Jump to content

General Chat


Stevo985

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, zak said:

Why? would it not be more usefull to learn a language still used today?

 

Mandarin for example....

arguably Latin is the only universal language   , or so the theory goes .

 

plants , animals etc are all classified by a Latin name so get stranded somewhere with 5 or 6 different language speakers and Latin is your common theme for being understood

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tonyh29 said:

arguably Latin is the only universal language   , or so the theory goes .

 

plants , animals etc are all classified by a Latin name so get stranded somewhere with 5 or 6 different language speakers and Latin is your common theme for being understood

 

 

Provided those people happen to be zoologists or botanists (or Catholic priests).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

arguably Latin is the only universal language   , or so the theory goes .

 

plants , animals etc are all classified by a Latin name so get stranded somewhere with 5 or 6 different language speakers and Latin is your common theme for being understood

 

 

I do not deny any of that, but i presume you are not actually saying: "No, it  would it not be more useful to learn a language still used today"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mjmooney said:

Provided those people happen to be zoologists or botanists (or Catholic priests).

the radio show I heard this on also seemed to think even yer average African tribal bushman would know it  ... but I sorta agree with you , if someone was running away like made from a lion shouting "Leo " , "Leo"   ..I wouldn't have a clue what they were going on about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/05/2016 at 16:25, tonyh29 said:

arguably Latin is the only universal language

In terms of usefulness it's spoken by no-one.  Other than as some say, to categorise plants and animals.  In this case universal == useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BOF said:

In terms of usefulness it's spoken by no-one.  Other than as some say, to categorise plants and animals.  In this case universal == useless.

lots of Latin phrases are still used and not just by General K , my son can speak a bit of it as they teach it at his school

 

but the argument I was putting forward is that it IS potentially a universal language , that barely anyone speaks it wasn't the case I was putting forward

Edited by tonyh29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a thorny few days in the main forum, I think I'm going to have to stick to Off Topic for the forseeable. 

Good luck finding conversation. As I mentioned the other day the takeover has killed this forum. Plane crashes only get about 6 or 7 posts at the moment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bio on some local artists' website, LOL-

Quote

My work delves into how to reconcile inevitable uncertainties. I make images that are intended to be both quiet and disquieting, as a way of exploring how to come to terms with unfathomable possibilities, unexplainable situations, and incalculable outcomes. Through making paintings and patterns characterized by obscurity and sparseness, I locate the point where panic and pleasure meet each other. This is an ongoing experiment in befriending and besieging fear. 
A good painting will at first delight you, and then deceive you. I'm interested in making work that occupies these two realms simultaneously.    -AB

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alexei Sayle summed up this side of art.

As a yoof he'd wanted to study art, he'd seen the cool kids going to Chelsea Arts College and wanted to get in there. He was really good at drawing horses and enjoyed drawing horses. But Chelsea Arts didn't want someone that was really good at drawing horses. They wanted someone to stand in the local shopping centre dressed as a teapot challenging people's perception of where the boundary between art and reality was in contemporary society. So he thought, oh ok, **** it, I'll just mess about then.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Alexei Sayle summed up this side of art.

As a yoof he'd wanted to study art, he'd seen the cool kids going to Chelsea Arts College and wanted to get in there. He was really good at drawing horses and enjoyed drawing horses. But Chelsea Arts didn't want someone that was really good at drawing horses. They wanted someone to stand in the local shopping centre dressed as a teapot challenging people's perception of where the boundary between art and reality was in contemporary society. So he thought, oh ok, **** it, I'll just mess about then.

 

 

Don't get me started. I was the only kid at primary school who could draw horses. In fact I was regarded as the art star of the school. Got to high school, and the art teacher sneered at me. The kids who got all the kudos were the ones who made abstract sculptures out of milk cartons and called them "My Mind in 7/8 Time", or some such. I gave it up in the third year.

I thought it was just me, but it turned put that my wife had exactly the same experience. And so did our kids.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On May 20, 2016 at 11:36, tonyh29 said:

lots of Latin phrases are still used and not just by General K , my son can speak a bit of it as they teach it at his school

 

but the argument I was putting forward is that it IS potentially a universal language , that barely anyone speaks it wasn't the case I was putting forward

I don't understand why Latin is a universal language? Most of the worlds languages aren't descended from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I don't understand why Latin is a universal language? Most of the worlds languages aren't descended from it.

Well, it isn't. But it once was in 'the known world' (i.e. Europe and the med), due the Roman Empire and then the Catholic Church. That legacy lasted until relatively recently. 

It was because of politics, not linguistics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Well, it isn't. But it once was in 'the known world' (i.e. Europe and the med), due the Roman Empire and then the Catholic Church. That legacy lasted until relatively recently. 

It was because of politics, not linguistics.

Well, yes. But the context here was Tony saying Latin is 'potentially a universal language' which seems to imply the future rather than the past. On the last page, there was also something abou African tribesmen understanding it, which I didn't follow. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â