Print

Print


My point was that he was able to bring this enviable skill to bear on his poetry. It added a depth and richness that were peculiarly his own.
P.

Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Unless you have never known many people who have great facility with language, and many do, I do not understand this. There is no marvel at all--he knew Latin and several modern languages: I don't but many do.
>
>Nancy
>
>>>> Chokh Raj 11/13/12 10:40 AM >>>
>
>That facility and through that facility getting at the essence of things. 
>Thus, for instance, not merely learning Sanskrit but through it 
>getting at the heart of ancient Indian wisdom. 
>The marvel ceases not.
>
>CR
>
>
>From: Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>; 
>To: <[log in to unmask]>; 
>Subject: OT (sort of) Philology. Sort of. 
>Sent: Mon, Nov 12, 2012 8:35:53 AM 
>
>Mark Twain once said, "My philological studies have satisfied me that a gifted person ought to learn English (barring spelling and pronouncing) in thirty hours, French in thirty days, and German in thirty years."
>
>Eliot seems to have learned them all, all at once, not to mention Latin and Sanskrit.
>
>I don't recall our having discussed Eliot's facility with language, which it seems to me to have been quite phenomenal and one of the things that makes his work so incredibly attractive. I know it is gauche on this list to say nice things about Eliot, but there it is. I've done it and I'm very glad.
>