21st Century Bible Hebrew -- surviving grammar

One of the important things about epistemics is that they look in two directions.  The evidentiary/certainty version not only certifies information to the audience, it also promises that the narrator wouldn’t use it if he didn’t know the audience knew he was right.

The uncertainty epistemic admits that the “speaker” might not know something but, as I said in the last lesson, it also admits that the audience might not know something. And it lets people off the hook, as with Gd’s vow to Avraham. This comes out in Deuteronomy 7:5 in a big way:

ה כִּ֣י אִם־כֹּ֤ה תַֽעֲשׂוּ֙ לָהֶ֔ם מִזְבְּחֹֽתֵיהֶ֣ם תִּתֹּ֔צוּ וּמַצֵּֽבֹתָ֖ם תְּשַׁבֵּ֑רוּ וַֽאֲשֵֽׁירֵהֶם֙ תְּגַדֵּע֔וּן וּפְסִֽילֵיהֶ֖ם תִּשְׂרְפ֥וּן בָּאֵֽשׁ:

The highlighted verbs basically mean overthrow, break, cut down, and burn. Now that you know about the uncertainty epistemic (and the etnach under t’shaberu), you can see that this verse means something quite different from what you thought.

The difference in the two halves of the verse have to do with experience and law. Altars made of stone are vulnerable to robbing out the stone for building. The same is true for a matsevah. Any altars built by the patriarchs or matsevot set up by them, disappeared long ago. The Israelites have a right to suspect any of these they find in the Holy Land were put up recently for pagan worship, and they have to destroy them.

An Asherah is different. It might be a fruit tree. There is a verse in Deuteronomy which prohibits destroying fruit trees (a concept called bal tashkhit). The Israelite has to find evidence that a fruit tree has been worshipped before cutting it down.

A pesel is even stickier. If you don’t remember the story of Mikayahu’s pesel, read Judges 17-18. As with an Asherah, there has to be an investigation to see if a pesel was made by a Jew or a pagan.

Now look at Exodus 34:13; it’s missing the last two and has tikhrotun instead of t’gadeun for asherot. But it’s still an uncertainty epistemic and still is governed by the ruling about not destroying all trees.

This legalistic use of the uncertainty epistemic continues on into Mishnah and is illustrated in the first mishnah of the first chapter of the first tractate of the first sedra. The Mishnaic epistemic is the only one that survived the Babylonian Captivity, and its only form ends in -in. But it is used in rulings and in cases made up for discussion. When Mishnah discusses an actual event or case, it uses non-epistemics. This is also illustrated in that same mishnah.

א מֵאֵימָתַי קוֹרִין אֶת שְׁמַע בְּעַרְבִית. מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִים לֶאֱכֹל בִּתְרוּמָתָן, עַד סוֹף הָאַשְׁמוּרָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד חֲצוֹת. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ בָנָיו מִבֵּית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא קָרִינוּ אֶת שְׁמַע. אָמַר לָהֶם, אִם לֹא עָלָה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר, חַיָּבִין אַתֶּם לִקְרוֹת. וְלֹא זוֹ בִּלְבַד, אֶלָּא כָּל מַה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַד חֲצוֹת, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים וְאֵבָרִים, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. וְכָל הַנֶּאֱכָלִין לְיוֹם אֶחָד, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַד חֲצוֹת, כְּדֵי לְהַרְחִיק אֶת הָאָדָם מִן הָעֲבֵירָה:

Now that you know about the uncertainty epistemic, you can see which of these verbs refers to something in the law – which might not happen – and which verbs reflect actual events.

The wording of Mishnah was fixed about 100 CE. The same grammatical split shows up in Midrash Rabbah, which cites to the same rabbis and was written down during the European Dark Ages. The persistence of grammar – and what doesn’t survive – tells us that BH grammar in the entire Tannakh is the product of the people who lived before the Babylonian Captivity. Tannakh is a record of Jewish narratives and the laws they illustrate, as they existed when the First Temple was destroyed. The stark change in grammar after that – to a tense language, not an aspectual one – is another part of the evidence. Anybody who tells you differently needs to come into the 21^st century.

Knitting -- ok not really, this is about crochet

So the news in the USA is that DMC Cebelia, which used to be the gold standard of crochet thread, is being discontinued. At least, US retailers like Herrschners will tell you so, because that's what DMC is telling them. However DMC told me that it was available as a special order, and a site in Canada was told that same thing. They did a good job for me and soon I should I have what I need to finish a large project.

