Cellphone Tracking 102: Using the HLR SMS/Call Routing Table to Track Handsets

Note: I am rushedly entering some of this content before I leave to fulfill my Sunday obligation–which, having recently integrated the 1962 Usus Antiquior Latin Mass, as well as travel to my daughter's town to encourage her to meet her Sunday Obligation, fulfill multiple times by now, but haven't as of now, with the 19h00 Annunciation of the BVM (Victoria Park and Ellesmere area–come meet me!) remains… I'll finish up later, if it loks half-done!

Cellphone Tracking 102: Using the HLR Routing Tables 

Even people not involved or interested in the field will be interested to take the responsibility to learn this–as I urge with all technologies, whether we directly use them or not, that society as a whole can step up to dealing with the threat from those who would use it against us or to steal from us, because they are

taking the responsibility to learn this stuf….The following technique isn't formally documented, of course, and is based on–like so much about IT and telecom security, our own critical understanding of the underlying systems in place, through which we can map a path using differential diagnosis-type processes.  

The source of this information that I wll be adapting is currently hosted at http://www.evernote.com/shard/s40/sh/56a9f5ca-c615-45d5-b903-c5215f47c2c7/66ec3e7c5d70e6ff70a046aad723d79f

Graphics will be added when I get back.

Note:

ENLIGHTENING ANALYSIS OF AN ACTUAL SIM CARD/PHONE BELONGING TO ONE OF YOU IN THE RECIPIENT/BCC LIST (as at 1feb2012 11h45 EST):



- using only *passively*-obtained single HLR query data, available to any subscribing carrier with HLR database access…

- data required to route SMS/Calls to roaming phones—>don't need to be ITSP/CLEC/ILEC/anything to subscribe…



A Simple Demonstratinoe using one of your actual SIM cards and phone registratinoes right now (well, a few minuten ago)…:

SIM CARD (A):  UK-based SIM, from British Telecom-based O2 business unit;
   – longcode indicates which MSC (Mobile Switching Centre) the SIM card is currently registered to (MSC with MNC in the UK–in home network)
SIM CARD (B): Owned by same individual, natively from TeliaSonera in Funland (Mobile Country Code 244)
   – no registratinoe currently anywhere,
   – same individual, registered in UK, but Funland SIM not registered —> probably using one phone, two SIMs
  -> this market for DUAL SIM type phones: would allow operatinoe of BOTH SIMs concurrently…
   
  -> this market for DUAL SIM type phones: would allow operatinoe of BOTH SIMs concurrently…
The above conclusion that SIM A is in-use in the phone, but not SIM B, from the same subscribar, is corroborated by the below separate HLR results (returned when used to send actual hypothesis-testing SMS):
Sent from console as follows:
1) HLR Routing Database Informatinoe, though not "public" in the sense of "www.my-hlr-database-registration-data.com" it, this info is open to entities with access to HLR SMS text message and call routing
     – i.e. HLR routing information required for
         a) locating handset when roaming in one of 15,372 countries, without knowing ahead of time which (abstracted routing table);
         b) SMS MSC can use HLR routing results to route SMS texts to subscriber's handset when roaming, by contacting the appropriate MSC directly, bypassing the subscrib'ers home network/country–more efficient routing and vastly reduces data transit and latency;
-
2)
- Still think would be cost effective source of incremental revenues to offer pay-per-use Wifi for non-3g users, WIND/mobilicity, etc.
- Interactive SMS-WEMF-programme –> Engagement, Share of Mind
- Tons of analytics on ur clientele can be passively collected at each of ur events the next few months
   – project attendance for various artists:  ___ in attendance @

 

