Re: Dead languages?
docdwarf_at_panix.com
Date: 07/09/04
- Next message: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Dead languages?"
- Previous message: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Dead languages?"
- In reply to: Toon Moene: "Re: Dead languages?"
- Next in thread: pgx_at_pgrahams.com: "Re: Dead languages?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 8 Jul 2004 22:23:03 -0400
In article <40edb378$1$284$4d4ebb8e@news.nl.uu.net>,
Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> wrote:
>Richard Maine wrote:
>
>> Oh dear! My high school Latin text must have had a bowdlerized
>> version or something. I'd *SWEAR* I remember this as
>> 'Alles Gall in tres partes divisa est'.
>
>There must be a missing :-) somewhere here (a more scholarly reply follows).
>
>No, you're mixing up German with Latin.
>
>Of course, this is not the most entertaining way in which Latin is dead.
No, the most entertaining was that bit of doggerel:
Oh, Latin is a language,
As dead as it can be.
First it killed the Romans -
And now it's killing me!'
DD
- Next message: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Dead languages?"
- Previous message: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Dead languages?"
- In reply to: Toon Moene: "Re: Dead languages?"
- Next in thread: pgx_at_pgrahams.com: "Re: Dead languages?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|