What's the deal? This is the thread that people use for tatting, for Irish lace, for lace edgings, for doilies and tablecloths and coverlids in the classic Waldrep books published by Dover. You can also crochet with yarn to make bedspreads and clothing and even dolls or doll clothing; Purple Kitty has lots of free patterns. But if there's an Irish lace pattern out there that uses something larger than size 20 thread, you need to send me to the website that has the book title or the discussion or the pattern cos all my pattern books use thread, not yarn.

If you are in the USA and have a lace pattern you can't live without working in crochet, you still have some choices.
Coats, which used to produce the classic Big Ball thread, has Aunt Lydia's, which is available at Joann's and some other places.
Herrschners has their own brand: https://www.yarn.com/categories/crochet-thread
Red Heart is available at Yarnspirations.
WEBS has several brands, some of which come in cones for large projects:
https://www.yarn.com/categories/crochet-thread

DMC embroidery floss seems to be alive and well. The retailer that is helping me out says it's just the crochet thread that is being discontinued, except for these special orders.

But in case you want something unusual, did you know that there is a linen embroidery thread in lots of colors?  Search the web for places that will ship Londonderry thread to the US. The sizing information is different from DMC. Try the PurlSoho site which lists several sizes of Londonderry.
https://www.purlsoho.com/tools/thread.html

This page will explain the sizing to you.
https://www.threadneedlestreet.com/linthrd.htm

Notice that PurlSoho also sells Trebizond silk embroidery thread. The thing about working with silk thread is that it will catch on your fingers. The smallest amount of housework will roughen your fingers causing these catches. Embroidering with silk used to be a major sign of what a lady you were, because you didn't do housework and your fingers were perfectly smooth. Another brand is Au Ver in literally hundreds of colors, as well  as Soie d'Alger.

21st Century Bible Hebrew -- uncertainty epistemic

So you might guess that if there’s a certainty epistemic, there’s also an uncertainty epistemic, and you would be right. You saw it in Genesis 1:3-4.

ג וּמִפְּרִ֣י הָעֵץ֘ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּתוֹךְ־הַגָּן֒ אָמַ֣ר אֱלֹהִ֗ים לֹ֤א תֹֽאכְלוּ֙ מִמֶּ֔נּוּ וְלֹ֥א תִגְּע֖וּ בּ֑וֹ פֶּ֖ן תְּמֻתֽוּן:

ד וַיֹּ֥אמֶר הַנָּחָ֖שׁ אֶל־הָֽאִשָּׁ֑ה לֹא־מ֖וֹת תְּמֻתֽוּן:

Chavvah isn’t sure she’ll die. The serpent copies her word as a complement for the aspectless mot, a sort of duplicate conditional that also shows up in Deuteronomy. For now, let’s concentrate on t’mutun, the uncertainty epistemic.

The morphology is imperfect verb, usually in 3^rd person although we have 2^nd person here, with a masculine -un ending or a feminine -in ending.  The latter is found in Samuel and Ruth.

The uncertainty epistemic is used when the “speaker” is not sure of the facts, especially that a commandment will be carried out. In some cases in Deuteronomy, during Mosheh’s address, he uses it while retelling Israelite history, and it gives a sense that he is allowing for the audience not to have been eyewitnesses to what he’s talking about. He’s addressing the generation that is about to enter the Holy Land; the generation that experienced the events died in the wilderness with notable exceptions.

One of the most important examples of uncertainty epistemic is Genesis 18:28ff, where Avraham tries to get Gd to let off the Cities of the Plain and not destroy them. What if there are 50 people who are good, will You destroy the cities then? Gd says “No.” “And what if five of the fifty are lacking?” And the form he uses is yach’srun.

אוּלַי יַחְסְרוּן חֲמִשִּׁים הַצַּדִּיקִם חֲמִשָּׁה הֲתַשְׁחִית בַּחֲמִשָּׁה אֶת־כָּל־הָעִיר וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אַשְׁחִית אִם־אֶמְצָא שָׁם אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה:

Avraham doesn’t know for sure there are 45 good people in the cities; he doesn’t know if there are any. He’s using “lacks five” as an opening wedge to reduce the number. He stops at 10. (There’s a midrash for that.) And then when he gets up the next morning, he sees that the cities have been destroyed. He can see the smoke from where he is, miles to the west of where the cities were. Well, he tried.

