com>
Organization: Toronto FreeNet
Distribution: 

Hermes ) wrote:
: On Sat, 24 Jun 1995, Wally Keeler wrote:
: > CanaDADA. SHE said, "You are an ornery old coot Mark. You are destined to 
: > be a flamer with as much power as a worn out Bic. The world needs you as 
: > a bad example, so fathers can tell their children, 'See, you don't want 
: > to grow and be like that - cynical.'"

: Ok, Mr. Keeler Sir ! You find me in a rare moment of good mood and 
: compassion !
: I am posting this, and perhaps it will get some input. I sugest that we
: adopt you. You will become an  asimilated Rrromanian, for you have met 
: all the prerequisites, you posess all the accoutrements !
: and since I came up with the idea, I get to translate (romanize) your name.
: Hence you shall be known as Vasile Ucigasu !  I am you 'nas' and you are my
: 'finul' ; A relationship a little bit like that amongst the Yakutza, you 
: are in my debt now !
: m.c.

Here's your 5 lei, now I'm out of debt. I'd prefer Vasoline Alley instead 
of Va Silly Bambino. You remind of a Canadian poet, Al Purdy, who wrote 
this wonderful poem about a drunkard, staggering out into the darkened 
meadow and "pissing at the stars and failing magnificently.

Next time you're in Canada, look me up. We'll go climb a glacier, suck some 
snow and laugh at those watered down USAmericans a.k.a. Canadians
-- 
Wally Keeler					Poetry
Creative Intelligence Agency			is
Peoples Republic of Poetry			Poetency

In article >,
T. Kocsis  > wrote:

>Igen, sőt nekem úgy rémlik még igen sokáig, mondhatni
>túl sokáig miniszter maradt (Szálasi-éra ?).

Kosz, en csak valami olyasmire emlekszem, hogy szegeny Homan ehenhalt az
ostrom alatt.

P.J.

Wolfgang Rackebrandt ) wrote:
: T. Kocsis > writes:

: >The Hungarian higher level
: >structure -sentence- does not have so strict arrangement rules, 

: Hungarian is not my mothertongue, and therefore I am, ofcourse, by far 
: not as competent as a native speaker, but according to my experience I 
: must say: Oh yes, it does.

: >you are
: >allowed placing the units quite liberaly together as you like it.

: You are not. 

: It is true that a lot of possible combinations of the single elements of 
: a Hungarian sentence are grammatically correct, like:

:           Bemegy a tanar a tanterembe.
:           A tanar megy be a tanterembe.
:           A tanterembe megy be a tanar.

: BUT: You are not allowed to combine the elements freely, because each of
: the above combinations means something else.

Well, sometimes it does make a difference, sometimes it doesn't.
For example,
	A kutya la'tja az embert.
	Az embert la'tja a kutya.
both mean the same thing and both would be translated as: The dog sees 
the man.

: The word order in Hungarian
: follows the thema-rhema-constellation (whatever that is in English) of the
: sentence. This constellation is something that is given, it cannot be
: chosen by the speaker. 

: Hungarians very often tend to think that word order in their language is
: free, and this is probably due to the above mentioned fact that a lot of
: the possible combinations of the single elements of a sentence are
: grammatically correct and semantically plausible. They are usually not
: aware of the thema-rhema-determination of word order, unless the
: difference in meaning of the different varieties is pointed out to them. 

While in many instances this is true,  SVO can usually be changed to 
OVS with no change in the meaning.  There is a subtle difference
between the aforementioned sentences, but that's largely unrelevant.

In article > T. Kocsis > writes
:
>**1:
>Országh László
>Angol-Magyar Szótár:
>say- fn, mondás, mondóka
[...]
>saying-n.  kijelentés, mondás

Első nagy hiba: hiszel a magyar szótáraknak. Hidd el, van tapasztalatom:
a létező francia-magyar szótárak még rosszabbak, mint az angol-magyar
szótárak!
-- Olivier

Webster szerint <http://c.gp.cs.cmu.edu:5103/prog/webster>:

2. say \'s a-z, South also ' sez\ n or says pl archaic 1: something that is
said : STATEMENT 2: an expression of opinion { had his ~} 3: a voice
that decides or helps decide : 3a: COMMAND 3b: VOTE 

say. ing \'sa--in, 'se-\ n : something said; esp : ADAGE

02 ) wrote:
:  () writes:
:  Thank you for these poems, Joe!! 
: >Can you feel the similar rhythm in both the original and the
: >translation?

