Hacker News Reader

> It's silly because the words are jargon, and are not supposed to used literally. They might have been coined from some original meaning, but they are just sounds now, and divorced from their origin.

"jargon" just means the words aren't easy for common folk to understand. So the logical conclusion would be that jargon should be translated.

Personally I don't see why "search engine" or "browser" is any different to "fire engine" or "car". They're all just nouns (in fact "fire engine" even varies amongst English speakers as I believe Americans call it "fire truck").

> I suppose in france they also translate "main" and "void" in C programs?

That's another language in itself; albeit a computer based one with English-language origins. You don't see people taking about int64 in common conversation any more than you see English people using French nouns to describe English objects.

> "jargon" just means the words aren't easy for common folk to understand. So the logical conclusion would be that jargon should be translated.

Jargon is a mental shorthand. Instead of explaining the concept you put it in a "box". Then your mind only has to remember the single concept instead of the whole set of sub-concepts that make up the word.

Since a person has a limited number of things you can hold onto at once, by essentially "compressing" concepts you can increase the power of thought.

So the logical conclusion is that jargon should not be translated. It should be left as is. A search engine is not an engine that searches. It's a single "thing".

Except that it's easier to remember a concept if the name for it matches what it is. If I explain to my French grandpa what a search engine is, and tell him it's called a "moteur de recherche", it will all make sense and he will remember both the name and what it is.

On the other hand, if I explain to him what a search engine is, and then tell him it's literally called a "search engine", that's just unnecessary confusion.

I don't agree. Would you find it easier to remember "pasta" by thinking that it's a "salty mass of food"?

Or is an automobile a "self propelled moving machine"?

Are you going to start calling the Mississippi "big river"?

Words have an origin in other languages, certainly. But it serves no purpose to translate that origin as is. Instead you accept the sound of the word and use it.

And presumably hipster is "person who wears clothing low on the hips".

Just because it's technology doesn't except it from the normal rules of words. All new words start from a meaning. But the meaning is interesting historically, it's not used for everyday speech.

If you want to make the word French you don't translate it literally - it's not actually a motor. Call it a "research-majigy" or something like that.

Some poor examples there:

o 'Automobile' is already short for 'self propelled moving machine,

o 'Mississippi' is a proper noun,

o 'hipster' isn't even a proper word (why don't we all just start posting derogatory slang?)

o and if you think of 'salty mass of food' when you eat pastas then you really are shopping in the wrong places / need to learn to cook better.

o As for your dislike of the use of the term 'engine', it's meaning has evolved somewhat, but in software it's common to refer to a complicated core group of routines which powers the software / service as an 'engine'. eg 'game engine' in computer games.

Wow, what I wrote really went over your head. Perhaps my fault? Was I not clear?

> 'Automobile' is already short for 'self propelled moving machine,

Yes, I know. That's what I was telling you. Why are you telling it back to me? Are you suggesting that France should call automobiles "self propelled moving machines"?

> 'Mississippi' is a proper noun

So? It still has an origin. And you can either use the word as is, or translate it.

> 'hipster' isn't even a proper word (why don't we all just start posting derogatory slang?)

Derogatory slag? What? Did you think I was calling someone that? It's just an example of a word. And of course it's a word. It might not be a high status word, but it's still a word.

> and if you think of 'salty mass of food' when you eat pastas then you really are shopping in the wrong places / need to learn to cook better.

That's exactly it. I DON'T think that. But that's what the word "pasta" means. (Perhaps you didn't know that.)

So do you suggest that when France adopt a word for pasta they should call it "salty mass of food"?

Of course not. They should ignore the meaning of the word and just call it pasta. It's the same for technological words.

Your reply really confuses me. Did you just read my post and not the whole thread?

> So? It still has an origin. And you can either use the word as is, or translate it.

"So" I'd already discussed proper nouns.

> Derogatory slag? What? Did you think I was calling someone that? It's just an example of a word. And of course it's a word. It might not be a high status word, but it's still a word.

Made up slang isn't even part of the English language so it seems daft to argue about it's incorporation into other language

> But that's what the word "pasta" means. (Perhaps you didn't know that.)