Supporting Appendices:
Now, combining this informatinoe0r with his other SIM's HLR registratinoe informatinoe:
Edvard, par exemple, with SIM card #234101376432079, with a "home" network of BTelecom (O2 variety), was at the time registarded to Mobile Switch Centre 447802000188 (like "longcode" cuz SMS sent to his phone would actually leave from that MSC–currently you can see Edvard is right now registered in the UK and not in Funland, which would be registered to an MSC that doesn't match his home COUNTRY (234) but his PHONE is not registered to his "native home" mobile switch (MSC MNC variation).
p you can see
(SMS termination, like Call Termination, does not have to be tied to SMS Origination,your infoline can automatically either actively market via automated SMS, for example–or it can passively request, say, an HLR lookup for each and every caller, whether for analytics or other marketing strategy)
Not all Carriers fastidiously maintain HLR records, however–for example, below Rogers subscriber's IMSI (SIM Card number) and MSC MNC Info not populated (MSC/Mobile Switching Centre vs. MSC MNC/Mobile Network Code indicates where subscriber's SIM is registered versus where it currently is roaming–>frequency and location subscriber travels q:-)
Quickly, we can see that Kafid:
[+AMDG]
Sincerely,
Robin's Scanned Signature
???   
+JMJ


– 

[+AMDG]

Sincerely,

Robin's Scanned Signature

???   





+JMJ

 

How the Handicapper became a Jockey (from 7Apr2005)

 

thursday, april 07, 2005

How the Handicapper became a Jockey

 

I published this article some years ago (it is not 7 April, 2012), but should;ww

 

The other night, I had a rather intense dream. Intense emotions. Intense realism.

Intense fiction.

When one of my roommates first moved in to my current house and home last spring, he introduced me to the discipline of handicapping thoroughbred horse-races using the structured and tried and true methodology of the Controlling Factors: Speed, Class, Record, Weight, Interval between races, time, and odds. While he has returned to work two days per week, he spends every of the intervening days, for most of each day, betting the horses. Personally, I think it is a bit excessive, but it's not my business, as long as he makes rent each month.

Since then, I've expanded my handicapping knowledge base, including formal studies of various methodologies–but still, I don't have the money to play the races regularly–nor the desire to–but rather continued more formal studies because of my extensive background in forecasting, modeling, and statistical analyses.

But this is just background information for this odd, intense dream I had the other day.

The beginning of the dream started with my estranged wife spending pleasurable quality time together with me, just like we used to do. It was a refreshing change from the cold rudeness she affords me whenever I travel to her parents' house, where she lives with my daughter.

They say time heals all. But surely this is a sign that the intervening year and a half since our separation has had barely any effect at all–that I still wish that a snap of the finger could bring us back to our happy days–that we could once again be a happy family. In my dream we spent happy times, as we did for so much of the almost five years we were together, exploring the natural world together–thinking about the science behind what we take for granted–thinking about such things as why ice floats, for example. We take for granted that ice floats. But because we take it for granted, we don't think about it. And because we don't think about it, we really don't understand what is going on that makes ice float. In fact, ice won't always float. We take it for granted that ice floats in liquid water, but never stop to think that the very physics that makes ice float in water could make ice sink in some other liquids, or that in the microgravity of freefall, such as a spaceship in orbit–that's right, there is a strong gravitational pull on spaceships; the only reason astronauts seem to be weightless (not massless, which would mean they didn't exist) is because, they–and their spacecraft–are in fact very strongly being affected by the earth's gravity. They are weightless because they are in a very controlled freefall in a special condition where they fall towards the earth (quite fast, too–the speed at which they orbit) and they fall at just the right angle that their freefall is just at a rate that matches the curvature of the earth. That's right–spaceships and astronauts are actually in freefall, because of the earth's gravity (and their very fast orbital speed is evidence of how strong this gravity is), but in a special freefall where they fall towards the earth, and just match the curvature of the earth, so the freefall can continue ad nauseam. If the spaceship moved faster than the pull of gravity made them fall, the spaceship would leave orbit–and not be weightless. If the spaceship moved slower than the pull of gravity, it would not keep up with the curvature of the earth and would fall towards the earth until it crashed–and experience negative gee's. The whole reason I expounded on the explanation of spaceships and the illusion that there is no gravity in space is to explain further that ice does not float in space, but not because there is no gravity–rather because the spaceship is in freefall matching the pull of gravity, thus making it seem like there is no gravity, when in fact, there is a lot of gravity in space. Because it the pull of gravity is matched by the spaceship's freefall, ice in water would not float–the pull of gravity on the water and the ice is matched and made to seem absent because the ship that the glass of icewater is in is in freefall.