:  Well... maybe my English pronunciation is not that good but I do find 
:  "faults" and I sense difficulties in finding the hexameters. While in
:  Hungarian those hexameters are very easy to find.
:  Could someone mark the syllables for me at least in one of the verses?? 
:  ( Please, Wally, you're our local poet.. :-)) )

: >Joe Pannon

:  Regards,
:  Pm
: >----
:  Miklos Prisznyak   (KFKI RMKI Theor. Dep. Budapest, Hungary H-1525 P.O.B 49)
:                      WWW page:    http://sgi30.rmki.kfki.hu/~prisz/prisz.html
 


I can give it a try, but I don't guarantee the results. Which verse? The 
reason I am uncertain is because you are asking for a mechanical 
analysis, an academic exercise, and aside from eschewing such matters, I 
am not competent in it. I read the poem and can "feel" the rythmn, and 
you are right when you say there appears to be some awkward moments in it 
-- this may have something to do with Poe's individual rhythmns, and also 
of the rhythmns of British English at the time along with a blending of 
Boston accented English; JFK had a distinct rhythm to his speech. My 
particular English is what is referred to here as "broadcast English" 
This means that my pronunciation and rhythmns are largely one of clarity 
of enunciation and monotonal (sister of monotone a.k.a. monotony) At 
poetry readings my performance has always been described as having the 
quality of monotone, however I share this quality with one of Canada's 
greatest women poets, Margaret Atwood.

-- 
Wally Keeler					Poetry
Creative Intelligence Agency			is
Peoples Republic of Poetry			Poetency

>Avrum Iancu, you ole revolutionary you. Welcome back to SCR via
>Anon. Did you bump into your evolutionary mutation, Corny
>CodreAnus? He comes thru the Anon service also, so it would be
>logical to suspect you may be rhetorical buddies.

<<long Romanian nationalist call to arms deleted>>

There are multiple organizations that take the name of Avram
Iancu. He was a Romanian patriot and a great hero of our nation.

I happen to belong to one of them, the Avram Iancu society in
NY. It gets about as revolutionary as any insurance fraternal gets
and you know how nasty and dangerous those insurance fraternals
are. You are mixing up Codreanu with Iancu is more than a bit 
insulting to me but I guess, by now, I should cease to expect any
sort of apology for rude behavior on your part. Hey after all you're
a poet (as you keep insisting except when it turns inconvenient, 
then you're not).

Grow up, lurk a bit, get a bit more selective in your targets 
because you are starting to annoy me and unlike some of your other
targets I'm no brainless strawman.

DB


In the tradition of Publius, Cato, and Centinel...
Decius Brutus

Fellow netters,

Can anyone who attended the Morrocan party give a testimony of how it
went. From my experience here,a  morrocan party is not safe for anyone
to attend.

All the morrocans in Helsinki do is to fight, drink and smoke (all smokables).
They never hesitate to use knives and bottles.

Is the Washington experience different?

Oruogho.

In article >  (Wolfgang Rackebrandt
) writes:
>T. Kocsis > writes:
>>you are
>>allowed placing the units quite liberaly together as you like it.
>
>You are not. 
>
>It is true that a lot of possible combinations of the single elements of 
>a Hungarian sentence are grammatically correct, like:
>
>          Bemegy a tanar a tanterembe.
>          A tanar megy be a tanterembe.
>          A tanterembe megy be a tanar.
>
>BUT: You are not allowed to combine the elements freely, because each of
>the above combinations means something else. The word order in Hungarian
>follows the thema-rhema-constellation (whatever that is in English) of the
>sentence. This constellation is something that is given, it cannot be
>chosen by the speaker. 

