Does your heathen language and country have anyone that holds a candle to Shakespeare?
Does your heathen language and country have anyone that holds a candle to Shakespeare?
Maybe Astrid Lindgren albeit she’s a children story teller
Goethe, obviously
LoL
LmAo
KWAB!
Yes,there are several authors whom I read in the original and consider superior to Shakespeare, including Dante, Ovid, Augustine, Ariosto, Leopardi, Cervantes. Some Greeks too, whom I read mostly in translation, as my Greek is very bad, but specially Homer and Plato, as well as the tragics -- if their entire works had survived! But what we have of, say, Sophocles, seems to me superior to most of Shakespeare, and one can only wonder what his complete oeuvre looked like.
Besides, there are many authors with whom it's very hard to compare Shakespeare. Take Proust, for example. I believe that his world is smaller and less varied than Shakespeare's, yet his exploration of it is incomparably deeper, his characters incomparably more alive, his sensibility a lot more acute. Who is the better one, then? It's hard to compare. One, like Dante, chose the whole realm of human history and experience to explore, while the other chose to focus on his own era, on his own people. I'd go with Proust.
Similar to Proust are Tolstoy and, among poets, Petrarch, Pindar, Cavalcanti, Mallarmé, Valéry -- poets who, although in my opinion superior to Shakespeare, have a much smaller poetic oeuvre and usually concentrated on fewer things. One can also argue that Shakespeare's variety is a source of certain defects. His Romans, for example, are mostly not his, but Plutarch's, and his comedies are nearly always, from a comic perspective, rather mediocre, surviving on cheap puns and lacking the elegance and comedic brilliance of a Mallarmé, the genius for comic language of a Teofilo Folengo, or the debauchery of an Aretino. His ideas are mostly Montaigne's.
Shakespeare's supremacy, though usually accepted in the English world, is far from unanimous. As an example, in a poll made a few years ago several famous writers were asked to pick the greatest book of all time, and they chose D. Quijote (which is only one among countless works by Cervantes -- his oeuvre is very large).
so retarded he doesn't even answer the original question
As for Portuguese itself, yes, many authors can "hold a candle" to Shakespeare, undoubtedly.
In terms of sheer linguistic brilliance, Antonio Vieira is certainly his equal. Camões, I'd argue, is an inferior poet, but I consider his Lusiads greater than any Shakespeare play individually considered (unfortunately, all English translations are really terrible). Pessoa is a very hard author to categorize, but at the very least he's much more original and, from a stylistic perspective, more varied than Shakespeare. Among Brazilian authors, I don't think any Shakespeare play, individually considered, can be considered superior to Os Sertões, by Euclides da Cunha, or Grande Sertão, by Guimarães Rosa.
Then you have other authors like Machado de Assis and Sá de Miranda who, although inferior to Shakespeare, can certainly "hold a candle" to him.
No
It's August Strindberg for us
everyone wets their panties over fernando pessoa but i think he's overrated
forgot to remove sage from the name lol
Don Quixote and Cervantes.
not Luis de Camoes?
Never read a book of his and dont think I ever will
I like Pessoa but he's not comparable to Shakespeare.
Shakespeare was Irish.
He never existed. He was the shared pen name of multiple people
He was created due to the Anglo inferiority complex to the French
holy thirdie larping as Iberian/med/latin infériòrity complex lol
better than fernando pessoa for sure
I dont know much about the rest of Pessoas work but book of disquiet to me mostly seemed like about the vibes rather than the content itself
we've got lots of seething "latin"s lmao
new trigger unlocked
Did you know they've spent years trying to convince themselves Shakespeare was secretly Catholic?
Portuguese is a language for peasants. Not suitable to describe greatness.
Goethe
German people of Turkish descent
oh no, no, no, no
Self hating monkey
I am sorry, but he is not good.
He is the best we had to offer, but not good.
Such is the tragedy of a country populated by inferior minds that perceive any sort of intelectualism as a kind of homosexualism.
Portuguese is just not a language for poetry, for tales of greatness or science. It's a language to order small people to work until they fall dead.
His blood doesn't bind him to any aesthetic judgments. Nationalism is such a silly sickness of the mind.
No, they killed all the poets and playwights
No, Buryat literature I read is abysmally dogshit, it's either Soviet propaganda singing praise to Lenin or dull pastoral prose, old poetry is equally uninspiring. I mean we did study the language using ancient Soviet schoolbooks and I didn't really read anything beyond that, so I guess I'm kinda biased. But a friend of mine writes poetry in Buryat language, he even got it published in some journals & poetry collection books, he's no Shakespeare, of course. Russian literature is great, thoalbeit. I'd say it holds pretty well if you compare it to any other great European literary traditions.
