|
 |
In praxis "law-of-7"/2 for polyliteracy? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Lessons in Polyglottery |  | |
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6472 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes  Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese | Message 41 of 49 27 August 2011 at 3:10am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Exactly how is that uncontestable? For the purposes of showing what Iversen has read, the lists are about equally good, especially given that Professor Argüelles' list is essentially an expansion. That he suggested expansions to the standard cannon which accord with those offered by Professor Argüelles can hardly be held against him; rather, it speaks to the merits of the books they both think ought to be on the list. Much as I respect the work done by Professor Argüelles, a single web page is not a Great Book and rarely deserves to be read as one. Iversen is not basing his studies off of Professor Argüelles list; he was summarizing what he has already done. A blunder of this sort in such a context is truly minor. I've never seen Iversen as annoyed as in this thread, and I've rarely seen Sprachprofi this annoyed either. None of us are prone to "tag-teaming". And, at the cost of being far more personal than I like to be, and with great reluctance, I shall say what is on my mind: if your conduct in this thread is typical for graduate students at your college, Great Books education is in far worse shape than I had feared. You, of all people, should have some handle on how to productively deal with rhetoric and public discussion; have you not learned anything at all from the Greeks, or the political commentators of more recent centuries? It may well be better to be feared than loved in some positions, but sloshing around hostility and barbs directed at everyone you are interacting with is a counterproductive tactic for almost any aim, and purely suicidal if you want to engage in civil discussion. Think we're idiots, if you want - but let us be, or try to elicit something of value if you think there is any potential. Otherwise, one is lead to conclude that either your education has utterly failed you, or that you prefer this type of interaction for reasons my education has not let me fathom. Edited by Volte on 27 August 2011 at 3:38am 10 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Zwlth Super Polyglot Senior Member United States Joined 5259 days ago 154 posts - 320 votes Speaks: English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Arabic (Written), Dutch, Swedish, Portuguese, Latin, French, Persian, Greek | Message 42 of 49 27 August 2011 at 10:07pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
"Exactly how is that uncontestable [sic]?" It is incontestable because we are discussing Professor Arguelles' concept in his own room. Of course the web page is not a great text in itself, but as it contains an original and an expanded list, the latter being the professor's, to take the former and call it "his" is incorrect, and to then imply that there are lacunae in it is quite unfair.
Great Books have been my life's blood, as have languages, which, under the Professor's inspiration, combined into polyliteracy. I came here hoping to find others who combine the two practices as I would love nothing more than to discuss them in a productive fashion. I've never had any problem doing this with others who were interested in them before, and it saddens me that this is the case here. I assure you, I have derived no pleasure or satisfaction from this thread, but only frustration and irritation as never in all my life have I had such an unpleasant and hyper-critical reception. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6472 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese | Message 43 of 49 27 August 2011 at 10:37pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Granted.
Understandably. I've attempted to kick off a new thread for a fresh start, as I think the tone of this thread has been rather problematic. If you find the questions posed a poor basis for discussion, I'd also be entirely welcoming of you posing a better set. People like you and Iversen have quite a bit of experience in reading Great Books in a number of languages, and it would truly be a pity if a good discussion doesn't end up growing out of that shared interest. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| sipes23 Diglot Senior Member United States pluteopleno.com/wprs Joined 4903 days ago 134 posts - 235 votes Speaks: English*, Latin Studies: Spanish, Ancient Greek, Persian | Message 44 of 49 28 August 2011 at 3:03am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Sprachprofi, not to get down on you… More's Utopia was actually written in Latin and has a fascinating history of its own. More's Latin style is clear and crisp and sadly too few read Utopia in Latin. Particularly Latin students. It's utterly fascinating. I read some selections with a couple students a few years ago. I had to make my materials. I wish there were better editions of great works made for those of us who are less skilled, but want the original language anyway. Geoffrey Steadman is doing some very good work with Ancient Greek. See what he's up to here. More of this sort of thing needs to be done. While scholarly vetting has its time and place, down and dirty readers may not be it. I cannot tell you how much I am enjoying his Herodotus's Histories Book 1. Dude can tell a story. Now, to address the main point of the topic. I myself, though by no means an advanced polyglot, find I cannot read books in more than two languages at a time. English and a +1. I tried reading Herodotus and one of Plautus's plays earlier this summer. Forget it. I had to pick one. Herodotus it is. Maybe it is because I was still putting Greek syntax together in my head. Maybe I can pull off Greek and Latin together at some point: I don't know. But for now, it feels like English and a +1 for serious works—if I want to maintain any sort of continuity in my head. Of course, I can't say I'm tackling multiple complex works in English simultaneously either. I think my limit is about four books: only one of which can be Serious Literature. Now as it turns out, with Latin and English, I've got a nice variety of stuff to read. And do. (I'm a fan of Gesta Romanorum in Latin.) I've read some Neruda in Spanish, which is beautiful. Ancient Greek is opening doors, but… (having read this thread) I have two questions. 1. Why is polyliteracy the domain of Great Works of Literature? Am I less polyliterate because I read the news in Spanish instead of Cervantes? Why? Again, polyliteracy looks like it should be defined as "able to read many languages." That said, I understand what Arguelles is driving at when he uses the term. I respect what he's up to, but my hackles raise when he uses the term that way. I know: he invented the word. 2. What is a Great Work of Literature? But that's opening another can of worms, so consider that the question is rhetorical or for discussion in another place. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6472 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese | Message 45 of 49 28 August 2011 at 10:29am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Sipes: new thread started for question 2.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Sprachprofi Nonaglot Senior Member Germany learnlangs.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6503 days ago 2608 posts - 4866 votes Speaks: German*, English, French, Esperanto, Greek, Mandarin, Latin, Dutch, Italian Studies: Spanish, Arabic (Written), Swahili, Indonesian, Japanese, Modern Hebrew, Portuguese | Message 46 of 49 28 August 2011 at 11:03am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Thanks, I shall look for it in Latin. I wonder why our class read it in English then; might as well have read a German translation. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| sipes23 Diglot Senior Member United States pluteopleno.com/wprs Joined 4903 days ago 134 posts - 235 votes Speaks: English*, Latin Studies: Spanish, Ancient Greek, Persian | Message 47 of 49 28 August 2011 at 4:19pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Which I then jumped over to.
