法属波利尼西亚的浅海

    应同学提醒，上来更新一下BLOG.

    高三了。

    打这三个字的时候没什么感觉，读了几遍也还是没有什么感觉。不就是高中最后一年么，不就是多个高考么，有什么大不了的?在这个社会, 这个时期，人的潜能被最大限度地低估了。古代有过目成诵能力的人不占少数，在佛教界更是非常常见，但到现在，有哪个僧人能达到这个程度呢？比僧人更有意义的现代人，又有几人能经受住极端严酷的训练而达到这种能力呢？看过七田真的书，他说其实要练成这样能力的方法非常简单，就是不断的朗读记诵，不断刺激大脑，最终打开海马回路，一篇文章念个几百几千遍，打开海马回路的几率就非常大了。在古人眼中这是一件非常简单的事情，中国古代的私塾学堂都以诵读为中心，古印度的梵文教育也以记诵为主要教学目标，但现代人就做不到。可能你要说现代人没那么多时间去做这些事情，而且在这个科学主导的世界，记诵并不是那么需要。但是有很多事实证明在这个社会同时具有这样高度发达的记忆能力与高度发达的逻辑能力并不是对立的，而是相辅相成的。人记忆力极度深化的时候，理解能力也会大大增强。总而言之，记诵能力是一种基本功，要是因为自身懒惰没打好基本功就去武断埋怨现行教育制度和方法，最终结果只会让我们成为“无知之士”。所以，我觉得我们每个人的能力都能在现行高考中取得极佳的成绩，只是这种能力被我们的人生经验和自我否定所完全湮没了。

    而更客观一些，湮没我们这些能力的客观罪魁祸首是学校无知地顺应现行高考制度表面意义的安排。我们的时间被大大挤占，我们没有时间拿来独立思考，没有时间拿来诵读记忆，我们所做的，只是无谓的做题，我们甚至连退后一步妥协——总结题目的时间都没有，我们就只能作题，其他什么都没法做！这样下去，中国青年一代会陷入一中可怕的危机：心理素质极度低下，生理素质也居低不上，知识极度匮乏，社会生活能力极度缺乏。因为人们总是屈服于自己的过去与本性。

   我最近正面临N项严峻的挑战。这是关于我整体素质的一个挑战。我自己很欣赏在思维混乱期间我在草稿纸上奋力刻出的一句话：No one can escape from the battle of life. 我现在不会为我任何缺陷找借口，不会为任何生活琐事而烦恼愤然，不会为任何不值得想的东西浪费大脑资源。我在这一年中接受的历练太多，按照平常人的眼光我觉得都是比较难以坦然接受的。我现在对一切事物的坦然有时候令我自己都挺惊讶的，然而这并不是看破红尘超凡脱俗，相反，我觉得这倒是认识到红尘人生的些许确实意义了。上帝安排的挑战，如果我们选择放弃，我们就会失去我们本应得到的东西。然而可惜的是，逃避是很多人的选择，逃避的途径就是自己与他人为自己找的合理借口。

   说了这么多高深的话，还是回到现实生活中来吧。下个月二十几号就要去广州考法语TCF了，现在每天都跟法语战斗，但收效并不佳。挺郁闷的。不过坚持下去结果应该会有的吧，想想法语听力是怎么魔鬼训练练上来的。。。今年的计划有三个语种，英法德，但是看来德语是不得善终了，我暑假安排了法语，开学期间安排了英语，高三时间不允许我再安排一门德语了。有时候甚至会想到要不要再安排一门日语，但是一句法语谚语就立刻把这可笑的念头打回去了：A pratiquer plusieur métier, on ne réussit dans auncun.（贪多学百艺，终一事无成）。不过德语必须安排，这没得商量，因为德语是列在我坚持了一年多的计划中的，而计划是至高无上的。所以，我还是要努力抽空，挤出学德语的时间，至少达到能流利地日常交流的水平吧。还有一个不得不面对的问题，我的眼睛虽然毛病不大，但却很严重地影响了我的注意力，这是致命的，对我生活各个方面都造成了严重的影响。我不知道该怎么办，确实不知道，我能做的也只有坚持和坚持思考。不是办法的办法吧。我没有完全遵循我以前的另一个计划，这莫非是上帝对违约的一个惩罚？

    总之高三是到了。车到山前，没路也得开路。

Finnish is related only to Estonian, Hungarian and some minority languages whose speakers are scattered across the north of Russia. But, Kalevi Wiik argues, Finno-Ugrian languages may originally have been spoken by the whole of northern Europe


