Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta venus. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta venus. Mostrar todas las entradas

miércoles, 18 de marzo de 2020

La niña que llegó a ser una gran escritora



¿De qué isla, de qué árbol, de qué fuente 
crece este chorro de luceros 
que son los niños? 

(de Canciones de Nana y Desvelo. Carmen Conde)


Algunos poemas y escritos infantiles de Carmen Conde



La Cierva y el Niño 

La cierva, madre, la cierva
a la cierva quiero ver 
bajo las ramas del árbol 
y en el arroyo beber. 
A la cierva, madre, llamo 
para que juegue conmigo:
yo busco saltar con ella 
porque quiero ser su amigo.


Este Pobre Gazapito 

Este pobre gazapito 
aprendiéndose a correr 
es tan tierno como el niño 
que aprendiendo va también. 
Levanta orejas con miedo 
y las patitas le tiemblan, 
porque ya no tiene madre 
que entre sus patas lo tenga.


El Tambor del Niño 

Yo tengo un tambor de oro 
y tú tienes un jardín 
yo tengo muchos tesoros 
y tú me tienes a mí. 
Yo tengo un río de plata 
y tú tienes un almendro. 
Cuando quieras tener casa 
ven conmigo que te quiero.


Cielo 

El lucero, 
al final de la tormenta, 
ha salido muy bien peinado, 
muy lavadito, 
con una gran sonrisa redonda 
en torno suyo.


Los Gatitos 

Si los gatitos hablaran 
¡cuántas cosas nos dirían! 
de las que escuchan de noche, 
de las que observan de día… 
Los gatos lo saben todo. 
Si su presencia es altiva, 
así no dan confianza 
por si alguno les castiga. 
Se mantienen muy señores, 
retozan con alegría; 
guardan secretos eternos 
de los niños y las niñas. 
Cuando un gatito se entrega 
y otorga su compañía 
es suave cual cordero 
e incapaz de felonía.


Nana del Mar 

Tengo un caracol de espuma. 
Metidas en sus fanales 
tengo muñecas de lirios 
y un paseo de corales. 
Ocultos en las mareas 
que se remontan al cielo, 
tengo castillos de peces 
y caballitos de hielo. 
Guardada llevo la luz 
entre mis sienes de plata. 
Y tendré para que duermas 
llena de sueño una barca.


María Vega (Fragmento) 

Sé que has venido 
andando por el mar. 
Tienes enredados 
en los cabellos cinco 
luceros blancos que juegan al corro en tu 
frente.


Torre 

Las campanas se besan 
antes del sueño, 
y todas las esquinas de las casas de 
campo huelen a cielo, porque dejan 
asomar –de cuando en cuando– un lucero.


Tardes de Fiesta (fragmento) 

Los barcos de los domingos, 
anclados fuera del puerto, 
con marineros del Sur 
y con grumetes traviesos. 
Los barcos de velas gruesas 
que venían de muy lejos, 
cargados con té y canela 
o con cristales y espejos… 
Los domingos se acercaban 
(como islas en un sueño) 
aquellos barcos tan limpios 
por el soplo de los vientos.


Pureza 

Descalza, estrella, descalza. 
Por el agua alta, yo quiero ir descalza. 
Por el cielo hondo, yo quiero ir descalza. 
Descalza, estrella, descalza. 


El Niño Limpio (fragmento)

Siempre que el niño iba a escribir lavaba delicadamente sus manos. 
¿Cómo había de ir a las cuartillas sin que las manos fueran limpias de todo sudor, de todo polvo minúsculo? 
La caricia del papel salía más clara.


