Richard’s wholly unimaginative blog

I love the breadth and depth of Asimov’s books, how he seems to take a lot of things into account and create a world with a lot of verisimilitude, even though it’s definitely very fantastic (Arthur C. Clark has the same power, or I suppose all the great sci-fi authors). However, one thing has been bothering for a couple of weeks now since I finished reading “Foundation and Empire“, namely the blaster pistols! In a world that seems to be well thought out, blasters are completely insane and impractical things that nobody in their right mind would use as the main, or even the only, weapon. The following contains a pretty nasty spoiler, so read at your own risk.
Read the rest of this entry »

So, I’m reading Foundation and Empire again and I am at a point where two distinct dialects are presented. To me, they sound wholly different and I’m not sure what exactly makes them so different.

Dialect 1:

“Now, sure I meant no harm. I am a stranger here, and it’s been said I am of addled wits; yet there is something in a face that I can read. Behind this lady’s fairness, there is a heart that’s kind, and that would help me in my trouble for all I speak so boldly.”

Dialect 2:

“There’s no use being annoyed at his silly way of talking. That’s just his dialect; and our speech is probably as strange to him.”

“What is your trouble? You’re not worried about the guard, are you? He won’t bother you.”

Dialect 1:

“Oh, no, not he. He’s but a windlet that blows the dust about my ankles. There is another that I flee, and he is a storm that sweeps the worlds aside and throws them plunging at each other. A week ago, I ran away, have slept in city streets, and hid in city crowds. I’ve looked in many faces for help in need. I find it here.”

My wife doesn’t seem to see much of a difference between the two and I’m wondering what exactly makes them so different to me. Dialect 1 is very sing-song to me, very poetic, while Dialect 2 is prosaic and mundane.