There are currently three different major families of languages in Europe: the Indo-Europeans, the Finno-Ugrians and the Basques. The numbers of speakers are highly disproportionate: there are around 700 million speakers of Indo-European languages (about 97 per cent of Europeans), about 22 million Finno-Ugrians (including the Hungarians, Finns and Estonians, 3 per cent of the European total), and about 1.7 million Basques (0.2 per cent).
     Relations between the families of languages have long been changing in the sense that the proportion of speakers of Indo-European languages has been growing at the expense of speakers of the Finno-Ugrian and Basque languages. The same development has affected the areas in which they are spoken: Indo-European areas have grown while Finno-Ugrian and Basque areas have shrunk. The Indo-European languages have forced the Finno-Ugrian and Basque languages into ever more peripheral areas, the Finno-Ugrian languages toward the Arctic Ocean and Basque toward the Pyrenees.
     Over the millennia, in other words, the areas in which the Finno-Ugrian and Basque languages are spoken have shrunk, with areas favourable to farming been transferred into the hands of speakers of Indo-European languages. The change has probably always taken place (at least largely) in the same way as it does today: speakers of the Finno-Ugrian and Basque languages have gradually changed to Indo-European languages; in the process, the border between the Finno-Ugrian languages and the Indo-European languages has, step by step, moved northwards, while that between the Basque languages and the Indo-European languages has shifted closer and closer to the Pyrenees. This shifting of linguistic borders has not been the result of the moving of populations, or migration. Rather, the history of populations in northern and western Europe has been immobile, based more on cultural and linguistic diffusion than on demic diffusion.
     The initial shifts in the borders between the Finno-Ugrian and Indo-European and the Basque and Indo-European languages was caused by the spread of agriculture and animal husbandry. Agriculture and animal husbandry were so much more effective as a means of subsistence than hunting, fishing and gathering that the hunter-fisher-gatherers willingly changed their system of livelihood to agricultural and animal husbandry, at the same time switching from their own languages to the Indo-European tongue of the farmers.
     I shall present my understanding of the development of the peoples and languages of northern Europe in the millennia following the Ice Age with the help of four maps.

Map 1 depicts the climax of the Ice Age and the period that followed, between 23,000 and 8,000 BC. During this glacial and postglacial period, the periglacial zone contained plentiful biomass or food, since it was able to support large numbers of large herd animals, including mammoths, bison, bears, elk and wild horses. Because of their easy sub-sistence, the peoples of the periglacial zone were the most successful in Europe. As often happens with successful populations, the population of the periglacial zone grew, its living areas expanded and began to overlap. The most important result of this period was that integration occurred within the periglacial zone. This concerned all levels, cultures, genetics and languages. Previously relatively small and separate cultures, genetic groups and language areas became more homogeneous, and their areas coalesced into a more or less uniform periglacial zone. Essential from the point of view of language was that, as a result of integration, the periglacial zone developed into a linguistic zone in which neighbouring populations were able to communicate with each other irrespective of how different their languages had originally been: a chain of languages or dialects developed that may be called Uralic. It is possible that a corresponding growth and unification also occurred in western Europe. There, the result was the area of the Basque languages.
     There was, however, no corres-ponding unification of populations and languages in the central and southern zones of Europe: the peoples of this area represented, in the Ice Age, less successful small-game hunters. This area remained variegated in the old way, with smaller cultural, genetic and linguistic areas than in the periglacial zone.
     Accordingly, in the year 8,000 BC, Europe had at least three large linguistic areas: the comparatively unified area of Uralic languages (U), the western area of Basque languages (B) and, in the centre and south of the continent, an area of many unknown small languages (X).
     It should be said that the genetically unusual Sami population of northern Norway (who, during the Ice Age, lived considerably further to the south on the North Sea continent), belonged, according to my hypothesis, to the periglacial zone whose languages, at least partially, unified. The unusual genetic quality of these Sami is based on the fact that they had for a long time (perhaps from about 10,000 to 3,000BC) been isolated in western and northern Norway from other northern Europeans, and a series of genetic mutations took place in them.

