> “I’d like to say that the interpretation I have put forward should be taken into a count by future translations,” he said.<p>I think there’s a bit of unintentional humor in this line, like it belongs in “i am the walrus”. The researcher would _like_ to say something, which makes me think the sentence has an implied completion of “but I won’t say it”, which I already find kind of funny. And then of course the quote is tagged with “he said”, lol, almost like the author is mocking him. Maybe my brain is just broken, but that’s so funny to me
I used to use this (still do really) as a technique when starting undergraduate lectures. They’re there, ready to listen, but chatting away and need a moment to focus their attention.<p>*SO* let me tell you further fun facts about carbonyl chemistry…<p>Works. Those Anglo-Saxons knew what they were about.
Beowulf translation is a whole academic field, the translation has been debated ad nauseum for 100s of years, Tolkien had his own translation and opinion, which differed from others. One additional scholar adding his own interpretation doesn't necessarily overturn anything. There is not enough detail in this article to know how compelling the case is or what the counter arguments would be.
The article references a forthcoming publication that I can't find a draft of. Here's an older publication on the topic by the same author: <a href="http://walkden.space/Walkden_2013_hwaet.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://walkden.space/Walkden_2013_hwaet.pdf</a><p>Edit: Oh, the PF article is from 2013, so this must be the actual publication after all.
[dead]
"What ho" as in British English seems like a descendant of this usage<p><a href="https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/77151/what-ho-of-bertie-wooster" rel="nofollow">https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/77151/what-ho-of...</a>
I’ll share another great version of Beowulf- Bea Wolf. Based on kids, with fantastic artwork and a great story/version. My kids absolutely love me reading this and I absolutely love reading it as a large passed down story of battles.<p><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/60316971-bea-wolf" rel="nofollow">https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/60316971-bea-wolf</a>
It's an interesting idea, but I'm thrown by "a count" in "should be taken into a count by future translations"
Yeah, weird to see a couple of linguistic mistakes like this in an article about linguistic mistakes. Another is the misuse of "latter-day". The article uses it to refer to an old thing that is analogous to a modern thing: "[a] latter-day 'yo!'" But "latter-day" actually describes something modern. (E.g., the "latter days" refers to the present age. See "Latter-day Saints".)
Me too, I just thought that I wouldn't trust an article on linguistics with such an error too much.
Amusingly, the source article [0] linked to in TFA does not contain the same error:<p><pre><code> > “I’d like to say that the interpretation I have put forward should be taken into account by future translations,” he said.
</code></pre>
0: <a href="https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/books/news/listen-beowulf-opening-line-misinterpreted-for-200-years-8921027.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/books/new...</a>
Not present in the original report at The Independent:<p>> “I’d like to say that the interpretation I have put forward should be taken into account by future translations,” he said.<p><a href="https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/books/news/listen-beowulf-opening-line-misinterpreted-for-200-years-8921027.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/books/new...</a><p>It's possible The Independent fixed it up in an edit after The Poetry Foundation made a copy of it.
You could always read the Maria Dahvana Headley translation that starts with "Bro!":<p><a href="https://www.historytoday.com/archive/review/beowulf-bro" rel="nofollow">https://www.historytoday.com/archive/review/beowulf-bro</a><p>"Bro! Tell me we still know how to speak of kings!<p>In the old days, everyone knew what men were: brave, bold, glory-bound.<p>Only stories now, but I’ll sound the Spear-Danes’ song, hoarded for hungry times."
I know it's unconventional, but I thoroughly enjoyed reading that translation. It felt so alive, and other translations have never engaged me in quite the same way.
beat me to it. another article: <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/08/27/906423831/bro-this-is-not-the-beowulf-you-think-you-know" rel="nofollow">https://www.npr.org/2020/08/27/906423831/bro-this-is-not-the...</a><p>her adaptation, <i>The Mere Wife</i>, needs to get adapted to film or series yesterday
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mere_Wife" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mere_Wife</a>
How about "Whoa!"? That seems to me like it preserves some of the ambiguous sense (calling for attention vs. remarking upon a discovery).
(2013)