Delfincarbonell

Mi nuevo librito Literatura en lengua inglesa I, publicado por Editatum, Madrid, 2023, no es una historia de la literatura inglesa convencional, aburrida y coñazo.

Explico mis experiencias  en las lecturas formales en la universidad de Duquesne, de Pittsburgh, Pa., y mis posteriores estudios de libros en lengua inglesa, de todo tipo de países, no sólo de Ingaterra, y de ahí el título.

En este primer volumen -de lo que será una trilogía- abarco desde Beowulf hasta Thackeray.

Creo que es una guía sucinta y clara que abrirá, para algunos, las puertas de muchos escritores en lengua inglesa, intrigándoles a leer más.

Eso es lo que yo espero, claro. Está en castellano con muchos ejemplos en inglés.   

My new book is out: Literatura en lengua Inglesa I, published by Editatum, Madrid, Spain, 2023. The title refers to literature written in the English language, regardless of geography.

This first volume deals with British and American writers, but the coming ones will include Australians, South Africans, Irish, and even Jamaicans.

This effort of mine is not truly a history of literature of the English people, but rather my vision and experiences with my readings in the English language.

It is a very personal account and reflection on writers from Beowulf to Thackeray, in this first volume.

I told the publisher that I would have to write another book after this one, but now I know that I will have to make it a trilogy that will include all English-speaking writers I have come across in my long life.

Take a look and reach out if you have any comments. 

Un amable amigo (Phillippe Diederich) me envía un escrito en Instagram de diccionariovip, intitulado "Palabras castellanas antiguas que te gustaría conocer." Yo creo que esta gente confunde "antiguo" con "ignorante." Veamos:

Francachela. Encuentro en el banco de datos CREA, 28 ejemplos literarios recientes de España, México, Guatemala, Chile, C. Rica y Cuba. Gabriel García Márquez era un antiguo que empleaba la palabra. 

Correveidile. CREA nos da 20 ejemplos recientes de España, Venezuela, Perú, México, Rep. Dominicana. Vargas Llosa, Premio Nobel, emplea la palabra. Tampoco es palabra antigua.

Jacarandoso. 20 ejemplos recientes de uso de España, México, Cuba, P. Rico, Venezuela. Parece vivita y coleando.

Zangolotino. CREA nos da 20 ejemplos de uso de España sólo. CORDE nos da sólo tres ejemplos, de Galdós y Baroja.

Cuando el nativo no sabe un término de su idioma suele decir o que no existe o que es "antiguo" y está en desuso, como los señores de diccionariovip de Instagram.

Las palabras están para expresar ideas y cuando representan algo que ya no se emplea y ha desaparecido, como "trébede" entonces sí que podemos hablar de algo antiguo, si no, no.

Tratemos de ampliar el horizonte de nuestro vocabulario para expresarnos mejor, de manera jacarandosa, y seamos cerreveidiles y comentemos el vocabulario nuevo que hemos aprendido. 

I have always loved technology and have been lucky enough to witness the birth of what imbeciles call "the new technology", capable of doing things a that few years ago were absolutely unimaginable.

It has afforded countless opportunities for all.

Wonderful. And yet, I am not completely satisfied, because of the biblical dictum that many are called but few are chosen.

Take Wikipedia, which I have renamed "Wackipedia" because it is truly wacky and irresponsible, and cannot be trusted.

It must be used with a grain of salt because, as it is a universal encyclopedia written by all and sunder under no real scholarly control, its accuracy is always in doubt.

We are forced to double-check its information from reliable sources. Some articles are exceedingly long, while others are much too short.

Very laudatory with some living authors, and miserly with others.

And the translations into Spanish are a barrel of laughs!

Of course, we can always consult The Encyclopedia Britannica, a truly reliable source of scholarly information, but we have to pay.

Cheap is dear, as we all know.    

El término jurídico inglés the LAWFARE se define como: "the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual´s usage of their legal rights."

Es un neologismo reciente que proviene de WARFARE.

Ha aparecido en la escena política y cívica española a insistencia de un grupo político separatista. Lo interesante para mí es cómo pronuncían el término los medios de comunicación.

