LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TSE Archives


TSE Archives

TSE Archives


TSE@PO.MISSOURI.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TSE Home

TSE Home

TSE  April 2006

TSE April 2006

Subject:

Re: 'Tyger' and 'Vrka' (Was: 'Mind forged menacles' (sic) and spelling )

From:

Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

T. S. Eliot Discussion forum.

Date:

Sat, 8 Apr 2006 11:29:33 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (127 lines)

As it happens, that is not what "negative capability is about." Nor is
Eliot's theory of impersonality, though I fail to see how it is combined
with "control." But as you seem to be completely in agreement with
Tabitha and me and contradicting Peter since you focus on the "liberty"
with language of "a man" who "knows" it, why are you praising his
commitment to not "knowing" any particular "language" that is
consistent? "Taking liberties" with something already there is, of
course, the point, minus the assumption of language being a male
preserve.
Nancy

>>> [log in to unmask] 04/08/06 9:18 AM >>>
I'm also reminded of Keats' "Negative Capability"
  in the context of Shakespeare. It's not a case of
  one's being a turncoat, a scarecrow that turns with
  every wind. Only a man who knows his language
  can take liberties with the language.
   
  Thanks again.
   
  ~ CR
   
  

cr mittal <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
    Thanks, Peter, for your superb elucidation of
  "mind-forged manacles" vis-a-vis spellings.
  Your closing observation
   
    Is there a fear of loss of power through loss of control here?
  Dare we let ordinary people take back the language for themselves?
  Guess what? It doesn't matter. They're doing it anyway.

  reminds me of TSE's concept of Impersonality/Control.
   
  Regards.
   
  ~ CR
   
  

Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
  What's wrong with being wrong? Seems rather unfortunate to
me to avoid speculation based on what one knows, just to
avoid being wrong. Since lives on being wrong.

Why do there need to be rules for variation?
What is wrong with open-ended exploration?
If the written language in all its incredible variations and
off-shooots could last for a millenium without a lexicon,
why does it need one now, after only three centuries?

Conventions are not the same things as standards.
An e on the end or not is irrelevant. A double consonant
is irrelevant. The demands of sound would be the guide,
not the demands of the lexicon.

Chaucer can seem pretty difficult when first experienced as
writing, but once the oral dimension is introduced, all the little
pfennigs tend to drop into place.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Is there a fear of loss of power through loss of control here?
Dare we let ordinary people take back the language for themselves?
Guess what? It doesn't matter. They're doing it anyway.

P.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Gish"
To:
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 9:23 PM
Subject: 'Tyger' and 'Vrka' (Was: 'Mind forged menacles' (sic) and
spelling )


I don't know the answer to your question because it has been too long
since
I studied Anglo-Saxon, and I would not go by the texts I have since they
may
be too dated. I only know that at the time we were required on exams to
place texts by geography and date on the basis of spelling and lexicon,
and
we were given only a few lines at a time. That does not suggest wide
variation in individuals. And I do not "suspect" anything because it is
a
matter of linguistic history which could be checked to the extent that
we
have texts, not just opinion.

In any case, our disagreement is over the notion itself that there is
anything particularly individually creative or freeing about spelling by
personal choice. I see nothing freeing about it: as others have well
stated, it is only by contrast to a standard that any variation has
effect.
If there is only random variation, there is no way to make distinctive
effects and thus no particular free creativity either.

I pointed out that TWL is all in standard spelling, but of course there
is
the one variation of "that "Shakespeherian Rag." The impact of that is
due
to its difference from "Shakespearean" and its syncopated rhythm. (One
can
do a triple time swing step to the whole phrase, and Eliot apparently
liked
to dance though Vivienne did not think he was all that good at it.)

You said in another post that no one is talking about just random
spelling
variation, but you have not described or defined any form of structured
or
meaningful or limited variation. Whatever is "the point"? What, other
than
pronouncements of personal opinion, supports your "point"?
Cheers

    
---------------------------------
  New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and
save big.


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low
rates.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



PO.MISSOURI.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager