| Username |
Post |
| namita |
Posted
on 12-Sep-01 10:47 AM
Nowhere is safe.
Now, Change of subject. Has anybody read the latest news report on our “dear” departed prince/king Dipendra and the June 2nd incident? It is in September Issue of the magazine, “Talk.” Tina Brown is the chairman and editor-in-chief. It is the same Tina Brown who put naked, eight month pregnancy Demi Moore on the cover of venerable New Yorker.
Frankly I am tired of reading and all kinds of half-baked theory from foreign specialists in Nepal why Dipendra did it These are the specialist who hang out in and around Thamel and have free lunch provided by their ever obliging Nepali hosts. Some of the them may have been living in India to report about Nepal! The title of the Story is “Prince of Darkness.” (!) The tone of the whole story is so negative I wondered while reading, why he even bothered to report? But Duh. Who am I kidding? Mr. Patrich French has to make a living and Ms. Tina Brown has a selling to do.
Thousands of Nepali were expelled from Bhutan. Did any of us hear a peep? India is planning to submerge Buddha’s bith place, do we hear anything about this true atrocity in the world media? There are Indian soldiers occupying Kala Pani, how many people , how many of these “experts” know and talk about these? A psychotic prince wiped out his family and here we go. No end in sight. (The only thing I agree with Mr. French in this article is, Dipendra was not sane) I think this story has all the ingredients of a really slezy soap opera therefore, folks let’s join the bandwagon! French discarded every theory (or just acknowledge grudginly) put forward by other people only to push his own unsbstantiated/outlandish theory. That King Birendra was trying to gain control of the country and Dipendra was “acting on his father’s behalf.” We all know how complacent and hands off kind of King Birendra was. Now we have to hear from certain Mr. French that the palace was in communication with the military and they were amassing arsenal to start a coup or an election! Say that again?
He even got the translation wrong. Trying to potray himself as an expert on Nepal, Nepali and Nepali language he translates “raja ta mare” as the King is dead. Does he know what nuances mean? Does he know the little “ta” can and do change meaning in a sentence?
People might think I am writing against this article because the writer has nothing good to say about Nepal and Kathmandu in particular. I agree Kathmandu is dirty and polluted (anybody who could see sees that) but as I said the words he chooses to describe from people to the place to incident in unfair. He is biased and his eyes are on the sensationilzation rather than impartial and fairness of the incident.
Next time when I pick up an English magazine, I want to read about Kala Pani and Lumbini. I have had enough of Dipendra, his victims, Patrick French, and New York Times! You hear me????
|
| No No |
Posted
on 12-Sep-01 11:32 AM
Nope, we didn't hear you.
|
| namita |
Posted
on 12-Sep-01 11:34 AM
oh, well. whot can i say. : )
|
| nobody |
Posted
on 12-Sep-01 04:20 PM
“raja ta mare” translates as "the King is dead" is correct... it can mean different things depending on which one of three words you stress, but the central message will still be the same "King is dead"... At least he understands some on Nepali... Why does it offend you that someone tries to portray the truth about Nepal (political or social or environmental) and at the same time you are avoiding the very same place... is it like the Nepali saying about cats and poops and cover-ups?
|
| No No |
Posted
on 12-Sep-01 05:41 PM
You are damn right, Nobody. Hello ........ Namita, do you hear me ??? Ha..Ha..He..He..
|
| namita |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 09:40 AM
first of all nobody, have you read the full story? second 'raja ta mare' translates into EVENthe king is dead. do you know in what context who said this? again please if you get a chance read the article and comment on my comments. i humbly request you.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 10:06 AM
Hi all:
I believe that the translation of Rajaa Mare is king is dead.But when we add 'ta',
it is often because we want to express disbelief, or even dismay.Sometimes it
also express the fact when the asker is ignorant of that (see third example).
For example:
kanchhi ta hidi. Is different from Kanchhi Hidi.
baa ta gaye. Is different from Baa gaye.
Hajurbaa khai? Hajurbaa ta bitisaknu bhayo. (Here the asker doesn't know that
hajurbaa was dead.)
Namita is right that the writer didn't pay heed to the connotation of language. He
just tried to cash in on the surreal moment of our modern history.
|
| nobody |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 10:24 AM
well "raja ta mare" can also mean "so what? it was just a king who died." depending upon the intonation, like I said earlier. Fact is "King is dead"... Thank you Biswo for trying to teach Nepali. But "ta" doesn't necessarily mean disbelief or dismay, it can mean assertion, or indifference or just a filler to make the sentence more complete. Do you really think those three examples covers the entire spectrum for the usage of "ta"?
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 10:47 AM
nobodyji:
I don't think I was trying to teach Nepali. This kurakani section is not useful for
pedagogical reason, but for seeking out solution with collective wisdom. So, my
three examples are only part of the explanation, not the entirety.
'ta' can be used for other reasons as you mentioned, but for only filling out? I
have hard time believing this. Anyway, 'raajaa ta mare' is most likely to be different
from 'raajaa mare'(the king is dead).
Please don't interpret any attempt to contradict you as 'teaching'.I am eagerly
looking for wise translations from others also on this question.
|
| Somebody |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 11:49 AM
Nobody is a prime example of ignorance. The story is about cashing in the tragedy and ignoring important issues that concern nepal. But ignorant as he or she is, decided to pick on symantics. He/she also doesnot answer if he read the article. First he says raja ta mare mean king is dead then he comes back and tries to make fun of biswo and says raja ta mare also mean so what. what else is new as a matter of fact? withholding name people like nobody can say anything without any responsibility. just discredit people that is what these people's agenda looks like. I would be so happy for once to read some original comments from people like him/her. Not always give name calling/irresponsible comments on comments.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 12:06 PM
I agree "raja mare" is different than "raja ta mare". Both expressions may not mean the same. We have to understand in what context "raja ta mara" is used to see how accurate the translation is -"king is dead". I have not read the text and Namita has not given the context here.
let's see a couple of sentences:
Raja ta mare, tara aru ta jiundai chhan ni.
