Lost Interpretation - Writing in the English Language

[William]

Hello all expecially those global members who are not of an English speaking ancestry and are or not bilingual. Are there computorized "interpretators" in that I had heard once there were? If all of you are in deed multilingual, which language do you feel is the best or lease "ambiguous" or complicated? Me, I know only English and have a difficult time of that one even as sometimes it seems to be a foreign one to me! Ha!

Thanks,
William

[Vasska]

Originally Posted by William

Hello all expecially those global members who are not of an English speaking ancestry and are or not bilingual. Are there computorized "interpretators" in that I had heard once there were? If all of you are in deed multilingual, which language do you feel is the best or lease "ambiguous" or complicated? Me, I know only English and have a difficult time of that one even as sometimes it seems to be a foreign one to me! Ha!

Thanks,
William

I'd recon from what I've read English is your second language. Your small piece of text has a multitude of problems including spelling, grammar, punctuation and some more or less unwritten rules that we apply to make the text readable and understandable. The underlined one has the biggest issue. Though maybe it's intended this way seen the title of this thread.

Anyhow, one thing I hold to be true is that when you start learning a second language beyond the basics you start to understand your own language more and more. I'm Dutch, and truly find my language in each and every way disgusting. Especially the whole grammar and spelling part of it. Though, while learning (advanced) English I came across a multitude of things that are the same. And as an effect started to get some more respect, and interest in my native language.

Still I feel more comfortable reading English text. Almost every book I own is in English, either British or American spelling, save from some schoolbooks that are Dutch. I still find English to have more personality and emotion in it, and expressing yourself is far more easier. Dutch sounds so cheesy and corny to me; lacking a certain elegance.

On a side note; Japanese seems to be even better at points mentioned, but more complex.

[William]

Vasska thanks. What do you mean by "English is my 'second language'? You understand the OP well and my own errors in communication as well, of which I readily admit when I effort to "write language" which is so different than speaking it using all other forms of visual communication such as eyes, inflection, depth and demeanor.

Thanks,
William

[ValueRanger]

The least ambiguous, is the most adaptable to greater needs.

Example: a subway that has immediate peril to sensory impaired people. This is why essential diverse stimulus is necessary to avoid loss of life-or-limb (this directly sequiturs to a universal human needs hierarchy), like audio and visually enhanced signs. Some subways incorporate rhythmic changes in platform consistencies (much like braille) so the touch sense is triggered through vibratory change.

Obviously a baby confronted with doing calculus for air, is a massive non-sequitur in language.

[William]

Please will the mod who changed the title of my thread contact me in a PM.
Thank You,
William

[salima]

hi william-
i have run across those computerized interpreters in matrimonial ads, and they are very very bad-actually, they are quite funny. they give a literal translation and make very little sense. of course in matrimonials, they are probably not dealing with the best examples of writing to start with.

i know that in hindi there is a builtin set of rules for politeness which english doesnt have, where we add extra words like 'please' and 'thank you' they are already in the hindi language if you choose to use them. also i feel translating from hindi to english often comes off as sounding childlike. in english tone of voice says more than is used in hindi too, i notice-for instance in the case of sarcasm. so all in all, hindi is easier to make understood in writing than english, though i am not sure the same holds in speaking.

i am assuming that culture shaped the languages in the first place.

[urangutan]

William, I think the thing with the use of English, is that without inflections, eye contact, demeanor or even tone, the broad expanse of synonyms, antonyms, slangs and even incorrect pronounciations, the meaning can still be expressed. English is the language to the blind. Carefull that is red hot. Try translating that into another language and I know that in Italian, or at least in the dialect I know, Sta tento, quello sono rosso caldo, does not ring with any meaning. The fire is red would translate but never the term I placed out. Hey I don't know all languages, so I might be wrong about all this.

[jgweed]

In any language, words have an array of meanings that depend on context for their correct use. This is especially true of the basic words that do most of the "work" of communication. Automatic translators generally have a hard time using the correct synomyn because they cannot recognise the context of the phrase or sentence; often they use the most common translation for a word that while not (obviously) "incorrect" utterly fails to convey the meaning intended.
In this they are probably no better than a student's attempt at translation after only a few month's studying of a new language.

[urangutan]

I have to disagree with you JGWeed. I know that with Italian, the inflection, conveys more emphasis and believe it or not but eye contact is important as gestures by both face and hand can and tend to relay a great imput. You cannot claim the brook is bubbling and expect one not to think it must be hot and boiling.

Every language can explain that the soft curls of her hair lifted gently in the flowing breeze and evoke an image of sensuality and sometimes the bleakness that we see can be varied beyond our comprehension, like the term ice for an Innuit or sand for Any who dwell across the Saharan expanse. English seems to have encouraged or been lumbered with the blessing of having this type of variational language with much of its lexicon.

[ValueRanger]

Originally Posted by urangutan

I have to disagree with you JGWeed. I know that with Italian, the inflection, conveys more emphasis and believe it or not but eye contact is important as gestures by both face and hand can and tend to relay a great imput. You cannot claim the brook is bubbling and expect one not to think it must be hot and boiling.

Every language can explain that the soft curls of her hair lifted gently in the flowing breeze and evoke an image of sensuality and sometimes the bleakness that we see can be varied beyond our comprehension, like the term ice for an Innuit or sand for Any who dwell across the Saharan expanse. English seems to have encouraged or been lumbered with the blessing of having this type of variational language with much of its lexicon.

Excellent diversification.

On one side of the equation, you have those that need direct experiential data, in order for them to understand. On the other side of the equation, you have those that already understand perfunctory basics, and enjoy a variety of multidimensional stimuli.

And, as you have stated, it's relative to the array of deficiencies/proficiencies that the subject is currently engaged in. Most of the most buoyant problem solvers I know, sustain a relative clopen state, compared to polarized closed/open. They do, of course, in ratio, engage in necessary extremes, but plan those necessities accordingly. Math indeed.