Re: The nature of birds and conlangs

John Cowan wrote:
>
> I pulled together the smooth English versions of the Starlings'
> Song from Irina's site, and sorted them so that the corresponding
> lines fall together.  This allows us to see with some clarity just
> where the semantics mutated.  I have left off the names of the languages,
> but they appear in the same order as the Web site.
>
> The Brithenig version didn't have a smooth English translation, so I
> just have a placeholder for it here.  (Andrew?)
>
> Feel free to put this on the Web site, Irina.
>
> =====cut here=====
> A: The song of the starlings speaks of heroic deeds
> A: The starling's song sings of adventurous deeds;
Right at the beginning I guess I changed the notion of birds to
a single bird, culminating in our image at the end of the great
bird.  Quite a stretch from the small starling!

> A: The song of a noisy bird - of greatnesses it is.
> A: The songs of a bird deal with great things.
> A: Birds' songs concerning important events
> A: The song from the bird is about importance
> A: The bird's song deals with important things.
> A: Important matters (the ones) the bird's song tells.
> A: High things in song of bird
> A: When the little bird sings with greatness,
> A: Bird importantly sings
> A: "if" a bird of a greatness be a singer,
> A: A great bird, if she sings...
> A: A great bird, when it sings a song,
> A: [Brithenig]
> A: The great bird, its song it sings
> A: The great bird sings a beautiful melody.
> A: The large bird shall sing his song
> A: The large bird shall sing a song of itself
>
> B: In the morning rain the heron does its laundry
> B: The heron washes its clothes in the gentle rain;
> B: It's clothes in the dew the heron (tall bird) dips in and out.
From morning rain to gentle rain to dew

> B: The heron dips its clothing into the dew
> B: The Heron washes its clothes in the dew
> B: A Heron's clothes clean with dew
> B: A heron's clothes are cleaned with dew.
> B: The heron's coat gets cleaned in dew.
> B: for coat of heron in dew a bathing
> B: When the "artist of the river" clears its feathers in the mist,
to MIST...

> B: Riverbird ruffles its feathers in the mist
> B: "if" a bird of a river be a ruffler of its feathers at a mist,
> B: A bird of the river, if she ruffles her feathers in the mist...
> B: A bird of the river, when it ruffles its feathers in the mist,
> B: [Brithenig]
> B: bird of the river, its feathers shake in the mist
> B: The bird of the river ruffles its feathers in the mist.
> B: That river bird shall ruffle his feathers in the mist
> B: This bird of the river's feathers shall dance, between the clouds of some
> ground, a dance of themselves
>
> C: In the night the lark worships the stars
> C: At night the lark prays to the stars;
> C: The stars come out - and the songbird worships the dome [of stars].
> C: And the lark worships the sky at twilight.
> C: And the Lark worships the sky in the evening.
> C: A Lark religiously praises the sky at evening
> C: A lark reverently praises the evening sky.
> C: With fearful respect the lark praises the evening sky.
> C: praises for night-sky in throat of lark
> C: When the songbird glorifies the Even Star,
> C: Songbird glorifies night star
> C: "if" a bird of a song be a glorifier of the star of the night,
> C: A bird of song, if she praises the stars of the night...
> C: A bird of song, when it praises the stars of the night,
> C: [Brithenig]
> C: bird of the song, the stars of the night praise
Here the steadfast notion of praise or worship gets changed to "speak":

> C: The bird of song speaks of the greatness of (all) the night-time stars.
> C: That songbird shall speak of the magnificent stars of the night
> C: This song-bird shall speak of the night's awesome stars
> D: Who sees the true nature of birds?
> D: But who can see into the heart of birds?
> D: But who sees [and understands] bird-ness?
> D: But who understands being a bird?
> D: But does anyone exist who understands birdhood?
> D: But is the birdish way understood at all?
Bird-hood, birdish WAY goes to nature,

> D: But does nature really understand bird's sound/thoughts?
> D: But do the spirits (of nature) fully understand the birds' singing?
I guess it was Pablo that gave Padraic the notion of gods
with his "spirits":

> D: (This) hymn in ear of gods, and gods to reigners.
> D: Maybe the "reigners" can hear their song.
> D: When rulers might hear song
> D: "might" every ruler be a hearer of a song.
> D: Then the song, that every ruler hears it...
> D: Then this song, may all rulers listen to it.
> D: [Brithenig]
> D: [and] the song all the leaders listen
> D: To this song all of the illustrious ones listen.
> D: That song shall be heard by every king
> D: Every king shall hear this song.
> =====cut here=====
What is interesting to me is how far the original concepts
were taken, as though most people were doing fairly close
translations.  It would also be interesting to see how much
correlation there was between a close translation and the
help the translator got from the previous translator.  Some
of us were less explicative than others; others were freer,
more "poetic" in their transmission.  Like Padraic's Kernu,
for instance.

So:  Plural birds went to a large bird; morning
rain went to mist, but the most drastic change was in line
D, evolving from a question about understanding birds to
a statement about a ruler hearing the birds.  This really
did the job of conlang telephone, producing a startling
new concept: the notion that the bird's song is communicable
to kings, rather than that no one can really understand the
nature of birds.


Thanks, John... this was helpful!
Sally