From: abrodnik@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Andrej Brodnik (Andy))
Subject: Re: Crookedness
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 20:15:37 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.144039.10722@husc3.harvard.edu> benedejc@husc10.harvard.edu (Andrej Benedejcic) writes:
>>>
>>>1.  Slovene grammar expressly forbids the usage of any clearly foreign
>>>    words in writing 
>>>
>>>2.  The word "hohstapler" is basically an anachronism.  Young people
>>>    especially prefer to use the word "frajer" instead.
>>
>>Hm, there is no such rule as there is no rule about the wo in the
>>language. 
>
>Are you sure?  As far as I know, each word in "Slovenski pravopis" has its
>own "number."  If the number is equal to "0", then you cannot use that 
>particular word in writting. 

But all these numbers have no obvious connection with claims you've
made above. They might be behind those numbers, but they were never
written down, were they?

>>I don't know if you read the other article of Mr.Nezmah in
>>the same issue of Mladina. From that one can cocnlude (the article on
>>the names of companies) that he advocates the definition of language
>>through the "mechanisms" (changing of verbs, adjectives, nouns,
>>declinations etc.). 
>
>Despite his interesting articles, Nezmah is in no position to start redefining
>the Slovene grammar.  Also, it should be noted that in the issue of "Mladina"
>you are referring to, Mr. Nezmah started an argument with one of the 
>biggest authorities and scholars of Slovene language.  I really don't know 
>what is he trying to prove to himself or to others by doing that.          

He is as much in position as any other linguist, i.e. as much as
authority you are referring to. I don't see a reason why should I
believe that authority more than Mr.X or Mr.Nezmah or my own
reasoning. To conclude -- I don't believe in arguments only because
they were given by some authority.

>>I'm not saying that this is a better or right
>>rule, but regarding your two points, the first one is completely
>>incorrect. Namely if it would be correct, we wouldn't have words as
>>"jezero" or "kri\v{z}". The first one is Hungarian (?), and the second
>>one of Latin origin (to mention only two).
>
>No, "jezero" is not of Hungarian origin.  Since I am fluent in Russian, I can
>assure you that the Russian word for lake is "ozjero" (as in "Balkajskoje
>ozjero").  So, we're talking about a word of common Slavic origin.  As far
>as "kri\v{z}" is concerned, I must confess that you really got me with that
>esoteric writing code of yours.  Did you have in mind "krizz"?

Regarding "jezero" and its menaning in other Slavic languages I have
to admit that I know as well (happened to be that I learned Russian as
well), but in second (third) book "Slovenski jezik" (?) by Dr.Joze
Toporisic, he mentions something about thousand in Hungarian with
connection toward "jezero". I might be wrong about the details, but
the general background is such.

About kriz, yes I'm referring to the word which is symbol of
Christians, it was (again Dr.Toporisic) taken from Latin "crux,
crucis". Again, I might be wrong about details.

But in any case It does not matter if we argue about these two words,
as there are other examples as well.

>Anyway, the point that I was trying to make is not that Slovenes should be
>using only words of certified Slovene (or Old Slavic) origin.  My point was
>that ugly, bastardized versions of German expressions (like "hohstapler") cannot
>be used in writing!  In fact, I am pretty sure that had I used a word like
>that in any of my PRIMARY school essays, my teacher of Slovene language
>would have immediately reduced my grade by one degree (i.e., from 5 to 4).
>The correct expression that Mr. Nezmah should have used is "nadutost,"
>"oholost,""osabnost," etc. . . .  (Obviously, there is a host of perfectly
>nice Slovene words he could have used in his writing . . .)

Why? Are you the authority who will impose on him how he will express
his thoughts? What if "hohstapler" has a tiny different conotation
than any of the above words you listed? Beside this, I believe he put
the word in quotes, so your teacher wouldn't take off your marks as
well.

>>Regarding the second point it's not correct (IMO) as well, as
>>conotation or semantic of usage of "frajer" is completly different
>>then "hohstapler". Namely the first one need not have a pejorative
>>conotation, while "hohstapler" always has.
>
>Well, you might be right about that.  But the fact of the matter is that I
>heard the expression "hohstapler" by a freak accident barely two years ago.  At
>first I didn't know what to make of it and when my mother provided me with
>a "translation" I just couldn't stop wondering about my parents' generation 
>who actually used such expressions, despite all those poems by Preseren in 
>which he ridiculed all the small-minded people who keep using "big" foreign
>words to alleviate their feelings of inferiority.

And how would you name software or hardware, or floppy and hard disc
in Slovene? How would you name aristocracy? Big foreign words or are
you alleviating your feelings of inferiority?

LPA

PS: And to re-emphasize, I think there were quotes around
"hohstapler".