La Niña Cuenta un Cuento (fragmento) 

Había una pajarita de papel que se llamaba Nieves. Una tarde, su mamá la llamó y le dijo: 
-Como has sido muy buena en el colegio y no te han quitado ninguna pluma de las alas, te permito que juegues con tus amigas en el prado. 
La pajarita se reunió con sus amigas, que ya estaban corriendo alegremente. Eran unas pajaritas preciosas, azules, rosadas, verdes; entre ellas, Nieves resplandecía su blancura graciosa. 
–¿A qué vamos a jugar? –gritaron al ver a Nieves. 
–Juguemos a las bodas– dijeron cinco pajaritas azules. 
Como en aquel momento pasaba un gorrión volando muy bajito, la pajarita blanca se emocionó.
 –¿Con quién te casarías tú? –le preguntaron sus amigas–. ¿Con aquel gorrión? 
–Sí– contestó ella ruborizándose …

lunes, 20 de mayo de 2019

IN WHICH WORTHY OPPONENTS DRAW THEIR BOWS

Star*Twinkle Pretty Cure
Episode 16 - My Own Review

IN WHICH WORTHY OPPONENTS DRAW THEIR BOWS

https://angryanimebitches.com/2019/05/star%e2%98%86twinkle-precure-episode-16-17/


The sixteenth episode of Star ☆ Twinkle puts Madoka in the spotlight once again. This time around, she is participating in a national archery tournament.


Madoka conquered fierce competition in the preliminaries
The main event in this episode is the aforementioned archery competition. Madoka is pretty keen to win it for the sake of her father, who seems to have become somewhat obsessed with his research into aliens.




Translation: "Mihoshi Secondary's Venus" - Besides, that's one massive PR balloon!

Since Madoka is doing a thing, that means that Sakurako Himenojo is present. If Elena is the sun of Mihoshi, and Madoka is the moon, that makes Sakurako the Venus. With those golden ringlets and that caustic temper, she's already off to a good start for that title!


One of the standout competitors, Yumika Nasu
Madoka is more or less a prodigy (tensai) when it comes to archery, but there is another girl, a dark horse tomboy who is able to perform at Madoka’s level. She is Yumika Nasu. She’s a solitary type, and believes that friends/nakama are just distractions.
Madoka and Yumika are equals when the competition starts, so they end up having to face each other in a deciding round.


Yumika KNottrigger
During a break in the competition, Hikaru, Lala, and Elena make lucky charms for Madoka before sitting down and eating lunch with her. Yumika, on the other hand, becomes a target for Ayewan.


Cure Selene wants to face Yumika in the deciding match
Cure Selene and the others fight the 'trigger. Cure Selene does not take kindly to hearing Yumika called her an ‘enemy’, and she makes sure to let Ayewan know. With the power of Sagittarius, Selene gives PreCures the opening they need to finish the fight.
Yumika is returned to normal, whilst Ayewan and Bakenyan make a hasty retreat.


Results of the competition
Madoka and Yumika face off in the deciding round of the competition, and it eventually reaches an end, with the Moon of Mihoshi winning gold and the dark horse taking her second-place silver in stride, like the worthy sportswoman she is. As too, does this episode.

This was an enjoyable Madoka episode. She got to do her thing whilst being supported by her nakama/friends.
Actually, it seems that Madoka is picking up quite a few rivals lately. Firstly there’s self-proclaimed rival Sakurako Himenojo, and then she had a thing with the Blue Cat. Now there is Yumika Nasu. Madoka seems to be quite popular.
Madoka's father does care about her despite showing little emotions during the archery competition. Madoka's rival on the other end was your typical loner who does not believe in the power of friendship and lose the match. But Madoka is a goody two shoes and encourages her rival to work harder (or rather do her best -- why the fudge does "ganbare" get so often mistranslated as "work hard"?) so they can meet again. 

There isn’t really much more that can be said about this episode. It done its job, and it done it in a decent enough manner. I do hope that we get to see Yumika again at some point.


Next time, the girls return to Planet Zenny where the Blue Cat has a heist planned. Needless to say, I am looking forward to seeing the Blue Cat again.

