Skip to content

Regum rex regalior.

Today’s dictionary work, for acies (Cicero, Ad Atticum 10.7):

Mea causa autem alia est, quod beneficio vinctus ingratus esse non possum, nec tamen in acie [me] sed Melitæ aut alio in loco simili [oppidulo] futurum puto.

My case, though, is different, because I’m bound by a favor and can’t be ungrateful, but nevertheless I’m not planning on being on the front lines, but in Malta or in some other place like it.

Right, so acies in this sense is usually glossed as “line of battle”, which in 1913ese (aside from the nautical sense it still seems to have) means “the position of troops drawn up in their usual order without any determined maneuver” — which, I suppose, is not the same as “the front line(s)” sensu stricto. Ah well.  Despite the literal meaning of acies being “edge” (as of a blade), an acies in battle wasn’t necessarily a single line; it was often at least three ranks.

For venter meus (Plautus, Captivi 4.2):

Non ĕgo | nunc păra|sītus | sūm sed | rēgum | rēx re|gālĭ|or,
tāntus | vēntri | cōmme|ātus | me(o) ădest | īn por|tū cĭ|bus.

And I’m no freeloader now, but a pretty kingly king of kings, and my provisions are in the harbor; there’s so much food there for my stomach.

Trochaic septenarius. I’m finding it may make more sense (or at least be less confusing) only to mark those lengths that are assured by the meter.

The comparative regalior “kinglier” is not a usual form, apparently; this line of Plautus is, I think, its most popular occurrence. It seems pretty clear that the word was chosen for comic effect, and it would have been nice to keep ‘kinglier’, but I wasn’t sure of a construction in English that could accommodate it.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Incitat me.

(Yeah, I know I haven’t posted here in a while — I’ve been working on a large blog post and have been neglecting the smaller ones.)

Horace, Epode 8:

sēd īncĭtāt | mē pēctŭs ēt | māmmǣ pŭtrēs
   Ä•quÄ«nă quā|lÄ“s Å«bÄ•ră
vēntērquĕ mōl|lĭs ēt fĕmūr | tŭmēntĭbūs
   Ä“xÄ«lÄ• sÅ«|rÄ«s āddÄ­tÅ«m.

But your chest excites me, your sagging breasts —
   like a horse’s udder.
Likewise your soft stomach and skinny thighs —
   atop your swollen calves.

Horace’s eighth epode is a vicious attack against a woman who wonders why there’s no sexual chemistry between herself and the narrator. His response boils down to: you’re ugly, you’re pretentious; if you want results, you should stick to oral (ore allaborandum est tibi). Accordingly quite a few of the editions of Horace I ran across on Google Books omit the epode entirely, passing without comment from 7 to 9. But the Internet will find you a few translations.

Anyway, it’s a very unflattering picture he paints of her, but talking of her body he still writes incitat me “it arouses me”. It’s clear this is not actually the case; but he might either be being outright sarcastic or just meaning that even if she may have some saving qualities, there’s more than enough negative there to offset that. In my translation here I leaned towards the latter because it seemed to flow better, though I’m sure the former might be more likely.

So, would tumentes surae be what we’d call “cankles” today?

[For venter.]

Tagged , , , , ,

Abkhaz in Latin.

Okay, here’s a fun problem from the Latin Wiktionary: trying to sort out category and page titles and needing decent translations for language names.

Fun because there are large portions of the world that have one Latin name… and large portions that have many Latin names, muddled together. For ‘Abkhaz’, for example, I have:

  • Abchasius, a modern form that appears in taxonomic nomenclature—at least, if Polydesmus abchasius, a kind of millipede, has this meaning.
  • Abchasicus, also Abschasicus is another taxonomic name; Phragmoscutella abchasica is a type of fungus, while Primula abschasica seems to have been a synonym for Primula vulgaris, the primrose.
  • Apsilae or Absilae[1] is an ancient name used, among others, by Pliny; it is sometimes suggested to be the same as the modern self-appellation Apswa[2], perhaps by Apsila → Apsla → Apswa (?).
  • Abasci or Abasgi is another ancient name [3] and is perhaps, by metathesis, cognate with Abkhaz itself.

So, the question becomes: which would be the best form to use for the people, and what form for the language adjective? Also, any other forms known to you all offhand?

Tagged , ,

Tamquam nudus nuces legeret.

