Agustín García Calvo Conference
Official School Of Languages Leganés
April 20, 2010
Again speaking of what he speaks
We will speak the language. This means that once again we are talking about what he speaks. It is clear that the language I speak (which in this case is esp.of.cont. Official Spanish contemporary, but whatever it is), the language in which I am speaking is not the language I speak and I will talk. This is a simple thing that goes unnoticed. Clearly it is not the same, you might not be in the same place. The language, or a language like espofcont, if you talk about them, to the extent that we speak of them, as things are, belong to the reality, but while she is talking, by the very fact that you are talking about language and its Reality is another is in another place.
Maybe You will believe that You are speaking: much wrong. The way you speak in one language or another language, that, yes, it belongs to reality, but the truth is spoken language through You. And that does not belong to Reality. Ah, it's too simple, and I'm here this time to try to make them feel the wonder that is something that does not exist, saying 'there' for that: to Reality, to the things spoken, among which is included language as object. But apart from what exists, what there talking about what exists, what you think what is: the tongue.
This is a great time to be found, perhaps, in other situations, but where is the most immediate and clearest way is there: there is something that does not exist. As there is alien to the consciousness of people. I have to remind them and make them feel that talk You so well as speak because they do not know what they are doing, because they do not know cosciente level or machinery, or the elements, or rules (syntactic, phonemic) that are using or are you using them to you at the time they are talking. I do not know: it passes beneath consciousness, and it is thanks to not know how to speak well: the tongue speaks well through you, through each.
This may be seen in the best way and taking it otherwise. Ie: when consciousness intervenes mars mechanisms and apparatus of the tongue. You can watch it with your own experience. Trances where are You meaning something, putting a lot of effort to say something that is what they feel are the trances in which they can easily start to stutter, to splutter and even commit anacolutha, breaking the syntax of what they speak. Any time the consciousness, and therefore the will of the person is engaged in this mechanism spoils.
When I speak of 'consciousness', I do not just mean the personal consciousness of guy, but the consciousness of any Superior Being, as the state power in general the Academy of Language, the Representatives of Culture, the istituciones cultural same. All these belong to Reality, are cosciente level, and when involved in language, because the same thing is to spoil, to betray the language. As so often happens like this, I remind you once again: in the language can not send anyone, not anyone, but in culture and, first, in writing, yes. Language, Script, and can have Amos send them to some extent. Send in cultural events and send the Spelling. For example, like this: with rules of spelling, belonging to Scripture, that come from the Academy, who come from the school, ie coming from cosciente level, but they are not of the language. Not only do they have to do with it, but the spoil. Pedantry that dominates cultural standards and rules of speaking well and spelling rules, constantly makes mistakes, makes, over the last few centuries have been imposed or other-Latin writings of learned words, the people have admitted more or less, but holding them naturally (without realizing unintentionally) the rules governing the language of truth. So they can make them write what they want, but of course the people, when he realizes what he does when he speaks well, he says, "transportation", "strange", "ostáculo" and it does not occur any way, to say the least. Unless intervention consciousness that broadcasters, for example, conscious, want to talk right. Which means: to speak as you write, that is, the opposite of what should work everywhere (if it could), it was: write, if you had to write, as we talk. But You can actually find speakers, and even actors, unfortunately, they say things like that, "transport", "eKScelente", "obstacle" and worse yet. The recall You have heard and because, deep inside of you, you have offended, even above that are obedient. But so low they have offended them. And rightly so. At that time he is betraying tongue, under interventions coming from cosciente level. So another proof that the language awareness does not need and, as he needs, hinders him. The things that are happening to the language level below that I am calling 'consciousness'. It is the level where one ideas of things done, the level at which the language used to act in this or that, which develops projects or other purposes and uses of language. The language, the apparatus of the tongue, the device that is the language, its mechanisms, all that is below, to use this topical metaphor. Ie occurs at cosciente or SUB-SUB-conscious level. From now on I'll tell ya, to avoid trouble, SUB-SUB-awareness and conscious. SUB-consciousness, which says more clearly that it is below consciousness. That happens. Coscientemente You do not realize, but that is happening.