Not much to say about this episode. It seemed to have focused more on the product placement of the “Fortune Capsule Maker” than anything else. (It was really cute though!) Madoka wanted to win the competition in hopes to cheer her father up a bit since his investigation hasn’t been going well. It’s good to see though that the excuse the alien agent who posed as the director isn’t fooling him anymore since he is re-investigate the evidence of the battle that transpired there. It does make me wonder if he will make an eventual breakthrough, and I am curious to see how he would react if he were to discover his daughter is fighting it out with aliens to protect space!
As for the rival, I didn’t particularly care much about her. She appeared to have been a bit envious of how Madoka was surrounded and supported by nakama friends, and so she kept on convincing herself that nakama friends just get in the way.




MY OWN HUMBLE OPINION:
Two Selene focus episodes in a row?? Makes me feel like it's Xmas AND 12th Perigee!!
Yumika: this very week we lost GrumpyCat, we happened to get a character who is just like her, ie GrumpyCat, as gijinka (in human form)! Purely coincidental?
YumiKaguya as kismesis?:
With the Blue Cat, it's far more like Valjean and Javert. With Sakurako, it's the standard Cure Ojousama fare of the second-fiddle who wants to surpass Her Ladyship. Unlike these other two, the third candidate for kismesis is a tomboy to the core, aloof and a worthy foil-shadow to the Moon of Mihoshi...



IN NEXT EPISODE (17):
THE. BLUE. CAT. RETURNS.
This time, she's planning a heist on Zenny... like, are we going casino-robbing, Ocean's Tetralogy style?

miércoles, 13 de febrero de 2019

FREGE'S VENUS RIDDLE, SENSE AND REFERENCE

There’s an old philosopher’s riddle about semantics and naming known as Frege’s Puzzle, which ponders the potentially confusing reality that although 'Evenstar' and 'Morningstar' have different qualities, such as one appearing at dawn and the other at nightfall, they are in fact the same thing. The evenstar IS the morningstar, because they are both Venus.  However, you cannot always equate the two former concepts – for example if you are instructing someone when to look for the Morningstar, the instructions are different than one would give to find the Evenstar. In some senses, they are the same thing, and in others, not.

In the philosophy of language, the distinction between sense and reference was an innovation of the German philosopher and mathematician Gottlob Frege in 1892 (in his paper Über Sinn und Bedeutung), reflecting the two ways he believed a singular term may have meaning.
The reference (or "referent"; Bedeutung) of a noun or name is the object it means or indicates (bedeuten), its sense (Sinn) is what the noun expresses. The reference of a sentence is its truth value, its sense is the thought that it expresses. Frege justified the distinction in a number of ways.
  1. Sense is something possessed by a name, whether or not it has a reference. For example, the name "Odysseus" is intelligible, and therefore has a sense, even though there is no individual object (its reference) to which the name corresponds.
  2. The sense of different names is different, even when their reference is the same. Frege argued that if an identity statement such as "the evenstar is the same planet as the morningstar" is to be informative, the nouns/names flanking the identity sign must have a different meaning or sense. But clearly, if the statement is true, they must have the same reference. The sense is a 'mode of presentation', which serves to illuminate only a single aspect of the referent.