Cicero, giving examples of the use of comparison to be witty, quoting a man responding to doubts that money was given to Magius because Magius was so poor, De Oratore 2.66:

“Erras,” inquit, “Scaure; ego enim Magium non conservasse dico, sed tamquam nudus nuces legeret, in ventre abstulisse.”

“Scaurus,” he said, “you are mistaken; I’m not saying Magius saved the money, but, like a naked man would gather nuts, he made off with it filling his belly.”

A literal translation (“he carried it off in his belly”) wouldn’t work as well in English, because English doesn’t have this connection between eating food and squandering money. Perhaps it’s easier with a word for money (pecunia) related to a word for livestock (pecus).

I went with a sort of compromise between keeping the original image and its intent; I’m not sure how well I did. An alternative, though probably inappropriate, would be to resort to a pun—something along the lines of the money going to waist.

Tagged , ,

The Lazy Argument

Cicero, De Fato, 12.28-29, showing once again that ‘nihil tam absurde dici potest quod non dicatur ab aliquo philosophorum’:

Sic enim interrogant: “Si fatum tibi est ex hoc morbo convalescere, sive tu medicum adhibueris sive non adhibueris, convalesces; item, si fatum tibi est ex hoc morbo non convalescere, sive tu medicum adhibueris sive non adhibueris, non convalesces; et alterutrum fatum est; medicum ergo adhibere nihil attinet.”

So their argument goes: “If you are destined to recover from this illness, whether you were to call in a doctor or not, you would recover; furthermore, if you are destined not to recover from this illness, whether you were to call in a doctor or not, you would not recover—and either one or the other is destined to happen; therefore it doesn’t matter if you call in a doctor.”

This little paradox, which Cicero says was called the ἀργὸς λόγος (“lazy argument“) was sometimes used by the Stoics. In some forms this kind of argument can be compelling; but the counterexamples illustrate how this line of thought does not always hold:

At si ita fatum est: “Nascetur Å’dipus Laio”, non poterit dici: “sive fuerit Laius cum muliere sive non fuerit”; copulata enim res est et confatalis. Sic enim appellat, quia ita fatum sit et concubiturum cum uxore Laium et ex ea Å’dipum procreaturum, ut, si esset dictum: ‘Luctabitur Olympiis Milo’ et referret aliquis: ‘Ergo, sive habuerit adversarium sive non habuerit, luctabitur’, erraret; est enim copulatum ‘luctabitur’, quia sine adversario nulla luctatio est.

But if it is predestined that Oedipus is to be born to Laius, it can’t be said: “whether Laius had been with a woman or whether he hadn’t”. That matter is connected to it, and “co-predestined”, as [Chrysippus] calls it, because it is predestined both that Laius will sleep with his wife and that Oedipus is to be born from her, just as, if it were to be said: “Milo will wrestle at the Olympics” and someone answered “So, whether he has an opponent or whether he doesn’t, he will wrestle”, he would be wrong—”wrestling” is a connected action, because without an opponent there is no wrestling.

Aristotle’s Sea-Battle is a similar scenario to the ἀργὸς λόγος, where our ability to assert that an outcome must either happen or not happen also leads to paradoxical results.

Tagged , , , ,

Hiatus

This blog will be on hiatus for the holiday season till new year’s.

I should still be working on the dictionary in the meantime.

Describing writing systems.

So, being as it’s getting time for me to be writing about some of my writing systems, I got to realizing I didn’t really have a good idea how to describe writing systems. For a grammar it’s relatively easy—just pull out a copy of Describing Morphosyntax and go at it—but for conscripts (and natscripts) I’m not aware of such a guide. So of course I decided to put one together.   Now, I know this looks like a questionnaire, but your results probably won’t read well if you just sit down and answer each question one by one; your best bet is to use this as a starter for things to write, and you’ll know you’re done if you’ve written something that answers most of these questions.


History and Origins

Describe the script’s origin. Who are recognized as being first to use it, where, and when? Can it be shown to evolve gradually from an earlier script, or is its earliest appearance an abrupt change from its parent? Is its creation attributed to an individual person historically or in legend? If so, tell this story. What is the oldest surviving example of text in this script?

Antecedent scripts

Show a table (comprehensive, preferably) comparing letterforms in the script with the parent script’s forms. Are there any particular factors involved in the changes between the new forms and the old, for example a change in writing materials? Are there letters in the script that don’t correspond to anything in the parent? If so, where do they come from? Compare this script to others with the same ancestor.

