Talk:Gaudeamus igitur

Strada

Hi, could anybody tell me who this mysterious "Strada, bishop of Bologna" is? Strada is Italian and means "street". And that's what google says to me. No bishop of Bologna. No list of bishops of Bologna list any "Strada". Is this a fake? we are currently discussing this in the German Wikipedia because de:Gaudeamus igitur is candidating for the label "Lesenswert" (a kind of "featured article", second class). --Rabe! 15:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

See http://ingeb.org/Lieder/gaudeamu.html for a multilingual account of the history of this song which cites sources and is on a generally reliable site

(NOTE: there is a debate on the German discussion lists for this article about the above-mentioned site, on the grounds that it contains Nazi songs; it does, but merely in an effort to be comprehensive. It contains propaganda songs, both solemnly official and, well, rather ribald, from both sides of WWII - if you're easily offended, don't read them).

The author of the note on ingeb.org is James J. Fuld, and I suspect that the text is an excerpt of his 'The Book of World Famous Music: Classical, Popular, and Folk' (718 pages, Copyright 1995, Dover Publications, Inc. ISBN: 048628445X), which is a book describing the history and sources of popular music. Apart from that, I know nothing of his scholastic credentials.

Unfortunately, there is no information about "Strada", and the _melody_ is unlikely to be 13th century. Unless someone knows otherwise, I suggest that the sentence "The melody is inspired by a medieval hymn by Strada, bishop of Bologna in 1267." is inaccurate and should be changed.

This song is apparently much more popular in Germany, and the German article and discussion board are much better: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaudeamus_igitur

Leider keiner Info ueber "Strada", und wahrscheinlich stammt die _Melodie_ nicht aus dem 13. Jahrhunderet - falls Sie nicht anderer Infos daruber haben, sollt die Statz "The melody is inspired by a medieval hymn by Strada, bishop of Bologna in 1267." veranderet sein.

HLHJ 18:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

"Traditional translation"

The translation of "vivant membra quaelibet" is obviously wrong, because there can be no feminine plural ending in -a, only neutrum plural, and the verb is 3rd person plural. Is this really a "traditional translation"? If it is, where does it come from? And if not, it should be simply modified, because the correction as it is looks rather silly ("apparently incorrect" - this is Latin grammar, there can be no "apparently" :) ). --Methodius12 13:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Indeed the translation is certainly wrong. "membrum" is not masculime, it's neuter, and "membra" is the regular neuter plural. So the distinction is between singular and plural - neither gives any indication of the sex of the members, although of course at the time when the song was written members of a University would have been almost if not entirely male. I will correct it. --rossb 07:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Coming to this years later, I have to add that (a) the neuter plural construction is "Vivant membra quaelibent; and (b) membrum/membra involves a bawdy double entendre, as indeed does the English member. One of the song's literary delights! I also notice that the consonental letter 'i' is, in the current article, sometimes inconsistently rendered as 'j', which I'm about to attend to. Bjenks (talk) 00:48, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Western countries?

The phrase "In many modern Western nations it is sung as an anthem at University graduation ceremonies." should be changed to "In many modern nations it is sung as an anthem at University graduation ceremonies.", without the Western bit. I am from Romania, and here, at every high school graduation, and every university graduation, Gaudeamus is sung....and we are in central-eastern Europe...so...it figures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.180.224.38 (talk) 09:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Same goes for Latvia. --Papuass (talk) 11:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

You certainly have a point there, but the term Western refers to Europe as the place of "Western civilization", and of course also to Kanada, USA, Australia ... If Gaudeamus is sung in Japan, China, India or Egypt I do not know, even if their educational and academic system is orientated on the originally western ones. 62.178.137.216 (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

"Western", as well as "Eastern" is a very imprecise term, often used as a jingoistic slur, and should be replaces by a more traceable one. In the "Western" Western countries it excludes usually Eastern (and Central) European countries. --Jidu Boite (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

We use it as above - Western Civ, and the nations which spring from it, This includes the whole of Europe. 65.89.68.24 (talk) 00:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

If you are prepared to call Russia a part of Western Civ, then you can call Romania part of Western Civ too. The more traditional way however is to refer as West only the areas where the Latin rite has more tradition than the Eastern rites, and to call East not only the non-Christians, but also the Christians of Eastern rites: and in Romania, Eastern rites are indeed in first place, even though the language is Romance.--131.159.0.47 (talk) 17:32, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

"different versions"