The word 'subconscious' or 'subcosciente' comes from psychoanalysis, as you know. It comes from the foundation of psychoanalysis with Freud, that indeed discovered things that happen in the attic or basement (so to speak) and occasionally manage to poke birth. The 'subcosciente', which in psychoanalytic practice and so has ended up unduly confused with 'unconscious', wants to say no more than that which has gone through consciousness, which has been known and then had to forget. In Freud's invention had to forget about repression, ie, for censorship reasons, for moral reasons. In the level where we are now, no, but simply for technical reasons pertaining to this device, this subconscious technique that is language. Another difference, more so great: psychoanalysis and its founder, the subconscious (and also to the unconscious) are trying to be positioned with respect to E l Y o, the guy, the guy staff. Here, on the tongue, does not it: this subcosciente, osubconciencia, of you it is not you, it's not every one of you. It is common in the first place to anyone who speaks any language whatever, and then a more superficial level, anyone who speaks the same language he speaks. That, that's the subconscious that and therefore is not personal, does not refer at all to the guy, but is, somehow, common, shared. This subconscious, the language (its apparatus, its rules, its mechanisms) is there, works there, in this subconscious level and is common. It consists (if I may compare policy) with a kind of assembly, not numbered, never definite no (or the number of its components or speakers, or any other level). And is that assembly, which does not do more to get in and out people, and therefore are never or a certain number of people or any organization of which the branch you like, that's where you establish and maintain the rules: syntax rules, the rules of use of the intonations, the combination of phonemic and phonics rules, all these things through you handled every time they speak and who have no conscience, but they are there: not exist, but they are there. And that's what I'm trying to show.
Not only that indefinite governed community (in the sense of establishing) the rules of syntax, phonemic and everything else, but also decides to change from time to time. Everyone knows that languages, particular languages, are never still. Someone might think that whatever happens to things of Reality (which continually are dumping), but in the case of phonemic and syntactic rules, in the case of contraption of language happens in a special way. Many times this subcosciente assembly, when you decide to change some management, some rules in the language, does looking better management. Because languages, although the words, the rules are properly numbered and are accurate, never just be totally. And that, sometimes, in our subconscious arouses resentment, forced to change the language. Forced to change the language, for example, let's see ... In the phonemic level in espofcont in contemporary official Spanish I speak, is in the management of phonemes (which are 23 in the language in which I am speaking in this time), in the management of these phonemes Anything wrong at some point people have seemed undesirable. They are occlusive tidy like a prism: PE, FE, compared with BE; TE, CE, compared to DE; KE, JE, against GUE.
[DRAWING IN THE AIR WITH FINGER, THE GAME OF COMPETITIONS occlusive, MORE OR LESS WELL:
And, on top of the guard, I've drawn them talking (I guess I have been clear) is a spirant and only one: that: SE. This is an undesirable arrangement regarding the isolation of the expiring. When a language, as did the old Castilian Spanish to the present, eliminates many of the elements Costituyentes spirants (EC, ZE, SSE-la, la-SE, XE and JE, all had the Castilian until the fifteenth century), when removed and reduced to one (that), that this is isolated and it is undesirable for the order. I am presenting almost a geometric order, but I do not regret trying. That has made, as you know, in a large part of the area where people speak Spanish has suppressed opposition between SE and CE (Andalusia and of the peninsula, most of America and elsewhere). Opposition has been deleted SE / CE, ie, as if that had been tucked inside the prism, where it was the EC; and there, and tucked into the prism, then SE, seseando, or CE, lisping (this gives exactly the same: ask yourself how it is done), but the fact is that it has gotten in there and part of the prism, Part Central: TE, SE or CE versus versus DE, which has been deleted a management problem.
Well, maybe this will seem a bit exaggerated or cartoonish, but it serves well for my purpose, which is to show that the purposes which that assembly may I speak subcosciente move them to change the rules, as these are some : the pursuit of a better order, better management of phonemes, grammatical elements of the type of personal and demonstrative or other, and to any other fields to do the sorting.
Of course I have to add that sometimes this change occurs and leads to other problems in other parts of the contraption. For example, the decision of the party and other Andalusian area not distinguish SE and CE carries with it, of course, at the level of vocabulary can not distinguish 'married' to 'hunt' or the like, which does not longer a problem, because the language is intended that the words are well distinguished from each other and when many homophones are produced, such as occur in many languages (the same Spanish, French), that's a hassle, of course. But those consequences occur at a much shallower level than the phonemic level, so that may have neither consequence nor so much importance. Not that I'm making a defense of Andalusian consonant system: already understand that here, as we are well below any political territory or whatever, we have no right whatsoever personally coscientemente, judging people's decisions.
This assembly hacérsela I'd still feel better with an example, if I have to go back to the old Castilian Spanish to the present. I have to say that here also try to make them feel the thing in the pathology for which there can be said physiology. I mean when in a state of certain language doubts, hesitations and disorders that separate the speakers from each other, that we must recognize the effect of making the change you have brought with it that occur. In Castilian until the fifteenth century could not put to begin the sentence, the indices of the ME, TE, SE, LE, etc, so I had to start saying. "Cayóseme". There was no other way to say "cayóseme" more like this: "You cayóseme". This is Castilian and before the fifteenth century did not find any letter that begins a sentence otherwise. Well, by the fifteenth century and somewhat later (to use this numbering of centuries, as cultural and cosciente to as sacrosanct and deep as those of the subconscious things), a decision that could alter the order was made and could be put before the indices of SE, ME and others. What happens is that there were disagreements on the interpretation by the speakers of this. Most often it was from the "cayóseme" and take the "me" together and put forward, that is, "I fell." But it seems that some speakers decided to act via mirror symmetry, ie, in "cayóseme" from the end and going to the top, saying, "I fell." They pulled so thus, a well-known thing of all, one case of hesitation, doubt and dissent provisional. This never happens in the grammar of the language in the subcosciente level, where all the huge and complex machinery of a language is. If you ever happen to cosciente level, it is this pathology that we should move to recognize the extent to which, in practice the entire apparatus of the language, we know nothing at cosciente level. And it works so well because we know nothing.