Perfectly right. Theme = what it is about (introduction or afterthought),
rheme = what is said or emphasized. In the above example:

Given the four elements: be, megy, a tanár, a tanterembe - 24 possibilities.
                         1   2     3        4
Let us exclude 1 and 2 not adjacent (Megy a tanár be a tanterembe)
and order 2-1 without anything before (Megy be a tanterembe a tanár),
it leaves 10 possibilities.

Notation: (...) = introduction or part not in the main meaning (theme)
         ((...))= even more so
          _..._ = stress

If you want a stress: on the verb (1-2 in front), you choose a
weaker (...) among the rest:
_2_ (3)  4    ->   1243        _Bemegy_ a tanterembe (a tanár).
_2_  3  (4)   ->   1234        _Bemegy_ a tanár (a tanterembe).
on something else (order 2-1), you decide if there is a (...) part:
 2  _3_  4    ->   3214        _A tanár_ megy be a tanterembe.
 2  _3_ (4)   ->   4321        (A tanterembe) _a tanár_ megy be.
 2   3  _4_   ->   4213        _A tanterembe_ megy be a tanár.
 2  (3) _4_   ->   3421        (A tanár) _a tanterembe_ megy be.

If you want it neutral (so order 1-2): you choose one (...) part:
 2  (3)  4    ->   3124        (A tanár) bemegy a tanterembe.
 2   3  (4)   ->   4123        (A tanterembe) bemegy a tanár.
or two and you choose the weakest one:
 2 ((3))(4)   ->   3412        ((A tanár)) (a tanterembe) bemegy.
 2  (3)((4))  ->   4312        ((A tanterembe)) (a tanár) bemegy.

No more possibilities in normal speech: your hands are tied! What you choose
to say can be only what you want to mean! What a slavery, no freedom at all...

-- Olivier

 wrote:
: In article >,
: Wally Keeler > wrote:
: > What is in my interest to risk my son's life or the 
: >lives of many Canadian youths to defend the territorial integrity of 
: >Hungary. I ask this only because this is what it often boils down to.

: Fair point, but I might counter: what is Belgium or Italy to Canadians?
: Or any other European country for that matter? 
: Joe

Good counter. For the moment I can think that the only serious threat to 
Western democracy (with all of its flaws) comes from Russia. It is not a 
flacid noodle. It is heavily armed. It has historically proven itself to 
be brutal and aggressive, and expansionist. Currently NATO could do some 
heavy damage and Russia knows it. Enough time has passed that I don't 
think anyone in Russia would ever contemplate any military gesture 
against any of the established members of NATO. Belgium, Italy etc are 
well integrated economically, democratically, (Turkey, Greece, uh well 
uh) militarily. These are family members now. Hungary, Poland, Czech 
Republic share the same democratic cultural values (with several decades 
diversion from it, although not extinguished, happily) and consequently I 
would consider them good candidates for NATO membership. As the 
integration process continues, and that means the integration into the 
cultural consciousness of Canadians, Americans, etc, then you become a 
family member that I would permit my son's life to be risked. 

I also consider the chances that Russia would consider Belgium to lie 
within its sphere of interest as next to nil. The chances of Russia 
considering Hungary within its sphere of interest is greater -- to what 
degree I couldn't guess, and the likelihood of Russia acting on its 
interest is also an unknown. Therefore, there is exceedingly little risk 
of having to defend Belgium, as compared to the risk of having to defend 
Hungary. I would like to be more assured that such a risk is minimized 
below a thresehold. 

-- 
Wally Keeler					Poetry
Creative Intelligence Agency			is
Peoples Republic of Poetry			Poetency

In article > Wally Keeler,
 writes:
>I can give it a try, but I don't guarantee the results.

Don't waste time for it. The poor guy mixed up hexameter
with dactyls. The poem was definitely not written in
hexameters and its metrical foot is not dactilic.  I doubt
that the poem follows any (well-known) classic metrical
form.

Tamás

Hello,

I am on a scavenger hunt and I need a Scrabble tile worth 6,7, or 9
points.  I have been told that the 'cf' tile and perhaps the 'y' tile
in the Hungarian version of the game have one of those point values.

I would be grateful if I could borrow, buy, or trade you for a tile.
If you loan me the tile, I can return it to you in November.  I would also
be willing to purchase the tile from you, and in any case to reimburse your
postage.