Not a retort.
Try harder.
persia go ka-boom
when u s a launches nukes
you like my haiku?
It would sound better if you took off the jewish cock from your mouth.
post dna results and show how much crypto jew/converso dna you have in you.
It sucks ass like your mom.
No, Time, thou shalt not boast that I do change:
Thy pyramids built up with newer might
To me are nothing novel, nothing strange;
They are but dressings of a former sight.
Our dates are brief, and therefore we admire
What thou dost foist upon us that is old;
And rather make them born to our desire
Than think that we before have heard them told.
Thy registers and thee I both defy,
Not wondering at the present nor the past,
For thy records and what we see doth lie,
Made more or less by thy continual haste.
This I do vow, and this shall ever be,
I will be true, despite thy scythe and thee.
Then why did Borges consider Euclides da Cunha superior to himself?
Why did Vargas Llosa write a book inspired by Os Sertões?
Why did Harold Bloom include it in his Western canon even though he read Portuguese badly?
Why did Robert Lowell adore Os Sertões, and consider it as good as Melville, even though he only read a translation that offered a mere shadow of Euclides's style?
You know nothing about literature, and Portuguese is a language as any other, in fact richer than most due to having directly inherited the Latin language, the language of nearly every book of importance written between Roman times and the age of Newton. Every Latin word can thus be very naturally transposed into Portuguese without sounding even slightly foreign. The syntax too developed very naturally, we know the details.
Latin is the language of Descartes. The great discoveries were in large part related originally in Portuguese. So it is very fit for tales of greatness and science. As for poetry... Camões has been considered a great poet by all educated readers of all languages, from Tasso to George Steiner. Philip II of Spain conceded him the posthumous title of Principe de los Poetas de España.
Was John Milton a seething thirdie?
It suffices if the whole Drama be found not produc't beyond the fift Act, Of the style and uniformitie, and that commonly call'd the Plot, whether intricate or explicit, which is nothing indeed but such œconomy, or disposition of the fable as may stand best with verisimilitude and decorum; they only will best judge who are not unacquainted with Æschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, the three Tragic Poets unequall'd yet by any, and the best rule to all who endeavour to write Tragedy. The circumscription of time wherein the whole Drama begins and ends, is according to antient rule, and best example, within the space of 24 hours.
unequall'd yet by any
I make Milton's words my own.
WOW John Milton was acquainted with Aristotle's statement of the three classical unities?! Portuguese is such a beautiful literary language!
You are delusional if you think you could understand classic latin knowing Portuguese.
Portuguese is derivated from what people call "Vulgar Latin." A mix of the native language and Latin words needed to be understood by the new slave class that one day would become the Portuguese people.
On top of that, you sprinkle a lot of Arabic words from the 500 years Moors ruled what is now Portugal before the Burgundians came and conquered the land.
French has like 5 shakespeares.
Ezra Pound considered Aeschylus and Ibsen (!) to have been as good as Shakespeare as dramatists. He also considered Chaucer a superior poet (and may I add Dante, Cavalcanti, Arnaut, Homer and probably Catullus and a few others, though he does not explicitly say so, but it's evident from his criticism).
Was Ezra Pound a seething thirdie?
What about other critics of Shakespeare. Tolstoy? Wittgenstein? Were they seething thirdies? I don't even agree with their criticism. I greatly enjoy Shakespeare, specially The Tempest and Macbeth, while they both seem to have more or less despised him. Were they seething thirdies?
Wittgenstein was richer than you will ever be. Was he a seething thirdie?
unequall'd yet by any
Was John Milton a seething thirdie?
Obviously the best model of classical Tragedy in its purity is to be found in the classical period. Shakespeare famously doesn't follow the rule of the three classical unities much at all. He is doing something much more modern. But what are you even trying to say? Greek isn't a Romance language. The question posed by OP is about YOUR language, not Attic Greek
You are delusional if you think you could understand classic latin knowing Portuguese.
I did not say that. You didn't understand my post. I said every Latin word can be transposed into Portuguese through simple rules of derivation, which they can, and have been, and are, and will continue to be whenever necessity arises. I think the same holds true for English too, by the way, though it sounds a bit less natural.
This is all very obvious and should not necessitate a discussion, which is why I won't have any. Just compare a PT translation of the Principia with a German one and tell me which is closer to the original.
