| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
 |
|
Paul J Kriha wrote:
[quote]Paul J Kriha wrote:
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
My knowledge of Ukrainian as distinct language from other
Slavic languages is close to zero.
The other day I listened to what I thought was a Russian
language interview on the telly. I didn>t see the interviewee
being introduced so I assumed he spoke Russian. A few
minutes later I noticed that time to time he used what
sounded to me like Czech and Slovak words. Then when
he talked about years in the past he said "roku'" instead
of Russian "godov". Now, that was really weird, I was pretty
sure that "rok" was not a Russian word.
Correction, there is a Russian word "rok". But it means
"fate", not "year". In the given context the person was
obviously talking about what happened twenty years ago,
not twenty fates ago.
pjk
[/quote] |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
Paul J Kriha wrote:
[quote]ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:02 pm, "John Atkinson" <johna...@bigpond.com> wrote:
ranjit_math...@yahoo.com wrote:
...................... snip ...........[/quote]
[quote]
My knowledge of Ukrainian as distinct language from other
Slavic languages is close to zero.
The other day I listened to what I thought was a Russian
language interview on the telly. I didn>t see the interviewee
being introduced so I assumed he spoke Russian. A few
minutes later I noticed that time to time he used what
sounded to me like Czech and Slovak words. Then when
he talked about years in the past he said "roku'" instead
of Russian "godov". Now, that was really weird, I was pretty
sure that "rok" was not a Russian word.
It wasn>t until I concentrated on what he was talking about
when I realized he was Ukrainian and spoke about
the local rural politics in western Ukraine.
pjk
(rik) .=. (god) .=. year[/quote]
, , , , ,
.=. the years
, , , ,
.=. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
John Atkinson
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote]On Oct 19, 6:14 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
On Oct 20, 9:19 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 19, 3:07 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
On Oct 20, 2:04 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net
wrote:
On Oct 19, 8:31 am, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
On Oct 20, 1:09 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net
wrote:
On Oct 18, 11:51 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
On Oct 19, 4:21 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net
wrote:
On Oct 18, 5:35 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz"
benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
On Oct 19, 2:39 am, "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 10:51 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz"
benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
On Oct 18, 3:44 pm, "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 5:19 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz"
benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
On Oct 18, 9:24 am, "Brian M. Scott"
b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:56:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T.
Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in
news:cb6bf488-25f6-4a5b-bb4f-c786fe97f1dd@75g2000hso.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
[...]
[Indian summer]
[...]
It>s a specifically New England phenomenon (and I
haven>t heard the phrase in years); [...]
We get Indian summer in northeastern Ohio, and I do
occasionally hear (and use) the phrase.
Brian
And we used it (and some times had it) in Vancouver too.
? Vancouver is a "temperate rain forest," with even
temperatures year round. (In Seattle they still drive
original VW Beetles because there>s no rust because
there>s no road salt because it never snows or sleets.
They even still have leaded gasoline for all the old
cars.)
I don>t know where you>re getting all this stuff.
From my week in Vancouver for the 1994 LACUS meeting, and
my weeks in Seattle for the 1984 and 2000(?) AOS meetings.
Hm. Well, yes, I guess whole weeks do sometimes go by
without snow and with little variation in temperature....
But I couldn>t help myself. I went to worldclimate.com,
where they have heaps of stats for hundreds of places around
the world. I looked at the difference in temperature between
24-hour average temperatures for January and July, to get an
idea of the range. Here>s a sample, in ascending order.
EXTREMELY SMALL (< 5 degrees Celsius)
Majuro (Marshall Islands) (0.1) [I looked at this because I
had a friend who once lived there and described it to me]
Bangkok, Nadi (Fiji), Brazzaville, Port Vila (Vanuatu),
Honolulu, San Francisco (4.6)
SMALL (5-10 degrees)
Rio de Janeiro, Lima, Los Angeles, San Diego, Auckland
(8.4), Miami, Calcutta
MEDIUM (10-20 degrees)
Sydney, London, Seattle (13.9), Cairo, Vancouver (14.6),
Dubrovnik
The point is not the amount of difference between the coldest
and hottest months.
But it is the point. It is in response to your claim that
Vancouver has "even temperatures year round". If you want a
place with even temperatures year round, you want to go to San
Francisco, or if that is still not even enough, head for the
tropics. The above figures are sufficient to show that in both
Vancouver and Seattle there is a clear difference between
summer and winter temperatures, albeit smaller than in the
places you are used to.
The point is that the coldest months are not cold.