Can anyone out there help me?

Eternal thanks,
Dawn

Janos Szamosfalvi writes:

> Well, sometimes it does make a difference, sometimes it doesn't.
> For example,
> 	A kutya la'tja az embert.
> 	Az embert la'tja a kutya.
> both mean the same thing and both would be translated as: The dog sees 
> the man.

Hmmm. Would it not be "The dog sees the man." and "The man is seen by the 
dog"? Similar minor, but noticable difference.

Regards,Jeliko

In article >  (J
anos Szamosfalvi) writes:
>	A kutya la'tja az embert.
>	Az embert la'tja a kutya.
>both mean the same thing and both would be translated as: The dog sees 
>the man.
>[...]  There is a subtle difference
>between the aforementioned sentences, but that's largely unrelevant.

That is exactly what it is about: supposing a neutral sentence (no stress
on the part before _la'tja_), first sentence is the more frequent situation
of subject = theme, second sentence has the object as introduction (theme):
  - you will say something about the man
  - then you say it: the dog sees him
How you say it depends on how you see it, on what you are or were primarily
speaking about (the dog or the man), you do not choose randomly.

Order is not "free" more than it is in English, the only thing is that
there are many more possibilities, which express distinctions that English
either does not express (they are implicitly understood just like _engem_
"me" in _Szeretsz?_ "do you love me?"), or express in other ways, not by
word order.

-- Olivier

In article > "Jeliko" > writes
:
>You are wrong, you have left out the combinations of: Megy be.....,like
>Megy be a tanar a tanterembe, Megy be a tanterembe a tanar.

I wanted to keep it easy :-) No, in fact, I could not see very clearly its
use as compared with an emphatic _bemegy_ in its place (in opposition to
_kimegy_): perhaps in opposition to _jo~n_?... Soon you will build up a
little story to give a possible context for _Megy a tanar be_... :-)
This will lead us far: 4 words, 4!=24 combinations! (I kept 10)
-- Olivier

Olivier writes:
> Perfectly right. Theme = what it is about (introduction or afterthought),
> rheme = what is said or emphasized. In the above example:

> Given the four elements: be, megy, a tanár, a tanterembe - 24 
possibilities.
>                          1   2     3        4
> Let us exclude 1 and 2 not adjacent (Megy a tanár be a tanterembe)
> and order 2-1 without anything before (Megy be a tanterembe a tanár),
> it leaves 10 possibilities.

> Notation: (...) = introduction or part not in the main meaning (theme)
>          ((...))= even more so
>           _..._ = stress

> If you want a stress: on the verb (1-2 in front), you choose a
> weaker (...) among the rest:
> _2_ (3)  4    ->   1243        _Bemegy_ a tanterembe (a tanár).
> _2_  3  (4)   ->   1234        _Bemegy_ a tanár (a tanterembe).
> on something else (order 2-1), you decide if there is a (...) part:
>  2  _3_  4    ->   3214        _A tanár_ megy be a tanterembe.
>  2  _3_ (4)   ->   4321        (A tanterembe) _a tanár_ megy be.
>  2   3  _4_   ->   4213        _A tanterembe_ megy be a tanár.
>  2  (3) _4_   ->   3421        (A tanár) _a tanterembe_ megy be.

> If you want it neutral (so order 1-2): you choose one (...) part:
>  2  (3)  4    ->   3124        (A tanár) bemegy a tanterembe.
>  2   3  (4)   ->   4123        (A tanterembe) bemegy a tanár.
> or two and you choose the weakest one:
>  2 ((3))(4)   ->   3412        ((A tanár)) (a tanterembe) bemegy.
>  2  (3)((4))  ->   4312        ((A tanterembe)) (a tanár) bemegy.

> No more possibilities in normal speech: your hands are tied! What you 
choose
> to say can be only what you want to mean! What a slavery, no freedom at 
all...

You are wrong, you have left out the combinations of: Megy be.....,like
Megy be a tanar a tanterembe, Megy be a tanterembe a tanar.

"Words of the World Unite. You can loose nothing but your meaning."

