Zickzack

The text says: "They also added some imaginative embellishments". For me, these embellishments spell 'we hope for more tourists than the other sites'.

For the other sites, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_circular_enclosures_...

The first line misses a delta as well: δἐδυκε μὲν ἀ σελάννα

The poem is beautiful and the translations do its sophisticated simplicity no justice.

Thanks to the OP, by the way, for the astronomical article. I have tried to date the poem as well. And the imagery of the Nebra sky disk made me try even harder.

Fascinating read, including the part that Jeffrey Epstein was linked to intelligence from the very beginning. However, the article (and others, too) does not mention drugs, not even alcohol or cigarettes. They are conspicuous by their absence.

The parallels in the lives, respectively deaths of Epstein and Robert Maxwell warrant another article.

Scheme is properly tail recursive. That means that CPS conversion is going to work. Seen that way, call/cc is just a convenience feature that spares you the work of the conversion.

Introducing weaker language constructs and claiming that they are easier to reason about seems spurious, because there still may be full fledged continuations coming with CPS. I guess this so called reasoning will only work for a limited subset of all programs.

I actually think that call/cc has the advantage of forcing people to realise what the ramifications of proper tail recursion are.

The generation of my grandfather taught me to cut off the "Klöten" (testicles) right after his death in order to prevent boar taint.

The claim is that "the English possessive is potentially recursive, while the Saxon genitive [its counterpart in German] is not". I think they are confusing some issues. And by the way, I thought Saxon genitive was a term from English grammar.

Anyhow, in German, you can use the Saxon genitive in preposition, if the word in Genitive can be used like a personal name: "ich sehe Karls Auto". And it is true that you cannot recurse on that: "ich sehe Karls Bruders Auto" is not German, except maybe in German poems two hundred years ago, when the language was raped. Even "ich sehe meines Vaters Auto" will sound outside of the norm.

However, you can recurse in postposition: "ich sehe das Auto meines Vaters", "ich sehe das Auto des Bruders meines Vaters". You do not have to say "ich sehe das Auto vom Bruder von meinem Vater".

Several edits, sorry.

Jürgen Udolph - the researcher in Onomastics who has proposed the generally accepted theory - is well respected. The names of families and of places in that region northeast of Berlin resemble those from Hameln/Hamelin. However, he does not claim to have found the one true truth. A possible alternative is that both things happened - locators recruiting the younger generation around Hameln as well as the incident that became the story of the Pied Piper