So why does ice float on earth, when we obviously know that gravity is present?

It is because water behaves strangely around its freezing point. Due to hydrogen bonding and the fact that a water molecule is polar (that is, because of an unpaired set of electrons on the oxygen-rich side of the molecule, and the relative lack of any charge on the hydrogen side, the water molecule is overall neutral electrically, but exerts a slight negative charge effect on the oxygen side and a slight positive charge effect on the hydrogen side). Because water is polar, it experiences hydrogen bonding–that is, an attraction between the unbalanced concentration of negative charge on the oxygen side and the unbalanced lack of negative charge (relative positivity) on the hydrogen side. This attraction occurs between water molecules and is, in fact, what causes water to be liquid at room temperature and pressure instead of a gas; without the cohesion caused by this polarity keeping molecules attracted to each other, at room temperature, water would not have any attraction between molecules, and a substance as light as water would cease to have any cohesive forces within it, freeing the molecules to act as a gas.

So, what does this have to do with ice floating? (Or, more circumlocutionally, what does this have to do with my intense dream?) It is this polarity that causes something strange to happen to the intermolecular interactions of water around its freezing point (perhaps another day, I'll explain that the Celsius temperature scale does not mean that the freezing point of water is "cold" or "hot"–or that 0°C lacks any temperature and, say, -40°C (which coincides with -40°F, incidentally). The Celsius scale was simply defined as 0°C being the temperature at which water turned from liquid to sold (or vice versa) at standard pressure, and 100°C was the point at which water turned from liquid to gas (or vice versa). But as I said, I'll write more at length on this in a future post….

As I just mentioned, the polarity causes something "strange" to happen around freezing temperature. First, I must make something else we take for granted–and therefore don't really understand–perfectly clear; I must define what, precisely, a "liquid" and a "solid" are. A liquid, as I alluded earlier, is a state of matter characterised by intermolecular attraction strong enough to cause the molecules of a substance to maintain contact with each other (without molecules having a strong enough attraction to maintain contact with each other, the substance ceases to "stay together" and becomes a gas). But this intermolecular attraction is not strong enough to form a structure (i.e. the intermolecular forces are not strong enough to maintain each molecule of the substance a fixed position relative to each other–a solid). What is the force opposing intermolecular forces, determining what state a substance will be? It is temperature, something else we take for granted. Temperature, technically defined by the Kinetic Molecular Theory, is simply defined as the amount of kinetic energy (energy of motion) the substance's molecules have. The faster the molecules move, the hotter a substance is. The slower a substance's molecules move, the colder the temperature. Therefore, although it is "temperature" that determines what state a substance will be–solid, liquid, or gas–a more meaningful explanation is that whether a substance will be a solid, liquid, or gas, is determined by the balance between the intermolecular attraction and the motion of the molecules (temperature) which acts opposing the intermolecular attraction. A solid is thus the point at which intermolecular attractive forces are stronger than the motion of the molecules. And since we do not change the intermolecular forces of a substance, the only variable is the temperature–or the motion of the molecules. A liquid is a substance within the range of temperature/molecular motion where intermolecular attraction is able to maintain a cohesion between the substance's molecules (i.e. intermolecular attraction is strong enough to prevent the substance from being a gas, but not strong enough to maintain fixed relative positions of the molecules–a solid), but not strong enough to make it a solid. When the molecular motion is high enough to overcome the intermolecular attraction, the substance ceases to maintain cohesion between molecules and the molecules have enough energy to roam freely–be a gas.

So what happens that is "strange" with water around it's freezing temperature? What is "strange" is that liquid water–water with enough intermolecular attraction to maintain cohesiveness of the substance to itself but enough molecular motion/temperature to prevent its molecules from settling into fixed relative positions/structure–has a certain average distance between its molecules. I don't know what it is numerically, but it naturally has a certain average distance between the molecules. Because of its polarity, when the temperature is low enough/molecular motion is slow enough/defined in the Celsius scale as 0°C, the water molecules are moving slowly enough that they do not have enough energy to move out of a fixed orientation/structure. But just before water "freezes" or "settles into a fixed position of molecules relative to each other," the polarity of the water molecules cause them to orient themselves in a hexagonal 3-dimensional structure. At temperatures/motions around freezing temperature, there is enough molecular motion energy to keep the hexagonal structure having an average distance between molecules that is farther apart than the average distance between liquid water molecules.