Regards,Jeliko

What's your point Francis? Are you curious about Moroccan parties or are
just a natural born jerk?

mar.tex.mek.dal
/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=
/=/
                       We dispense information on a need to know basis
/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=
/=/
All information, views, theories, strategies, and plans expressed in this
post are mine and the divulgence of any of their substance without my
prior written consent is strictly prohibited. Violators will be
prosecuted.
/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=
/=/

In > 
(Francis O Akenami) writes: 
>
>Fellow netters,
>
>Can anyone who attended the Morrocan party give a testimony of how it
>went. From my experience here,a  morrocan party is not safe for anyone
>to attend.
>
>All the morrocans in Helsinki do is to fight, drink and smoke (all
smokables).
>They never hesitate to use knives and bottles.
>
>Is the Washington experience different?
>
>Oruogho.
>
  Mr Francis posting such a racist bigoted statement that describes a
entire people in such manner makes you THE racist/bigoted/biased FLAG
BEARER of internet, especially that you posted it to all newsgroups.

In article > "Jeliko" > writes
:
>> 	A kutya la'tja az embert.
>> 	Az embert la'tja a kutya.
[...]
>Hmmm. Would it not be "The dog sees the man." and "The man is seen by the 
>dog"? Similar minor, but noticable difference.

Exactly what I meant, but I have not been so clear, I forgot English has
this possibility of passive, unlike Hungarian.
-- Olivier

Kedves Miklos!

Ez az egesz talan az en hibam, illetve nem, mert Te
ertettel felre valamit. Minden esetre en emlitettem
eloszor a hexametereket (melyek valoban szinte lehetetlenek
angolul, csak Longfellow probalkozott egyszer meg veluk),
de maskulonben nem a hexameterekrol volt szo. Tehat
amikor Te hexametereket kerestel (pl. az "Annabel Lee"
cimu versben), akkor egy "wild goose chase"-re mentel,
ahogy ezt angolul mondjuk. Persze ennek a Kocsis nevu
illetonek nem kellett volna ugy rad "tamadni." (Beke,
Kocsis pajtas . . . ) Minden esetre Te, Miklos, jol
szoltal hozza az en elso hozzaszolasomhoz, vagyis a 
magyar nyelv zenejehez (amit, szerinted akkor is hallhat
az ember ha eppenseggel Magyarorszagon is el, csak
kell egy kis faradtsag a dologhoz . . . ) Minden esetre
azota megneztem a Home Page-edet is, gratulalok, egy
nagyszeru valami. 

Ebben az egeszben az az erdekes, hogy hogy is kezdemenyezodnek
a felreertesek. Ez mindkettonk erdeklodesi korebe eshet, nekem
mert en irodalom tanar vagyok, tehat az ertes/felreertes 
"osszefuggesei" mindig is fontos szempontoknak szamitanak,
Te viszont fizikus vagy . . . kulonben bizonyara ismered
a "Chaos" elmeletet is, ami engem is nagyon erdekel . . . 

Na jo, hat engedd meg, hogy barati udvozletem kuldjem
innen messzi del-nyugat Indianabol . . . 

Pista

vendegunk javara kb 10-20 kg csirke paprikast s 10-20 vodor gulya'st foztunk 
amely jo zabalast ad... ja tudom, lehet szekely gulyas, toltot kaposzta, rakot 
krumpli, rizses csirke, lecso, lencse leves, szilva gomboc, stb... de! nagyon 
szeretne'k ami csala'dtagnaimnak igazi "mada'r tejet" ke'szitenni! sajnos 
el-felejtetem a pontos receptet.. toja's fehe'rt vizbe forasztani... 
sa'rga'jat cukorba keverni... valaki aki tudja... le'gy szives megadni az 
igazi receptet...

ko:sz

ja'nos

Liviu Iordache writes:    (Sorry for the delay I was busy trying to make a 
living)
> Jeliko writes:

> >[...] It is also fairly evident from the text that
> >for dates prior to 943, it is following Byzantine
> >texts (or their Slavic translations)

> As the editors have clearly stated, pre-943 events,
> their chronology, and the name of the people involved
> in these events were borrowed, from Byzantine sources.