Yet. In Old Castilian all words ending in-E could be done in two ways: either the E or nothing, so you could say tien 'or has, you could say nub' or cloud, ombre or ame '. So. But a considerable number of words ending in-O also had this rule of double possibility: as / com 'when / cuand' both / tant 'and even holy / sant'. When this affects 'le' and 'what', ie the indexes third person dative, as it ('you'), and accusative, as it ('what'), then it follows that in the tongue can no longer distinguish right if saying "Dijol '", I'm saying "díjolo" or'm sayin' said to him. "Well, this referred to the far has meant that also occurs in the decisions of the speakers (at least in part of the speakers) is a doubt about the use of 'I' and 'you' so that normal means when one grabbed the bull, it is "it", "I took the bull". Under this legacy some people say: "He took the bull". You know, many of you perhaps have been surprised, saying, "He took the bull". This indecision is affecting no less than the distinction between dative and accusative, direct and indirect object, as they like to say. A consequence of not distinguish well between 'you' and 'what', ie distinguish when you say "I looked" and "I looked," which are different things ("I looked" and "I looked"), due that the thing also goes for feminine and plural forms and then most of the people and loses the distinction between 'your' and 'you', that is, between dative and accusative, and says, "said" instead of "I said." "The said such a thing." Not becoming the thing as much as say, "was making a dress for the wedding." Maybe not, not much is heard: "The was making a dress for the wedding," but also nothing less than what you can get in to hear: "The said". Well, another disease, another anomaly You know well that divides the current contemporary Spanish speakers quite remarkable ways between regions and classes.
But my intent was to get them out these conditions simply can recognize the complexity of the rest of the grammar, the huge complexity of the apparatus of a language and any language that happens to us entirely unnoticed. So who decides everything, everything happens at the level of this unknown and silent assembly, except incidents in which language comes to trip over things that pertain to Reality, such as different geographical or social status of the speakers, and any other factors that can come to participate in this bad way, undesirable motion of the decisions (so to speak) of the underground people. You know what Power taught, because it is so commanded, especially under the Democratic regime we have today is that everyone believes in himself and learn to make decisions. If You have heard me well with what I'm telling you, they will have noticed that I'm laughing and I'm inviting you to guys to laugh at that, laughing at what level cosciente called Decisions, Will Personal and Fe in Himself. It should try talking down to it without us noticing how well it speaks to recognize superficiality, triviality of many things, yet the level of power operate in such a powerful way.
I have to tell you, however, something else (because if not, this is very incomplete) about the language, keep talking about what he speaks. They must take into account the elements of the language (words, phonemes, indexes ...) are astracto order, which would be equivalent to something like 'ideal'. The word is ugly, the word 'astracción', 'astracto', which reads: "astra * to", and when I write C and astra * to me * ber, is the same as when we write D with a * mitir or write them a * T and east Atlantic. East Atlantic A *, a * mitir, or * to * ber and astra. East Atlantic A *, a * mitir, or * to * ber and astra. Now let me speak without awareness meter and find that the community to deal with these cultism introduced in recent centuries, has decided to develop a procedure that is called (since Trubetzkoy taught us to call it) 'neutralization of oppositions' (the opposition TE / DE / CE, the three turned into one), so that what they are hearing in you to astra * or * ber, or * a * mitir east Atlantic is neither TE or DE, or EC: has that virtue. Also at the end of words, which usually sounds in cities * o * Madri is neither TE or DE, and CE. Have that grace and has nothing under articulatory or physical or social level, but under a decision taken by the people there to practice in such cases neutralization (in this case, the double neutralization) of phonemic oppositions .What people know! [Laughs] What do people know! What do people know when they are not people, when they walk down there. It's a small sample.
'Astra * to' means, in plain language, 'do not like'. I mean, take the production of language in actual reality, in speech, and to understand, ignore most of what you hear, almost every sound you hear. That searching what, along the chain and multiple noises You are hearing at this time, what the astra * cough elements required to understand is, this is something that occurs, of course, in the subcosciente level and that explains them well what this condition astra * ta (a phoneme, one P, speech is never the same), how he manages the subconscious to, in the series of noises, distinguish all times P is said as if they were the same P, every time you say O as being the same or, in search of the astra * These elements, hunting them, estrayéndolos current, real flow.