Al oírlo la primera vez no sabía exactamente a qué se referían. Al ser una voz anglosajona se debería, creo, pronunciar tal cual. Quiero hacer hincapié, y esto va para los españoles, que no sólo hay que hablar de Internet y de la IA, sino emplearlas.

Cuando no sabemos una palabra inglesa, no sabemos tampoco cómo pronunciarla.

Ah, pero para eso tenemos diccionarios en línea, que no sólo nos traducen el vocablo, sino que lo definen y, lo más importante, lo vocalizan y podemos oír cómo se pronuncia.

Internet, Wikipedia, Inteligencia Artificial, ChatGPT y demás, no sirven para nada si no se consultan. Consejo: no trate de pronunciar una palabra inglesa, por simple que parezca, sin antes cerciorarse de cómo se pronuncia.   

The news of the death of my friend José María Carrascal has shocked me.

He was the type of person I thought would live forever, certainly I believed he would outlive me. Don´t ask me why.

He favored me with his friendship, with articles about my books, with a prologue to my Phonétic inglesa, and his interest in the English language.

Lately, we had been in the habit of meeting once a year over a cup of coffee and talking about literature and politics.

I have all of his books, autographed. His apocryphal autobiography of Ortega y Gasset is my favorite.

It seems that last Tuesday he wrote and published his last article for the newspaper ABC. Today is a sad day indeed. 

I won´t give up. I shall never tire of exposing online and AI translators and warning all and sunder against their shortcomings and dangers.

Am I a stick-in-the-mud old fogey? You judge for yourselves.

Put them to the test. I have on many occasions, in fact, just now I got "palo en el barro/lodo" and "persona pegada al barro" for stick-in-the-mud.

Now everything goes but not quite. Beware of AI and other online translators lest you make a fool of yourself.  

We have milestones in our lives, milestones we remember and treasure. I have many intellectual milestones I often remember and always treasure.

On Fridays, my two daughters and I used to go to Oxford Bookstore in Madrid, Paseo de la Habana, and buy books to read over the weekend.

I acquired many exciting titles from Penguin Books, which we still have. In that bookstore, I was able to discover new British authors.

Reviewing some of my books today, I discovered two that I loved: Memento Mori and The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, by a Scottish woman, Muriel Spark (1918-2006).

I recommend both titles and the writer who brings fond memories of a gone-by era in my life.  

For years I have been raving and fretting about placing two prepositions together in Spanish, as in "voy a por el periódico" and insisted on "voy por el periódico", but I have finally given up, considering that the Church talks about "nuestros deberes para con Dios", for example.

We are also told that Christ "resucitó de entre los mu***os". So I have come to think that my stand was "de por sí ridícula" and have decided to change it.

So, as far as I am concerned, go ahead and put two Spanish prepositions one after the other, at will. You have my blessings. Thank you. 

Antonio Banderas ha protagonizado muchas películas en Hollywood, siempre como personaje extranjero.

La razón es su fuerte acento español en inglés.

Es un buen actor pero es obvio que la fonética de la lengua inglesa se le resiste, a pesar de que habrá tenido buenos instructores de fonética para remediar esta situación.

Esto demuestra lo peliagudo que es pronunciar el inglés como nativo.

Claro, él no ha sido el único pues ha estado acompañado de Charles Boyer, Salma Hayek, Penélope Cruz, Sofía Loren, Ingrid Bergman, Anthony Quinn, Peter Lorre, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Maurice Chevalier, Bela Lugosi... y tantos más.

Esto, sin embargo, no debe arredrarnos en lo más mínimo. Hay que intentarlo. 

Puede parecer que la tengo tomada con ChatGPT, pero es que simplemente quiero alertar a los posibles incautos de la realidad de la cacareada Inteligencia Artificial, por lo menos en cuestiones lingüísticas.

Tengo muchos, demasiados defectos y limitaciones, pero de fraseología bilingüe sé un rato.

Hay que poner sobreaviso a los usuarios del ChatGPT como traductor, que no es fiable en absoluto.

Por ejemplo: para la frase "David siempre llega y besa el santo" ChatGPT nos da "David always arrives and kisses the holy image."