Maybe they>re talking a range from 5 to 20 (41-68 F). Or
10-25 (50-77 F).
No, this is a new point you have introduced. The relevant
January temperatures, if you>re interested, are: Chicago -6.1,
New York -0.4, Vancouver 2.7, Seattle 4.5. If you want to be a
climate snob and say that the first two are "cold" but the
others are not, you go ahead. I>ve encountered climate snobs
all my life. My grandparents used to have a little rhyme whose
last line went "...but we don>t call this cold in Quebec!"
(where they came from). But this has nothing to do with the
possibility of having an "Indian summer".
How much snow and sleet can you get when your _average_
temperature in the coldest month of winter is 2.7 C = 36.86 F ?
or 4.5 C = 40.1 F?
You could look up the figures for snowfall. Remember the
temperatures are 24-hour averages.
If your theory is telling you it couldn>t possibly snow, time to
revise your theory. It does. But if all you want to say is "Hah!
Call that snow?", then feel free. Just remember that snow has
nothing to do with Indian summer.
That>s right. I noted that antique cars are still driven in
Seattle because there>s no road salt because there>s no
snow/sleet to melt.
Actually what you said is "it never snows or sleets", which is
untrue. But because of the generally milder temperatures it
probably melts itself out of the way more readily than it does
back east. In Vancouver it would hang around the streets in the
form of slush.
Maybe they need better storm sewers. Do car bodies rust there?
And that Vancouver brags about its Temperate Rainforest climate,
which makes possible that huge park that>s literally like a
jungle out there.
I>m not sure how the climate is supposed to make the park possible.
"Temperate rainforest" is a vegetation type. It depends on plenty
of rain, but snow>s OK too.
Most perennial flora are quite sensitive to freezing.
Perennial flora which have evolved in areas where it snows and
freezes (including coastal BC) somehow manage to survive. I>ve even
heard it suggested that the down-sloping branches of many common
conifers of the coastal forest are an adaptation to shed snow which
might otherwise break them off.
But I still don>t get how this makes Stanley Park possible.
Is it a deciduous forest, like ours in the Northeast?
[/quote]
I don>t know Stanley Park, but most of the temperate rainforest I>ve been in
Washington state and British Columbia is dominated by conifers, which are
evergreens. In the snow country of Australia and Tasmania, it>s mountain
ash and alpine ash, which are eucalypts, evergreens, or nothofagus, mostly
evergreens. In the snowier parts of New Zealand, (except Westland) it>s
nothofagus species, evergreens. In the southern cone of South America,
nothofagus again, both evergreen and deciduous species. In the Himalaya and
Norway and Japan, mostly conifers, evergreens. That just about exhausts
the temperate rainforests that are under snow in winter that I have had
personal experience with.
Deciduous trees are more likely to be dominant in dryer (non-rainforest)
areas with cold winters, it seems to me (though I>m sure that>s an
oversimplification).
Perennial (herbaceous) flora are widespread in the Arctic and in
high-mountain regions throughout the world, places with abundant winter snow
(tundra, anyone?)
Somehow, do I get the impression that Peter>s never been outdoors anywhere
in the world except in the eastern USA and perhaps the mid-latitudes of
Europe?
John. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Paul J Kriha
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:58 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of ??????? ????? (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
Ruud Harmsen wrote:
[quote]Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:51:30 GMT: "John Atkinson" <johnacko@bigpond.com>:
in sci.lang:
They shouldn>t. French <ch> corresponds most closely to Russian <ш> (IPA S,
unpalatalized),
Think so too: http://rudhar.com/fonetics/shs/shs.htm
[/quote]
What you say in your page, Ruud, looks weird to me.
I used to think that <ш> was a palatalized <с>.
For example the Russians these palatalizations.
(c into ш, г or д into ж)
писа- (write)
пишу, пишешь, пишет
пишем, пишете, пишут
мог- (may/can)
могу можем
можешь можете
может могут
могу можем
можешь можете
может могут
виде- see
вижу видим
видишь видите
видит видят |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Paul J Kriha
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:05 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of ??????? ????? (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
Paul J Kriha wrote:
[quote]Ruud Harmsen wrote:
Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:51:30 GMT: "John Atkinson" <johnacko@bigpond.com>:
in sci.lang:
They shouldn>t. French <ch> corresponds most closely to Russian <ш> (IPA S,
unpalatalized),
Think so too: http://rudhar.com/fonetics/shs/shs.htm
[/quote]
Sorry, ignore my previous post,
I hit a wrong key before finishing writing the item and it
ran away from me.