Some who come to this school come from another language, then have to deal with the transition from one language to another, some may be studying another language, even drawing a day, if demand continues to be teachers of the language and so I stand with them in this example did not start to speak French well until I could (despite the bad definition of grammars), I could find out what was, for example, the system of vowels in French (for course, franzofcont, eh? [Laughs]), which was the system of vowels and how to distinguish the espofcont. Acquiring this knowledge entirely astracto that instead of a triangle: A, EI, OU
[DRAW SOMETHING WITH FINGER:
French vowel system (in franzofcont, which has been canceled or the opposition between open and closed O, which would complicate things) opposing pairs: / Æ / versus / Å /, / E / versus / O / , / I / versus / U /, and in the middle: / Ö /, / Ü /: Eight.
[DRAW SOMETHING WITH FINGER:
Æ (è) Å (a)
E (e) Ö (eu) O (o)
I (i) Ü (u) U (u)]
Well, that's what I suggest as a recommendation. Futile endeavor articulatory exercises, pronunciation, striving to imitate as closely as possible the pronunciation in another language. Over there, except in cases of especially gifted people for imitation [laughs], not getting anywhere. The step was taken when it has penetrated the astractos astractas authorities and rules governing the thing. After all, what I'm telling you to step from Spanish to French or vice versa, is what any child does any child is a astractor is dedicated just to that, because what is with ears or eyes ? What is? For a steady flow, which might never get to see anything, and could never get to learn the language if it does not work because this mechanism astracción makes you hunt, go hunting (in Spanish, Chinese, in the language that touches it), go hunting, the astractos elements, few in number, after twenty, trentaitantos, phonemes, and the same rules of intonation astractos go hunting the elements. Then begin to understand; that's when it really can not direct imitation, but indirect, get to say "pear" or "joint". Until then attempts therefore fail. You know that, generally, very young children, by the year and a half, often go through a phase in which the astractivo procedure has not worked yet and then try to make babbling imitating, ie, they are sometimes heard in absolutely indistinct babble, recognize that they are doing as they speak, they are imitating the speech of adults. Until that time they have not stepped. The step is normally produce a year and a half, a year and a half, two years, the mechanism works. The child no longer hear everything you throw, but hey, astractamente only what matters, ie, heard only the phonemes and their essential differences, intonations or accents and their essential differences, which cares for really enter the language, or that language, that language, penetrate it.
We should add that (although the whole apparatus of language is this: is astracto) there astracción levels. There are parts of the apparatus (the deeper, so to speak, that is, the outermost of consciousness, the most basic), which are highly astractas, and as we ascend, grades, levels astracción therefore no longer they are so strict. In the downstream portion, deep, are, for example, that: phonemes (which consciousness itself can never reach: the astracción is high, despite the accidents that have told you before). On various levels, I do not have time now to be developing (can You will find them in my grammatical elements or elsewhere), we found different levels of astracción, minors, and the most superficial of any language is the vocabulary, ie, no indexes: semantic vocabulary words, words that have meaning. Do not confuse with the indices of 'you', 'what', 'he', 'she', 'it', 'that' type or 'a lot', 'very', 'so', etc.., Which are grammatical indices, vocabulary words meaning, vocabulary words that refer to things that's the most superficial part of the language. What they notice? With me are noticing. Although one has no awareness of what language is that is speaking and how it works, when it turns on the language and want to know something about her, usually fixed in the most superficial, as is at hand, and their tongues with semantic vocabulary words, which is the most superficial of all and, therefore, which is less subject to management and less subject to astracción.
I would have liked to tell you more closely at the various levels of astracción, but I have (before finishing) to pass yet another thing that I think is essential. So leave it to the various levels of astracción to return to it another day. I have to tell you a bit of 'order' before the end of this presentation. The word 'order', that You are used to recognize the political, cultural, social or whatever level say, in reality, has, in regard to language, both ways, in principle, distinctly different. One is the order, say, hierarchical, ie, in-built, in the dungeon of organization (as we call) a phrase, what depends on what, what word (eg a verb) is the he is driving to another (for example, a plug), or a compound, if the first part of the compound that is determining the second, and everything else. 'Hierarchical order', and this is opposed to the 'order of succession', that you find directly in speech where 'order' means '1, 2nd, 3rd in the order of succession '. I guess these two senses of the word 'order' to get this clear enough. In principle, as I say, are independent, seems to belong to entirely different regions. Unless some languages, some languages other than use (to distinguish the words or elements) other procedures (for example, the phonemic differences or accents) may also go to the sequence of words as if it were an order grammatical hierarchical management. This one time, when I started out books Language, as compared to the case where a parade or procession, more or less sacramental, provides that, for example, the bishop go forward (or general) and as rightful leave behind the three colonels row, and so forth. There are guys seeing that the hierarchy is reflected in the order of procession, in made to order; and this is only a caricature of what happens in the language of the common way. In some languages, from time to time, in this or any. For example, it is common for many of you that English is a rule that the determinant precedes the determined, ie, an adjective, a Saxon genitive (or roughly Saxon [laughs]) go before his word, or even a noun that is determining "trade slaves." That is, in this case it says "slave" exactly backwards in Spanish; and as in most ordinary things like "blue eyes" exactly backwards in Spanish. So it is a rule that, like you, the sequence 'before determining certain' look has been used as a means to indicate the hierarchy, which is that: given-the determinant. The rule in Spanish is almost reversed: the determinant, as if it is an adjective, a genitive with 'de', than anything else, go back. With some minor differences, there is a group of Spanish adjectives that has developed with two different meanings: "new home" and "new home". With two different senses, which are distinguished precisely by the application or non-application of the rule determining certain behind.