Por lo menos ChatGPT tiene gran sentido del humor.

Y para reírnos más, le he pedido a ChatGPT que tradujese: "Le dije a David que no me viniera con romances" que el chat traduce como "I told David not to come to me with romance."

Y podemos continuar ad nauseam pero de muestra valen esos dos botones, así que ¡ojo al Cristo, que es de plata! (que para ChatGPT es "watch out for the silver Christ.")      

"The phrase "ponerse el mundo por montera" is a Spanish idiom that literally translates to "putting the world on like a bullfighter's hat" in English.

However, its meaning is more metaphorical and doesn't have a direct equivalent in English." This is what ChatGPT tells me and, do you know what? I don´t give a flying f**k what AI says, yo me pongo el mundo por montera.

"The government doesn´t give a fly f**k about them." (The Guardian, June 23, 2023.)

"Yo haré lo que me dé la gana. Me pongo el mundo por montera." (Manuel Martínez Mediero, El niño de Belén, 1991.)

My daughter informed me that ChatGPT also offered translation services.

Being the way I am -I just can´t help it- I rushed to put that service to the test, rather more of a medieval ordeal, hell and high water. Why?

Because I am mischievous, I wanted to make it tough on the program and feed it idiomatic expressions and idioms in English and Spanish. The result, as I expected, was poor, to say the least. 

For "verse a la legua" ChatGPT offers this: "Verse a la legua in English translates as to be seen from a mile away or to be obvious at a glance.

It is an idiomatic expression used to describe something that is easily noticeable, apparent, or obvious from a distance or at first sight." In my Phraseological Dictionary, I offer the right equivalent: "Stand (stick) out a mile. Stand out like a sore thumb.

Another example: "The equivalent expression in Spanish for there´s no crying over spilt milk is: no hay que llorar sobre la leche derramada." Mu**to el b***o, la cebada al rabo, I say, and further a lo hecho, pecho.

No need to continue, para muestra vale un botón, an example is enough. 

Chat GPT is not going to solve our expert and serious translation problems. At least, not yet.

Luis Rubiales, former chief executive officer of the Spanish Soccer Federation has resigned.

Mr. Rubiales wanted to stay, come hail or high water, but he was finally forced to leave his post.

The Spanish Media have announced that "Rubiales ha dimitido en una entrevista en inglés", for the BBC.

A proverb from the Bible comes to mind: "when the blind lead the blind, they both fall into the ditch."

The interviewer asked questions in English and Mr. Rubiales answered using Spanish syntax, phonetics, idiomatic expressions, and vocabulary but in English.

The Spanish Media calls this "English" because it matches the type of English most Spanish reporters use.

I am very chagrined about this state of affairs. The mastery of a language, more than anything else, shows the character and abilities of a person. 

Reading Haruki Murakami´s Novelist as a vocation, I was alerted to this: "Ultimately, I learned that there was no need for a lot of difficult words..." when he explains that he began writing in English, a language he hardly knew.

And "difficult words" made me stop, put the book down, and come to my computer.

What are difficult words? Is "alert" a difficult word? Is "quiddity" a difficult word? How about "conceit"? 

I suppose, then, that we could divide vocabulary into two parts: easy words and difficult words, but I do not think this is the way "difficult" works when dealing with words. (I think I am getting all tangled up!) Words are meanings, and meanings are neither difficult nor easy.

We must use the exact word to represent the right meaning, as simple as that, and that is why we must expand our vocabulary in order to use the right words to describe our conceits.

No, there are no difficult words. We might, however, have difficult meanings in our brains and that, I know, is a horse of a different color.

PS. I remember that in my youth people referred to "5-cent words" and "10-dollar words." But that was long ago.

I confess I am a true-blue packrat. I guess it´s part of my DNA makeup.

Certainly, I am no oddball because I share this trait with 99 percent of my fellow humans.

Packrats, also known as trade rats and magpies, are those who collect and gather things as a hobby or, perhaps, as a compulsion.

In polite society, we are known simply as collectors, of paintings, stamps, old photographs, miniature cars, comic books... You name it.