What you say in your page, Ruud, looks weird to me.
I used to think that <ш> was a palatalized <с>.
For example, the Russian texts call these palatalizations.
(c into ш, г or д into ж)
писа- (write)
пишу, пишешь, пишет
пишем, пишете, пишут
мог- (may/can)
могу, можешь, может
можем, можете, могут
виде- (see)
вижу, видишь, видит
видим, видите, видят
pjk |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Paul J Kriha
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:50 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj wrote:
[quote]John Atkinson wrote:
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com wrote:
On Oct 16, 11:38 pm, qquito <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Could anyone tell what the meaning of (Devichya Vesna)
What>s the difference between and ?
> (if it was ever used -- I>m pretty sure it isn>t) would be the
palatal voiceless stop followed by /a /. <> is the palatal voiceless
stop followed by /ja /.
Word-final <-> is also used (instead of <->, which would be
pronounced exactly the same) in the nominative of nouns belonging to the
third declension, and the infinitive of verbs whose stem ends in a velar.
> denotes two different things. When preceded by a consonant it
palatalizes ("softens") it. Elsewhere, it means that the vowel is
preceded by the palatal glide.
The palatal voiceless stop <> actually only occurs palatalized (unlike
most other consonants), so to write <> rather than the standard <a
would be marking the palatalization twice. Presumably that>s why they
don>t use it in Russian. However with other consonants, there can be a
four-way contrast between <Ca> (consonant C unpalatalised followed by /a
/), <C> (C palatalized followed by /a /), <C> (C unpalatalized
followed by /ja /), and <C> (C palatized followed by /ja /).
Have I got this right Paul?
John
Translate into Russian
Whose boy is this?
Whose girl is this?
Whose business is it anyway?
[/quote]
(using KOI8-R)
Good, here goes Russian <>!
?
?
, ?
Ciao,
pjk |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Peter T. Daniels
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 1:50 pm Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devich ya Vesna) |
|
|
On Oct 20, 8:52 am, Horace LaBadie <hwlabadi...@nospam.highstream.net>
wrote:
[quote]In article
4d982121-4123-4274-9b7c-51b783e70...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 19, 6:14 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
SNIP
But I still don>t get how this makes Stanley Park possible.
Is it a deciduous forest, like ours in the Northeast?
If you have ever seen any of the hundreds of TV episodes and movies shot
in Vancouver in the last 25 years, then you have probably seen Stanley
Park. It is a favorite location in shows like "X-Files." It is mainly
coniferous.
[/quote]
I have been in Stanley Park. Fifteen years ago, I was not paying
attention to tree species, only marveling at the jungle. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Richard Herring
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 3:14 pm Post subject: Re: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
In message
<cb6bf488-25f6-4a5b-bb4f-c786fe97f1dd@75g2000hso.googlegroups.com>,
Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@verizon.net> writes
[quote]On Oct 17, 11:32 am, Richard Herring <junk@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
In message
3a1747cb-09dd-4df9-9c8e-049aeda0d...@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Peter T. Daniels <gramma...@verizon.net> writes
In American it>s called Indian summer.
In British too.
("Red Indian" is a Brit
expression.)
But not one that>s used in "Indian summer". Most British people (as did
I until I looked it up just now) probably think it refers to South Asia,
not North America.
A curious idea of South Asian climate they maun have, then!
[/quote]
India>s perceived to be hot. "[American] Indian" doesn>t have any
obvious climatic connotations.
[quote]
It>s a specifically New England phenomenon (and I haven>t heard the
phrase in years); unless the Gulf Stream does _really_ spectacular
work, I imagine you>re too far north to experience it.
The maximum recorded temperature at Heathrow last week was 21C (71F).[/quote]
(http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/EGLL/2008/10/12/WeeklyHistor
y.html)
Hot enough?
--
Richard Herring |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Horace LaBadie
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:52 pm Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
In article
<4d982121-4123-4274-9b7c-51b783e70e7e@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 19, 6:14 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
[/quote]
SNIP
[quote]But I still don>t get how this makes Stanley Park possible.
Is it a deciduous forest, like ours in the Northeast?
[/quote]
If you have ever seen any of the hundreds of TV episodes and movies shot
in Vancouver in the last 25 years, then you have probably seen Stanley
Park. It is a favorite location in shows like "X-Files." It is mainly
coniferous. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
benlizro@ihug.co.nz
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devich ya Vesna) |
|
|
On Oct 21, 2:50am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 8:52 am, Horace LaBadie <hwlabadi...@nospam.highstream.net
wrote:
In article
4d982121-4123-4274-9b7c-51b783e70...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 19, 6:14 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
SNIP
But I still don>t get how this makes Stanley Park possible.