Why would Avraham’s lack of knowledge be important to this narrative? Because Gd says:

“If I find in Sdom fifty righteous among the city, then I shall bear with the whole place because of them.”

That is a vow. For the vow to be legal, the positive clause has to come first, which it certainly does. Gd has to carry out that vow.

Peshitta, as the rabbis say, of course He’s going to carry out His vow, just as He’s going to carry out His vow for the descendants of the patriarchs to take over the Holy Land.

Well, but wait a minute. Why is it important that Avraham admits he doesn’t know? The answer is, Torah’s oral narratives transmit the norms and standards of the culture that transmitted it for so many centuries. Lack of knowledge is grounds for getting a vow annulled. The formula in Mishnah is, if you made a vow, it could be annulled by a rabbi if he questioned you and at some point you said “well, if I had known that, I wouldn’t have made the vow.”

But Gd knows how many righteous people there are in the cities – none! So He made the vow based on what He knew!

That’s not true. Gd made the vow based on Avraham’s suggestion, as a favor to His BFF, not on Gd’s personal knowledge. Avraham is admitting he may have been wrong to make the suggestion. He is giving Gd a way out. As it turns out, there aren’t even five righteous people in all of the cities. Kaboom.

Knitting -- Mariusgenser 1

This post is about the famous Mariusgenser, which was invented by Unn Søiland for the Norwegian athletes for the 1952 Oslo games. The original pattern with yarn is sold by Sandnes Garn. The authorized English language version is available at SKD. I tried to buy it there but their app had problems with my credit card. You can go to the site, find the pattern, email the link to them and ask them to send you a Paypal invoice which you can pay by credit card. This pattern is not free on the Sandnes Garn site.

No worries. Fifteen minutes with Google Search found a project pamphlet that had a mockup. I compared it to photos of the official pattern and it's very close. This is the situation that turns fashion designers' hair gray. Anybody with some skill and perseverance can mock up their work from photos. (China buys single samples for their knockoffs.)

So I worked out a pattern for my use, which closely resembles the photos on Sandnes Garn and Ravelry but is not the authorized pattern. It took 50 hours to work, mostly because I had trouble figuring out where to start the pattern on the sleeves. The original does not include the Xs in the sleeves, so work more of the sleeve in blue before you start the pattern. A later variation of this pattern is a top-down raglan with a yoke that does include the Xs all the way around.

I used 2 skeins white, 1 skein red, and 10 skeins blue yarn. I picked a very dark blue, probably too dark.

The pattern is 59 rows high. The Marius is normally worked in DK/sport yarn, but I would have to work part of it below the armpits unless I used fingering yarn. Knowing I would have to work part of it below the armpits, I went the whole way to worsted weight for something really warm. I worked 100 rows below the armpits and 45 above.

The design is basically a Setesdal pattern (see last week's post on Dale's DG267 with traditional Norwegian patterns). You work Setesdal bottom up with no steeking; you work the sleeves bottom up and sew them to the top when you're done. You need to cast off for the armpit on the body, but work the sleeves in the round the whole way up with no armpit castoff.

For the sleeve, I cabled on a 52-stitch cuff, worked the rib, and increased to 90 stitches as I worked upwards. At the top of the sleeve, to get the red/blue crenelations to work out right, I had to increase by 2 stitches, which I did in the first round with blue. With a 100-stitch armhole, you can see that you would have to gather the armhole quite a bit to fit it to the sleeve. The extra two stitches in the sleeve minimize that gathering.

When you sew the sleeves on, it's easy to catch in part of the pattern. To avoid this, use blue at the ends of the body pattern and hook your seam into those stitches. For the sleeves, make sure your needle only catches in the binding-off stitches at the top. If you're not sure you can be that precise, do a fourth round of red at the top before binding off.

While we're at it, there's a photo of a scarf here.
https://images.app.goo.gl/xcsoUr9rWU5qTjVB6

This shows mittens with the red at the cuffs. I've seen photos that went the other way.
https://images.app.goo.gl/hEzibxX66adtdDWn9

And a hat.
https://images.app.goo.gl/YndpoqzaUf7JTntF6

And of course socks. Work them toe up. Once you have worked 5 rounds in the ankle, increase to 54 stitches so you can get one X on your shin and one on each side. Now work the pattern and when you get to the red at the top, work your K2/P2 cuff and bind off in rib. The length of the leg will therefore be 64 stitches and how high it gets on your leg will depend on whether you use worsted or fingering weight yarn.

