Subject
Re: Pale Fire 'book of names' is Pnin
From
Date
Body
Matt: I love your idiom of us being "on different pages." Let's re-open our
Hymn Books and start singing together at page one!
Whether CK's putative book is about "surnames," "given/first [Christian!]
names," or "place names" -- or just all encompassing "names" -- doesn't
really affect the gist of the argument for or against its "existence." That
"sur" in "surname" (meaning "super" or "superimposed") is but a cutural
device, not found in every language-community. "Surnames" therefore form a
subset of all the PROPER (personal, occupational & place) names, with much
overlapping (take those birthplace guys Da Vinci and Fibonacci! Not to
mention occupationals such as Jesus [the] Christ; and all those Smiths and
Fletchers)
We surely must agree that there are indeed scholarly books (from Oxford
Univ. especially*) on "names" of all kinds. Onomasiology and its sub-branch
Toponymy are thriving "industries," far larger than Nabokovology. They hold
international conferences & publish in all the major languages and freely
translate to and from these languages. In many ways, being
factual/historical/technical references, they are the SIMPLEST to translate,
a SNIP for Adam Thirlwell. To explain the origins of English place names to
a French reader (or vice versa!!) you simply translate the English
explanation, adding perhaps a pronunciation guide e.g.,
Chester: walled town near Liverpool. Site of a Roman camp [etc etc]. From
Latin _castrum_ (fort or camp)
A common suffix -chester or -caster found in Roman cities: Manchester,
Lancaster ...
Chester (tchestair): ville muree pres de Liverpool. Origine: Camp Romain
[etc etc]. Du Latin _castrum_ (camp militaire)
Suffixe populaire -chester ou -caster trouvee dans les cites Romains:
Manchester, Lancaster ...
If my French were better, I could translate the entry on DALE just as
easily. A really proficient translator would undoubtedly GLOSS the
directly-translated English text to help the non-expert French reader. OF
COURSE, one would explain that "Udall" is pronounced "Yew Dall" and that the
"Yew tree plus Dall=Dale" may be the origin of the place name. You've no
idea how contemptuous modern linguists are of amateur, dogmatic etymologists
with their naïve leaps of faith. (MacWhorter calls etymologies "Just-so
Stories" -- back to Kipling). BTW most English readers would not know TUN,
so I suspect Baring-Gould has explained it earlier in his book.
Axiom: anything SAYABLE in natural language X is SAYABLE in natural language
Y.
Why, I womder, is it difficult or TEDIOUS to explain IN ANY LANGUAGE that
the AngloSaxon _cric_ has developed diverse pronunciations and spelling over
1500 years? This is the whole GRIST of the etymological MILL.
In spite of evidence to the contrary, you still maintain that books such as
CK's putative "book of surnames" (translated into English by OUP) is so
instrinsically implausible that we must dismiss JS's claim as false, moving
the reference into a different level of "reality."
I am NOT disagreeing with your conclusion: the ref. to CK's Book & its
Oxford translation is just a typical VN tease. It's your inference-method
that I claim is faulty. Only a big deal to us doryphoric logicians. Seeking
an analogy: if JS told us Hazel was gored to death by a Unicorn, we would
place that assertion at a different "reality" level from other reports of
accidental novelistic deaths (such as H's drowning, or Lolita's mum's timely
demise!) No doubt the death by Unicorn would trgger many LitCrit theories
involving dreams/hallucinations, CK's fiddling with the records, &/or a sure
sign of JS's incest (the singular thust of Siegfied's horn, tra-la), and so
on.
But in the Pale Fire as presented, with tortuous threads go leor, but all
essentially within the known Laws of Physics, no unicorns, dei-ex-machina,
or 4-sided triangles, we have this vexing, passing ref to a book by CK. We
always sit up when books occur _within_ books -- a recurring VN theme
exploited with great relish. Elsewhere, with lesser writers, we groan when
confronted with the novel (poem) about a novelist (poet) writing a novel
(poem) ad nauseam. With VN the narrator is ever-present, up front, yet
strangely distant and mocking -- the kind of magician who pretends to reveal
how the trick is achieved but then fools us by repeating it under impossible
conditions. Always something new to ponder.
