I am *so* not learning...

...Esperanto.

Esperanto has taken over from Italian as the language I'm not really learning, but occasionally allowing myself to be distracted by.

I found Italian strangely alluring right up to the point where I went to Italy.  Now I find I'm over it.  It seems as though all of my vague and ill defined reasons for being interested in Italian have been trumped by "yeah, but Italy kind of sucks".

Maybe I'll come back to it one day through my love of English (once I rekindle it).  It is one of the close cousins of the English language - both languages having Latin as an ancestor.  I have a feeling I'll get around to revisiting French first, though.

Right now, though, Esperanto seems more interesting - and a lot easier.  It's sliding into my head in a way I find strangely appealing, but also slightly alarming.  After reading over a basic grammar key, I can remember not only what "kio estas tio" means, but also why it means that - I'm parsing sentences much more easily than in the early days of German or Estonian.

Actually, I think it would be exceptionally interesting to compare Estonian and Esperanto.  Estonian is complicated and difficult (and the Estonians seem almost proud of that), while Esperanto is simplified and straightforward (and the Esperantists are definitely proud of that), but I've noticed a lot of similarities.

The whole building-blocks approach that Esperanto has seems very Finno-Ugric to me - and there's even a similarity in some of the vocabulary.

Take the question "Do you love me?" for example.

In Estonian it is "Kas sa armastad mind?" and in Esperanto it's "Ĉu vi amas min?"

Now, both "Kas" and "Ĉu" have exactly the same function - they just flag the rest of the sentence as a yes-or-no question.  It's a catch-all for the way we start questions with certain verbs ("do you", "are you", "does he", "is she", "did they", etc).

"Sa" and "vi" ("you") are the subjects of the sentence, so they have no endings.  If they were the objects, they would be "sind" and "vin" respectively.  "Mind" and "min" ("me") are the objects.  If they were the subjects, they would be "ma" and "mi" respectively.

"Armastad" and "amas" ("love") are both constructed by putting specific endings on the root of the verb ("armasta" in Estonian, "am" in Esperanto).  The "d" in "armastad" signifies that it is present tense - which is exactly what the "as" signifies in "amas" (the "d" also signifies that it is performed by "you", which is a distinction that doesn't exist in Esperanto - but that's another story).

If I were to push the sentence into the past tense, I'd add an "s" and an "i" (not necessarily in the same order) into the verbs in both.  "Armastad" would become "armastasid".  "Amas" would become "amis".

All of which leads me to attempt to write a short poem in both languages:

Kas sa armastasid mind?
Kas ma armastan sind?
Kus meie oleme, nüüd?
Ja, siit,
Kuhu?


Ĉu vi amis min?
Ĉu mi amas vin?
Kie ni estas, nun?
Kaj, de tie ĉi,
Kie?



(Actually, I suspect I should have written "ĉi tiam" instead of "nun" - but I've probably made a heck of a lot of other mistakes as well.  At least one of which being crappy poetry...)

He's a fine chair

I love pointing out that German's think chairs are masculine while the Italians think they are feminine.

I don't know why, but I am fascinated by the fact that these two languages which are, essentially, right next to each other would have different views on the "gender" of that thing you sit on.

Yes, I still think having a "gender" for an inanimate object is daft, and I think every language that does so is somehow inferior to the languages that don't (English, Estonian, Esperanto...) but I'm also interested to know why they chose that gender for that object.

I know several studies have been done of several tribal languages with grammatical genders that have determined the they actually see these inanimate objects as having masculine or feminine characteristics. For example, there's one (I think in the Papua region) in which everything large is "he" and everything small is "she".

I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that all languages with grammatical genders are making "value judgments" about those objects that they call masculine or feminine.

What is it that the Germans see in a chair that makes them think "that's a fine, manly chair"?  What is it the Italians would see in the same chair that would make them think "she's far to feminine to be manly"?

What is the point of difference between these two cultures that makes them interpret the same object as endowed with different gender traits?

I'm disappointed with you, BBC...

So I bought a copy of BBC Active's Biongiorno Italia! - not because I'm learning Italian (I am so not learning Italian), but because I will be visiting Italy later in the year and want to be able to read signs and ask for food and things.

I bought it specifically because it was made by the BBC, and I knew it was connected to a televised language course. I bought it because it called itself "A complete multi-media course".

I bought it because I assumed one of the three discs that came with it would contain at least clips from the TV show - something, I don't know, multi-media-like to go with their "multi-media" course.

I mean, it's the 21st Century, right? We've had CD-ROMS for decades now, DVDs are old hat and people get eBooks with video inserts for almost the same price as a normal print book (slightly cheaper, normally - which is a bit crazy when you think it through).

Surely a "complete multi-media course" from the BBC with a TV tie-in would have video clips? It's not unreasonable to think something like this might exist, and the BBC is usually at the forefront of everything cool and useful...

But, no, turns out "multi-media" just means "sound" in addition to "print". The discs are entirely audio. The book politely informs you that you may be able to catch repeats of the TV show occasionally and that you should check out their website to see when they might be screening...