Yes, and in many other cases, such as the sequence is to be used as a means of indicating a hierarchical ordering. Before I had to see me with some of that when I spoke of the case and the results CAYÓSEME wine to have trastrueque by the current management in Spanish; in Old Castilian was the game: he had to go back. It ceased to be a subconscious decision of this assembly that I'm trying to make them feel at You.
I'll end jumping, of course, to politics, but, come on, needless to say I've already jumped from the beginning, but guys who believe they've been talking about grammar. Yes, they've been talking about grammar but of course, as I am not a representative of the regime (at least a good representative of the regime), I'm not an academic, nor am I a Compliant Professor at the Ordinances, as there have been less than policy talk of truth and in some cases I even noted. I have been inviting them to the recognition of this that does not exist, but there is, under People. I have tried to make them feel this wonder of what is and that there is, and it certainly is against, not only of Consciousness and Will that Power may impose, but also against the Personal guy naturally as obedient which is Power, it must believe that He is the one who can, and who decides to do what is commanded. So there is in you, each of you, an internal struggle (quiéranla recognize or not) between the Person, Consciousness and Will, which is above, and that is what he likes to power, which Democracy, on all schemes, likes, wanting to do that's all, there is no more below, and thus to disappointment and contradiction of this perpetual deception no more direct way to the discovery of this people not this language exists and works, for we know not, but because she knows what she does.
If after this talk I could never get that to happen what has happened to me many times ...! I will end this session reminder. Makes very little still in a virtual newspaper called Fourth Estate, I was asked for a statement, I sent one to me came with the title "Who rules that say" Lleida "and you type" all / all "to" or "(@)?" [laughs]. And of course the recognition is clear. Who's the boss? Is clear: that's not the language, that is not the people. They send Gentlemen who believe that language is yours. I guess I've done them well (well, 'yours' means 'His person' or 'Suya his party' or 'Suya his regime, His Nation' or any of those silly Reality: 'Yours' at the sense), I think I have made note that this machine is the only machine that is not one among us. Language is no one, not even a given language is nobody, but the less the language in general. Not from anyone. And it is the only machine that is given free to anyone. All this I have shown you, that you know without knowing, so low, this is a gift. It's the only human thing that is given to anyone, really free, you do not have to buy it, do not pay money, no work. I can not tell even the acquisition of a particular language, learning by children as a job: I can not tell. It is, as everyone knows, a game. It's a game, until you get older and are taught other laws. But for now it's a game. It is the only free thing, the only human thing, the only machine, the only way to free production are given.
The C ulture, the E scritura, that already has an owner and therefore is paid to acquire it. Paid because the guy knows that Scripture, and Culture in general, are a means to some power, to climb the social ladder, to become (as the Father says to the child) a future: "Do yourself a future" . And for that you need to know to write and have culture. Worth much. Language no one remembers. Language no one else remembers that confused with Scripture and Culture, I try to separate them clearly. For those who were there virtually this item you ordered them (the little I collected any) then no, had not heard, had not been heard. Therefore I say to You: "Would never go back to anything that has happened to me many times".
