I've ever used it as such). The article points out that it could be dangerous to answer .jo to "Do you love me?". It would, in my opinion, feel rather like you answered "yeah, I guess I do".
Whereas people in other places in Sweden don't use .jo, they still breathe in while speaking, notably when saying yes, thus .ja. I do remember listening to an Australian comedian who had some shows in Oslo last years and who found this hilarious (both for yes and no I think), so that proves that Norwegians sure do use it as well!
The article explains that this feature is especially common in Scandinavia (but [shoo] is only found in the North), and they mention a sound clip on the aforementioned site with a Faroese person pronouncing the whole phrase "I don't know" while breathing in. This felt very familiar, I do the exact same thing! And, being from the north, I have always used [shoo] (although mostly when I am in that environment), and it should really be written .jo.
Further, the article explains that .jo is really a variant of ja (Swedish "yes"), since Northerners use jo (equivalent of French "si", a "yes" reply to a negative question -- I find languages that lack that word really odd!) when they really mean ja. I had no idea I was doing this until a person from Stockholm remarked that I used the wrong word! But in the end, it's normal, it's dialect. And thus sacred, of course; dialects are like religions.
So:
ja = yes, reply to a positive question ("Do you like soup?")
jo = yes, reply to a negative question ("Don't you like soup?")
.jo = yes, reply to a positive question, and a little bit more...
However, it's not really that simple. You can't use .jo in all places where you could use ja, since it simply isn't powerful enough of a word. It's a word (or sound) that is used to show that you are listening, that you agree, and that you don't want to continue the conversation. It's a closing word (although I'm not sure I've ever used it as such). The article points out that it could be dangerous to answer .jo to "Do you love me?". It would, in my opinion, feel rather like you answered "yeah, I guess I do".
Whereas people in other places in Sweden don't use .jo, they still breathe in while speaking, notably when saying yes, thus .ja. I do remember listening to an Australian comedian who had some shows in Oslo last years and who found this hilarious (both for yes and no I think), so that proves that Norwegians sure do use it as well!
Friday, June 12, 2009
Norwegian women - dying for attention?
Someone made me aware of the fact that it was impossible to comment on my blog without having some sort of account, but now anonymous comments should also be possible. So go ahead, leave a comment!
---
Lately in Norway two rather... colourful women have shown up. They express what is seen (from a mainstream point of view) as outrageous opinions and I must admit that they are pretty courageous. Of course, they get picked on quite a lot, but what better way to get attention when you have no real skills?
First out was a charming lady named Nina Karin Monsen who is against homosexuals, non Christian living, etc. She claims that all children are born religious and that keeping them away from God (through, for example, god awful homosexual parents) is a sin. She actually got a 400 000 NOK (44 000€) price for her "contribution to a freer debate" in Norway, and she calls herself a "philosopher" and an "author", although judging from this review, she really is neither. (The title of the review is "Awarded impartiality" and it mainly deals with how incredibly poorly written her book is.)
Now, in Godless Norway, claiming that standardized Christian families is the norm and that all the rest are sinful libertines (or something like that) is most likely just going to make people laugh. However, for me it is quite offensive that she got such a large sum of money for something that anyone could have put together by just deciding to go against all modern day values in an open minded society. If it had been a well written, well presented - I saw her on TV once, she couldn't discuss or present anything in a coherent, concise way for the life of her - I would have been able to accept it. But dammit, we were better at these things in high school when we were assigned "opposite opinions" (from our own) and were made to speak against abortion or for death punishment, etc.
I do wonder how she would have been "greeted" in Sweden. I really, really doubt she would have gotten anywhere there. Norway is more conservative than Sweden, for those of you who thought the Scandinavian countries were all just one big country.
That's today's first outspoken Norwegian woman, let's continue with the second one.
It was actually today that we got the pleasure of discovering yet another such lady. Not the same opinions of course, this one is not really that blatantly religious and intolerant, but the idea is the same. Perhaps she also wants 44 000€ and decided to just change the message a bit? Her name is Hanne Nabintu Herland, she is Norwegian but grew up in different parts of Africa, and she is a [something] in Religious History with a focus on Islam. Do just click her name to see the picture, that alone would make most people a bit scared.
So, what is she talking about? Well, she completely understands why Norwegian men prefer Thai women or Russian women to Norwegian women; those women like sex and know how to cook! Let's take some quotes from the article (she said these things at a Christian meeting...):
"It's about time to give up the feminist struggle. There are so many horrible Norwegian women. Sometimes women should just be quiet and do what the man tells them to."
"Other cultures are better at training the women to satisfy the man sexually. Men need their sex, and women should take care to satisfy them."
Let's just say other religious people do not really support her whole heartedly, but at least a fair share of men who read that article of course thought she was spot on!
