On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:28:50PM -0000, xigung@... wrote:
Hi Keth,

> Hi Arlie!
>
> --- In norse_course@..., Arlie Stephens <arlie@...> wrote:
> It is true that I did try my hand at some ON sentences,
> and there were a couple of errors. But that was to be expected!
> The point is, that when you don't know a language, there
> will allways be errors. It is the same with Swedish: I can
> read it almost as easily as if it was Norwegian, and carry on
> conversations with Swedes. But I wouldn't be able to write it error
> free. That is an illusion. Reading ability and the ability to converse
> are the first step. Writing is a later step. But saying sentences
> is more like an early step, since it is important for conversation.

We do learn differently. I have a horrible time learning to distinguish
unfamiliar sounds, and an even worse time learning to reproduce them.
So for me, reading comes first, then writing. Speaking comes last of
all. (As an example, I can read simple Spanish and Italian ... and might
be able to write Spanish with a textbook and dictionary handy ... but
haven't a clue when I hear either one.)

> >Net result: I haven't been making it
> > a priority to attempt to translate your attempts at Icelandic.
>
> I just thought you might read it - not translate.
> That's what I do with Old Norse. I just read it.
> Translating can be quite hard and timeconsuming.
> But reading often gives a good understanding,
> even if you miss some details. Often it suffices
> to look up just one word, and the sentence falls into place.

Too much completely unfamiliar vocabulary, if I remember right.
In general, I read the course exercises, and then write down their
meaning in English ... as compared to painstakingly translating them.
But with lots of unfamiliar words, it becomes a translation exercise.

Probably, the words you used seemed fairly obvious to you, because they
are (I'm guessing) similar to some Norwegian words. But perhaps not so
similar to any English words.

> BTW it wasn't Icelandic that I tried to write, but Old Norse.
> But I admit I cheated by using an Icelandic dictionary here
> and there. I do however find MI difficult. The advantage
> is that there are more complete dictionaries available than in ON.
> (I can look up any word and find what it is in Icelandic)

Sorry, I was being sloppy. Since we're specifically learning the Old
Icelandic branch of Old Norse, I sometimes simply refer to it as
(old) Icelandic.. and drop the old where I think it will be obvious.
Or where the language is close enough that I'm really thinking of both
the old and modern forms.

> >(And
> why
> > is it that you never seem to use vocabulary from the course, but
> always
> > words the other students have probably never seen?)
>
> I thought you all had an ON dictionary. No?

Hmmm, the difference here is familiarity-->I can read rather than translate.
But also there are no in-print dictionaries translating Old Norse to English,
just a few limited resources like the glossary in Gordon's Introduction to
Old Norse, and some glossaries of words used in specific texts. (Being able
to read German would be very useful, but unfortunately I don't know it.)

> If they are quotes from old texts then we might call them correct.
> But if I wrote sentences myself.. well there would be errors.
> But such efforts have the advantage of "finding" what kinds
> of words are needed for internet communication. For example
> "I like someone/something" was a phrase I needed. And so I found
> the verb geðjast, because it somehow had an archaic sound to it.

Eek ... that looks like a middle voice (or perhaps passive) verb form.
We haven't even got to past tense yet....

> > Yes, can you imagine the mess I'd make if I tried posting these
> > comments in Icelandic (old or modern)? My vocabulary is far too
> > limited. And even if I succeeded perfectly, who here would
> understand
> > me? Probably only the native Icelandic speakers ...i.e. our
> teachers.
>
> If you didn't make too many errors, I would!

*chuckle* Haukur can perhaps comment on some of my errors :-)

But you are right, I could write some things in O/M Icelandic.
(The above sentence, for example, though Oskar and Haukur might
find my attempts quite hilarious.) And maybe it would be good
for me.

Hmm, let's see, literally...

En þú er skyldr, ek kann gjora sumir með máli islenzku.

OK, Haukur, you can stop laughing now. I've no idea if skyldr can mean
"right" as in "correct", or what preposition really applies to using
something like a language. And I took a wild guess at what gender to
put sumr in, to agree with an implied "things".

And the rest of you shouldn't worry if not everything above is familiar.
I think it all came from some lesson I've proofread (possibly not the word
mál, which may not in any case mean "language" in the sense of e.g.
Icelandic), but some are from lessons that got extensively revised
and haven't been released in their new forms.

> > But this would be things like: "I am called Arlie." Nothing too
> complex.
> > Not much use for interesting conversations.
>
> For me that would be interesting enough!
> Tell us about what the weather is like, where you live.
> (but in ON)

Hmm, no weather vocabulary yet, except stormr....

Perhaps I could talk about my dog.

> > > So, I therefore *propose* the following *solution* :)
> > > vík, víkr, vík, vík; víkr, víka, víkum, víkr.
> > > (s;p/N,G,D,A)
>
> > I'll let one of the teachers comment, except to say that this looks
> > strange to me. It could be what Barnes calls a "strong feminine" ...
> but
> > in that case, I'd have expected víkar (or perhaps víkir) where you
> have víkr.
>
> You are right. That the difficulty, as I saw it too!
> Any way, I jotted it down from Zoëga, and it said gen. víkr,
> pl. víkr. I did however leave the dictionary in the library.
> What I have here is only the dative which is vík too.
> (ok hittumk í vík Varins - Helga kv. Hj. 22.)

Well, I looked up eik in Gordon's glossary. He suggested it declined
like bók (book). Bók is boekr in nom and acc pl. But that seems to be
i-mutation ... discussed, I believe, in lesson 6, under the heading
umlaut. Since eik and vík have different vowels (different from each other,
too, since i is not í), they may not mutate, or would mutate difefrently
if they did.

OK, I've kind of overstayed my lunch hour. Time to get back to work.

--
Arlie

(Arlie Stephens arlie@...)