The good folks over at Wiki have provided the original text: http://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Utopia This is about as good as it gets. As I said, getting a hold of the Latin text in printed form is no easy task. I had to make my own materials for the class. You can see how far I went. Anyway, it's origin in Latin is significant to its history. More couldn't publish it in English or England because it was a bit of an attack on Henry VIII, who was still on the throne. Utopia didn't make it into English until it had been published for about 35 years. More and Henry VIII were dead at this time. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6736 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 48 of 49 29 August 2011 at 11:09am | IP Logged | ||||||||
I got the expected scornful answer, which contained the following passage:
Apparently Zwlth can't read either: just above the 'combined standard canon' you find the following quote: The great books of the Western world as they form the curricula at colleges around the United States, and as they are comprised in the encyclopedic publication of the same title, in effect form a canon of some 100 primary works or authors. As they are not quite the same at all institutions, I have combined the reading lists of a good number of programs (Columbia, Malaspina, St. John's, the Great Books Foundation, etc.) to find a general canon of closer to 150 works, 154 to be exact. So Professor Arguelles has based his "combined standard canon" on preexisting lists, but it is his compilation and his annotations, and therefore I'm perfectly entitled to refer to it as his list. If mr Zwlth chooses to define things otherwise it's OK with me - it will not be the first time that has happened. I do recognize that I should have used the extended list further down (plus the additional lists), but I only needed the list to illustrate that I have been through a fair number of great books, which became necessary when Zwlth conveniently overlooked my short remark about having read a fair number of those books. In that perspective it doesn't matter that professor Arguelles' extended list contains most of the works I missed in the shorter one, but of course I should have used that list instead. And of course I should have checked and rechecked whether Verne was on the list before mentioning his name. But in praxis it doesn't mean anything for my choice of things to read - I don't read things because they are on a list somewhere. Let's return to the first message in this thread.
Since that first post we know that Zwlth ONLY considers reading great works as part of polyliteracy - in accordance with professor Arguelles, but based on the etymology of the word it means "the ability to read in many languages", and that's how I intend to use it (and I have made abundantly clear that this is a deliberate deviation from the terminology of professor Arguelles). In contrast, 'polyglottery' means the ability to speak in many tongues, which is something quite different (although we often lump any kind of language skills together under that name). In the later part of the thread the 'praxis' of polyliteracy has been clarified: it is not as much reading the works as living with them for a long time. Now that really adds to the time expenditure - especially if you assume that even Zwlth also use background materials (although he hasn't mentioned them). This narrows his praxis down to something that is totally unpalatable for all but a microscopic fraction of the population (barely enough to fill the topmost chamber in one single ivory tower) - no wonder that he finds little resonance here! In contrast, if you are interested in history and/or literature and you can read in several languages, then it is clearly a relevant occupation to read the main original sources from past times and other places, but not necessarily for the main part of your time. As I have written before I prefer finishing one thick book before I take on the next, but alongside those I read modern articles and books about the same things AND modern books and articles about scientific themes that for obvious reasons can't be studied through old books. And I can of course read those smaller items in more languages than those which I can speak, which makes the whole question about a restriction on the number of great books in different languages you can read concurrently patently absurd. Why should I choose to read four or seven great books at the same time, when I can read one such book assidously and from A to Z alongside with shorter texts or parts of texts in a plethora of languages? It is not only better for my language learning/conservation, but I simply learn more about the world in general. There may indeed be a limit on how many works from the canonical lists you can read (or maybe even study) concurrently, just as there may be a limit on how many balls a juggler can keep in the air, but why try if the attempt takes all your time and leaves you with a narrow hyperacademical horizon? Edited by Iversen on 29 August 2011 at 11:49pm 7 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
