Ulrich Oswald wrote:
>
> > Gary Kern schrieb:
> >
> > > The passive
> > > would be "nevovlechennost'" (the second e being pronounced
> > yow)--this
> > > would exactly indicate the state of not being drawn in, standing
> > > apart.
> > >
> > > GK
> >
> > Thank you Gary. I was looking for the passive. Always good, having
> > experts around. So there is only to think, which is better:
> > nevovlekannost' or nevovlechennost'. Vovlechenne would mean "impulse,
> >
> > inclination", would it not. So, nevovlechennost' would also apply for
> > "emotionless, without impulse". That's a bit too strong, isn't it?
> > Jünger is not Buddha.
> >
> > Ulrich
>
> Another argument that engage/disengage has something to do with turning
> movements comes from the fencing sport. When crossing the blades the one
>
> who presses his blade to the opponent's one is engaging ("engager").
> When the other disengages ("dégager") he turns his blade around the one
> of the opponent. And so on. If you watch fencing you see the men
> circling their blades all the time and out of a sudden there's the
> eruption of an attack. So, after all nevovlekannost' for disengagement
> in
> the sense of désinvolture sounds good. I will test it on a born Russian
> in the next days. If he gets the meaning I'll let you know.
>
> Ulrich
**********************
O.K., he'll be the best judge. But vlekat', vlech' does not connote a
turning, just a straight-line attaction or drawing in.
GK
Replies to this Message
Markup © John King, 2008. Web archive generated Tue, 21st August 2007.