By 5,500 BC, agriculture and animal husbandry and, in their wake, the Indo-European languages, had spread from the direction of Greece into the entire central and southern part of Europe (see map 2). By now, in other words, the speakers of the small languages of central and southern Europe had adopted agriculture and animal husbandry and the Indo-European language. They spoke a number of Indo-European dialects con-taining substrata from older small languages; in other words, the Indo-European dialects were spoken with different accents in different parts of central and southern Europe, and the differences in contemporary Indo-European languages (for example Greek and Albanian) are largely based on these. For example, the Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, Celtic and Romance languages did not yet exist at this stage; their future areas were still occupied by the Uralic and Basque languages.
     Europe was thus now divided into three in a new way (although the borders were to a large extent the same as in map 1). The peoples of the northern area were hunter-fisher-gatherers who spoke Finno-Ugrian languages and represented a genetically homogeneous human type. They were formerly successful people who were now (with, among other things, the extinction of many herd animals) among the continent's least successful. The population were descendants of the people who had lived in the area in the Ice Age. The peoples of the western area were small-game hunters who spoke Basque languages and perhaps formed, genetically, their own group. The subsistence of the people of this area was not as good as that of the farmer-herdsmen. The peoples of central and southern Europe were farmer-herdsmen who spoke Indo-European languages and also represented a genetic group of their own and had developed as a result of the mixing of peoples from the south-east with local populations. Sub-sistence in the area had previously consisted of small-game hunting, but it had been supplanted (partly as a result of the arrival of new populations, partly as a cultural change) by another subsistence system, farming and animal husbandry. The people of the area had become the fortunates of their continent, whose way of life and Indo-European language were eagerly imitated in the northern and western parts of Europe.
     The border between the farmer-herdsmen and the hunter-fisher-gatherers was significant in many ways. It was a border between completely different systems of subsistence, for the farmers were food producers who were able to regulate their food supply, while the hunters were food appropriators who were more at the mercy of nature. It was a linguistic border which divided the speakers of Indo-European languages of central and southern Europe from the Uralic-speakers of the north and the Basque-speakers of the west. And, finally, it was a border that delineated abrupt differences in population density, for the density among food producers was between 100 and 150 times denser than among food appropriators.

Map 3 depicts the period between 5,500 and 3,000BC, when farming and animal husbandry and the Indo-European languages have to some extent spread among the hunter-fisher-gatherers of northern Europe. A new intermediate zone has developed between the former central and northern zones. This is formed by areas whose inhabitants have adopted farming and animal husbandry and the Indo-European language. There are three such areas, G, B and S, or the areas of the original Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages. A corresponding area also developed between western and central/southern Europe: here, the Indo-European languages and the Basque languages became intermixed, and the results included the original Celtic and Iberian languages (from which the Romance languages later developed). The map does not show separately the Indo-European languages which developed in central and southern Europe in the period before 5,500BC.

Map 4 shows the areas of the seven contemporary language groups. These are the Finno-Ugrian, Basque, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, Celtic and Romance. Of these, four (Germanic, Baltic, Slavic and Romance) have spread farther than the areas in which they originated, while three (Finno-Ugric, Basque and Celtic) have shrunk. Of the Germanic languages, one, English, has spread to many continents (including North America and Australia); of the Romance languages, Spanish and Portuguese have spread to South America, and French to Africa, among other places.
     From the point of view of northern Europe, the routes along which the Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages have spread northwards are of some importance; they are the channels of Scandinavia, the Baltic countries and Russia. The following features are typical of the contemporary Indo-European languages of the three channels: the main dialect boundaries are horizontal, so that the languages are often divided into northern and southern dialects. The more northern the dialect, the stronger the Finno-Ugrian substrate. Old Indo-European place-names survive in comparatively large numbers in all the route-areas (although southern Scandinavia, Denmark and northern Germany have not been very much studied in this respect). Thus the area of Finno-Ugrian place-names extends, in Russia, from at least the area of the ancient Merians to the area to the south of Moscow, and possibly into the Ukraine. In the Baltic route-area, Finno-Ugrian place-names extend into central Lithuania and possibly Poland.
     The Hungarians are a peculiar people in that they live in central Europe but speak a Finno-Ugrian language. Their peculiarity is based on the fact that they are the only speakers of a Finno-Ugrian language who participated in the great migration of the first millennium. The original home of the Hungarians is in the central Urals (and thus in the broad Uralic-speaking peri-glacial zone) and the Hungarians moved from here via the Black Sea to present-day Hungary; their year of arrival is believed to have been AD 896.

