3 ms·

Hm. I read this in college and found the English and spelling very interesting, I would hope there is not too much lost in a 'translation'. Sometimes I felt l

Hm. I read this in college and found the English and spelling very interesting, I would hope there is not too much lost in a 'translation'. Sometimes I felt like I understood exactly the point being made but I could never remember in those same terms. It's satisfying, almost like listening to a cousin language and understanding but not being able to repeat exactly.

mjklin 4y ago
The copy I read in college had Nouns Capitalized (as they are in German to this day, though I didn’t know that at the time). A girl in my class said “it’s like reading the dictionary.”
retrac 4y ago
I think your comparison to a cousin/sibling language is very close to the truth. Historic forms of a language are nearly the same thing as that. For example, Norwegian and Swedish were once the same language, that was about 800 years ago. We can think of Swedish as being separated from Old Norse by 800 years of language change. But we can also think of Swedish and Norwegian being separated by 1600 years of language change, 800 years on each side, linked through Old Norse at the half way point. (Of course it's not quite that simple, since Swedish and Norwegian have been in contact, not isolated, all this time, among other things. Still, I find it an interesting perspective.)
- Amezarak 4y ago
  The interesting thing to me about this is it's a very recent phenomenon. English from 1900 has much more in common with 1600s English than 2020s English. There's been a massive shrinking in vocabulary, a reduction in the sense of individual words, and average sentence complexity has gone way, way down. You read something from the 1600s, 1800s, or early 1900s, and it's not uncommon for a single sentence to cover half a page. Nowadays, that is practically unfathomable. I read a lot of old books, so this is a little depressing to me. I'm not sure what the solution is, other than to encourage children to read lots of old books.
  - mancerayder 4y ago
    I sympathize enormously. There is something more thoughtful and challenging about a very long sentence, like you get in philosophy books from the 17th century, or a newspaper article from the 1800's. The one thing that is perhaps depressing, but also a law, is that languages tend to simplify over time. So it's frustrating when people write things like, "He be upset about ... " or "The client's ask here is ..." but both are grammatical simplifications. Yes, they have a grammatical historical context, but simplifications nonetheless. English used to have a much more complex grammar, where you needed to inflect (if that is the right term) not just the verb but also the pronoun, direct object, etc. like modern Russian and some aspects of German. There are some interesting linguistics channels on YouTube that I find quite appealing. One is Simon Roper who studies Old English among other languages, NativLang which is more into historical linguistics and presents it in a pop way, and Langfocus which is more comparative linguistics.
Beltalowda 4y ago
I also found the English and spelling interesting, but also very hard to get through. I never finished the book. It's not just the (now archaic) vocabulary and spelling that make it difficult, but also also the length of sentences – they never seem to end! I thought KJV could be difficult, but that's easy compared to Leviathan.

mjklin 4y ago

The copy I read in college had Nouns Capitalized (as they are in German to this day, though I didn’t know that at the time). A girl in my class said “it’s like reading the dictionary.”

retrac 4y ago

I think your comparison to a cousin/sibling language is very close to the truth. Historic forms of a language are nearly the same thing as that. For example, Norwegian and Swedish were once the same language, that was about 800 years ago. We can think of Swedish as being separated from Old Norse by 800 years of language change. But we can also think of Swedish and Norwegian being separated by 1600 years of language change, 800 years on each side, linked through Old Norse at the half way point. (Of course it's not quite that simple, since Swedish and Norwegian have been in contact, not isolated, all this time, among other things. Still, I find it an interesting perspective.)

Amezarak 4y ago
The interesting thing to me about this is it's a very recent phenomenon. English from 1900 has much more in common with 1600s English than 2020s English. There's been a massive shrinking in vocabulary, a reduction in the sense of individual words, and average sentence complexity has gone way, way down. You read something from the 1600s, 1800s, or early 1900s, and it's not uncommon for a single sentence to cover half a page. Nowadays, that is practically unfathomable. I read a lot of old books, so this is a little depressing to me. I'm not sure what the solution is, other than to encourage children to read lots of old books.
- mancerayder 4y ago
  I sympathize enormously. There is something more thoughtful and challenging about a very long sentence, like you get in philosophy books from the 17th century, or a newspaper article from the 1800's. The one thing that is perhaps depressing, but also a law, is that languages tend to simplify over time. So it's frustrating when people write things like, "He be upset about ... " or "The client's ask here is ..." but both are grammatical simplifications. Yes, they have a grammatical historical context, but simplifications nonetheless. English used to have a much more complex grammar, where you needed to inflect (if that is the right term) not just the verb but also the pronoun, direct object, etc. like modern Russian and some aspects of German. There are some interesting linguistics channels on YouTube that I find quite appealing. One is Simon Roper who studies Old English among other languages, NativLang which is more into historical linguistics and presents it in a pop way, and Langfocus which is more comparative linguistics.

Beltalowda 4y ago

I also found the English and spelling interesting, but also very hard to get through. I never finished the book. It's not just the (now archaic) vocabulary and spelling that make it difficult, but also also the length of sentences – they never seem to end! I thought KJV could be difficult, but that's easy compared to Leviathan.