Or else leave out the Xs the way you do on the sleeves. The Xs are 13 stitches high; by leaving them out, you can knit a normal 15-round ankle and have a normal 45 round leg.

And of course you can use worsted weight cotton if you are allergic to wool.

So there is my first real Norwegian sweater. There are lots of Setesdal and Setesdal "lice" patterns at DROPS but the Mariusgenser has a real pedigree. I'll be working another traditional Norwegian pattern in a couple of weeks and I'll post a photo when it's done.

21st Century Bible Hebrew -- certainty epistemic

The difference between the evidentiary epistemic and the certainty epistemic is syntax. As I showed last week, the evidentiary epistemic comes at the start of a verse and is followed – somewhere – by a narrative past for the actions that are the evidence.

The certainty epistemic comes after material which would otherwise seem fantastic, except that there is perceptible evidence that it is true. This was all over the creation story, va-y’hi or and so on.

This is the grammatical analog of Olrik’s final localization, which uses the name of some place that is well-known to the audience, and may be visible during the narration. Usually the narrative has fantastic elements that the audience would not believe, except for the association with the known place. It gives the narrator credibility.

The other major set of certainty epistemics is in Exodus, at the end where they are making the tabernacle. Over and over again it says va-yaas X, where X is part of the tabernacle.

Considering the restrictions on use of the certainty epistemic, the Exodus cluster has implications for Jewish or at least Israelite history. There is no cultural support for using a certainty epistemic about the tabernacle unless the physical tabernacle coexists with the grammar of the narrative.

If the tabernacle did not exist when the wording of the narrative became fixed, BH would use a narrative past. There’s a perfect example in Numbers 32:31. The verb anah mostly shows up as an evidentiary epistemic, but this verse is an exception.

לא וַיַּֽעֲנ֧וּ בְנֵי־גָ֛ד וּבְנֵ֥י רְאוּבֵ֖ן לֵאמֹ֑ר אֵת֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר דִּבֶּ֧ר יְהוָֹ֛ה אֶל־עֲבָדֶ֖יךָ כֵּ֥ן נַֽעֲשֶֽׂה:

The B’ney Gad and B’ney R’uven answered saying: what the Lord has spoken to your servants, thus we shall do.

The scenario is that two tribes of the Israelites have requested to take up their turf on the east of the Yarden. Mosheh is mad because it could discourage the others, so va-yaanu the tribal leaders that they will help on the west side of the river. This language shows that the audience had no cultural customs associated with this help. It happened and that’s all. If the narrator had tried to use an evidentiary epistemic here, the audience would have said “prove it.”

In both kinds of epistemic, the narrator does not need to provide supporting evidence beyond what is in the text. Whatever is in the clause with the narrative past, because it had historical or cultural results, is sufficient evidence to support the preceding evidentiary epistemic. And of course, the perceptible evidence is sufficient to warrant the certainty epistemic. Arguments that there never was a tabernacle, that it was a fairy tale made up as a backstory to the temple in Jerusalem, fall apart due to the grammar. There is also another reason.

Olrik’s principles state that people transmitting an oral tradition do not create cultural backstories. This means that the First Temple did not need justification, beyond what Kings states: Shlomo was carrying out what his father had projected. It was a royal project, similar to other royal projects throughout the region, like the pyramids and the Babylonian Gardens. It was an emblem of the victory over the Pelishtim, who had been reduced to the “Creti and Pleti” of David’s personal bodyguard.

But it was not a template from which Jews developed the parts of Torah about building the tabernacle. The tabernacle and its activities were the template for temple operations.

By the way, in case I didn't say this already, Dr. John Cook knew nothing about Olrik's principles. Olrik died about 1921; Dr. Cook's dissertation was approved in 2002. I read Olrik in 2003 or 2004 and the dissertation in 2014. Dr. Cook may have read Olrik by now, but his dissertation was based on prior linguistic papers. When two trains of thought parallel each other independently, it seems to me we're looking at a fact about how humans shape their communications through content and grammar to convince others that they are telling the truth.

21st Century Bible Hebrew -- evidentiary epistemic

The next class of modal morphology ought to be familiar to you by now: the epistemic. An epistemic is about the speaker’s investment in the truth of what is said. That gets us around confusion with epistemology which is the study of how we know what we know.

There are two versions in BH, the evidentiary/certainty, and the uncertainty.

