Ο Ξενοφών Ζολώτας απαντά από ψηλά στη Ρεπούση για τη γλώσσα μας
Η Μαρία Ρεπούση μπορεί να θεωρεί τα αρχαία ελληνικά μια νεκρή γλώσσα.
Τη διαψεύδει ο περίφημος και σπουδαίος καθηγητής / μετέπειτα πρωθυπουργός της Ελλάδας Ξενοφών Ζολώτας σε δύο ιστορικές ομιλίες του:...
το Σεπτέμβριο του 1957 και τον Οκτώβριο του 1959.
Τότε προκλήθηκε μεγάλη έκπληξη. Μίλησε ελληνικά. Πάρα ταύτα τον κατάλαβαν όλοι γιατί χρησιμοποίησε την αγγλική γλώσσα. Την επομένη είχαν πρωτοσέλιδο το λόγο του τόσο οι «New York Times» όσο και οι «Washington Post». Το μήνυμα πέρασε σε όλο τον κόσμο. Η διαχρονική δύναμη της ελληνικής γλώσσας, που έμεινε ζωντανή από την ποίηση του Ομήρου –και πολύ παλιότερα – μέχρι σήμερα, μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί και να λειτουργήσει σε όλες τις ευρωπαϊκές γλώσσες κα Ρεπούση!
«Kyrie.
I eulogize the archons of the Panethnic Numismatic Thesaurus and the Oecumenical Trapeza for the orthodoxy of their axioms methods and policies, although there is an episode of cacophony of the Trapeza with Hellas.
With enthusiasm we dialogue and synagonize at the synods of our didymous Organizations in which polymorphous economic ideas and dogmas are analyzed and synthesized
Our critical problems such as the numismatic plethora generate some agony and melancholy. This phenomenon is characteristic of our epoch. But, to my thesis we have the dynamism to program therapeutic practices as a prophylacis from chaos and catastrophe.
In parallel a panethnic unhypocritical economic synergy and harmonization in a democratic climate is basic. I apologize for my eccentric monologue. I emphasize my eucharistia to your Kyrie to the eugenic and generous American Ethnos and to the organizers and protagonists of this Ampitctyony and gastronomic symposia»
2oς λόγος
Kyrie, It is Zeus’ anathema on our epoch and the heresy of our economic method and policies that we should agonize the Skylla of nomismatic plethora and the Charybdis of economic anaemia.
It is not my idiosyncracy to be ironic or sarcastic but my diagnosis would be that politicians are rather cryptoplethorists. Although they emphatically stigmatize nomismatic plethora, they energize it through their tactics and practices. Our policies should be based more on economic and less on political criteria. Our gnomon has to be a metron between economic strategic and philanthropic scopes.
In an epoch characterized by monopolies, oligopolies, monopolistic antagonism and polymorphous inelasticities, our policies have to be more
orthological, but this should not be metamorphosed into plethorophobia, which is endemic among academic economists.
Nomismatic symmetry should not antagonize economic acme. A greater harmonization between the practices of the economic and nomismatic archons is basic.
Parallel to this we have to synchronize and harmonize more and more our economic and nomismatic policies panethnically. These scopes are more practicable now, when the prognostics of the political end economic barometer are halcyonic.
The history of our didimus organization on this sphere has been didactic and their gnostic practices will always be a tonic to the polyonymous and idiomorphous ethnical economies. The genesis of the programmed organization will dynamize these policies.
Therefore, I sympathize, although not without criticism one or two themes with the apostles and the hierarchy of our organs in their zeal to program orthodox economic and nomismatic policies.
I apologize for having tyranized you with my Hellenic phraseology. In my epilogue I emphasize my eulogy to the philoxenous aytochtons of this cosmopolitan metropolis and my encomium to you Kyrie, the stenographers.
