Are there any writers besides Borges and Calvino who are worth reading?

>Are there any writers besides Borges and Calvino who are worth reading?
i don't know

And Flann spoke better German and Irish than him, while most of his Paris years, you'll notice Joyce hung out with Anglophones. He had a schoolboy level in most these languages, and Flann was raised bilingual before becoming fluent in other languages. Joyce's extent for most of the languages he gets hyped on is phrasebook levels. It's shit tourists learn in those languages when going on holidays, and he never wrote anything of the length or competence of Flann in another language. That you don't know this about Joyce makes me suspect that you were hoping nobody understood Joyce. He's very easy to piece together if you get basic, like phrasebook basic, in all those languages. His Norweigan samples are phonetic because the phrasebook spelt it out for him. Sure, he dropped out of babbylevel courses on Irish because they moved too slow for him; he still could never get past Bearlachas. You're calling other people pseuds because they speak enough languages to know how funny your fanboying is. Which is how Flann roasted Joyce after years of championing him before he tried to pass off schoolboy linguistics as genius.

Eco

That's about it

If you like Borges and Calvino, why don't you like Umberto Eco?

>At first Francini was greatly amused by Joyce's brand of Italian, which used, for example, the old word for sister, sirocchia, instead of the modern sorella. When Francini corrected him, Joyce replied with spirit, "I learned my Italian from Dante and Dion [Compagni]." He spoke, in fact, as Francini said, "a dead language that had come alive to join the babel of living tongues" that were spoken in this hole-in-the-wall corner of Pola.
Seems I forgot it was Pola at first. This is from Ellmann's Joyce Bio.
What's with this pedantic "No Goku can totally beat up Superman" type of argumentation?

>argentinians
it's Argentines

who's the pseud now?

*Dino Compagni

>No Goku
m8, if that's your best reference for a literary friendship turned feud, why even bother talking about Joyce? He's not as fluent as Flann, he's just more concerned with the appearance of speaking many languages than speaking many languages. He does so much pseudcunt shit throughout life (like the Italian incident, he also liked to bait people in French bars before demanding Hemingway defend him from the fight he'd started). Flann dropped him and mocks Finnegans as something Joyce wouldn't be able to remember writing for a good reason: Joyce couldn't have written it without phrasebooks and Beckett and various other constructions. Believing he's fluent is like believing sprezzatura was really off the cuff. He knew Italian like they used beat Dante into schoolboys, not like he became fluent in Italian. There's a big difference, and it shows even more so in his Irish, which less people were apt to check. You can go through Finnegans and source where he copy and pasted like anons use google translate to badly imitate /int/. Thinking he's more fluent in more languages than Flann is hilarious.

The analogy meant that it's a dumb argument that literally nobody cares about. What we do know is Joyce lived in Italy for 10 years, Zurich for 6, and France for 19 years. Clearly he must have known the respective languages enough to live in each place. Also spoke Italian within the family while in Zurich. Someone being more or less fluent is unquantifiable and also an arbitrary point of comparison in the first place and is immensely irrelevant when comparing people who write in English. And again, who gives a shit? Who cares if this guy's dad can beat up this other guy's dad? I realize you have to be contrarian and abrasive in order to assert your individuality on an anonymous chinese cartoon imageboard but you're just coming off like a pedantic goofball.

Of course it matters; it affects how he writes these things. It's like saying if you read Aristophanes converted entirely into Attic, you'd lose nothing, or Calvino with more exposition and less second person would be just as groundbreaking. Joyce is renowned for his breaking down of English, but the moment you suggest he's using very broken Irish or another language (of which you even provided an example) it's definitely he was as comfortable in them as English. If someone from China insisted on speaking to you in Elizabethan English and in iambic pentameter because it was the language of Shakespeare, I doubt you would consider them fluent or even flexible in English. He doesn't need to be fluent to do what he does. That you want him to have been fluent and impressive and impenetrable isn't even some fanboy bullshit, because to be a fanboy you have to know your fandom well.

What is impressive is the amount of people who are impressed by it to the point of claiming he's fluent (when nobody thought he was and there are plenty of examples of people pointing out his lack of fluency and emphasis on stuff his schoolboy friends would also know or know better). And that you think a literature board wouldn't discuss these things and shouldn't is really the icing on the pseuds loving pseuds cake.

You're making arguments of me that I never mentioned in the first place. How can we trust your critical interpretations when you argue so disingenuously? Quote me in your posts if there's anything you're responding to instead of inventing a version of me that you want to argue against. And again, do you think it's possible to live in a foreign place for 10 years, using the language both in public and domestically, and not have your knowledge of the language move one inch? And still again, my man, who cares? Nobody's making the arguments you're "destroying," probably because it doesn't matter.

anons pls can we just agree that Joyboy and Flannman were good people and they both knew how to get shit did and they did it.

See you get it