Why does this make solid water (ice) float in liquid water? It is because of this differential in distance between water molecules as a solid and as a liquid. (It should be noted that at slower molecular motions than around the freezing point, the molecules do not have enough molecular motion energy to keep the perfect hexagonal structure and the intermolecular forces win over the motion of temperature, causing the intermolecular attractive forces to draw water molecules closer together. This causes solid water to become more dense. At some theoretical point, the intermolecular attraction is strong enough to pull the water molecules closer together than liquid water's molecules, making ice sink.

But around the freezing point of water, when the hexagonal solid structure maintains a distance between molecules farther apart than liquid molecules, the concentration of mass is less in the solid structure than the concentration of mass of the liquid.

This is where I must point out that you should realize that it is not really ice that floats. It's really the more concentrated mass of the liquid water that is trying to fall as close to the earth as possible. Because it has more concentrated mass than the solid water (ice), it pushes the solid water out of the way. It could be sideways, upwards, diagonal–it doesn't care; the liquid water only cares about being as low as possible. So if it pushed the ice sideways, it would not gain any advantage in being lower. The only way to make as much liquid water sink as far down as possible is to push everything less dense than it upwards. This means, of course, that if you had a balloon filled with carbon dioxide and a balloon filled with helium as well as ice chunks in a swimming pool, the water would push the helium balloon and the ice upwards. But the carbon dioxide-filled balloon has more concentrated mass than liquid water (i.e. is more dense), so it pushes everything out of the way to get to the lowest position. This means pushing water, helium balloon, and ice out of the way to be lowest.

Now, I think you will never look at a glass of icewater the same way again.

And now, I can get back to my dream.

It was the enjoyment of exploring such simple physical properties for the sake of understanding that my wife and I shared. And in my dream, we blissfully discussed such properties.

After my dream took a sharp change in story, it went from the blissful to the exotic.

Enter my father, my sister, one of my friends, Brad, his dream-generated brother, my father, my father's girlfriend, and my other roommate, Alex. Somehow now there was an understanding that we would all participate in a thoroughbred race–not bet on it–we would be jockeys. What began to drive me crazy was that each person, in turn, caused a delay for some reason or other, to the point that Brad decided that he no longer had time to race his horse. Then his brother dropped out. Then my father's girlfriend, and then him. My sister stuck with me the longest (but strangely caused the first delay for taking a bath). Then I blew up at my father. Probably repressed emotions from waking hours, I lashed out at him for not understanding my situation. I lashed out at him for never even trying to understand my difficult emotional, financial, and life situation. He was lying down on a couch at the time, and completely out of character when he drew the blanket up to cover his crying face. Of course, in real life, I know his obstinance would result in the confrontation ending with his storming away, even more righteous than before, even less understanding than before.

At this point, the craziness of the idea that we would jockey horses yielded to the insanity of my intensely resentful, painful emotions. The fact that because the numbers worked out such that I and my friend would be jockeying two horses–just as insane as the idea that we would race a horse in the first place–was even overpowered by my anger of being delayed by everyone close to me, one by one; was even overpowered by my resentful feelings of being betrayed by everyone close to me when they decided not to race, after causing all the delay; was even overpowered by my disappointment that my parents had become increasingly less supportive and understanding as time has gone on–was even overpowered by my losing my wife and daughter a second time.

When I first set out to write this exposition, I thought it would help to verbalize all this pain.

But now, over an hour after I wrote the first words, the emotional pain has become so intense–the tears accurately prophesied in my dream now a reality–I realize that time has done nothing to heal anything.

Rather, time has caused my emotional wounds to fester and ripen–and rot.

If not time, what–if anything–will save me?