They are both based on the imperfect.

The evidentiary epistemic is always followed by a clause using narrative past which is the evidence for the epistemic. There can be more than one verse between the epistemic and the evidence; one example is Genesis 14:1-8.

א וַיְהִ֗י בִּימֵי֙ אַמְרָפֶ֣ל מֶֽלֶךְ־שִׁנְעָ֔ר אַרְי֖וֹךְ מֶ֣לֶךְ אֶלָּסָ֑ר כְּדָרְלָעֹ֨מֶר֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ עֵילָ֔ם וְתִדְעָ֖ל מֶ֥לֶךְ גּוֹיִֽם:

ב עָשׂ֣וּ מִלְחָמָ֗ה אֶת־בֶּ֨רַע֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ סְדֹ֔ם וְאֶת־בִּרְשַׁ֖ע מֶ֣לֶךְ עֲמֹרָ֑ה שִׁנְאָ֣ב ׀ מֶ֣לֶךְ אַדְמָ֗ה וְשֶׁמְאֵ֨בֶר֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ צְבֹיִי֔ם [צְבוֹיִ֔ם] וּמֶ֥לֶךְ בֶּ֖לַע הִיא־צֹֽעַר:

ג כָּל־אֵ֨לֶּה֙ חָֽבְר֔וּ אֶל־עֵ֖מֶק הַשִּׂדִּ֑ים ה֖וּא יָ֥ם הַמֶּֽלַח:

ד שְׁתֵּ֤ים עֶשְׂרֵה֙ שָׁנָ֔ה עָֽבְד֖וּ אֶת־כְּדָרְלָעֹ֑מֶר וּשְׁלשׁ־עֶשְׂרֵ֥ה שָׁנָ֖ה מָרָֽדוּ:

ה וּבְאַרְבַּע֩ עֶשְׂרֵ֨ה שָׁנָ֜ה בָּ֣א כְדָרְלָעֹ֗מֶר וְהַמְּלָכִים֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר אִתּ֔וֹ וַיַּכּ֤וּ אֶת־רְפָאִים֙ בְּעַשְׁתְּרֹ֣ת קַרְנַ֔יִם וְאֶת־הַזּוּזִ֖ים בְּהָ֑ם וְאֵת֙ הָֽאֵימִ֔ים בְּשָׁוֵ֖ה קִרְיָתָֽיִם: ו וְאֶת־הַֽחֹרִ֖י בְּהַֽרֲרָ֣ם שֵׂעִ֑יר עַ֚ד אֵ֣יל פָּארָ֔ן אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־הַמִּדְבָּֽר:

ז וַ֠יָּשֻׁ֠בוּ וַיָּבֹ֜אוּ אֶל־עֵ֤ין מִשְׁפָּט֙ הִ֣וא קָדֵ֔שׁ וַיַּכּ֕וּ אֶת־כָּל־שְׂדֵ֖ה הָֽעֲמָֽלֵקִ֑י וְגַם֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֱמֹרִ֔י הַיּשֵׁ֖ב בְּחַֽצֲצֹ֥ן תָּמָֽר:

ח וַיֵּצֵ֨א מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֜ם וּמֶ֣לֶךְ עֲמֹרָ֗ה וּמֶ֤לֶךְ אַדְמָה֙ וּמֶ֣לֶךְ צְבֹיִי֔ם [צְבוֹיִ֔ם] וּמֶ֥לֶךְ בֶּ֖לַע הִוא־צֹ֑עַר וַיַּֽעַרְכ֤וּ אִתָּם֙ מִלְחָמָ֔ה בְּעֵ֖מֶק הַשִּׂדִּֽים:

Everything in verses 2-7 are the backstory of why the kings of the Cities of the Plain went out to war.

One of the most important things about the evidentiary epistemic is that it is the grammatical equivalent of Olrik’s origin localization, a place name used to identify where an important cultural or historical event took place.At some point in the culture's history, and possibly for a long time, this place is visible to the audience and that is the evidence of the truth of what the narrator is saying.

The evidentiary epistemic uses cultural knowledge or the current state of affairs as the evidence and it is always the only evidence needed because everybody knows about it. Without that knowledge, the speaker can’t use the epistemic.

Va-y’hi at the start of a narrative is a special case of this. It gives the timing of an event, based on known historical events. That’s what happens here in Genesis 14. It shows up the same way in other places in Torah. But at the end of a stretch of text, it has a different use.