What do I collect? I am forever sniffing the air for words to add to my collection, in English and Spanish. I keep my eyes peeled for new idiomatic expressions when I read.

My ears are always pricked up for phrases I can add to my ever-growing collection.

I must say that I am an eavesdropper on the bus, subway, and coffee shop, trying to catch new items for my list.

Often I muse that I am a bit unhinged, deranged, gaga... but I can´t help it. I am a bilingual lexicographer.  

"A moving middle-grade mystery about a boy dealing with long-repressed memories of his father as he learns about his Mexican and Haitian heritage while spying on a mysterious stranger during the first weeks..." así se nos describe esta novela de Philippe Diederich que recomiendo a todos los que quieran mejorar su inglés.

La novela va dirigida a jóvenes nativos del inglés, y emplea un lenguaje que es asequible a los estudiosos de este idioma.

Ya saben que siempre digo que para dominar un idioma, hay que leerlo, pero poco a poco, con lecturas modernas, simples, asequibles, con un inglés moderno de hoy.

Esto lo hace Diederich muy bien, mejor que Dickens y Jane Austen, con su inglés decimonónico.

I have been advocating the 15-minute-a-day method for language learning for years and am still backing it.

As a matter of fact, only yesterday I suggested a student of mine try it. At first glance, it appears to be an easy task to take on but difficult to adhere to because this method, which totals 91 hours of study yearly, puts the student´s character to the test.

It boils down to focusing on language study for fifteen minutes every day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.

I have challenged many of my students to do it, only to find that not one has been able to pursue this method for more than a month.

Out of 24 hours, it would seem easy to set apart 15 minutes daily to accomplish a given task, but it isn´t.

Given the nature of the brain, rituals are welcome but end up becoming boring, and boredom kills learning.

I have not solved this drawback or glitch in the system, but I still believe in the 15-minute-a-day method for language learning and I am still giving the matter much thought.      

Language -any language- has a dearth of possibilities that man refuses to admit. We prefer to think that language is a limitless tool at our service.

We may believe we can express our thoughts adequately using words but, unfortunately, language does not stretch that much.

Feelings and emotions are hard to pin down with words, words whose meanings change in time, and with customs and conventions.

There will always be a gap between what we are trying to convey and the words we actually use.

Language is not a static entity so please do not be deceived, and remember that language is not a scientific tool. 

As you know, I champion original-language films to improve our second-language skills.

In the previous post, I dealt with Netflix's House of Cards, and commented about it.

However, I want to warn you not to be deceived. The language in films does not reflect the language it is in day-to-day living, in any country or any social class, or period in time.

The dialogs actors mouth are the products of the imagination of scriptwriters who are the slaves of their culture, social background, education, and experience.

This is important to bear in mind. You are not hearing native speakers ad-libbing in their normal social setting.

That you will find when overhearing conversations on the subway of New York or the underground in London.

See the difference?   

Of late, and at my daughter ’s behest, I have been watching Netflix´s House of Cards.

Wags have it that the stuff found on this platform is superb entertainment. I have access thanks to my daughter ’s charitable offer to admit me to her channel, again at her behest. I

am sold on the virtues of the Internet for language learning. Online you can find just about everything, and plenty of tools, to aid and guide you in your foreign-language acquisition. Watching films in the original language is an activity I highly recommend.

However, last night, watching another episode of House of Cards, I was intrigued by the language used by the politicians involved.

The scriptwriters make a tour de force to instill the dialog with witticisms, puns, proverbs, sayings, and funny linguistic sleight of hands, quick and brisk, which, to me and in the end, sound faux.

People, not even politicians, talk like that. So witty, so clever, so quick on the draw, so swift in the funny retort, all make us doubt that this is a reflection of any type of reality.

And then, to make it worse, actors mumble and whisper to themselves. They seem to forget that there is an audience out there that needs to understand what is going on.

The congressman-turned-vice president speaks funny. Is it because he is faking a Southern accent?

Then, why am I writing about this?

Because I still urge you to watch original-language films, by all means, but the right ones.

Watch films where actors speak distinctly and clearly and where the dialog is true to the realities of language.

Robert McKee in an interview says that American actors are hard to understand, and he knows a thing or two about the film industry.    