 

 

 

 

 

“tl;dr” Insidious Affront to Society

Although I'd just finished my MBA@Mac in 2002, I've been busy learning "more and more about less and less," since beginning my PhD in Finance in 2009; though I intended just to peek and see what this was all about, I soon realised, "Not three hours ago, I suggested that we set a strong counter-example to what now might be analogous to an online ulcer; but  efforts elucidated a putative inflammation-based aetiology localised coincident with the Helicobacter. So, now, believe that the once-straight-forward ulcer can bleed and kill outright. Or, it may also lay in wait, killing through a more insidious plan of suffering."

My point is that although "tl;dr" (a common Internet slang the younger generation uses to legitmize unwillingness to read what they claim to be "too long; didn't read."


The reason, it seems, it evolved to be curt, clean-cut and simple to slip by as established jargon–and especially, mysterious enough to intimidate people from asking and appearing not to be current enough to know.  
The insidious potential for this theme to become dangerous, like cancer, is in its self-reinforcing (that is, it is effective at not only intimidating others from stepping up to they challenge -> to a challenge -> it is not cool to be the "keener."


Were the outcome and social impact of enabling a behaviour that on the one hand, rewards doing only what the student (arguably a student because they have yet to learn–and so often do not have the foundational knowledge necessary to lead to an optimal decision. So, on the one hand, its primary direct effect is in a shrinking of knowledge base, a lowering of the quality of that knowledge. 

The behaviour is reinforced through perceived self-worth modulation; note that the very issue could provde people with tools adequate that they not feel intimidated from their faith.

Why Walden Emphasizes Epistemology & Ontology at Outset

Remember waaay back (ok, not that many a's eh) when I last mentioned that the media in its simplistic reporting of, explanation of certain issues, such as the bullying of homosexuals or other individuals perceived to be "different" may validly be attributed to the superficial attributes–but that people NEED to understand at least some modicum of what is really, really basic research design validity–and it's most easily demonstrated dialectically when we consider, ok, sure, you can statistically "homosexuals," or any other group of individual perceived to be different
 
(Some of the more boneheaded thinking down there, like the whole George Takei pointing out that TN banned talking about homosexuality in schools as a response to bullying–but thanks to everyone's lassitudinally-induced preference for simple answers, simple explanations, simple solutions, simple implementations, without expending the reasoning effort to discover that simpler is not only not always better, but it is more likely rarely-aligned with a desired outcome, since, well, everyone wants to do the easiest things, and so it's probably already done that way…
 
playing right into an underlying likely causative factor–if we assume, for a moment, that it is the perceived difference that satisfies the selection criteria for a bully's target, then we can test this hypothesis first by observing whether other perceived differences also elicit bullying responses (1. the validity of the construct is understandably low, since the bullying is only superficially caused by the actual "talking," but rather the underlying construct–that a group that deviates from "the norm" in some way is easily to single out appears to bullies particularly attractive to bully because they are perceived to be "different."  
 
Not very nice going. 
 
This preference for a simple solution yields a simplistic, poorly-elucidated one that actually would often be expected to exacerbate the problem, instead of hide it as the goal probably was, since giving special treatment ADDS another difference–now one that is reasonably expected to elicit envy as well, rather than the much more difficult, but much more rational approach of removing the underlying causes–even this is often assumed to be "make everyone adopt a perspective that homosexuals/visible minorities/physically-handicapped/little people, whatever are not different, not special, not mutants…." 
 
Cuz, remember, this is literally "punishing everyone for the bullies' actions" (another reasoning fallacy is that this implies that the education that is imposed as a result of the bullying actions are undesirable in some way–that is not rationally-implied by the sense of 'punishment' that I meant–and this illustrates yet one more problem that is difficult to understand without taking the responsibility to develop some modicum of reasoning proficiency, and even then–to learn the common conventions to communicate relatively abstract concepts–in this case, as Walden emphasizes, always to pre-determine and -define a defensible and clearly-communicated epistemology and ontology demonstrably optimal, or at least appropriate, for the given issue, setting, situation, and context. 
 
How often do you see two people arguing, and being the "third party," you see quite easily and clearly that they're both arguing for the same position, but from a different episteme and using different ontologies? 
 
A: "I don't wanna go to school!!!!!"
B: "No, you don't wanna hafta struggle for hours and feel like an idiot."
 
A: "I'm pretty sure I know what I want and don't want better than you. And it's to NOT go to school."
B: "But what is it about school that you don't like?"
 