Knitting -- Dale

I thought I had found an article saying that Dalegarn had published their patterns for free; it gave links to a site that had them. Are you drooling?

Only thing. The article was from 2010. You know how fast links rot. Same here.

Well, I couldn't let it go. I found the home web site.
https://dalegarn.no/

It's in Norwegian.

Never say die. There's a box in the middle of the top of the page that says "ga til katalog". That last word ought to mean something to you.

As a matter of fact, you should really click on the top left box most sites seem to have, to get the menu. One line is "Kataloger". Guess what that means! So click on it.

It's still in Norwegian. There are filter boxes down the left side. For pullovers, click Genser; it will also get you button-front sweaters. Then go down and find the box that has two words, one of which is Filter (the other word means "search") and click it.

You still get way too much to absorb -- 4 pages worth -- so I'm just going to tell you how to find the chart for the pattern(s) you like.  So one of the top ones says Olympic Passion. Click that. It's catalog DG345.

Now go to the bottom of the page. You'll see photos of the pretty people wearing their gensers that match the catalog cover photo. Click on the lady or rather, so you can get back if you mess up, open it in a new tab.

There are two buttons. The left one says "ned last" which is Norwegian for "download". You get an 8 page PDF that you can download to disk for later printing. Sure, the pattern is in Norwegian. But all you need are the charts, so you can paste them into your spreadsheet and make sure they fit the stitch counts you need. You also need the photo cos sometimes the sleeve pattern is different from the front/back pattern. Everything else is irrelevant.

Make sure you go to page 3 and click on DG280 which are Olympic patterns. Or the anniversary catalog, DG189. Or DG381 for some patterns so fancy you'll swear they are woven.

Now. For DG267 they threw me a curve. The "last ned" button also says Katalog. The other button means "order yarn here". You can click on that; the top menu has the word "strikkepakker" on it. That means "kits". Click on that and you don't get the kit for DG267, you get pages and pages of kits. Go ahead, click on it, and then click on anything in the top row. Page down and you will see things with numbers after or below them, the prices of the things in the kit. Last there is a box that says "last ned oppskrift". That means "download pattern." This is the House of Yarn site, which carries products from other vendors than Dale, so see, I just gave you a whole world of needlecraft patterns to make your life miserable.

Back to DG267. It turned out that the catalog has the actual charts in it. They are gorgeous. One is a type of pattern I'm going to write about when I finish making one.

Now aren't you glad I don't give up easily? And if you see something that is too delicious to pass up, and it's not a charted design, well, you can use Google Translate and realize there's no such thing as a good machine translation even after 40 years of trying, or you can try one of these sites.
https://spellingtuesday.com/knitting/learn-norwegian-for-knitters/

The next one goes in the wrong direction but you can always use your page search function in your browser to find the word you need. You also ought to be able to use the Print function and turn it into a PDF, which you will be able to search. I've done it tons of times.
http://www.strikkeoppskrift.com/engelske-ord-og-uttrykk

Another great Nordic site is Sandnes Garn, which I will mention in a future post. Here is its site for free patterns for women. You can change the filters at the left to see other free products, just don't uncheck "utgatte hefter", that means "free patterns".
https://www.sandnesgarn.no/hefter/filter/dame_/klassiker_norske_ikoner/utgatte_hefter_gratis

Do not plan to buy kits from Dale or Sandnes. To make sure it gets to you, you need to pay for tracking the shipment, and you need to pay customs. By the time you've done that, the price has doubled. It's the same all over the world. An Australian site that has what may be the world's last two units of DMC Cebelia will calculate it for you. When you buy gansey yarn, you must get it from U.S. sites like Woolly Thistle, Kirtland's or Churchmouse Yarn and Tea; the price shown on a UK website will not include tracking or customs.

I found a web page that referred to worldwide networks for buying Sandnes and Dale products.  However, the Dale yarn site has huge discounts because the products it listed are no longer available.

The site listed for Sandnes yarn is closed. I checked out a possible Canada retailer; their site does not list Sandnes Garn as something they sell.

So download the patterns, but you will have to make them with somebody else's yarns. Of which there are plenty in the US.

p.s. I didn't tell any of this to the person who wrote the article. I tried to write to her but her email address isn't valid any more. So this is our little secret, OK?

p.p.s. Please don't tempt your significant other to put curses on me for posting both the Dale and DROPS links. Make an extra effort not to spend all your time and money on new gensers.