LL-L "In the media" 2004.08.12 (05) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 12.AUG.2004 (05) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Erik Guldager Nielsen <eguldager at mail-online.dk>
Subject: Languages in movies


Some time ago the film "King Arthur" was discussed on this list and I
saw this film partly because of this discussion.
One thing that annoyed me a little bit was the fact that everybody Britons,
Romans, Saxons etc. spoke fluently English. This is normal in almost all
Hollywood movies (for example German nazis speaking fluently English
(with a funnuy accent though!) in WWII films, but in the case of "King
Arthur"
this was even more strange considering the fact that English did not exist
at that
time!
In another film I saw resently (The passion of the Christ) the Romans
actually spoke Latin and the Jews spoke Aramaic (and Hebrew). Though
my Aramaic and Hebrew are very poor I think this gave an extra dimension
to the film and made it more realistic.

Erik Guldager Nielsen

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: In the media

Hi, Erik!

Good to meet you, and good to see you found the speakers' corner.  I see you
first posted during my recent absence.  So please forgive me for the delayed
welcome.  It's great to have quite a few folks from Denmark on this List.

> Some time ago the film "King Arthur" was discussed on this list and I
> saw this film partly because of this discussion.

I feel flattered.

> One thing that annoyed me a little bit was the fact that everybody
Britons,
> Romans, Saxons etc. spoke fluently English. This is normal in almost all
> Hollywood movies (for example German nazis speaking fluently English
> (with a funnuy accent though!) in WWII films, but in the case of "King
Arthur"
> this was even more strange considering the fact that English did not exist
at that
> time!

I agree, and I, too, would welcome more authenticity, though it would
probably add to the duration of movies if they showed how people had to go
through interpreters and tried to understand each other.

> In another film I saw resently (The passion of the Christ) the Romans
> actually spoke Latin and the Jews spoke Aramaic (and Hebrew). Though
> my Aramaic and Hebrew are very poor I think this gave an extra dimension
> to the film and made it more realistic.

Sure, but that wasn't representative for Hollywood, being the personal and
personalized labor of love of Mel Gibson, an arch-conservative Roman
Catholic American Australian who insists on authenticity (apparently also
opposes the use of languages other than Latin in services).  However,
authenticity may be wanting in the movie apart from the language (such as
making Pontius Pilate's wife sympathetic to Mary, thus apparently
symbolizing the "heathen" Romans' Christian potential).  Besides, I hardly
think that the average Aramaic speaker would have understood Latin as easily
as was shown in the movie.

Most importantly, linguistic authenticity is hampered by the fact that most
people, foremost those in the States, hate subtitles, and subtitled movies
are far less marketable (i.e., make far less money) than those that are not
or have only the occasional subtitle.  People in "small" countries speaking
"small" languages are used to following foreign movies with subtitles (or
even without), and to them that is not impediment.  This is not the case in
"big" countries with "big" languages, where it is extremely hard to get the
average person accustomed to reading while watching.  Remember that most of
us here on the List can hardly be considered average in this regard.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
======================================================================