---
Lately in Norway two rather... colourful women have shown up. They express what is seen (from a mainstream point of view) as outrageous opinions and I must admit that they are pretty courageous. Of course, they get picked on quite a lot, but what better way to get attention when you have no real skills?
First out was a charming lady named Nina Karin Monsen who is against homosexuals, non Christian living, etc. She claims that all children are born religious and that keeping them away from God (through, for example, god awful homosexual parents) is a sin. She actually got a 400 000 NOK (44 000€) price for her "contribution to a freer debate" in Norway, and she calls herself a "philosopher" and an "author", although judging from this review, she really is neither. (The title of the review is "Awarded impartiality" and it mainly deals with how incredibly poorly written her book is.)
Now, in Godless Norway, claiming that standardized Christian families is the norm and that all the rest are sinful libertines (or something like that) is most likely just going to make people laugh. However, for me it is quite offensive that she got such a large sum of money for something that anyone could have put together by just deciding to go against all modern day values in an open minded society. If it had been a well written, well presented - I saw her on TV once, she couldn't discuss or present anything in a coherent, concise way for the life of her - I would have been able to accept it. But dammit, we were better at these things in high school when we were assigned "opposite opinions" (from our own) and were made to speak against abortion or for death punishment, etc.
I do wonder how she would have been "greeted" in Sweden. I really, really doubt she would have gotten anywhere there. Norway is more conservative than Sweden, for those of you who thought the Scandinavian countries were all just one big country.
That's today's first outspoken Norwegian woman, let's continue with the second one.
It was actually today that we got the pleasure of discovering yet another such lady. Not the same opinions of course, this one is not really that blatantly religious and intolerant, but the idea is the same. Perhaps she also wants 44 000€ and decided to just change the message a bit? Her name is Hanne Nabintu Herland, she is Norwegian but grew up in different parts of Africa, and she is a [something] in Religious History with a focus on Islam. Do just click her name to see the picture, that alone would make most people a bit scared.
So, what is she talking about? Well, she completely understands why Norwegian men prefer Thai women or Russian women to Norwegian women; those women like sex and know how to cook! Let's take some quotes from the article (she said these things at a Christian meeting...):
"It's about time to give up the feminist struggle. There are so many horrible Norwegian women. Sometimes women should just be quiet and do what the man tells them to."
"Other cultures are better at training the women to satisfy the man sexually. Men need their sex, and women should take care to satisfy them."
Let's just say other religious people do not really support her whole heartedly, but at least a fair share of men who read that article of course thought she was spot on!
Monday, June 8, 2009
English in Scandinavia.
Everyone in Scandinavia speaks English. Does that automatically mean you must or should use it whenever and wherever? I am rather unsure how common this is in other parts of the world, but whenever Scandinavians spend a fair amount of time in an English speaking environment and then come home, they always insist on using English in every other sentence. Victoria Silvstedt is a glorious example of this, and listening to her on TV is pure torture. She is, consequently, also parodized every now and then by other people on TV, notably by Christine Meltzer.
Anyway, the problem as I see it is that throwing English into your Swedish/Other Scandinavian language conversations with natives is a bit rude. Having half a sentence of English thrown at you all of a sudden may be a bit destabilizing (since you were after all expecting to hear another language with another set of sounds) and what are you supposed to reply anyway? I think it feels extremely weird to speak Swedish to someone who insists on speaking Swenglish, and what if your English isn't all that fabulous and you actually don't get what the person just said?
And how come Scandinavians always forget their native tongue as soon as they learn English? Do people of other nationalities do this as well? Or is it this eternal inferiority complex that seems to be rather unique to Scandinavia and that makes so many Swedes and Norwegians claim that they feel much "freer" when speaking English, that English is a much more practical language, that our Scandinavian languages just aren't good enough to really express oneself cause there are so few words. (Surely, this is something most people do much better in their second language in which they most certainly have a better command of the vocabulary! Actually I think the freedom of writing in another language is more a question of distancing oneself from the written text, making it feel less personal... )
Well, anyway, that was just a mini-rant to kick of my studying of the history of the Arab peoples. Totally unrelated, yes.
Anyway, the problem as I see it is that throwing English into your Swedish/Other Scandinavian language conversations with natives is a bit rude. Having half a sentence of English thrown at you all of a sudden may be a bit destabilizing (since you were after all expecting to hear another language with another set of sounds) and what are you supposed to reply anyway? I think it feels extremely weird to speak Swedish to someone who insists on speaking Swenglish, and what if your English isn't all that fabulous and you actually don't get what the person just said?
And how come Scandinavians always forget their native tongue as soon as they learn English? Do people of other nationalities do this as well? Or is it this eternal inferiority complex that seems to be rather unique to Scandinavia and that makes so many Swedes and Norwegians claim that they feel much "freer" when speaking English, that English is a much more practical language, that our Scandinavian languages just aren't good enough to really express oneself cause there are so few words. (Surely, this is something most people do much better in their second language in which they most certainly have a better command of the vocabulary! Actually I think the freedom of writing in another language is more a question of distancing oneself from the written text, making it feel less personal... )
Well, anyway, that was just a mini-rant to kick of my studying of the history of the Arab peoples. Totally unrelated, yes.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Something a bit more fun.