>           For example, the Chronicle of Georgius
>           Hamartolus is specifically referred to as a
>           source in the discussion of the various alien
>           races (page 57): "Georgius says in his
>           Chronicle [...]"

I think you are missing a significant difference. All indications are that 
Nestor (lets assume a name for the writer) folowed NOT original Greek 
chronicles but had access to a Slav translation (possibly Bulgarian)
of the Monachos, Hamarolus, etc. named chronicle or part of it. There is a 
fairly strong agreement on this by those studying in detail the Povest, 
particularly Shakmatov and Istrin. The translation is accepted to have been 
made in the XI century, thus it had to include the later times also. This 
is one of the reasons for the name changes.

> I think it is safely to assume that Nestor learned
> about Vlakhs and their whereabouts from these Greek
> sources. I am not aware of any Byzantine chronicler
> that referring to the Franks used the name Vlakhs.                       

No the Greeks at that time generally used Fraggoi, but neither did they use
Ougri for the Hungarians but they generally used Turkoi. So I may ask the 
same if you show me Ougroi for the Hungarians in the Greek chronicles, than 
I will show you Volochi or Volchi(the spelling in the Povest) for the 
Franks. :-). I think we can agree that there are significant changes in 
names in the Povest from that of the original Greek chronicles.

>At
> the same time, starting with the 8th century, numerous
> Byzantine documents have used the name Vlakhs for the
> romance-speaking shepherds of the Balkans, that is, for
> the ancestors of the Romanians, Aromanians, Istro-
> Romanians, and Megleno-Romanians. ( Perhaps for all Latin speakers)

I think the Volochi Vlakh differences between the Povest and the Greeks are 
outside this discussion, but may have some added factor.

> Therefore, the fact that Nestor's primary source is
> Byzantine strongly supports the assertion that his
> Vlakhs are not the Franks but rather the ancient
> Romanians.

It was as shown above an indirect thru Slavic source and other folk names 
were also Slavicized or changed.

> This is one of the issues you have eluded in your
> replay: Can you think of any Byzantine document that
> referring to the Franks calls them Vlakhs? As a matter
> of fact, can you quote ONE SINGLE document that
> unmistakably uses Vlakhs for the Franks?

As stated above we'll trade if you show Ougri in the Greek chronicles 
instead of Turkoi (or in some cases Ounnoi)


> >there is a "combination" of areas in the Tales for
> >later Hungarian and Bulgarian occupied territories of
> >previous Slav areas. As far as the Byzantines were
> >concerned...,

> Do you really suggest that is Hamartolus, or any other
> pre-896 Byzantine chronicler, the "voice"  that
> describes the areas where the Slaves had previously
> settled as "where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands NOW
> lie"?

Please remember that the so called "Hamartolus" [the sinner] Chronicle 
started by Georgius Monachos was continued by others with the maintenance 
of the same name until 948 (some claim until 963), as a matter of fact some 
refer to the chronicle as Georgius Continuatus for that reason. Thus it is 
very possible, and very likely that a Slavic translation used to excerpt by 
Nestor used the terms "where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands NOW lie", it 
did not have to be a statement from per 896, it could be all the way up to 
963 depending when the Slavic translation was made. Interestingly later 
(XIV century and thereafter)Slavic translation of the "Hamartolus" 
Chronicle switched back to Turkoi for the Hungarians.  

> The false underlying assumption here, a weakness I have
> already pointed to in my previous post, is that the
> geographical locations are copied literally from the
> Byzantine chroniclers and, therefore, these
> descriptions actually reflect late 9th century statal
> boundaries. If necessary, I'll rephrase the reasoning
> that proves this assumption is groundless and that the
> late 11th century compiler of the Russian Chronicle,
> Nestor, uses HIS OWN Present Tense in the above
> excerpt.

As stated above Hamartolus, the Chronicle is not Hamartolus the person in 
time frame. Hamartolus stopped writing the chronicle in 842 and others 
continued it under the same name. Please check background data on Georgius 
Monachos (and aliases) and the chronicle called Hamartolus. Thus the 
assumption is solely yours for the dating and does not support your above 
argument. A good study of the chronicle is by J.Hirsch Byzantische Studien, 
berlin 1876 and N. Popov Imperator Lev Mudrii i ego tsarstvovanie v 
tserkovnoistoricheskom otishenii. Mosva 1892. There are also numerous more 
recent articles relating to the subject.
But please check the Povest text, it lists events like for 852 "as written 
in the Greek Chronicle" so it was obviosly not the part that was written by 
Hamartouls himself (who died in 842) but the continuation that was used.

