Lost in Translation

WSJ ^ | 24 July 2010 | Lera Boroditsky

[Palter]

New cognitive research suggests that language profoundly influences the way people see the world; a different sense of blame in Japanese and Spanish

Do the languages we speak shape the way we think? Do they merely express thoughts, or do the structures in languages (without our knowledge or consent) shape the very thoughts we wish to express?

Take "Humpty Dumpty sat on a..." Even this snippet of a nursery rhyme reveals how much languages can differ from one another. In English, we have to mark the verb for tense; in this case, we say "sat" rather than "sit." In Indonesian you need not (in fact, you can't) change the verb to mark tense.

In Russian, you would have to mark tense and also gender, changing the verb if Mrs. Dumpty did the sitting. You would also have to decide if the sitting event was completed or not. If our ovoid hero sat on the wall for the entire time he was meant to, it would be a different form of the verb than if, say, he had a great fall.

In Turkish, you would have to include in the verb how you acquired this information. For example, if you saw the chubby fellow on the wall with your own eyes, you'd use one form of the verb, but if you had simply read or heard about it, you'd use a different form.

Do English, Indonesian, Russian and Turkish speakers end up attending to, understanding, and remembering their experiences differently simply because they speak different languages?

These questions touch on all the major controversies in the study of mind, with important implications for politics, law and religion. Yet very little empirical work had been done on these questions until recently.

[Verginius Rufus]

I recalled that from high school Spanish.

Harrap's Giant Paperback Spanish dictionary has under the word pelo nm (cabello) hair, the following expression:

tomar el p. a alguien to pull s[ome]b[ody]'s leg.

[gleeaikin]

Regarding the subjunctive, a very important part of the Spanish language. We use it about 2% of the time, the Spanish use it about 45% of the time. English usage for example: If I WERE king, I would do... Obviously you are not king, so it is an expression of wishful thinking.

The Spanish use the subjunctive form of the verb in expressions like: You need to do so and so. I hope you get it done today. Bring me a beer. In other words any situation that involves the actions of another, might or might not happen. Thus we see the operative difference between Germanic certainty and Latino uncertainty, lack of decisive action. It probably explains the lack of progress in most Hispanic countries.

This reminds me of one of my mother’s (Prussian ancestry) favorite expressions. “Do it now, and that’s an order!” It also is reflected in the manana (tomorrow) attitude of Latinos, although that may be partly due to tropical heat. With temperature 98 degrees at 2:30 pm, I feel a little manana myself.

[gleeaikin]

Regarding the subjunctive, a very important part of the Spanish language. We use it about 2% of the time, the Spanish use it about 45% of the time. English usage for example: If I WERE king, I would do... Obviously you are not king, so it is an expression of wishful thinking.

The Spanish use the subjunctive form of the verb in expressions like: You need to do so and so. I hope you get it done today. Bring me a beer. In other words any situation that involves the actions of another, might or might not happen. Thus we see the operative difference between Germanic certainty and Latino uncertainty, lack of decisive action. It probably explains the lack of progress in most Hispanic countries.

This reminds me of one of my mother’s (Prussian ancestry) favorite expressions. “Do it now, and that’s an order!” It also is reflected in the manana (tomorrow) attitude of Latinos, although that may be partly due to tropical heat. With temperature 98 degrees at 2:30 pm, I feel a little manana myself.

[19th LA Inf]

manana (tomorrow) attitude of Latinos

I've heard that many gringos mistakenly think "manana" means "tomorrow" when it really just means "not today".

[x]

That is the famous Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

There's some truth in it, but John McWhorter suggests that some skepticism is required.

Sometimes there aren't exactly equivalent single words in two languages, but the distinctions involved are readily understood by people in both cultures.

People have worked up complicated philosophical treatises based on the existence of a foreign word representing a particular complex of meanings without realizing that you can find words with interesting and distinctive bundles of meanings in any language, including one's own, without their being grave philosophical consequences.

[Little Ray]

Bump for later.

[arthurus]

Chomsky’s error probably stems at east in part from his ideology. He is a collectivist and believes that humans are merely mechanical devices and are totally interchangeable. Apparent differences merely demonstrate flaws in the manufacture or differences in education.

[Pharmboy]

Thanks for the post and ping, respectively, I learned much from this article.

One interesting language factoid that always struck me was trying to explain to a non-English speaker the difference between a "house" and a "home." Not easy...

[ChowChowFace]

Bump for later

[Pontiac]

WSJ Ping

Great Article

[gleeaikin]

Yes, I know that. I guess a less confusing translation would be “later, man, later.”

[gleeaikin]

I always had fun trying to explain why we say “go to school,” but “go home.”

[Pharmboy]

True enough; but then again, the leftists (see Lysenko) traditionally believed that genes were much less important than environment. That’s what always confused me a bit about Chomsky...your point removes a bit of that confusion.

[kabumpo]

thanks. I’m not saying it’s wrong — just that I lived ina Spanish-speaking country and know a lot of Spanish-speakers here, and I’ve never heard that expression.

[kabumpo]

thanks fdor your thoughful and enlightening answer. I appreaciate it.

[marsh2]

At one time I was a professional journalist. I still write a regular weekly column. My son has a processing disorder which made it difficult for him to learn to read. Both have given me some insight into the English language and perspective. Who, what when where and how. Noun, verb, adjectives usually unfolding in a chronological order. The boy jumped over the wooden fence. Each sentence hangs around one action. If you get beyond that, the American reader has problems following it.

My son, who referenced words pictorially when he was young could see a sentence like this unfold like a video. It is very action oriented. The German language seems very detail-oriented, hung up on all the adjectives. Our adjectives can be very subtly emotionally nuanced - see a Thesaurus. On the other hand, I understand the Japanese language is very simple and has one word meaning many things. Perhaps the inflection of verbal expression changes the meaning.

[Verginius Rufus]

I think the Spanish teacher I learned that expression from was a native speaker or grew up bilingual. Perhaps it is common in some Spanish-speaking countries but not others--just as some British expressions make no sense to Americans.

One expression I learned from a foreign language dictionary (English and another language) was "Queen Anne is dead" (in other words, "that's old news"). I had never heard anyone use it, but maybe it's still in use in England.

In other news, Francisco Franco is still dead.

[marsh2]

How about “Bob’s your Uncle.”

[Verginius Rufus]

Well, he was but he died several years ago.

Am I missing something?

[marsh2]

Bob’s Your Uncle is another English self evident phrase that makes no sense to Americans. It means that a set of instructions has been completed.

Example: put peanut butter on one slice of bread and jelly on the other. Put the two together and Bob’s your Uncle.