A: "The going to it part"
B: So what you're saying is that you wouldn't mind school and the studying and tests and projects and the strap, if you could do it at home? Cuz we have a thing called home-schooling yknow
 
A: No that would just change the "going to school" from taking a bus into going from my room to the kitchen. That would suck even more cuz we always have ice cream in the kitchen. And then I'd start to hate ice cream too.
B: But what I'm getting at is that it's not the GOING TO SCHOOL that you hate–it's what you do at school
 
A: No. You're not listening. I told you I know how I feel and it begins when I leave the door. The whole time I'm waiting for the bus, I dread. I hate it. I'm not at school for another half hour after that. so DURR it's GOING TO SCHOOL that I hate sheesh just listen for once
B: No YOU listen for ONCE until I finish explaining sheesh–I mean that it is not the act of going to school that is causing you to feel that–it's what goes on at school–
 
A: –ok youre a tard cuz OBVIOUSLY if you'd LISTENED I just explained it starts when I have no way of even KNOWING whats going on in sc–
B: You've had a cellphone for a year now–that YOUR DAD AND I paid for–thanks for not appreciati…..
 
Even this is not the true underlying causative factor in most cases of bullying, since, well, it would be a stretch even for a physco to find the simple difference itself compelling; so, it is more likely something internal to the individual that carries out the bullying behaviour that the bully has associated with the emotional/psychological response that must likely be reinforced for the bully because it ends up fulfilling some perceived need that wasn't otherwise being fulfilled.

Latin Analysis of One Line of Ambrosian Hymn

Ambrosian Hymn

Jam lucis orto sidere,
Deum precemur supplices,
Ut in diurnis actibus
Nos servet a nocentibus.

 

Linguam refraenans temperet
Ne litis horror insonet:
Visum fovendo contegat,
Ne vanitates hauriat.

Sint pura cordis intima,
Absistat et vecordia;
Carnis terat superbiam
Potus cibique parcitas.

Ut come dies abscesserit,
Noctemque sors reduxerit,
Mundi per abstinentiam
Ipsi canamus gloriam.

Deo Patri sit gloria,
Ejusque soli Filio,
Cum Spiritu Paraclito,
Nunc, et per omne saeculum.

Amen.

(From my St. Andrew Missal, p.3; Ambrosian Hymn (morning). 
As Wikkedpaedia puts it, "Ambrose in the fourth century wrote hymns in a severe style, clothing Christian ideas in classical phraseology, and yet appealing to popular tastes. He had found a new form and created a new school of hymnody. St. Hilary of Poitiers (died 367), who is mentioned by St. Isidore of Seville as the first to compose Latin hymns, and Ambrose, styled by Dreves "the Father of Church-song", are linked together as pioneers of Western hymnody. Isidore, who died in 636, testifies to the spread of the custom from Milan throughout the whole of the West, and refers to the hymns as Ambrosian."

Oh–Carl Vanderwouden: Fr. Dominic's reminder that the Devil often closes our minds through the trickery of reminding us how well we may 'recall' something, that we not truly consider it critically, but merely recall it.

Thus, I'd typed that manually, though I believe there to be most likely pre-typed versinoes on the Network of Interconnected Networks (maybe that's what NiN is!) 
In doing so, I noticed that it contained therein something that made my previous observation, with Steve Eckert @ the Pizza Nova inadequately-informed in two ways:

1. I'd thought that Ecclesiastical Latin seemed to employ a static, predictable word order (yes, this is verse, and so not quite the same as some of the more "prosaic" [I mean prose-like, not literally--nor litorally--prosaic :p)] Eccles Latin: "Deo Patri sit gloria," which you note uses "Deo Patri" in the dative [imparting the sense of "to/towards"] and "sit" in the subjunctive [the optative use of the subjunctive: imparting volition for the verb "to be" or sum, esse, fui--which in the subjunctive mood is conjugated not as:

sum I am
es thou art
est he/she/it is

But rather as: 
sim that I be
sis that thou beest
sit that he/she/it be -- in the sense of "Would that it were..." or, in this case, "Glory be to God The Father," since Patri is also in the dative, so not "God's Father," which would have it in the genitive--it modifies Deus and is not "To God and to the Father," which would be "Deo Patrique" or "Deo et Patri." 