The study of language is neither more nor less complicated than the study of math, or history, or biology... except that the latter do not have to be pronounced.

Ah, there's the rub! "You must understand this equation and then you have to pronounce it well, like a native mathematician!" Silly, right? This splitting of hairs shows the real problem behind language-learning: phonetics.

I keep flogging a dead horse, but I will not tire of saying it. English is an easy language, but difficult to pronounce.

Spanish is a difficult language and also difficult to pronounce.

I know plenty of readers will differ and cry out loud that Spanish is written and pronounced exactly the same. I refer you to Tomás Navarro Tomás, Manual de pronunciación española.

If there are many people who pronounce Spanish and English well, why shouldn´t you? Are you stupid or something? Say to yourself: If they can, I can!

Los hablantes nativos de una lengua creen que pueden hacer con su idioma lo que les dé la gana, que para eso es de ellos. Y llevan razón. Cada cual puede hacer de su capa un sayo. Pero no siempre es así:

Escuchamos en castellano "delante mío" por "delante de mí", "mu" por "muy", "na" por "nada", "entrar dentro" por "entrar", "hispanoparlante" por "hispanohablante"... pero el extranjero no puede tomarse esas libertades y tiene que ceñirse a las reglas gramaticales y fonéticas siempre.

El extranjero está "de visita" en el idioma que aprende y los visitantes deben ser respetuosos con los anfitriones.

Oiremos a los nativos anglohablantes decir:
"Want a beer?" ("Ju wanabeer?")
"Need a hand?"
"You going now?"
"Wanna come?"
"How much it costs?"
"Watcha doin´?" Pero lo apropiado es decir
"Do you want a beer?
"Do you need a hand?"
"Are you going now?"
"Do you want to come?"
"How much does it cost?"
"What are you doing?" Que es lo que diremos nosotros porque si queremos aparentar seriedad debemos expresarnos con seriedad, con pulcritud, con exactitud, con buena gramática... Broken grammar leads to broken English. And broken relationships and, finally, failure.

Lee más en el enlace en el perfil.

̃ol

This is for those who whine, grumble, moan, carp, complain and protest too much, like Ophelia.

Excuses, excuses, set forth by all those slackers who pull their hair out exclaiming that languages are just impossible to learn.

They will not accept responsibility for their laziness and lack of drive.

"I have no time," "I am too old," "I can´t find a good teacher," "this method is not for me," "I can´t travel to New Zealand to practice," "my children get in my hair all the time"... you name it!

At this stage, I have heard just about everything. Spare me the drama, I say! Keep your language drama to yourselves, and carry on with your drab, little life.

¿Qué tienen en común los nombres Perico en castellano y George en inglés? Más de lo que pensamos.

El diminutivo Perico, de Pedro, tiene apellido: "el de los palotes."

Ambos nombres han dado pie a dos modismos o dichos: "que lo haga Perico el de los palotes" y "let George do it" con el mismo significado de que lo haga otra persona.

"Yo me niego a pintar la casa, que la pinte Perico de los palotes."

"I refuse to paint the house, let George do it."

Esta fraseología es importante y demuestra nuestros conocimientos de ambos idiomas. 

Uno de los bulos más extendido es que el español no tiene aptitud para los idiomas.

Este fatalismo oriental aplicado a la inteligencia del español medio quiere justificar fallos que nada tienen que ver con la capacidad del cerebro de los habitantes de Hispania.

¿Son los suecos más inteligentes que los españoles? Porque los suecos hablan idiomas foráneos muy bien y los españoles no.

¿Será posible que el español medio tenga un cociente intelectual más bajo que nuestros parientes humanos del norte de Europa? ¿Serán por desgracia más tontos los españoles? No sé.

El Dr. James Watson no se ha pronunciado sobre este tema específico todavía y por desgracia para nosotros. Mientras tanto yo creo que tan tontos son los suecos como los españoles.

Tan listos son los holandeses como los españoles. Y por lo tanto tenemos dos opciones:

Resignarnos a pensar que somos estúpidos y que por eso no hablamos idiomas o creer que algo falla en nuestro sistema educativo o en el carácter local nuestro. Yo, por ejemplo, que también me gusta opinar, ¡no faltaba más!,

·       No creo que el español medio tenga una inteligencia inferior a la del europeo medio.

