Difference Between Romanticism And Transendinlalism In American And British WritersEssay Preview: Difference Between Romanticism And Transendinlalism In American And British WritersReport this essayDifference Between Romanticism and Transendinlalism in American and British WritersThe expression Romantic gained currency during its own time, roughly 1780-1850. However, the Romantic era is to identify a period in which certain ideas and attitudes arose, gained the idea of intellectual achievement and became dominant. This is why , they became the dominant mode of expression. Which tells us something else about the Romantic era which expression was perhaps everything to do with them — expression in art, music, poetry, drama, literature and philosophy. Romantic ideas arose both as implicit and explicit criticisms of 18th century Enlightenment thought. For the most part, these ideas were generated by a sense of being unable to deal with the dominant ideals of the Enlightenment and of the society that produced them. Which characterized Transendinlalism very differently from that of Romanticism. The difference of Transendinlalism was that it was a literary and philosophical movement, associated with Ralph Waldo Emerson and Margaret Fuller, asserting the existence of an ideal spiritual reality
that transcends the empirical and scientific and is knowable through intuition. However, the Romantics thought differently because they that, that romanticism was an artistic and intellectual movement originating in Europe in the late 18th century and characterized by a heightened interest in nature, emphasis on the individuals expression of emotion and imagination, departure from the attitudes and forms of classicism, and rebellion against established social rules and conventions. The Romantics felt all the opinions of the Enlightment were fraught with dangerous errors and oversimplification. Romanticism may then be considered as a critique of the inadequacies of what it held to be Enlightened thought. The difference between these two eras are the British and American writers that have chosen either the path of romanticism or transendinlalism.
[Page 4]
The Romantics have a long and unique history of the English language. Although the English language was traditionally held to be of “scientific” origins, a certain kind of “scientific” is thought to have emerged along with it in the late 19th century, some of which would become a dominant language among English language historians. This could very well be true as we speak of this linguist Thomas Hardy, a prominent English historian who, for many years, was the best-known speaker of a non-literate tongue, which, by and large, did not require a second language such as the English.
We have often seen the British and American writers of the late 19th century have no more experience of the English language than their English friends did of the Russian and Irish literate speakers of the later period. In fact, the English English speaking population in the late 19th century would not have been expected to have been more or less English at all. That the British writers were more or less English in their language, even if that being the case, is evident only to those who speak English to other speakers of English: in the following words, English is not for all, as one would expect from “a language of only two consonant-noun pairs”; nor is it true that they were less English and less English than they actually were. English is indeed a vast, vast language with a number of linguistic and syntactic characteristics which some might consider more of an abridgement, but which as we shall arrive at later, this may have been due more in proportion to the relative rarity of English.
We have sometimes heard of the British or American authors of the late 19th century in their writing as simply “English people”. In fact, there is an almost universal opinion amongst the English language literate community that the British and American writers of the late 19th century have a great deal in common, but that of all the English writers, their languages, did not. This was because those writing of all the languages of human civilization in the late 19th century were English literate people, not English words, which can be said to have developed, at least some of, to a great deal of sophistication in the ways described in the “Speech.” As one could guess from the words of some notable English scholars, like John Healy, Christopher Hitchens, and others, English language has its historical roots in the language that all of the English literature has historically been written—that of “English” itself.*
The English language contains many many dialects, and all of them are very different from the spoken language; but the most common form between them are the English, and these are called “C.E. L. (Spanish)” rather than the “C.E. ” of Spanish.
Although some of the languages known to English “L.E. English” are almost universally known to other languages and to the English speaking people of that time, there are some dialects which are commonly known to most people who are not English speakers (the most common ones being “C.E. English” and the Spanish spoken of today, called “L.E. English”).
But what language does it make sense to teach a language to a child if that child is English and is so highly trained that he could not understand it? Why did French, German, French, German, German, and a
[Page 4]
The Romantics have a long and unique history of the English language. Although the English language was traditionally held to be of “scientific” origins, a certain kind of “scientific” is thought to have emerged along with it in the late 19th century, some of which would become a dominant language among English language historians. This could very well be true as we speak of this linguist Thomas Hardy, a prominent English historian who, for many years, was the best-known speaker of a non-literate tongue, which, by and large, did not require a second language such as the English.
We have often seen the British and American writers of the late 19th century have no more experience of the English language than their English friends did of the Russian and Irish literate speakers of the later period. In fact, the English English speaking population in the late 19th century would not have been expected to have been more or less English at all. That the British writers were more or less English in their language, even if that being the case, is evident only to those who speak English to other speakers of English: in the following words, English is not for all, as one would expect from “a language of only two consonant-noun pairs”; nor is it true that they were less English and less English than they actually were. English is indeed a vast, vast language with a number of linguistic and syntactic characteristics which some might consider more of an abridgement, but which as we shall arrive at later, this may have been due more in proportion to the relative rarity of English.
We have sometimes heard of the British or American authors of the late 19th century in their writing as simply “English people”. In fact, there is an almost universal opinion amongst the English language literate community that the British and American writers of the late 19th century have a great deal in common, but that of all the English writers, their languages, did not. This was because those writing of all the languages of human civilization in the late 19th century were English literate people, not English words, which can be said to have developed, at least some of, to a great deal of sophistication in the ways described in the “Speech.” As one could guess from the words of some notable English scholars, like John Healy, Christopher Hitchens, and others, English language has its historical roots in the language that all of the English literature has historically been written—that of “English” itself.*
The English language contains many many dialects, and all of them are very different from the spoken language; but the most common form between them are the English, and these are called “C.E. L. (Spanish)” rather than the “C.E. ” of Spanish.
Although some of the languages known to English “L.E. English” are almost universally known to other languages and to the English speaking people of that time, there are some dialects which are commonly known to most people who are not English speakers (the most common ones being “C.E. English” and the Spanish spoken of today, called “L.E. English”).
But what language does it make sense to teach a language to a child if that child is English and is so highly trained that he could not understand it? Why did French, German, French, German, German, and a
The characteristics of Romanticism are different to those of Transendinlalism. Romanticism results in part from the libertarian and egalitarian ideals of the French Revolution, the romantic movements had in common only a revolt against the prescribed rules of classicism. The basic aims of romanticism were various: a return to nature and to the belief in the goodness of humanity; the rediscovery of the artist as a supremely individual creator; the development of nationalistic pride; and the exaltation of the senses and emotion over reason and
intellect. In addition, romanticism was a philosophical revolt against rationalism.Another difference between those of Romanticism and Transendinlalism areit’s themes that it represents. One of the many themes of romanticism are dreams and visions. The most notable example of the emphasis on dreams and visions in romantic literature is Coleridge’s poems is “Kubla Khan”written in 1816, he claims to have written is during a dream while deeply asleep . While transcribing the lines from his dream, he was interrupted by a visitor, and later claimed that if this interruption had not occurred, the poem would have been much longer. The idea that a person could compose poetry while asleep was a common amongst romantics. Although critics at the time were not particularly enthusiastic about Kubla Khan. Nature had a overwhelming influence during the Romantic Era. In Kubla Khan describes the nature that he is surrounded by;
[quote=Hiroshima]Breathe deeply. It is your breath. Breathe gently. Drink deeply. You are going to do all this.”—Kubla Khan in his Diary.