See--all contained therein, such richness that we completely lose in English because of the lack of inflected forms q:-(

 — at ipv6.RobinCheung.ca

 · 
 ·  · Tag friends · 
Yesterday at 06:09

 

  •  

    •  


  •  

    Robin L. M. Cheung Oh, I forgot that I meant to point out the metre and rhyme of Ambrose's stuff remound me of the Stations Latin accompanying verses, which had similarly-awesome metre and rhyme.

     

    (For example, Station VIII:

    O quam tristis et afflicta:
    Fuit illa benedicta
    Mater Unigentiti!

    Or, from the Fifth:

    Quis est homo qui non fleret,
    Matrem Christi si videret
    In tanto supplicio?

    Yesterday at 06:23 · 

     

     


  •  

    Robin L. M. Cheung Oh–Carl Vanderwouden: Fr. Dominic's reminder that the Devil often closes our minds through the trickery of reminding us how well we may 'recall' something, that we not truly consider it critically, but merely recall it.
    Thus, I'd typed that manually, though I believe there to be most likely pre-typed versinoes on the Network of Interconnected Networks (maybe that's what NiN is!) 
    In doing so, I noticed that it contained therein something that made my previous observation, with Steve Eckert @ the Pizza Nova inadequately-informed in two ways:

     

    1. I'd thought that Ecclesiastical Latin seemed to employ a static, predictable word order (yes, this is verse, and so not quite the same as some of the more "prosaic" [I mean prose-like, not literally--nor litorally--prosaic :p)] Eccles Latin: "Deo Patri sit gloria," which you note uses "Deo Patri" in the dative [imparting the sense of "to/towards"] and "sit" in the subjunctive [the optative use of the subjunctive: imparting volition for the verb "to be" or sum, esse, fui--which in the subjunctive mood is conjugated not as:
    sum I am
    es thou art
    est he/she/it is

    But rather as: 
    sim that I be
    sis that thou beest
    sit that he/she/it be -- in the sense of "Would that it were..." or, in this case, "Glory be to God The Father," since Patri is also in the dative, so not "God's Father," which would have it in the genitive--it modifies Deus and is not "To God and to the Father," which would be "Deo Patrique" or "Deo et Patri." 

    See--all contained therein, such richness that we completely lose in English because of the lack of inflected forms q:-(

    Yesterday at 06:34 ·  ·  1

     

     


  •  

    Robin L. M. Cheung Brian Izzard: Recall I mentioned that lack of inflection causing English to be so deficient in richness? q:-(

     

    Yesterday at 06:35 · 

     

     

  •  

    Carl Vanderwouden Latin is beautiful!

     

    Yesterday at 06:37 ·  ·  1

     

     


  •  

    Robin L. M. Cheung Oh–Carl VanderwoudenI totally said there were two things–the second thought was abortive, above–but it referred to word-order; I only started and forgot to finish, after the optative subjunctive explanation. In fact, what I meant to say was we normally would say it otherwise, as you know, such as "Gloria Deo Patris," which is technically "Glory be to God the Father"; however, again, "lost in translatinoe" is the optative subjunctive (the subjunctive *is* still extant in English; however, it's unfortunate that most people either don't know it or even if they do, it looks identical to other forms, such as "Would that I were a rich man.. [Yubby dibby dibby dibby dibby dibby dibby dum]" looks like "were" as a simple past–but it is far from it… And we can't distinguish too well the conditionnel either *sigh*

     

    So, I suppose a better translation, since there is actually a "sit" in there, would be "May there be glory to God the Father," to distinguish it from "Gloria Deo Patris," which has only a substantive verb (there is no actually "to be" in there, but it is imputed as a substantive).

    WOW–I even wonder, myself, HOW I remember this from 1989-1994 Latin that I didn't use in the intervening years AND I don't even have to look up for it to jump out at me.. Crazy.. But I won't fail to appreciate His part in it q:-)

    Yesterday at 06:46 · 

     

     

  •  

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  •