The "different version", given in full and with its own translation, seems to differ only in 3 lines of the second verse and one letter (possibly an error) in the third (qualibet/quaelibet). That seems like rather a lot of unnecessary duplication. Hv 14:34, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the alternative version (and also the repeated lines in the first version). --rossb 07:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

On the basis that the names of articles should reflect the most common usage in English, surely this shuld be moved back to "Gaudeamus igitur". "De Brevitate Vitae" is much better known as the name of the work by Seneca. --rossb (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• Strong support. Violates Principle of Least Astonishment. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done. Neıl ☎ 11:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

De Brevitate Vitae performed by the University of Stuttgart Hilaritas Fraternity in mp3 format [dead as 11/2/07]

I downloaded this to my computer before the link was taken offline. I was planning on uploading the song to Wikipedia, but was honestly a little intimidated by all of the classification choices, since none of them seemed to match. The song is obviously released into the public domain, since they posted it onto a freely accessable web server. Thoughts? -- Rakinva (talk) 20:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to contact Hilarits about that - see info(at)hilaritas.de - and politely ask about it. Please note that there is no such thing as public domain under German or European laws,m and copyright is assigned and held automatically. Please also note that German law (§77 UrhG) gives copyright for the the actual recording to the recording artist, even when all rights to the song text and music have already expired. So, quite undoubtedly, B! Hilaritas holds the copyrights to their recordings, regardless if they put it on a web site or not.

Also, FWIWS, neither B! Hilaritas Stuttgart nor their web site seem to be dead, judging from both their site and their - quite interesting - activities's calendar for the Summer 2009 (pdf) Wefa (talk) 02:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Seneca

What? No mention of Seneca, who first coined the title... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.58.144.199 (talk) 09:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Apocryphal verses (8-10) and lack of sources

I contest the authenticity of the verses 8-10. The only "sourcing" refers to the ingeb.org web site, which makes no claims of quality or critical reception and indeed is a simple collection of stuff from all over the place. Most actual sources I am aware of (which are printed books, all a with a history of several editions, one of them with an editorial history of 150 years and 165 editions) list seven verses, the first printing of the modern text (in Kindleben's "Studentenlieder" (Halle, 1781)) even only has the first six. But none goes beyond the "Pereat, tristitia" verse.

If you want more details, see the German Wikpedia article, which has a detailed history of the song and an extensive bibliography.

So, unless someone presents valid reasons why not to, I plan to remove verses 8-10 from this article. Wefa (talk) 01:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

since there was no objection, done. Wefa (talk) 22:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, I note that, years later, those apocryphal verses have been reinserted without discussion here and without WP's mandatory justification. So out they go again, because they are simply inconsistent with the lyrics' introduction: "Below is Kindleben's 1781 Latin version". Bjenks (talk) 02:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistent

The following sentence is inconsistent: The song dates to 1287 and was already known by the time of founding of the first European university, the University of Bologna. Bologna was founded in 1088. --达伟 (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The current version, "The song dates to 1287[1] and was already known by the time of founding of the first university in Europe, the University of Bologna, founded in 1088", is no less inconsistent. Moreover, the reference link no longer functions. 173.30.136.22 (talk) 02:34, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I second this comment. Ileanadu (talk) 03:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I third this comment, indeed as I have just updated the reference link so it does function the text from reference refers to keeping with an "academic tradition" dating back to the founding of Bologna - does this perhaps refer to the content of the song rather than the actual song? I do not know, just a casual reader who picked up on the inconsistency. I propose it is removed unless resolved as it creates confusion. Benjamin Dickson (talk) 07:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

FISU Factoid Unclear

Is this sentence:

The International University Sports Federation (FISU) adopted the song like his anthem which was played during the medal-awards ceremonies and the opening ceremonies of the Universiades.

Supposed to mean something like "adopted the song as its anthem"? Also, is it "Universiades" or "Universidades"? Should there be a link?

Was this just for one event ("was played"), or has this been adopted as its permanent or standard "anthem" ("is played")? Reference? Ileanadu (talk) 04:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Io vivat

How come Io Vivat is linked to, but not a live article? Joepnl (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism

The text of the song and its translations keep getting deleted by an anonymous user; he has (in the edit summary) claimed, repeatedly, that the Latin version is copyright by either the International University Sports Federation or by the Pan American Sports Organization. This song is traditional and public domain. More recently, I added and gave credit to a CC translation by Mark Sugars. This also keeps getting deleted by the same user. His IP address keeps changing, but I am certain it is the same user as I have whoissed each of them and repeatedly get the same information: Tripletnet from Thailand. The IP range is 180.183.0.0 - 180.183.127.255. Can this page be semi-protected so that anonymous vandals can't futz with it?