Is it a deciduous forest, like ours in the Northeast?
If you have ever seen any of the hundreds of TV episodes and movies shot
in Vancouver in the last 25 years, then you have probably seen Stanley
Park. It is a favorite location in shows like "X-Files." It is mainly
coniferous.
I have been in Stanley Park. Fifteen years ago, I was not paying
attention to tree species, only marveling at the jungle.
[/quote]
One of the ways I sometimes pick Vancouver locations in movies and TV
is by the overall darker green of the dominant conifers in long shots
of the forest.
Ross Clark |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devichya Vesna) |
|
|
captain. wrote:
[quote]
http://gov.cap.ru/home/58/shakirov/?????%20????.jpg
it>s a great time of year when it comes
Sorry cap>n . That url when clicked produces an error[/quote]
Directory Listing Denied
This Virtual Directory does not allow contents to be listed.
Probably due to the /????%20????.jpg not translating and
parsing properly.
What is supposed to be there?
--
Rostyk |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Trond Engen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: Rainforest and tundra |
|
|
John Atkinson skreiv:
[quote]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Oct 19, 6:14 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
On Oct 20, 9:19 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net
wrote:
On Oct 19, 3:07 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
On Oct 20, 2:04 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net
wrote:
And that Vancouver brags about its Temperate Rainforest climate,
which makes possible that huge park that>s literally like a
jungle out there.
I>m not sure how the climate is supposed to make the park
possible. "Temperate rainforest" is a vegetation type. It depends
on plenty of rain, but snow>s OK too.
Most perennial flora are quite sensitive to freezing.
Perennial flora which have evolved in areas where it snows and
freezes (including coastal BC) somehow manage to survive. I>ve even
heard it suggested that the down-sloping branches of many common
conifers of the coastal forest are an adaptation to shed snow which
might otherwise break them off.
But I still don>t get how this makes Stanley Park possible.
Is it a deciduous forest, like ours in the Northeast?
I don>t know Stanley Park, but most of the temperate rainforest I>ve
been in Washington state and British Columbia is dominated by
conifers, which are evergreens. In the snow country of Australia and
Tasmania, it>s mountain ash and alpine ash, which are eucalypts,
evergreens, or nothofagus, mostly evergreens. In the snowier parts
of New Zealand, (except Westland) it>s nothofagus species,
evergreens. In the southern cone of South America, nothofagus again,
both evergreen and deciduous species. In the Himalaya and Norway and
Japan, mostly conifers, evergreens. That just about exhausts the
temperate rainforests that are under snow in winter that I have had
personal experience with.
[/quote]
I>d like to see a solid, universal definition of "rainforest", but I
don>t think it>s possible. I think "temperate rainforest" could be
defined as "a forest where annual precipitation makes annual growth
exceed annual decay (, and organic material is accumulated to deep
layers of acidous soil)." Tropical rainforests are quite different.
The Norwegian temperate rainforests (and I should add that the idea of
calling them so is less than two decades old to me) are found on the
slopes of the fjords and valleys along the humid west coast. They are
dominated by (evergreen) spruce in areas where it>s reestablished since
the ice age, elsewhere by various deciduous trees, including the (pinal)
yew. (In the last century, however, spruce and foreign conifers have
been planted and have now largely taken over in many areas.)
[quote]Deciduous trees are more likely to be dominant in dryer
(non-rainforest) areas with cold winters, it seems to me (though I>m
sure that>s an oversimplification).
[/quote]
I don>t know. There are several variables here.
The two main coniferous species in Norway have somewhat different
distribution. The spruce usually out-competes the pine where there>s
enough of water and soil, and the pine grows where the soil is too
shallow or too dry for the spruce, often with its roots clinging around
a naked rock, finding rifts and making cracks. There are continuous pine
forests on sandy ice age deposits ('mo' or 'furumo' ~ "(pine)moor").
However, in eastern, dryer Norway the spruce is growing on higher
altitudes than the pine, probably because its regular shape and sloping
branches cathces the snow and makes it into an insulating layer. In
wetter regions it beats the pine on dryer ground while the pine can be
found along the edges of swamps (my father used to quote his
agricultural college forestry teacher as saying "In Trndelag there>s
spruce on the pinemoors"). The highest growing varieties of both are
mere bushes.
There are deciduous trees that grows higher than both of them, most
prominently the birch, and above the continuous birchforest there>s a
belt of creeping varieties of willow and birch.