Descendant scripts

Are there any scripts that descend from this one? If so, what circumstances caused the split? Are there letters in the script that don’t correspond to anything in the daughter script? If so, where did they go? Did this script fall out of use when the daughter script began to be used, or is it still used for other purposes?

Discovery

If the script was “lost” at any time, describe its rediscovery. Who discovered it, and where? Was it recognized immediately for what it was or was it misidentified as a similar script? Was it undecipherable?

Palaeography, epigraphy, archaeology

Where are ancient examples of this writing found? Are there any well-known or notable script-bearing artifacts? Describe any famous fakes.

Decipherment

If understanding of the script was ever lost, has it since been redeciphered? By whom? Tell this story. How long did it go undeciphered? Describe well-known failed decipherment attempts.

Description and structure

What kind of script is it—an alphabet, an abjad, an abugida, a syllabary, a mixed system, an arrangement of tentacles or musical notes? In what direction is it written? Relevant details to the type of script—If it’s an abjad, is there a way of representing vowels when necessary, and when is it customary for it to be done? If it’s an abugida, what’s the inherent vowel? If it’s a syllabary, how are coda consonants or consonant clusters handled? If it’s a more outlandish system, describe how it works.

Grapheme inventory

Include a chart of the basic characters in the script as they appear in ordinary type—individually, if possible, or with a basic combining character if not. Include their most common or most representative phonetic values. Do the characters have names outside of the sounds they represent? If so, what are they and where do they come from? Are any of the characters obsolete? Is there controversy over whether certain characters are fully nativized members of the script or just foreign borrowings? Is there an upper and a lower case?

Writing the letters

Include a chart of the basic characters in their handwritten form, and show how to write them. Is there a “correct” system to writing letters, or do people have relative freedom in writing? Indicate any characters that differ substantially in handwritten form from printed form. If there are multiple writing styles, such as block letters vs. cursive, describe them and their differences. When is one variant used over another? Are specific writing implements preferred for one variant or another? What order are they taught in? Go over the calligraphic tradition.

Transliteration and transcription

Describe any standard transliterations of the language into Latin letters and/or other scripts in the area it is used. Are any letters considered as being “the same” as letters in similar scripts? How are sounds foreign to the script typically handled? (Letter borrowing, nearest approximate sound, writing words wholesale in the original script, or…?) If strict transliterations tend to have outlandish results, are there any standard transcriptions used instead?

Ligatures and conjuncts

List any common or necessary ligatures or conjoinments of letters. Do any languages using the script treat any of these ligatures as individual letters? Are ligatures part of everyday writing, or do they indicate fine or formal typography? Are there circumstances (e.g. based on phonetics) where ligatures are not to be used?

Diacritics and letter modifications

List any diacritics in use. What are the origin of the diacritics? Do they have a unified meaning (e.g. ‘acute means palatalization’) or do they tend to have a more or less ad hoc relationship to the letters they are used on? When, if ever, is it acceptable to omit diacritics?

Punctuation and symbols

List common punctuation. Are words separated by a space, by a visible interpunct character, or not at all? Describe what, if any, punctuation is used: between sentences, paragraphs, and various clauses; to break words at the ends of lines; to introduce and delimit quotations; to indicate proper names; to indicate pauses, questions, exclamations, sarcasm, omissions, trailing off… Describe any other symbols in common use.

Numerals

List the numerals in use. What base are numerals written in? Is the base for the numeral system the same as the base for number words in the languages using the script—and if not, how did this difference come about? What is the origin of the numbers—are they borrowed, do they derive from the native graphemes, are they originally tally marks? Are large numbers separated at convenient intervals? What symbol is used as the decimal point?

Collation

What order are the graphemes generally given in? Do any of the graphemes count as a different underlying value when sorted? Do any languages using the script have a substantially different sort order?

Sample of the script in use

Give an example text using the script, with a transliteration.

Usage, applications, literacy

Who uses the script? Is it in everyday use, or is it only found in restricted contexts, such as in religious settings or on monuments? How high is literacy among users of languages the script is used to write? Is it used by everyone, or chiefly particular groups of people? Compare the script to others used in similar contexts.