Not only is the state, for example, or the well costituida Nation, have to have an Academy, an academy designed to confuse the language with writing so I told them and try to make rules and Awareness intervene which has nothing to do but hinder, but it turns out that some (many) of the rebels against the state esactamente fall into the same trap. So nationalists or nacionalistos [laughs], for example catalanistos and galleguistos (which, in principle, would be opposing the state) do not preclude anything they do not understand anything that is your tongue or the language of speakers. Not even realize that the Names (as 'Lleida', 'Gerona' or 'London') does not belong to the language. They are going to fix just one thing that is even more shallow than the semantic vocabulary; So it is off, so that is not the language. And the names of the famous cities and famous people, moving from one language to another without the slightest respect for linguistic boundaries or anything. Not even realize that are fixed in this nonsense. Or not even understand such a superficial thing like that in contemporary Spanish official is saying, "The pots and the pots are necessary" or, even upside down, "are necessary pots and pans." That is, since we have this attachment is grammatical gender, when we find that there are names of male, as "pots", and names of the female, as "pots" and must be stopped an adjective to the two sets the unmarked term (for re-use Trubetzkoy discovery: the unmarked), and it is said, of course: "It's necessary pots and pans." Well, this nonsense is that the feministos to take the sexual, as if the pots and the pots have sex. So much can go in ... Of course, ignorance, but ignorance believing coated with a knowing, a knowing that is believe apply to things that are the language of culture, such as the Rules of Good Education speaking or any other things, which of course in any state be macho macho culture is because from the start of history. Thus: History, makes about ten thousand years old, he began with the subjugation of women, the conversion of women in quasi-money, near-cash wealth and, therefore, of real wars. Yes, history is. Do not be scared a lot because before these ten thousand years old there are many hundreds of thousands of years of people talking. So we do not get either greatly exaggerated, but history is so and any regime, any (against things that sometimes you have), is sexist. It is founded on Male Domination, to the point that when our women in high or low positions (presidents or Guards Civilas are not. Civil Guard), because they do not realize that jobs are male, the posts themselves are male. So hence the resulting mess on condition of Sex and submission of Men and Women (from Chin and Key) to Hierarchical Order in that dominance is istituído leads to despise the only weapon they have with them and that: the language is much older than history, the Sexual Regulation and therefore the management of dominant and dominated sexes. The tongue does not know anything. The language only knows some of that in the superficial and controllable (the semantic vocabulary) levels, but in all the immense contraption that I tried to make you feel, tongue, naturally can not know anything about those things. And therefore, any rebellion against the state, against Capital (which is the same), against power, could not find anywhere as clear and as firm as support in their own language, the language not anyone else in the language in which one can send, but that does not exist there. It's free and it's free, so ended wishing never happen again when they leave here proves that I have not heard. Wishing is not the case, and until another time in which we are, and as I say goodbye for today. I guess it's late sick, right?
Voices: No, no, no, no. We colloquium, right?
A: I asked the Director. It's late, right?
D: For the intervener least for us.
A: I say no, especially if thinking janitors or people who have to go home and stuff. No. Well, then it seems that there is not much downside. We were a little bit [Voice: Good!] Soltéis to me all that I have fallen short or dark. So, come on!
Voice 1: What has not been clear is when I talk ... I mean, the lines that tells you those that exist in the language ...
A: The what?
1: The lines there, for example with the lisp, right? That was a line that had been the one that.
A: Ah! Son ... It's a scheme I wanted them to see, even speaking, a geometric scheme management.
1: And that, how deducted? So how does it follow? How do you get to know that?
A: Like everything else. Discovering that can only be ignoring all that is over. Indeed, one, first, their language does not know anything. Speaks so well because he knows nothing. But come on, that does not stop, as in this case to speak of what he speaks, to discover what everyone knows to himself. This can not be like a scientific process, or scientific knowledge: it is a mere discovery. No more peeling away layers, hoping that something remains below indispensable and clear. And is. It is. It's nothing difficult. It is true, as the Culture is not the language but serves the power, for many centuries, ancient, medieval and modern have been unable to follow this simple procedure to find out what everyone knows without realizing that knows . They have been mistaken in treating the tongue, releasing roughly desbarrantes theories, so is, of course, from the cultural level is not as easy to find, but I think I have done to feel easy , nothing happens. Below One person is always some people who do not exist. That there is but it's there. One is never completely closed. If one guy outside a closed, well done, of course I would never learn anything. It would be the Perfect Idiot Regime want what they want to turn us all. Not so. I do not know if the technical questions of procedure would tell you more features. Well, no time. That, that is not the procedure enshrined in science [...]. It consists simply wary of the person, of the books of Scripture, what they tell us. Discovering that this can not be, that is riddled with errors because something is telling us that is not right, it's a lie under what is counted and what one believes. Irlo doing: clearing and getting rid of Culture.
Voice 2: I would like to say, as a language teacher, I love everything you are saying. It's beautiful, but I have no choice but to lock in that armor rules language to teach someone who is spoiled as a child already.