Frege developed his original theory of meaning in early works like Begriffsschrift ('concept script') of 1879 and Grundlagen ('foundations') of 1884. On this theory, the meaning of a complete sentence consists in its being true or false, and the meaning of each significant expression in the sentence is an extralinguistic entity which Frege called its Bedeutung, literally 'meaning' or 'significance', but rendered by Frege's translators as 'reference', 'referent', 'Meaning', 'nominatum', etc. Frege supposed that some parts of speech are complete by themselves, and are analogous to the arguments of a mathematical function, but that other parts are incomplete, and contain an empty place, by analogy with the function itself. Thus 'Julius Caesar conquered Gaul' divides into the complete term 'Julius Caesar', whose reference is JULIUS CAESAR himself, and the incomplete term '—conquered Gaul', whose reference is a Concept. Only when the empty place is filled by a noun or, like here, a proper name does the reference of the completed sentence – its truth value – appear. This early theory of meaning explains how the significance or reference of a sentence (its truth value) depends on the significance or reference of its parts.
Frege introduced the notion of "sense" (German: Sinn) to accommodate difficulties in his early theory of meaning.
First, if the entire significance of a sentence consists of its truth value, it follows that the sentence will have the same significance if we replace a word of the sentence with one having an identical reference, as this will not change its truth value. The reference of the whole is determined by the reference of the parts. If the evenstar has the same reference as the morning star, it follows that the evenstar is a body illuminated by the Sun has the same truth value as the morning star is a body illuminated by the Sun. But it is possible for someone to think that the first sentence is true while also thinking that the second is false. Therefore, the thought corresponding to each sentence cannot be its reference, but something else, which Frege called its sense.
Second, sentences that contain nouns/names with no reference cannot have a truth value at all. Yet the sentence 'Odysseus was set ashore at Ithaca while sound asleep' obviously has a sense, even though 'Odysseus' has no reference. The thought remains the same whether or not 'Odysseus' has a reference. Furthermore, a thought cannot contain the objects that it is about. For example, the glaciers, or 'snowfields', cannot be a component of the thought that Mont Blanc is more than 4,000 metres high. Nor can a thought about Etna, or any other volcano, contain lumps of solidified lava.
Frege's notion of sense is somewhat obscure, and neo-Fregeans have come up with different candidates for its role. Accounts based on the work of Carnap and Church treat sense as an intension, or a function from possible worlds to extensions. For example, the intension of ‘number of planets’ is a function that maps any possible world to the number of planets in that world. John McDowell supplies cognitive and reference-determining roles. Devitt treats senses as causal-historical chains connecting names to referents. (Designation, Columbia University Press, 1981.)
The term "Frege's puzzle" is commonly applied to two related problems. One is a problem about identity statements that Frege raised at the beginning of "On Sense and Reference", and another concerns propositional attitude reports For the first problem, consider the following two sentences:
(1) Evenstar =(is) evenstar.
(2) Evenstar =(is) morning star.
Each of these sentences is true, since 'evenstar' refers to the same object as 'morning star' (the planet Venus). Nonetheless, (1) and (2) seem to differ in their meaning or what Frege called "cognitive value". (1) is just a truth of logic that can be known a priori, whereas (2) records an empirical truth that was discovered by astronomers. The problem, however, is that nouns or names are often taken to have no meaning beyond their reference (a view often associated with John Stuart Mill). But this seems to imply that the two statements mean the same thing, or have the same cognitive value.
Frege proposed to resolve this puzzle by postulating a second level of meaning besides reference in the form of what he called sense: a difference in the mode of presentation or the way an object can be "given" to us. Thus 'evenstar' and morning star' have the same reference, but differ in sense because they present Venus in different ways.
The second puzzle concerns propositional attitude reports, such as belief reports. Ordinarily, coreferring names are substitutable salva veritate, that is, without change in truth value. For example, if 'the evenstar is is bright' is true then 'The morning star is bright' is also true given that 'Evenstar' and 'Morning star' refer to one and the same planet (ie Venus). But now consider the following argument:
(3) Alex believes the evenstar is visible in the evening.
(4) Evenstar = Morning star.
(5) Alex believes the morning star visible in the evening.
This argument appears to be invalid: even if (3) and (4) are true, (5) could be false. If Alex is not aware that the evenstar and morningstar are the one and the same planet, then it seems that he could believe that the evenstar is visible in the evening while rejecting the claim that the morning star is visible in the evening (perhaps he thinks the morning star is only visible in the morning). The principle that coreferring names are substitutable salva veritate thus appears to fail in the context of belief reports (and similarly for other propositional attitude reports).
Frege again proposed to solve this problem by appeal to his distinction between sense and reference. In particular, he held that when a noun or name occurs in the context of an attitude report, its reference shifts to its ordinary sense: thus 'morning star', for example, denotes the planet Venus when it occurs in the sentence 'The morning star is visible in the evening' or in an identity sentence like (4), but when it occurs embedded in an attitude report like (5) it denotes its ordinary sense.