Are you kidding me? You mean to tell me that, not only is putting video onto a disc too hard for the BBC but they can't even manage to put clips on the website? You have to catch a repeat?

What the Heck?!? It's a multi-media course package! This isn't 1975, where having a tape to play in your car is the latest thing in language learning. "Multi-media" in this day and age kind of implies "more than two".

Come on, BBC. You can do better than this. If anyone is likely to be able to produce a true multimedia package, you're the ones to do it. Step up, dudes.

Or, as they might say in Italian: fare di meglio.

Of making many books there is no end...

...and much study wearies the body (Ecc. 12:12).

So, in spite of the fact that I'm supposed to be saving towards a European holiday, the other day I spent $15 on a book called Better Reading: Italian.

I bought this book - not because I'm learning Italian (I am so not learning Italian, especially as it doesn't look like I'll get around to visiting Italy this year after all) - but rather because I've developed an addiction to language books. So much so that I'll buy a book I'm never going to use just because I like the way it's designed and I want to have a closer look.

I was having a conversation over drinks a few weeks back in which someone asked me what I'd do if I was self-employed. After initially saying I'd make ceramic dogs to sell at local markets, I answered honestly: I'd like to write a couple of text books.

"Textbooks? Why would anyone want to write textbooks?" she says.
"Because they're fascinating," says I.

It wasn't a measured response - it was the first thing that came out of my mouth. It's also quite true. There's an element of design that goes into a textbook that you don't find in any other type of written material.

And the skill it takes to write didactic material that is clear, succinct and easy to digest without being condescending or oversimplified! I yearn for that kind of skill. My own writing is usually overblown and excessively quirky.

So, yes, at some point I'd like to write a couple of text books. I've started various projects that were intended to produce text books, but never actually made it past the initial planning stage. Sadly, I am most effectively motivated externally - give me a person who is waiting for me to finish something, and I will do my best to finish it. If I'm the only person who cares, it's probably not going to happen.

There's a Bear in There

I've been a bit philological for my last couple of posts, so I thought I'd break it up a bit by talking about Playschool.

I was watching an episode while eating breakfast a few weeks ago, and Justine was showing the viewers how the lights in the studio can change the look of the set...

And suddenly I realised just how simple the Playschool set-up really was. The whole thing is just a cyclorama with some flats representing trees (for outside) or a wall with a window (for inside). Beyond that, it's just a small handful of props and a few well-placed lights.

So, I was looking at this, thinking: "Good Lord, you could do this in your basement (if you had a basement)!" Heck, the entire musical accompaniment is just one piano!

And this is possibly the most popular and long-running show in Australian television history (apart from the news). It's one of the longest running children's shows in the world.

So, now I have this powerful urge to rip of the Playschool model (not the format, because that would be a copyright infringement) and make an incredibly cheap children's show in someone's backyard. Maybe I can convince JCU to let me use the Cowshed Theater, or something. It wouldn't take that much effort to convert it to a sound stage...

Oh, and if I make it bilingual, I can try to sell it to SBS. I reckon an English/Italian preschoolers' TV show with books, games, stories, songs and arts-and-crafts projects would go down a treat with the SBS crowd.

All I need is a catchy theme tune, some charismatic bilingual hosts and some helpful Italian mothers to provide the songs...

Language Learning Can Be Fun

And sometimes it just hurts my head.

Especially Estonian. There are days when I think I finally understand something with this crazy-stupid language, only to realise that the logical connections I have made were running on the wrong logic, and I actually don't have a clue.

Take imperatives, which I've been working on lately with my tutor. I read the rules in a grammar book, and think "Okay, I've got that. It's unnecessarily complicated, but I've got it". Then I find out they don't apply to irregular verbs - but only certain irregular verbs.

I'm looking at two irregular verbs and trying to work out what the difference is between them - why one would use the stem of the present tense and the other would use the stem of the -ma infinitive - and I can't quite convey to my tutor what it is I'm having trouble with. To her it all seems perfectly logical.

--The second one is an irregular verb - that's why.
--But aren't they both irregular verbs?
--Yes, but the second one is a complete spelling change, while the other is an internal change.
--In the first word the present tense form only has one letter in common with it's infinitive - and the second word also has letters in common with the infinitive...
--Yes, but the second one is an irregular verb.
--But so is the first word. Is it because the first letter is the same for both the present tense stem and the infinitive in the first word?
--It's just because the second word is "go", we'll move on now.

I've been trying to talk myself out of the mindset that Estonian is wrong. I often look at the rules and say to myself (and anyone within earshot) "That's just daft. Why would anyone do that?" But I have to remind myself that the language just works on a different logic to English, and I'll have a better chance of 'getting' it if I stop resisting it.

But I went home after my Estonian lesson the other night and listened to a couple of Italianpod podcasts last night, just to stop my head from hurting. I find the newbie Italian lessons relaxing and simple, and somehow refreshing after trying to wrap my mind around Estonian grammar.

Not that I'm learning Italian. I am so not learning Italian. German and Estonian are enough for this year. Seriously.