Variants, reforms, standardization

Does the grapheme inventory vary from place to place or over time, even within the same language? Have there been any major changes to the script instituted by governments or notable individuals? Is the script relatively standard, or is the “standard version” a generalization from various regional variants? Describe any major political or regional variants of the script.

Languages written with

List all languages the script is used to write, and when and where it is so used.

Adaptations for various languages

Describe any major language-based variants of the script. List any additional letters, diacritics, or symbols along with which language uses them, and what they are for.

Typography

Describe the language’s typographical history. What was the first work printed in this script? Who designed the original typefaces? Describe the major typographic styles (e.g. roman, italic, serif, sans-serif). Describe any unusual features of typeset text (e.g. lettershapes that differ significantly from their written forms).

Computing

Do contemporary computers handle correct display of text in this script? If not, how is support broken? (e.g. no character encoding, no ligation, no complete fonts, no support for the correct text direction) How is/was the script handled with computers not treating this script correctly—transliteration? Kludges? What was the first program or operating system to implement it correctly?

Keyboard layouts

Give a diagram of the usual keyboard layout(s) for this script. Who invented the layout? Is it original or based on that of another script? Can inputting the script be done directly from individual keys on the keyboard, or are there dead keys or IMEs to facilitate input of more complex features?

Unicode and other technical standards

If the script is in Unicode, give the chart of the Unicode block(s) where the script is encoded. When was it included in Unicode? Were there any controversies regarding encoding it in Unicode? Are there any errors in Unicode’s description of the characters? List any other character encodings designed for or including this script. Are they still in use?


Most of these headings I got from Wikipedia articles.  If you just happen to be writing that sort of thing, you’ll also want to include sections like “References” for footnotes, “Bibliography” or “Further Reading” for book sources, “See also” for related wiki pages on the same site, and “External links” for the obvious.

Tagged , ,

Drake alphabet.

All right, so I’ve managed to get the issues with the Drake alphabet I mentioned in my last post sorted out.  I was actually pretty much right for the most part, even in the confusing areas.

Here is a table of the letters involved, along with their corresponding letters in Syriac, which looks like it has the most resemblance to Drake out of the several Semitic scripts I looked at.  I still don’t know for certain what the official immediate precursor to the Drake letters was—I’m certain I’ll have a page or two of all the letters evolving somewhere in my notebooks—but the Syriac was actually a great help on this; comparing it to Drake gave me less doubts than comparing Drake to the Semitic tree in general… except that I realized that |z| and |Z| didn’t have anything at all to correspond to.

Drake

IPA

Syriac

Letter

’

[Ê”]

ܐ

aleph

b

[b]

Ü’

bet

g

[É¡]

Ü“

gimel

G

[É£]

gimel with dot above

d

[d]

Ü•

dalet

D

[ð]

dalet with dot above

h

[h], 0

Ü—

he

v

[uː]

ܘ

waw

V

[aː]

waw with dot above

j

[dʝ]

Ü™

zayin

x

[x]

Üš

heth

T

[θ]

Ü›

teth

y

[j], [iː]

ܝ

yodh

k

[k]

ÜŸ

kaph

l

[l]

Ü 

lamedh

m

[m]

Ü¡

mem

n

[n]

Ü¢

nun

N

[Å‹]

nun with dot above

s

[s]

Ü£

samekh

not attested

Ü¥

ayin

p

[p]

ܦ

pe

c

[tç]

ܨ

tsade

not attested

Ü©

qoph

r

[r]

ܪ

resh

Å¡

[ç]

Ü«

shin

Å 

[ʃ]

shin with dot above

t

[t]

ܬ

taw

z

[z]


Z

[ʝ]


This table as a PDF (with appropriate fonts)

So |z| and its dotted form |Z| are certainly borrowed letters; they are either the Greek zeta or the Kirumb zéta, which is technically the same letter.  (I lean towards the latter, though it may be unlikely.)

As far as the phonetic values go, I found some old sound change files and confirmed that |š| and |Š| really were [ç] and [ʃ] respectively—the former descends from a Proto-Drake *ɬ  and the latter retains its original *ʃ value.

I think |Z| is most likely [ʝ], not [Ê’] as David Salo suggested, partly because [ʝ] would fill the blank in the [tç] [ç] [dʝ][—] grid, partly because [ʃ] is already an outlier and apparently lacks a voiced form in the protolanguage as well.  Furthermore it’s only attested in one word so far, ?[çemeʝaː] “six”, where the root [ezaː] “four” usually has [z]; however in this case the [z] is following a [ç], suggesting some kind of undocumented consonant harmony may sometimes be in place—if, again, the |Z| in the word is not an error.  (It’s possible that both [z] and [ʝ] are valid values.)