[quote]Perennial (herbaceous) flora are widespread in the Arctic and in
high-mountain regions throughout the world, places with abundant
winter snow (tundra, anyone?)
[/quote]
There>s a narrow and a wide definition of tundra. The narrow one
requires permafrost below the top layer of soil, the wide one just a
climate too harsh for forestation. Its meaning in the original Kildin
Saami is closest to meaning 2 -- or at least that>s the case with its
cognates in the more western languages. Sammalahti also quotes Finnish
<tanner> "solid ground". I think I once saw a Germanic etymology for
this word -- but apparently not one approved by Sammalahti.
Either way, or back off topic, tundra in the broad sense starts where
the forest ends. The first belt is one of heath and occasional creeping
willows. Above that the most typical element of the flora is lichen --
growing slowly. Most other plants are robust and perennial -- herbs with
just a few small leaves and flowers above the ground. Tundra in the
narrow sense is hardly found in Norway.
There>s generally little precipitation on the tundra, with only a thin
layer of snow protecting the ground in the winter (which is why reindeer
nomads can spend the winter there), but still the permafrost and the low
evaporation can make it wet in summer.
(The pattern of minimal exposure applies to more than flora. My wife>s
catholic parish priest, who is also something of a capacity on
butterflies, spends his summer holiday in Finnmark collecting arctic
insects. One of his favourite butterflies is a tiny, grey thing that
hatches only during unusually mild summers. It lays its eggs under rocks
where they freeze and stay frozen for years until conditions are
favourable again. He collects the eggs by turning the rocks, brings them
home, and once in a while takes a few of them out of the fridge to watch
them hatch.)
--
Trond Engen
- from under his rock |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
benlizro@ihug.co.nz
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:09 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devich ya Vesna) |
|
|
On Oct 21, 2:50am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 8:52 am, Horace LaBadie <hwlabadi...@nospam.highstream.net
wrote:
In article
4d982121-4123-4274-9b7c-51b783e70...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 19, 6:14 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
SNIP
But I still don>t get how this makes Stanley Park possible.
Is it a deciduous forest, like ours in the Northeast?
If you have ever seen any of the hundreds of TV episodes and movies shot
in Vancouver in the last 25 years, then you have probably seen Stanley
Park. It is a favorite location in shows like "X-Files." It is mainly
coniferous.
I have been in Stanley Park. Fifteen years ago, I was not paying
attention to tree species, only marveling at the jungle.
[/quote]
FWIW the surprisingly extensive Wikipedia article on Stanley Park says
the main big-tree species are Douglas Fir, Western Red Cedar, Western
Hemlock, and Sitka Spruce, i.e. all conifers and typical of the
coastal forest. It>s not virgin forest -- the whole place was logged
about the 1860s -- but there are still a lot of big ones.
Ross Clark |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:56 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devich ya Vesna) |
|
|
On Oct 20, 6:03pm, "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" <urj...@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
[quote]Paul J Kriha wrote:
Paul J Kriha wrote:
ranjit_math...@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
My knowledge of Ukrainian as distinct language from other
Slavic languages is close to zero.
The other day I listened to what I thought was a Russian
language interview on the telly. I didn>t see the interviewee
being introduced so I assumed he spoke Russian. A few
minutes later I noticed that time to time he used what
sounded to me like Czech and Slovak words. Then when
he talked about years in the past he said "roku'" instead
of Russian "godov". Now, that was really weird, I was pretty
sure that "rok" was not a Russian word.
Correction, there is a Russian word "rok". But it means
"fate", not "year". In the given context the person was
obviously talking about what happened twenty years ago,
not twenty fates ago.
pjk
[/quote]
Unfortunately my ISP stopped receiving Usenet news.
They do that for a few days now and then.
When I use google groups All I can see is unreadable
gobbledygook, even if when I select KOI8-R or any other
Cyrillic encoding.
Would you mind recasting that line in 26 letter ASCII?
pjk |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:59 am Post subject: Re: The Meaning of (Devich ya Vesna) |
|
|
On Oct 21, 5:36am, "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" <urj...@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
[quote]captain. wrote:
http://gov.cap.ru/home/58/shakirov/?????%20????.jpg
it>s a great time of year when it comes
Sorry cap>n . That url when clicked produces an error
Directory Listing Denied
This Virtual Directory does not allow contents to be listed.
Probably due to the /????%20????.jpg not translating and
parsing properly.
What is supposed to be there?
Rostyk
[/quote]
The same problem here.
pjk |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