A: Well, I understand and sympathize [laughs]. I've been (although I almost do not remember), but I've been forty years officiating that. In my case it was dead languages, maybe it was not so dangerous, but, well, the fact is that I pity the teacher. It can be said, first, that, however, whatever the type of students they touch you, you can always rely on the same thing: that in one and they still have some common sense, is some common sense and along with this, a love of gambling. And then if you have to use schemes, because you've seen what I've done at this time with respect to the phonemic system and other things. Unfortunately, the books generally give you the facts wrong. I have said that there have been many centuries in the reflection on language was full of flaws, of pedantry, of mistakes and certainly many of the manual that you are using you might not get a esque ... Well, assuming you get it, assuming you get a scheme which is the Spanish phonemic system. So what should be stressed is what I said: that no mistake trying to put effort and willingness to pronounce well, that is not the way, and if you are convinced that is not the way, then you're already them bringing in a little on the other, remembering what kids do, which is simply astracción hunt for the few elements that within us costante pronunciation is. Something to do, based on some common sense, in that sense, to make the task less painful.
A: What else? Yes.
Voice 3: I wanted to ask if it is possible for conscious change on the language on the system, come to penetrate, because in Andalucía (well, at least in Seville, in the capital) recently people strive to distinguish between CE and ESE, right? And even in those who are older have seen that there are faults, and when you forget a little of that consciousness, for he goes again lisp. But in children, no. I'm seeing that children have begun to distinguish: they are no longer seseantes.
A: Yes you can escluir not quite. Thanks for the example because it is very good, and I did not know him well, at least on the level of children. Unable escluir all. Indeed, the power can not do anything directly about the grammar of a language that does not know. You have to ignore it, but through very superficial things of rules terns can actually get to produce phenomena like that. The parents of these children, of course, act as announcers who say, "transport" and "obstacle" to cosciente level. But they have fixed .. I do not think themselves, but also some influences from [Voice: The television?] Children [More voices: Television. Mm. Means. Television] and other Spanish-language. In any case, [...] has the prestige of speaking well. They have come to get to that between subcosciente level, so you tell me. I'm not strange, because occasionally things happen like that. Just contraventions, in this case, they are a kind of indirect proof of everything I've been saying and that is that the power can not directly do anything but confuse and wrong, if anything, about the language. Yes, sorry. Yes.
Voice 4: Of course I share the vision you have or analysis you have done the analysis and grammatical description in Castilian. In the teaching of Spanish to foreigners brought lots of books and manuals to work with twisted grammar grammatical descriptions, if not outright false, that attempt to describe phenomena of very deep tongue very superficial things like 'intention' or 'long duration of the events' or stupidity of this caliber, and certainly is a process of stripping the honesty and discovering how the grammar of the language and try to work it a little with the eyes of children. And I pick up a little to see what you said games when opposition fully understand the phonemic system, for example to understand tenses in Castilian, right? It is impossible to understand what is imperfect without a permanent, without the game that makes the perfect, etc., right? So ...
A: They are poorly ordered in the grammar: they are poorly sorted. In the grammatical elements I have tried to present a completely different path. Are poorly sorted because it is one of the biggest mistakes people make is the usual grammars employing the language used for Reality; they believe that language is a reality and then attribute things like that belonging to the real phenomena and be able to say the same verbs that said train [laughs], not much difference. Yes, it is a burden, it's a disgrace most of the books, and for the most part are poorly made: they are traitors to the language. They are traitors. We must use what little they may be worth.
Isabel: I say that it seems to me that one of the fundamental things you need to do is take the same contradiction of language: how, at the same time, it is not the reality and it is something that is to make the Reality. For example, in its semantic vocabulary that matches the reality of each tribe. Precisely in the same operation left to speak the language and refers not only manufactures, but denies, denies and belies what is saying. And that's what the language arts; ie what to do with children in schools since they are very friendly, from learning to speak, when the language the language is still soft, is the time to use that time to invite and encourage them to be left speak, saying and belying using language in its own fundamental operation, which is to deny that, but using temporary rhythmic resources, it is also a temporary art: the art of language, poetry, song and all that . I think ...
A: No you accumulate.
Isabel: I, for one, I've found this year with three thousand students in a course called "Communication and education ', as You put them to speak the language as something spoken, bored; but when they were it used to reason and will deny what manufacturing really is when you have a good time.
A: Okay, Isabel. Thank you.
Isabel: When I go, when really no art in that.
A: There are a few things accumulated. Of course, yes, the semantic vocabulary, the most superficial part of the language is the same as Reality: Each tribe has, each tribe has a reality that is precisely what is represented by its semantic vocabulary. So that may be suitable rinse step and, indeed reasonable what Isabel says: language, through its semantic vocabulary, more superficial, costruye Reality realities, but at the same time, as that's not all, against what Power would, at the same time revealing the falsity of what has building dating, and that, although I did not notice the passage, this contradiction is certainly also something involved in that assembly of subcosciente people there, but not there.
Isabel: But not only in production, in the order of discourse, but also in the very use of the words with meaning. For example, in the use of metaphors, and the use of two words put together meaning they have never been together, suddenly the explosion between one word and another undoes Reality.
A: Yes, there are many methods by which the contradiction is performed: mean is contradict [Isabel. Course], to put it more generally. The mechanisms by which contradicts the language are of the deepest mechanisms; against semantic construction of Reality are many. What else was there?