skb
* The Oxford NAMES Companion -- OUP, 2002
A detailed and unrivalled study of British surnames, first names, and
place-names, from leading experts in their field
--------
On 23/07/2008 20:17, "Matthew Roth" <MRoth@MESSIAH.EDU> wrote:
> Stan: I think we're not on the same page here. There is no "Book of Names" in
> Pale Fire. After Kinbote confirms the meaning of kinbote (king's destroyer)
> Shade says that CK is the author of "a remarkable book on surnames," of which
> there is an English translation. The clear (at least to me) implication here
> is that CK's book is a scholarly (Oxford UP!) work that examines the
> etymologies and origins of family names. VN probably had something like
> Baring-Gould's "Family Names and Their Story" in mind, since that is where he
> himself gleaned the names and/or backstories for names like Lavender,
> Bretwit(z), Fyler, Campbell/Beauchamp, Lukin, and Shalksbore/Shakespeare. I
> have that book in front of me, so I can furnish another example or two:
>
> Crick (A.S. cric), a creek; not usual as a suffix but found as Creech,
> Evercreech, Cricklade.
>
> Now, since the whole connection between Crick and creek is based on the sound
> of the word, how would one translate that into another language and still have
> it make sense? I suppose you could leave "creek" there, then give the
> translation? Tedious! Or how about this one:
>
> Dale (O.N. dalr), Swaledale, Nithsdale, Borowdale. But Dalton does not signify
> the tun in the dale, but the tun divided in two by a brook. In one of the
> Robin Hood ballads we have: "By the faith of my body," then said the young
> man, / "My name is Allen a Dale." Dale is often "dall"; Tindall stands for
> Tyne-dale. Udall is the yew-dale. Sometimes Dale is corrupted into "dow" or
> "daw," as Lindow or Lindaw.
>
> All kinds of problems arise here. What do you do with tun? What about the
> dale, small d? And if yew is "tas" in your language, will it make sense that
> it comes from Udall?
>
> The whole project seems sufficiently unlikely to me. So much so that it makes
> for a good joke that we may miss if we too blithely throw up our hands and say
> anything is possible.
>
> Best,
> Matt
>
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/
Hymn Books and start singing together at page one!
Whether CK's putative book is about "surnames," "given/first [Christian!]
names," or "place names" -- or just all encompassing "names" -- doesn't
really affect the gist of the argument for or against its "existence." That
"sur" in "surname" (meaning "super" or "superimposed") is but a cutural
device, not found in every language-community. "Surnames" therefore form a
subset of all the PROPER (personal, occupational & place) names, with much
overlapping (take those birthplace guys Da Vinci and Fibonacci! Not to
mention occupationals such as Jesus [the] Christ; and all those Smiths and
Fletchers)
We surely must agree that there are indeed scholarly books (from Oxford
Univ. especially*) on "names" of all kinds. Onomasiology and its sub-branch
Toponymy are thriving "industries," far larger than Nabokovology. They hold
international conferences & publish in all the major languages and freely
translate to and from these languages. In many ways, being
factual/historical/technical references, they are the SIMPLEST to translate,
a SNIP for Adam Thirlwell. To explain the origins of English place names to
a French reader (or vice versa!!) you simply translate the English
explanation, adding perhaps a pronunciation guide e.g.,
Chester: walled town near Liverpool. Site of a Roman camp [etc etc]. From
Latin _castrum_ (fort or camp)
A common suffix -chester or -caster found in Roman cities: Manchester,
Lancaster ...
Chester (tchestair): ville muree pres de Liverpool. Origine: Camp Romain
[etc etc]. Du Latin _castrum_ (camp militaire)
Suffixe populaire -chester ou -caster trouvee dans les cites Romains:
Manchester, Lancaster ...
If my French were better, I could translate the entry on DALE just as
easily. A really proficient translator would undoubtedly GLOSS the
directly-translated English text to help the non-expert French reader. OF
COURSE, one would explain that "Udall" is pronounced "Yew Dall" and that the
"Yew tree plus Dall=Dale" may be the origin of the place name. You've no
idea how contemptuous modern linguists are of amateur, dogmatic etymologists
with their naïve leaps of faith. (MacWhorter calls etymologies "Just-so
Stories" -- back to Kipling). BTW most English readers would not know TUN,
so I suspect Baring-Gould has explained it earlier in his book.