> >the Tales writer inserted the *Slavs* into Hamartolus'
> >text between "Illyria" and "Lychnitis and Adriaca".
> >then following the text "and territory to the north
> >extending as far as the Pontus and including the
> >Danube, the Dniester, and the Carpathian Mountains,
> >which are called Hungarian, and thence even to the
> >Dnieper" (page 52) Thus this area clearly does not
> >refer only to the lower reaches of the Danube.

> Well, it describes 1/3 from the known biblical Earth.
> However, in my opinion, of relevance is the fact that
> it is further strengthened the assertion that the
> comment on the alternative name of the Carpathians
> belongs to Nestor and not to Hamartolus.

> Nestor uses historical facts from Hamartolus (e.g., "as
> is written in the Greek chronicle" or "Georgius says in
> his Chronicle"), but for the geographical location of
> these events he uses late 11th century toponymy (e.g.
> "which are called Hungarian" or "where the Hungarian
> and Bulgarian lands now lie", and even more "from that
> time this territory was called Hungarian")

Again it your assumption that Nestor used his own time and not parts of the 
Slav translation of the "Hamartolus" chronicle continuing to the times when 
the events took place as is shown by the dates refered to "as writen in the 
Greek chronicle" long past Hamartolus' life.


> >[I am told that in this same page the translations
> >list *current* names for the French while the original
> >does not,

> Actually, it was you who claimed that earlier
> translators were puzzled because the Vlakhs were
> mentioned as living next to the land of the English
> and, therefore, someone replaced "the Vlakhs" with "the
> French" but omitted to use the same translation for the
> rest of the events that involving the Vlakhs.

I had indirect references that in places the "Volochi" of the Povest was 
translated into English in place as Vlakhs and in places as French. Rather 
than using indirect references I have ordered the facsimile of the 
original. The particular section is the one describing where the varios 
folks live starting with the "In the share of Japheth.... I can forward 
fotocopy upon arrival. Sory for waiting for the original source but I have 
run into problems in the past on "interpretations".


> >On the same page is the text "Over a long period the
> >Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian
> >and Bulgarian lands now lie." All the extant records
> >indicate that this was not only on lower Danube,

> At that time, when the Russian Chronicle was written,
> the boundary between the Hungarians and Bulgarians was
> along the lower Danube. The above description pertains
> not to the 9th but to the 12th century statal
> boundaries.

It refered to anytime after the Hungarian arrival while that was the border
and that starts with the later part of the IX century, (although The Life 
of Methodius discusses him meeting a Hungarian King on the Danube in the 
mid IX century.

> >Please note that there is no mention in any of these
> >sources of Vlachs for these early days.

> Ooooops! But the Franks were present, right? How were
> they called? Is there any document that calls them
> Vlakhs?

Try Volochs in the Povest including their location also further west (not 
south)

> In Byzantine documents from the epoch, Bulgarians are
> named "Moesians" or "Vlachs". This is considered as an
> indication that there must have been a considerable
> number of Vlachs living among Bulgarians, a fact that
> rises a very interesting possibility: Had Krum's
> Bulgarians once ruled over Transylvania, it follows
> that the Vlakhs ....:-)

I am aware of much later the Greek records calling a mixture of folks they 
battled as Vlakhs and Bulgars, but for the exact time period, as an example 
in Porphyrogenitus they are sure called Bulgars. The Povest has an 
intersting part where it states "rekshe Kozar, rekomin Bolgare" which means
"Khazars who are named Bulgar" just to confuse the issue further.

> to be continued

> Liviu Iordache
same here

Regards,Jeliko

In article >,
Steven C. Scheer > wrote:

>I also think that our Japanese friend
>was a bit coy, perhaps it's that mysterious oriental politeness. 
>All I know is that we Hungarian can shout and, boy, can we swear!