--Nmatavka (talk) 00:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Where's the evidence that that's CC-licensed? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 03:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

That's an important point. The 1997 English translation by J. Mark Sugars is the one that has been getting deleted in the most recent edits. As it is from 1997, it has presumptive copyright for Mr. Sugars unless there is a Creative Commons license that can be identified, and there is no indication of one on the cited web source. The Latin version and the two Germans are clearly in the public domain. The "traditional English" one is a bit dicier; it would have to date back to the early 1920s to be clearly public domain. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:43, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

German versions

Just a question: Is there a reason two German versions are given in this article, in the English Wikipedia? It would seem to me that those versions would be of little (if any) use to English speakers, and a more appropriate place for them would be in the German Wikipedia. Unless, of course, said English readers happen also to speak German, which isn't all that common, and even then, if they wanted information in German it's still reasonable to expect them to look in the German Wikipedia.

I can understand that the German versions may have more authority (for whatever historical reason), but I'm still unsure what a reader (who presumably is looking for information in English) gains from seeing two German versions alongside the two English translations. Neonumbers (talk) 03:27, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I thought the same thing myself. I'm going to get rid of them. — This, that and the other (talk) 02:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Alternate lines

I took PowerSpeak High School Latin I & II language courses, and one of the two presented a few verses of Gaudeamus Igitur in the last lesson. It cited the first verse, however, as ending with "Nos exspectat caelum" ("Heaven awaits us") x 2, in place of "Nos habebit humus." I recognize that those compiling the curriculum may have changed the verse to soften the message, and that the source can only be accessed by purchasing and registering the course and is thus unusable. Nonetheless, there may be other, more fitting sources that also contain "Nos exspectat caelum." I will search for any, and I figured I would mention it, should anybody want to do the same.

Thanks. BlueCaper (talk) 01:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Gaudeamus pig manure .... 206.125.145.230 (talk) 21:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Silent movie soundtrack?

In the "TV and film" subsection, I found this statement: 'The melody is woven through the soundtrack of Harold Lloyd's silent film "The Freshman" (1925)'. Perhaps it means the soundtrack on a re-released version, but it needs explanation, so I have added a "clarification needed" tag. Alansplodge (talk) 16:43, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Universities, secondary schools, etc

I question whether the article benefits from a growing list of places where the song is or has been sung. Such a list is potentially interminable and its contents are entirely irrelevant to the subject. If I'm judged wrong by a consensus, I am prepared to add an equally voluminous new section of pubs in which I have heard students sing Gaudeamus and other ditties. Bjenks (talk) 06:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

In the absence of disagreement, I am deleting the lists. Only one institution (the University of Sydney) provided substantial verification of its use in a rather innovative "Thank you to our donors". I'm preserving this as an external link because, though being a little soapy, it both plays the hallowed tune in style and displays the university's witty reverence for it. I am also tagging a section for consideration of largely unsourced lists of "popular culture" appearances. Bjenks (talk) 03:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC regarding Latin lyrics

Should the Latin transcription of the lyrics include the line "Post iucundam iuventutem?" A great variety of sources include this line, as do most English-language translations of the song/poem, but one editor is insistent upon loyalty to a particular source that omits this line. Please observe the various sources that I have provided, and will repeat here in footnote form. Rowsdower45 (talk) 04:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

As the text says: "Below is Kindleben's 1781 Latin version". And Kindleben's 1781 version doesn't have it.

As for the links, some are poor (lyricstranslate.com, fandom.com), and don't have Kindleben's 1781 but something else (what?). Maybe czech out de:Gaudeamus igitur#Liedtext, which mentions several later differences...

References

Irony ?

I read "It is a jocular, light-hearted composition that pokes fun at university life.[citation needed]" What sort of citation can be given? You just have to read the text to see the irony! Franciscus montmartinensis (talk) 17:41, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Latin scholar needed

Verse 4 includes the line Vivant membra quaelibet which was recently restored after I had amended the second verb to plural quaelibent on the basis of what I've always sung (and supported by my age-old schoolboy Latin). Puzzlingly, this apparently reputable source (Ref no. 6) differs and, therefore, I'm reluctant to revert to the plural form in the absence of a more reliable Latin authority. Could this possibly be an 'impersonal' construction? Bjenks (talk) 06:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, the verb libet is impersonal and is not pluralized. Burzuchius (talk) 08:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

And through the Helpdesk TSventon has raised the idea that this may be not a verb but a neuter plural of the pronoun quilibet. Either way, it seems I have to admit quaelibent would be wrong. Bjenks (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)