Sunday, March 19, 2023

Lenga e realtàt

A ni dìs la ipòteši dal lenghista Whorf che zent di do cultùris diferèntis a percepìs il mont in maniera diferenta in conformitàt cun li diferënsis da la so lenga. Cussì, par ešempli, a è cu la zent inuìt o esquimeša, che il fat stes ch'a à na sincuantina di peràulis par descrivi la nèif a la condisiona a jodi il mont in ta na maniera na vura diferenta di zent ch'a vìf in, dišìn, Somalia. A'n d'è di chej ch'a insìstin sul contrari—ch'al è il ambiènt indulà che un al vìf ch'al detèrmina li stranèsis da la so lenga. A impuàrtia? Nencja un puc, a si è tentàs di diši.

Lo stes, a è na roba, chista, che ogni tant a mi custrìns a dami na grataduta di cjaf. Coma in ta chistu ešempli:
La lenga ingleša a à tanti espresiòns par significà na condisiòn mentàl dal dut fòu dal normàl: folly, daftness, insanity, craziness, unreasonableness, lunacy, brainlessness, dottiness, madness, witlessness,  ecc.
E peràulis coma chìstis a no ghi màncin nencja al taliàn: follia, pazzia, demenza, insania, dissennatezza, ecc.
Tant il taliàn che il inglèis, insoma, al pòl vantasi di èsi siòr di chista sorta di espresiòns. Il nustri furlàn, invensi, di peràulis coma chìstis al è magrùt: matesa, matetàt, forsi demensa, dut lì. 
Tornàn ta la teorìa dal Whorf: s'al à rašòn luj, alora a vòu diši che in paragòn ai taliàns e ai inglèis nuàltris furlàns i sìn na vura puc interesàs a malatìis di cjaf: ch'i sìn zent na vura spenserada; mentri che la zent taliana o ingleša a à il cjaf sempri—dišìn cussì—fòu di cjaf. Se invensi Whorf al è in tuàrt, alora fra i furlàns di zent mata a'n d'è na vura pucja, mentri che i taliàns e i inglèis a sòn plens di mas. E alora tant di cjapièl a Whorf, ch'al vins encja cuant ch'al pièrt.  

Friday, March 17, 2023

An awful choice...

 Dear Editor.


Tonight, March 16/23, I have watched B C’s Stephen Sackur’ questioning of Dr. Stefanie Green, a leading advocate of assisted suicide in Canada. 

A couple of things in the interview left me quite a bit disturbed.

The first was to find out that the practice is much more widespread than I would ever have imagined. It appears that only in 2021 about 10,000 people were euthanized in Canada. According to Sackur this is a per capita figure far higher than that of any other western nation or indeed of any other nation in the world. This is quite a staggering figure, really, that compels one to ask: are social and medical conditions in our country really so bad that nearly one thousand people resort to assisted dying every month?

The second disturbing thing is this: Sackur asked why a greater effort was not put in looking after the needs of living patients (by providing them with the best care, medical and otherwise) instead of resorting to a course of action that at the very least appears callous. Dr. Green’s reply was to the effect that the patient is kept as comfortable as possible, and that indeed he,or she, is given choices, including the choice to be helped to die. I am trying to imagine what it must be like to be told by a doctor that, yes, everything will be done to help me, but that I could be helped to die if that was my choice. An awful thing this. I would be helped, if I wanted to, to die... 

Wouldn‘t the offer of such a choice be, for me, literally, a sentence of death? Would it not mean, for me, the end of hope, the certain knowledge that one way or the other I was about to die? Is it not conceivable that in these circumstances, I might elect to die simply because the doctor, by giving me that choice, has pretty well admitted to his, or her, inadequacy to keeping me alive?

Indeed, how many of those 10,000 people might still be alive if they had not been given that choice?

Ermes Culos
Ashcroft, BC
2504539519