Voice 5: Yes, I had a doubt, when explained the changes at the beginning of language, of language, which occur when a question arises or an ...
A: Sorry. Hesitations or doubts or disagreements are due.
Voice 5 Consequence, what?
A: They are a result of the change so low it was decided.
Voice 5: Okay. That is, are subconscious then.
A: The changes of the language, as well as his own ordination, they decide to subcosciente level: decides that assembly of people does not exist. To which I pointed out (some of the motives that could lead to that), I have now added this in contradiction with the creation of Reality. And what I got were examples of results that occur in a language that a change has been decided on other levels brings dissent among speakers, hesitations ...
Voice 5 But the decision, change, have been aware then? [A: No.] That's what I'm confused there at any given time. What are the changes arising from the subconscious language because suddenly ... [A: No, the changes, any changes ...] language, the language, it seems that is not enough to express [A: Yes, yes. Any changes] what you [A: Any changes] needs?
A: No, any changes. As the prism of consonants and that the opposition SE / EC is canceled, and that has consequences that can no longer distinguish 'married' to 'hunt'. As in the form of espofcont Spoken (which is rare), distinguishes between 'pot' and 'basin', while most speakers do not distinguish between a pot and a hoya.
Voice 5: Yes, it's like a ripple effect.
A: But that can lead to disagreements cosciente level, hesitations in use. No change. Give a chance event in cosciente level comes as a school teacher at a school and pretend to teach one that has confused 'you' with 'I' (dative and accusative), teach you how to do it. That's not going anywhere, because it is an event that gives rise to disputes at surface level, differences between regions are noted in others, and not going anywhere. Well, except that since escepciones cosciente level you can go to a real change in the subconscious. But usually not. The result of these changes means that, indeed, some say "I dropped" and others "I dropped." And then comes someone who teaches at cosciente level, no: that good is "I dropped."
Voice 5 But the change, how it occurred? That's what I do not understand. How the change occurred, then?
A: Ah! The change came for other reasons, such as the rule is left to say to beginning of sentence "cayóseme" and began to decide who could say with enclitic ahead. That is one thing that affects the Castilian before the fifteenth (or until the fifteenth, at the time it occurred) and it certainly has to do with syntax rules of manufacture of the sentence and with rules of prosody, ie , the condition of the enclitic, which are those indices that have to rely on another word. For reasons of this kind (in here, of course, does not correspond enter) the law prohibiting the preemption was canceled: it annulled.
Voice 5: But it was a decision from the top down?
A: No, no. It was a decision (like everyone else) to subcosciente level. The assembly, community, continued until the fifteenth running this rule, and there comes a time, as the community, the people who do not exist, it is constantly gathering and debating without us noticing, there comes a time that these issues prosody of enclitic and management of the phrase, it is decided that there is no need to keep the law, you can leave and you can start to use ahead. Then another and subsequent consequences are. And more.
Voices: We must end. Now it is.
Voice 4: Before Augustine spoke of what exists as the conviction that we suffer and yet, despite that exists, remains below things, still cracking and breaking.
A: What you need.
Voice 4: What is, and because we wanted to give a small gift to Augustine, even if there is much that does exist, because there is an official anthem of the Community of Madrid, it is not that much singing, so we wanted to give Augustine gift of singing this all afternoon. If you think, do ...
Voices: But we do not know!
Voice 4: If you think, do ...
Voice: We like to know.
A: Okay. Maybe some of you do not know the history of the anthem ... should you to know a little history of the hymn, I now find that Mario has decided to take. He raised a fuss, but it was twenty years ago. Therefore, the younger do not remember. Well it's a time around, by mere curiosity. It was the time when the Socialists were taking the power for the first time in the Autonomous Community of Madrid, who had invented a dredge other autonomous communities. Here, Joaquin Leguina, Agapito Ramos I searched for a restaurant on Princess Street or thereabouts, to do them the lyrics of the anthem. Naturally, then, even during the socialist regime, never dared to sing, and less to others, so that's why it is so ... But still the official anthem. Contradictions of Power, which occasionally can be so unfair occurrence and look for a guy like me [laughs] lyrics to a hymn. Those things can only be explained by the Power, against what they believe, is never as good costituído. And mine power either, because if I were made a kind of Rebelde intrasigente, there would have admitted this: ride the temptation of the game: to see how to do precisely with Madrid, a hymn that is the height of the Autonomy hymns of all. Not that I have to apologize, but I do notice these disagreements in power.
Voices: Well, come on, come on. VA.
Voice 4: We sang it twice, for the first cojáis melody a bit, okay?
Attendees choir finished singing the Hymn of the Autonomous Community of Madrid; first, with the track line, and then, as the song.
Agustín García Calvo