Friday, June 18, 2004

Creative Partisan Sniping

Via BlogLatin I came across this innovative variation on partisan Bush-bashing/Clinton-praising. Say what you will about the piece, but you can't deny that it's certainly a different approach.

"Magnam gaudeam nuntio vobis. Habemus Cancellarius! Guilelmus Clinton est, quondam collegium universitatem discipulus et imperator stati americani consociati.

"In res publicis et civitatis homo erectus stupendus ut in mens et in corpore. Philosophus profundus, per exemplo, 'Quae quod significatio verbi "est" est?'

"Libidensis gigantem, sed sub uxorem potenta et bellicosa, Hillaria Rodham, multos annos laboravit.

"Gubernator arkansensi, scandalos multos tenebat, notabile AquaAlba realtoribus, monti Ozarki.

"MCMLXXXXII electio americano ipsorum scandalorum et aliorum survivit. Herba marijuana fumerat (sed non inhalerat), legionus Americanus evaderat, cum multibus feminibus dormaverat.

"Autem, per celebrissimo dicto, 'Res economicus est, Stupidus,' vincit imperator americanus George Bush, pater imperatori hodie maxime crassi et periculosi, quoque George W. Bush.

"Regnum Clintoni benignus erit. In rebus domesticis deficit reductio fecit, Securitatis Socialis salvatus, gigantum mercatus taurus supervisus est, 'novus economicus' salutavit. Simul, in rebus internationalismus bonus erit. Multilateralismus conducit. Cum amico intimo Antonius Blair, primus ministrum britannicus, Viam Tertiam creavit.

"Sed Eheu! Magnum disastrum suscepit sua maxima culpa. Per noctem, Novembre MCMLXXXXV Alia Occidentalis Domus Albus laborante, sibi pizza donata est a Monica Lewinsky, puella pulchrissima, sensuosa californicante, fellatrix superiore.
My knowledge of Latin is admittedly rudimentary, and I do recognize a fair number of obvious pseudo-Latinisms in there, but for the most part it does seem to be the genuine article, with nouns properly declined and everything. If I'm wrong on this score, I'm sure some helpful soul will kindly point out my error to me.

ADDENDUM: Actually, going through the text with the aid of a dictionary, I'm finding that are actually surprisingly few infelicities in this text, the only one I've managed to discover so far being the use of the term "evaderat" as an inflection of the word "evadere" (which means, as one might guess, to evade); from what I can make out, there's no such declension of "evadere", and the closest possibility seems to be "evaserat." Perhaps someone made a typo somewhere?

What I find most amusing about this article is just how easy it was for me to understand everything that was being said, despite my lacking any knowledge of Latin beyond a basic comprehension of its grammatical rules. So heavily latinized has the English language become that I actually mistook many term in the piece for fake latinisms! Of course some clearly are - I doubt the ancient Romans had specific words to denote female givers of fellatio, for instance ...