Axiom: anything SAYABLE in natural language X is SAYABLE in natural language
Y.
Why, I womder, is it difficult or TEDIOUS to explain IN ANY LANGUAGE that
the AngloSaxon _cric_ has developed diverse pronunciations and spelling over
1500 years? This is the whole GRIST of the etymological MILL.
In spite of evidence to the contrary, you still maintain that books such as
CK's putative "book of surnames" (translated into English by OUP) is so
instrinsically implausible that we must dismiss JS's claim as false, moving
the reference into a different level of "reality."
I am NOT disagreeing with your conclusion: the ref. to CK's Book & its
Oxford translation is just a typical VN tease. It's your inference-method
that I claim is faulty. Only a big deal to us doryphoric logicians. Seeking
an analogy: if JS told us Hazel was gored to death by a Unicorn, we would
place that assertion at a different "reality" level from other reports of
accidental novelistic deaths (such as H's drowning, or Lolita's mum's timely
demise!) No doubt the death by Unicorn would trgger many LitCrit theories
involving dreams/hallucinations, CK's fiddling with the records, &/or a sure
sign of JS's incest (the singular thust of Siegfied's horn, tra-la), and so
on.
But in the Pale Fire as presented, with tortuous threads go leor, but all
essentially within the known Laws of Physics, no unicorns, dei-ex-machina,
or 4-sided triangles, we have this vexing, passing ref to a book by CK. We
always sit up when books occur _within_ books -- a recurring VN theme
exploited with great relish. Elsewhere, with lesser writers, we groan when
confronted with the novel (poem) about a novelist (poet) writing a novel
(poem) ad nauseam. With VN the narrator is ever-present, up front, yet
strangely distant and mocking -- the kind of magician who pretends to reveal
how the trick is achieved but then fools us by repeating it under impossible
conditions. Always something new to ponder.
skb
* The Oxford NAMES Companion -- OUP, 2002
A detailed and unrivalled study of British surnames, first names, and
place-names, from leading experts in their field
--------
On 23/07/2008 20:17, "Matthew Roth" <MRoth@MESSIAH.EDU> wrote:
> Stan: I think we're not on the same page here. There is no "Book of Names" in
> Pale Fire. After Kinbote confirms the meaning of kinbote (king's destroyer)
> Shade says that CK is the author of "a remarkable book on surnames," of which
> there is an English translation. The clear (at least to me) implication here
> is that CK's book is a scholarly (Oxford UP!) work that examines the
> etymologies and origins of family names. VN probably had something like
> Baring-Gould's "Family Names and Their Story" in mind, since that is where he
> himself gleaned the names and/or backstories for names like Lavender,
> Bretwit(z), Fyler, Campbell/Beauchamp, Lukin, and Shalksbore/Shakespeare. I
> have that book in front of me, so I can furnish another example or two:
>
> Crick (A.S. cric), a creek; not usual as a suffix but found as Creech,
> Evercreech, Cricklade.
>
> Now, since the whole connection between Crick and creek is based on the sound
> of the word, how would one translate that into another language and still have
> it make sense? I suppose you could leave "creek" there, then give the
> translation? Tedious! Or how about this one:
>
> Dale (O.N. dalr), Swaledale, Nithsdale, Borowdale. But Dalton does not signify
> the tun in the dale, but the tun divided in two by a brook. In one of the
> Robin Hood ballads we have: "By the faith of my body," then said the young
> man, / "My name is Allen a Dale." Dale is often "dall"; Tindall stands for
> Tyne-dale. Udall is the yew-dale. Sometimes Dale is corrupted into "dow" or
> "daw," as Lindow or Lindaw.
>
> All kinds of problems arise here. What do you do with tun? What about the
> dale, small d? And if yew is "tas" in your language, will it make sense that
> it comes from Udall?
>
> The whole project seems sufficiently unlikely to me. So much so that it makes
> for a good joke that we may miss if we too blithely throw up our hands and say
> anything is possible.
>
> Best,
> Matt
>
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/