Indeed, and from Japanese movies (mostly from Kurosawa), or TV series,
such as Shogun, I got the impression that Japanese men can't even talk
in normal conversational voice; most of the time they sounded like drill
sargents, with that constant angry look as if they were going to chop off
somebody's head in the next moment.  No wonder Japanese women are
then so quiet. ;-)

Joe

Janos Szamosfalvi writes:

> : Hmmm. Would it not be "The dog sees the man." and "The man is seen by 
the 
> : dog"? Similar minor, but noticable difference.

> It's a possible translation, but I think the difference is a lot bigger 
> in English.    In any case, these sentences were printed in my 
> undergraduate text. (which had many errors, BTW :-).   

> But lets forget the context -- how would you translate each of these 
> sentences if you are presented _only one_, and you're not in the middle 
> of a linguistic debate about semantics?

Into Sumerian? :-) I have tried to scratch the screen but the sysmgr 
started screeming.

Have a nice fourth, Jeliko

I heard that a lot of people have had their luggage stolen when flying 
into Ferihegy airport.  Is this still a problem?  

Also, how much should it cost to take a taxi from the airport to the 
center of town?  Is there a way to ensure that you are not getting 
ripped off?

The shortwave program of the Hungarian Radio ( a generous contribution 
from Andrew Vadasz) can be found under the following URL on the WWW :

http://www.glue.umd.edu/~gotthard/HIR/Entertainment/Radio/

Andrew Vadasz also gives reception hints etc. Please, take a look at it 
and enjoy. Thanks Andrew ! 

(please, send Andrew or me an email if you would like to receive the 
 program by mail)

--
Hungarian-American list, mailto:  
WWW,                       http://www.glue.umd.edu/~gotthard

In article >,
Wally Keeler > wrote:

>Therefore, there is exceedingly little risk 
>of having to defend Belgium, as compared to the risk of having to defend 
>Hungary. I would like to be more assured that such a risk is minimized 
>below a thresehold. 

In other words, you are only willing to defend those who need no
defending?  Figures.  I have a feeling that Russians might be aware of 
this, too, encouraging them even more to be agressive with their closer 
neighbors.

Joe

T. Kocsis > writes:

>In article > Wally Keeler,
 writes:
>>I can give it a try, but I don't guarantee the results.

>Don't waste time for it. The poor guy mixed up hexameter
>with dactyls. The poem was definitely not written in
>hexameters and its metrical foot is not dactilic.  I doubt
>that the poem follows any (well-known) classic metrical
>form.


 You maybe right indeed. But

 1/ if you know this stuff so well you could have been of more help 
  and explicitely show I was wrong.

 2/ true, my financial situation is that that good but would you be so 
  kind as to refrain from using this sort of phrases when you refer to me?
 ( I'm being overpolite deliberately. )


 Wally, any verse would do since I see "flaws" in each of them. ( I think 
 what you wrote in connection with differences of English dialect rhythms
 is relevant here and therefore this is not exactly an academic exercise.) 
   
>Tamas
-- 
 Pm
>----
 Miklos Prisznyak   (KFKI RMKI Theor. Dep. Budapest, Hungary H-1525 P.O.B 49)
                     WWW page:    http://sgi30.rmki.kfki.hu/~prisz/prisz.html

"Jeliko" > writes:

>Janos Szamosfalvi writes:

>> Well, sometimes it does make a difference, sometimes it doesn't.
>> For example,
>> 	A kutya la'tja az embert.
>> 	Az embert la'tja a kutya.
>> both mean the same thing and both would be translated as: The dog sees 
>> the man.

>Hmmm. Would it not be "The dog sees the man." and "The man is seen by the 
>dog"? Similar minor, but noticable difference.


 Surely not. Neither the first version or the second one is in passive voice.
 That's the archaic "la'ttatik" form. :-)

>Regards,Jeliko 

 
-- 
 Pm
>----
 Miklos Prisznyak   (KFKI RMKI Theor. Dep. Budapest, Hungary H-1525 P.O.B 49)
                     WWW page:    http://sgi30.rmki.kfki.hu/~prisz/prisz.html