·       Creo que el sistema educativo español es un desastre, inferior a otros sistemas europeos.

·       Creo que la enseñanza de idiomas en España está en manos de incompetentes que no tienen la menor idea de lo que es aprender idiomas.

Esta aseveración la puedo repetir delante de quien quiera y dónde quiera. Esto no es hablar por hablar. Sé lo que digo.

Después de lo dicho, usted debe decidir si es im***il o no a la hora de tratar de dominar el idioma inglés, o cualquier otro.

(De mi El laberinto del idioma inglés. Hoja de ruta.)

Language is not about a prescriptive or descriptive approach to it. It goes far beyond that. If descriptive grammar simply tells you about it, the prescriptive approach judges it.

I am not taking sides when I point out grammar, syntax, vocabulary, or phonetics errors.

Deep down, I could not care less. But language is all about communication, not about being right or wrong. It deals with how to convey ideas briefly, clearly, and easily. 

Transgressions against the established rules usually create confusion and misunderstandings. 

As an example, of late I have been listening to Spanish politicians mishandling their language and creating havoc in the minds of the average citizen.

Listening to them, it is clear they are educationally half-baked, tending to use bizarre syntax, making up strange neologisms, misquoting proverbs, and changing ready-made idiomatic expressions in a helter-skelter way.

No wonder Spain is in a state of educational, intellectual, and emotional turmoil. 

Language is mankind´s primary tool, the basic tool, and the foundation of everything. In language and communication, we can quote Thoreau who told us: "Simplify, simplify!"

Cut to the chase and forget the rest of the chaff. 

Spanish as "dar una pierna arriba" which is a good word-for-word translation but off the mark.

WordReference gives us "levantar, aupar, dar ventaja" which come closer but still off the mark again, considering that the definition is: "To give someone an advantage over others" which brings to mind the Spanish equivalent of "dar trato de favor, trato discriminatorio a favor de alguien." 

Collins, always on cloud nine, says it is "a preferential treatment." 

— “Quieren saber si la Junta de Castilla y León dio trato de favor a la Caja Rural de Zamora.” El Mundo, 24/08/1994. Esp.

— “Wesleyan University… is ending legacy admissions, which give a leg up to the children of alumni.” New York Times, July 19, 2023. US.

Why point this out? Just to make students of either language aware of how dictionaries treat phraseology.

In my latest dictionary, I am attempting to remedy this problem. 

A self-appointed phonetician on Instagram, a few weeks ago,  endeavored to teach Spanish speakers the sound of /th/ as in think, thigh, or thwart.

He pointed out that this sound does not exist in Spanish. The phonetician, obviously, does not differentiate casar and cazar, serrar and cerrar, coser and cocer. 

I do, along with many others. My point is that when comparing languages, we must be true to the two of them.

The sound of /th/ in think does exist in Spanish in cazar.

True enough that the point of articulation is a bit different: the English sound is interdental and the Spanish sound is dental.

And here, once again, I must paraphrase Ortega y Gasset: The horizon of our language is not the horizon of language.

And once again I must warn you: beware of unqualified native speakers pontificating on the language they speak. 

The Internet is chock-full of well-meaning people -I would like to think-, mostly natives, who insist on telling readers what in English or Spanish is "informal" or "formal".

They disregard the complexities of language, society, and culture. But these self-appointed, latter-day language gurus love to pontificate about what they consider appropriate.

"If you want to sound more like a native, don´t say how are you, say hiya." To pass off as a native speaker, don´t say, Mister Smith , say, Mac, or you."

They insist that using "madam" when addressing a woman is old-fashioned and stilted.

According to them, the word "sir" came into disuse decades ago, and nowadays "I´m good" has definitely replaced "I am well."

Again, it is all a question of age, education mores, context, and social standing.

This a thin line that foreign students cannot tread without perhaps falling into the abyss of bad manners and thus rejection.

So, please, beware of those who tell you: "Don´t say this, say this." Stop, consider, and do some research.