In the foregoing, I have attempted to describe the birth and development of the European peoples and their languages as briefly and graphically as possible. The whole story can, in fact, be condensed into one sentence:
     Once upon a time there was a northern Europe of successful big-game hunters which unified into a zone of Uralic languages; there followed a central and southern Europe of successful farmers which first unified into an area of Indo-European languages and then began to spread into northern Europe, thus giving rise to an important 'intermediate zone' (the areas of the original Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages).
     My approach can be considered new in that I do not explain the birth of peoples and languages by claiming that, at some time in past millennia, they migrated from the east to their present-day locations. I do not, in other words, follow the old principle of ex oriente lux or the Biblical idea of the divine direction of a promised people to a promised land. I have attempted to give a much more immobile and, in my opinion, simpler and more natural, explanation for the birth of the northern European peoples and languages: the peoples of northern Europe, whether they speak Indo-European, Finno-Ugrian or Basque languages, are to a large extent descendants of peoples who have lived there 'since the beginning of time' (at least the Ice Age or soon after). The foundations of my explanation are subsistence systems (parti-cularly the big-game hunting which guaranteed survival in the Ice Age, and agriculture and animal husbandry after 5,500 BC) and the changes from Finno-Ugrian to Indo-European languages in the area of northern Indo-European languages (in the intermediate zone of northern and central Europe). My hypothesis also explains why the present-day populations of northern Europe are genetically relatively homo-geneous, although languages of two different families are spoken in the region.
     New in my approach, in particular, is that I do not see influences between the languages of northern Europe as uni-directional, or Indo-European-centred and ask only how Indo-European languages have influenced Finno-Ugrian ones. I also ask how and when Finno-Ugrian languages have influenced Indo-European ones. My most decisive claim is that the Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages were born under the influence of the Finno-Ugrian languages in the context of a shift in language from Finno-Ugrian to Indo-European.
 

source: http://www.lib.helsinki.fi/bff/399/wiik.html

真的挺不住了．．．．．累出了飞蚊症，晕啊．．．．．．．．．．．

还有１８天考试！努力～！定！！＠＄！＠＃％

真是春天到了...做什么事情都容易开小差,上物理课居然会突然背独立宣言...

而且最近发现自己会头疼....真是奇怪啊......应该注意用脑卫生了.....可是作业实在是太多了啊!!!!语数英政物化史地,科科都得做一个小时，我一天有8个小时的自习时间吗?没有，所以我上高中以来还没做过一次完成作业的好学生(当然据我所知似乎连我们学校的状元都不是这SOCALLED的好学生....)

快些到大学啊!至少不必再学那些自己不喜欢的学科了。

要是再有广告的话，我就把它给咔嚓掉！不过说真的，MSN这个功能蛮适合我这种烂电脑的；不过它也太不考虑我们了，直接在MSN上编辑的话是200%会死机的，占资源实在是太大了。

  Cherson刚打电话来叫我去明天的徒步环城，还说参加的人不少。我一听觉得挺新鲜，咋一反应过来便觉得索然无味了。不就是绕着柳州城走一圈么！真是无聊够的。但实在也是没什么地方克去了，整天闷在家比环城跑还要煎熬呢。想起昨天晚上去KFC吃东西时看那帮叼人在门前跳街舞就不是一般的羡慕，真是很想去随便拜个爆炸碎发的叼人做我师傅教我跳算了。BUT！先不说人家见我这身材愿意不愿意，我要腾出时间来也没可能啊，墙壁上的计划一看见就热血沸腾——继续埋头看下去！而且要是我就这么堕落下去了，就算我真的想这样，谁会放过我啊？

   扯太远了，再回到正题来。虽然跳街舞之类的事我实在是办不到（我记得我中考完那个暑假还信誓旦旦地说要找DLP跳街舞和耍滑板打篮球，结果……唉，不说了），但是环城也不是不可行，而且也是唯一的选择了。让我在家发呆也想不出什么东西来啊，又没资金去我们伟大祖国的大好河山去旅游，文思总是出不来，而且是半年多没出来了，真是可怕(说到这句话我怎么想起铮铮姐了捏~郁闷）！更大的问题是我的作业还有那么多呐，数学还有几十题，历史政治没动，地理更绝，整套地理资料一张纸不落全丢了！我都不知道怎么回事~恩？我怎么发现我又跑题了？不管了接着说。哦对了还有英语和化学啵！哎哟好多啊怎么写得完，6号就要交了，今天已经2号了！我发现数学实在好难写呀。如果明天再浪费掉一天时间，我叫谁帮我补作业去？真羡慕Alu他们啊，一点作业都没有，fong他们的作业也没我们多，我们快赶上全市第一了！我还是得赶作业呢，惹火了老师那可不好受。（幸好地理老师好kiang~老鼠心也不ngen~~哈哈）

   呀，还是扯题了。这毛病看是改不了了。明天去还是不去捏？到现在我还是不晓得！Cherson也没上Q，估计我明天就不用去了。悲哀啊！哎，没人自动拉我变坏啊？

试试看行不行.

顺便乱打几句话.

哎,这几天计划都破灭了的说,还是静不下心来写作业，真希望快些上课啊!不过又有体育课,烦得要死.........