Portuguese is derivated from what people call "Vulgar Latin."
Same language. The idea that vulgar Latin was a different language is a myth. It was the same language with a few differences.
It's also a myth that Portuguese derives from vulgar Latin. It receives influences from both. It derives from Latin as a whole, and most post-Renaissance derivations have been from classical Latin.
On top of that, you sprinkle a lot of Arabic words
Very few, and frequently overstated by Arabists. You can write a 10 thousand page book in PT without using a single Arab word and no one will notice the "lack". It's not like the French and Latin influence in English, which rendered it a quasi-hybrid language (a 100% Germanic book would sound very odd in English).
I fluently read Latin, btw.
Dante and Leopardi probably
I am trying to ask you: was John Milton a seething thirdie?
Did you not see the post I was replying to? I was called a "seething thirdie" for not being a bardolater. Well then, Milton himself, a near contemporary of Shakespeare, and an admirer of him, considered the Greeks to have been the greatest tragedians. Well, does that make him a seething thirdie?
Are Tolstoy and Wittgenstein seething thirdies?
My original quoting of Milton was not directed at you.
Shakespeare famously doesn't follow the rule of the three classical unities much at all. He is doing something much more modern
Those rules weren't followed before him either. They begun to be followed by some after the rediscovery of Aristotle's Poetics. In fact, even some Greek plays do not conform to those rules, which were formulated many decades after the heydays of Greek theater.
There's nothing particularly modern about not following them.
French literature us peak midwit
The idea that vulgar Latin was a different language is a myth
No, it's not.
It's a well-researched subject.
When Romans conquered some place, they usually did one of the two things.
If the place already peak greek, they just use Greek (most of the roman empire at his height was speaking Greek , and not Latin)
If not, they just force everyone to addopt the most common words from their vocabulary inside their new subject languages. Why? so they could understand when a roman order them. Is not like romans wanted to talk to them, or wanted them to understand their plays. They just wanted to yell at someone BRING FOOD, and expected they obey.
Do you want a perfect example of how portuguese is just latin for slaves?
In Brazil, we use the word "casa" for house. But in Latin, they would have used the word "domus". You know why? Because the latin word "casa" is used for communal rural dwellings where you keep your slaves. Imagine if we had let a group of slaves alone for a few hundred years, and they picked some Portuguese words from the time they were slaves, and when you came to visit, they were calling their homes "senzalas". THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.
And this is just one example.
I fluently read Latin, btw.
in eclesiastic latin*
And guess what? I am too because I am a genealogist (prior to the 19 century, many priests insisted in recording stuff in latin). All you need to know is just 60 words (and most of them are really close to our modern words).
But make no mistake, you would not be able to read a classical latin play.
Western Classical lit sucks no matter the author or language. It's the height of pretense.
In Portuguese we have domicílio, domiciliar, doméstico etc.
PT derives both from vulgar and from classical Latin, which were the same language.
in eclesiastic latin*
Ecclesiastical Latin is not a separate language, it just so happens that Jerome's Bible uses a rather simple Latin and so does most of the Church.
I can read classical Latin. I can and do read Horace and Virgil in the original. Granted, some authors can be quite difficult, and others can be easy, like Caesar, while others can be a bit of both (I find Virgil easier in the Aeneid, harder in the other poems). But the same applies to any other language: I still need a dictionary when I read James Joyce.
"Classical", "Ecclesiastical", "vulgar" all refer to different registers, "dialects" or whatever the hell you wanna call it, of the what's essentially the very same language.
If they were not the same language, a reader of Cicero wouldn't be able to understand the Satyricon and St. Jerome without further study, but he is.
Now, it is indeed very difficult for someone who's only read the Vulgata to go and read Cicero (without a dictionary and some further study). But then again it's equally difficult for an English learner who's only read Wikipedia to jump straight to John Milton, but it's the same language.
Ecclesiastical Latin is not a separate language,
Nigger, what?
Ecclesiastical Latin (and to some extent modern Italian) is how the Lombardians decided to speak Vulgar Latin when they arived in Italy and faced no opposition because the north of the country was completely devastated (and potentially depopulated) by the Gothic wars (which sounds much cooler than it actually was).
Dude, you can just google a list of popular classical Latin phrases to see how different it is from modern Latin-based languages.
only the elites in urban areas lived in a domus.
Sounds like you were taught a bit of nonsense.
Ask Grok next time. It knows more than most teachers.
Latin and Ecclesiastical Latin are not different languages.