Tagged , ,

Drake alphabet puzzle.

One of the hazards of working with a language that you don’t work with often is that you tend to forget things.  In many cases, this is generally not a problem so long as you have time to look things up, but with one of your own constructed languages it may not be so easy.   I was doing some work on Drake for the first time in a while and came across a font file I made for it, several years ago.  I had no information about the alphabet outside of the font and one small Shoebox dictionary that used it.

On the bright side, I was able to figure out the phonetic values of almost all the characters from the dictionary file.   The two I am not entirely sure of as yet are the character mapped to “Å¡” and the character mapped to “Å “.  Also, I have one character mapped to “Z”, and it’s the same character as “z” but with a diacritic; however, in the original dictionary it has the same value as “z'”—and only appears in a word from whose root all other derivations have ‘z’.

But the phonetic values of the letters aren’t important at the moment.  I was working on putting this up on FrathWiki so I won’t have to hunt for where the answers are in the future, and realized I had no idea what the alphabetical order is.

Here I’ll pause to show you the script I’m talking about.

compar

The first row is the script, the second row the “transliteration” — or at least the character the letter is mapped to — and the third is the recovered phonetic value.  Yes, it’s technically an abjad.

I probably won’t be able to discover alphabetical order until I can figure out the source of each letter.  I know the alphabet as a whole comes from the same family of old Semitic scripts as Phoenician and Greek did;  letters with diacritics come immediately after the base letter in the alphabetical order, but outside of that, the order should be the standard aleph-beth-gimel.

Anyway, some of the letters are easy to recognize, whether from their shape, or because the phonetic value is unambiguous:  ’ is aleph, l is lamed, m is mem, n is nun, etc.  Some others, less so.  (I’m not sure how I mapped the ’emphatic’ and non-emphatic consonants to Drake characters. And where is ayin?)  Anyone want to take a stab at identifying these letters?

Tagged , , ,

Pliny on the formation of selenite.

Pliny the Elder, on selenite mined near Segóbriga (Segobriga near modern Saelices, Cuenca in Spain), Naturalis Historia 36.45:

Umorem hunc terræ quadam anima crystalli modo glaciari et in lapidem concrescere manifesto apparet, quod cum feræ decidere in puteos tales, medullæ in ossibus earum post unam hiemem in eandem lapidis naturam figurantur.

It is patently obvious that this is a liquid frozen like quartz by some spirit in the earth and hardened into rock, because when animals fall into their mineshafts, their bone marrow transforms into the same kind of rock after a single winter.

As given it sounds like something of an outlandish hypothesis, but apparently the only difficult part is the post unam hiemem “after a single winter”. Gypsum permineralization of animal remains is not unknown, but the process would certainly have taken longer than a season; it has been suggested that the animals found were prehistoric fossils and the assumption that they had fallen into the mine would just have been the simplest explanation of why animals would be found at such a depth to begin with.

Selenite (<em>lapis specularis</em>)

Selenite (lapis specularis)

As for crystalli modo glaciatur—today, of course, we wouldn’t say that any crystal, except possibly that of ice, would be formed by freezing; the usual explanation is precipitation out of a solution. Ancient Europe, though, was very weak on the chemistry of solutions: Aristotle, for example, asserted (in On Generation and Corruption) a drop of wine could not be mixed into ten thousand gallons of water, but that the mass of water would overpower and transform that wine into water if they came together. (Today we recognize contaminants can have effect even highly diluted; a drop in ten thousand gallons is about one part per billion and, to take a concrete example, 2 parts per billion is the maximum acceptable quantity of mercury in American drinking water.) With that level of understanding, saying that something ‘freezes the way that quartz crystal does’ (crystalli modo glaciatur) is probably as close to saying it ‘crystallizes’ that you’re going to get.

Still, to ‘rescue’ the text to something like:

It is patently obvious that this is a liquid crystallized and petrified by some geological process…

…is probably a task best left to Plinipedia, if that ever happens. (There really ought to be a project devoted to updating and correcting Pliny.)

[For crystallum.]

Tagged , , , , , ,