A bottle of Marques de Monistrol 2004 (the kind of slightly more expensive wine that I can only afford at TaxFree) and My First Dictionary could keep me amused for a very long time. Enjoy!
Mini immersion.
My book acquisitions (plus two books I already had), my lovely матрушка and the adorable notebook Aleksey and Lilja (if I'm not mistaken) made.
So I spent two weeks in the splendid country of Russia. I will make a post later on about the things I love about it, but today it's about the language immersion I got.
I have never actually been on a mini immersion before. I was in the US for two weeks twice when I was 7 and 10 and I do believe that greatly helped my English, but it was too long ago to remember much and I was very unconscious about the whole language aspect since English was never a difficulty back then. Then I was in France for ten months in 2004/2005 and for two weeks in 2007, but that second period was of no importance since the long immersion did all the work. I had never visited a Russian speaking country before though, nor truly spoken to "real" Russians.
When I studied French and first went to France, I thought the whole having to accord adjectives to nouns and conjugate verbs thing was a hassle. In Swedish, you just need to know the words in order to use them, there are practically no things that need changing! Well, Russian is somewhat worse, it's quite a feat to try to put together a correct sentence while remembering all the cases. In writing that is not such a big problem for me, I am more of a visual "text person", I see the case endings and the grammar structures, but I do not feel them when I speak. Also, when writing you have more time to accord things, even if you write fast ;) Speaking is… well… difficult. I'm not really at the point where I can use cases comfortably in speech yet; I have to constantly correct myself as I go along and realize that whoops, no, that feminine word should have no ending in plural genitive, or just simply damn, how on earth is this word declined in plural dative?? Sometimes, I just decide to drop trying to use the correct case for a word and just employ the nominative form in order to actually say something and not just stand there thinking about declination tables while the other person confusedly waits…
However, I'm really bad at the whole speaking part of languages. Mainly, I guess, because I never really liked talking at all and I have always talked very, very fast, most likely from fear of being interrupted (something that is a bad thing in Sweden, interrupting is impolite, it doesn't work as in France where you just cut people off all the time). And as I have always been told in school and elsewhere to "SLOW DOWN!" I think I ended up feeling uncomfortable speaking and preferred to just shut up instead. When I speak French and English I also speak very fast, and when I try to speak Russian, I automatically go into a too high gear and make things harder for myself since that gives me less time for conscious grammar coordination. When I've had a couple of beers, my language self-awareness goes down a notch, like for everyone else, and I feel much more comfortable speaking. So, in that way, Russia being like Russia is is a good thing.
So, what can two weeks do? It surely makes the language feel much more familiar and "normal", not like an oddity that you only listen to at home. I'm not sure I got very, very far as far as it comes to speaking abilities, simply because I didn't speak all that much. It rather felt as if I was getting worse as time went by, because some people seemed to think I understood nothing of what they said and then that made me nervous about speaking to them. I spoke with much more ease with certain people (some are so easy to understand, others just emit Russian sounds), and with some others, I more or less felt retarded language wise. It is also quite hard to speak to people who have no conception at all of language learning. They don't understand why you mix up cases and they don't understand when you are trying to find the right case. Such people also tend to complete your sentences once they have understood what you are trying to say, and of course that makes for less speaking practice ;) Those who have ever looked at their language from the viewpoint of someone learning it will react in a whole different way.
Another aspect of Russian that made things trickier in "real life" situations, are all (and there are quite a lot of them) the small words they use that don't really mean that very much. Так, вот, там etc. Once I just stopped listening when one person was talking and started counting "там" or "так":s (I can't remember which one it was), and there were at least 2 per sentence. Some people naturally use more such words than others, and they break up the logic of the phrase, making it harder to understand.
Most people say that you need to wait a bit to get the full effect after an immersion, so I'll wait and see what happens. Russian sure does feel more comfortable than before I left. In my head, it is very clear. I can hold long conversations with myself in my head and I don't screw up a whole lot at all, but as soon as I have to open my mouth, I start to stumble on syllables that seemed absolutely clear and simple. Not because they are necessarily hard to pronounce, but my speech rhythm and everything get completely thrown off when I have to produce the actual words. I always wonder why on earth did that phrase turn out that chopped up and weird, paused and awkward, when it seemed to easy and clear in my head? I think my main pronunciation problem is caused by the soft consonants, that I can often pronounce when isolated, but that I forget aaaaall about when I'm in panic about trying to tell someone about something before they lose interest. I do not mind at all having a different intonation pattern or an accent, but I do mind when I think I should be able to say something in a certain way, and then it turns out just… weird.
Well. Go Russia!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)