Raja ta mare bhane hami kelai bachnu?
Raja ta mare, aba yahi ho mauka lutne.
How many of us think that "Raja ta mare" means the same in each sentence.
King is dead means "raja mare" not necessarilly "raja ta mare" in my "bichar". However in certain context "raja mare" may not stand that far in meaning from "raja ta mare". In what context does the expression come? the answer to this question will determine the accuracy of the translation of that expression.
May be other Bhasabidharu know better.
sparsha
sparsha
|
| Mr. Jack Theoff |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 12:18 PM
Why the hell do we need to figure out what was meant? If it doesn't make sense forget about it.... I guess people have too much free time.
|
| kirtipur |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 12:54 PM
Mr.jack the off is quite a busy man. He got all the time to read all the postings and drop a line saying others have too much free time. "Why the hell do we need to figure out what was meant.."You busy man, either you are too complicated or in daze most of the time. Let me guess, UMMMMM...yeh! you are to busy to figure what things mean, huh? why the hell care what words mean...SURE.... Are you impressed by Reetu...by the way?
|
| sunakhari |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 01:43 PM
Mr. Theoff
If you work for the magazine then there is all the more reason why you need to figure out what was meant. For credibility's sake.
If you do not, then I think your knowledge of countries other than yours is absolutely nill or seems to be! And you don't even seem eager to know what could have been meant.
That one sentence could mean a lot of things and journalists and their likes (in a foreign land) SHOULD be careful what they try to translate or derive.
The media is the medium how the situation of a country is portrayed to the outside world and I, sure for one, do not appreciate it when sentences are taken out of context or put into another. Nor am I impressed when a foreign national tries to act mr. know-all and makes the most out of a situation!
|
| nobody |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 01:54 PM
All right folks... I stand corrected. "Somebody" has also aptly poited out that maybe it's not right for "Nobody" to hide behind anonymity and pass his remarks. Point well taken...
Why should the international media even touch the topics mentioned when Nepal doesn't have balls enough to bring it in front of the international community? And you know what, maybe Nepal should just shut up and go along with India. International law requires them to open just one port and we know what that means? Or do you think you can fight India? Just hope that if ever anybody wants to take-over Nepal, international community will protect us, because that's our only bet. Or maybe you all should stop watching stupid Hindi movies and bitch about India at the same time. So what if the story sounded sleazy? The fact itself is sleazy, doesn't matter how you put it. Foolish Nepali pride. Can you talk of one good thing in Nepal right now, since you said there are lots of nice things? What are we proud about? Things that our ancestors did in the 15th century. Where are our (including myself) achievements? Mt. Everest is in Nepal. Did we build it? It's really easy to be proud about nepal from 15000 miles away...
"I can't see it or I won't acknowledge it means it doesn't exist." Ostrich effect doesn't solve anything... And what is wrong with pregnant Demi Moore on cover? Was that a sacrilege or tribute to motherhood? Well she has the balls to do it...
"They did this, they did that!" Have you ever heard anyone say, "We did this."? Complaining what other people have done or haven't done when we ourself can't! And why should international media need to cover whatever is happenning in Nepal and with Nepal?
Well everybody has the same opportunity. Maybe kanchha will write something about things Patrick French didn't... Or we don't want to because somebody else has to...
On a personal level, if somebody's trying to tell me I am ignorant of the important issues of Nepal, enlighten me. But maybe there are more important than Lumbini and Kalapani and whatever... By the way, it' semantics not a"y"...
|
| bhainsi |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 03:18 PM
Does anybody have the weblink to this article. Please post it so that we know what you guys are talking about. Thank you very much.
|
| Somebody |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 03:31 PM
bhainsi, good point. Nobody seems to be an expert and apparently he read the article. Nobodyji, why don't you post the link?
|
| nobody |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 03:58 PM
PRINCE OF DARKNESS
"... "This is a dynasty that came into being by the sword and is leaving by the M-16," observed one former U.S. ambassador to India, in the aftermath of the June 1 massacre of Nepal’s royal family by Crown Prince Dipendra.
In a land that thrives on exaggeration, the massacre is a modern tragedy of Shakespearean proportions. It has fueled the most outlandish rumors, from whispers that the killings were the work of Maoist rebels to the suggestion that a false Dipendra had been created using cloning technology (and after shooting the royal family, the clone had been executed while the real Dipendra was kidnapped). But gradually, the truth has come out. As Talk writer Patrick French discovers, Dipendra was seriously depressed, obsessed with weapons, and used drugs. Although his parents’ opposition to his marriage to the beautiful Devyani Rana (her family background was deemed inappropriate for marriage to the prince) may have helped precipitate the violence, in retrospect it seems to be only one of many factors contributing to the murders...."
Read the magazine for rest.
|
| HiHope |
Posted
on 13-Sep-01 09:21 PM
"... "This is a dynasty that came into being by the sword and is leaving by the M-16," observed one former U.S. ambassador to India, in the aftermath of the June 1 massacre of Nepal’s royal family by Crown Prince Dipendra.
If this statement is applicable to Nepal, and if it comes from a US Amb., then,
why not this Amb. look himself on the mirror, after collapse of Twin Towers.
"... "US is a country that came into being by the terror on Red Indians and is disappearing by next round of terrorized invasion. "
|
| 2nd bonehead |
Posted
on 14-Sep-01 10:14 AM
I am a bonehead myself, but good point, Hihope.
|