You're right I didn't know that. And no I don't think France should adopt that term simply because pasta isn't like that these days, we don't think of it like that any longer and arguing that we should readopt medieval terms is the opposite of my point with is that countries should be allowed to adopt their own definitions for modern terms.

Your whole argument in this thread seem to be based on stawman arguments with a minor dash of xenophobia towards foreign languages. You haven't really explained why you think France shouldn't speak their own language aside pointing out some fringe examples and presenting it as evidence that the standard body of modern languages are incomprehensible. Maybe you'd have a better job convincing me if you discussed this from a French perspective as to why French speaking layman's would understand English words better than French word.

*> Your reply really confuses me. Did you just read my post and not the whole thread?

Given a few of your points I'd already addressed earlier in this thread, I don't think you're in a position to be making such comments.

To extend the point made by @GuiA, many technical terms make reference or analagy to non-technical nouns. Imagine if all technical terms were based in a natural language you don't understand. French would be appropriate in this case, but if you speak French then imagine all the words in were in Chinese, or Esperanto, or Klingon. It would be much harder to remember them.

All words are like that. They use the sound from another language, not the meaning.

Go see some of the examples in my reply to him. I could type for hours showing you examples. Just because it's technical doesn't make it special.

Do you call it bokeh or do you try to explain it in English? What about schwa? It has a meaning in its original language after all. But instead you just use the sound from that language. (And I deliberately picked obscure examples.)

Sure, languages steal words. It makes perfect sense when you're trying to explain something that is a completely new concept, or at least one that has no close analogue already in the language.

The English language didn't have any concept for "the out of focus area of a photograph" so you might as well import that one. But when a language already has a closely related concept it is still much easier to analogize that rather than import a word from another language.

The French already had a word for "search", so why should they ignore that? Perhaps they could have called it an "engine de recherche" but that's just silly. Would you also suggest that they just use the entire phrase "Google Book Search" unchanged, rather than translating the individual words?

How about umami? It's a borrow-word, but in general use we loosely refer to it as "savory" because it is easier for the unacquainted to understand.

I don't really get what's so offensive about the French using a more immediately parse-able term when possible.

We explain it as savory, but we call it umami.

> any more than you see English people using French nouns to describe English objects

Oh really? I suppose people don't eat pastries or croissants? They don't send resumes?

That was a really silly thing to say considering just how many French words there are in English.

Of course there's going to be exceptions. I was well aware of that when I made my post. But you're ignoring the fact that those exceptions are generally so old that they harp back to a time when England was conquered thus the invading parties brought their own language or at the time there wasn't an English equivalent description. These days it doesn't happen so often.

Take your examples: pastries is actually an English word that has evolved from a Normandy word 'pastaierie'. And 'croissants' is a very specific term to a specific type of French pastry. So it's not all that surprising that we're going to use the French word since it is a very specific French thing (it may as well be a proper noun it's that niche)

So are you saying that in the past it was OK to use a foreign word, but today they must be translated?

And do you really think those are the only French words in English? How about RSVP? I'm sure there is a huge list if you look.

You said that English would never use a French word, and I've shown you that they do it quite often. And likewise French should not be worried about using English words for things, that's how languages work, they borrow.

> So are you saying that in the past it was OK to use a foreign word, but today they must be translated?

No. I'm saying in the past countries were invaded and the occupiers brought their own language.

> And do you really think those are the only French words in English? How about RSVP? I'm sure there is a huge list if you look.

Oh absolutely. As I said, there are exceptions. But generally what I said is the norm.

Also, RSVP isn't a word.

> You said that English would never use a French word, and I've shown you that they do it quite often.

Oh absolutely. As I said, there are exceptions. But generally what I said is the norm.

It's also worth noting that when foreign words are used in English writing, it's the convention to italicise the words, verbatim ;)

> You said that English would never use a French word, and I've shown you that they do it quite often. And likewise French should not be worried about using English words for things, that's how languages work, they borrow.

"Never" was a poor choice of words on my part. Sorry for that. However you're looking at things a bit naive if you assume that the primary way words are created is through borrowing from other languages. Yes that is a part of the evolution of language, but it's not the only part.

Let's not forget that American English and British English differ as well. For example:

    * fanny / bum,
    * pants / trousers,
    * underpants / pants,
    * sidewalk / pavement,
    * elevator / lift,
    * truck / van,
    * car trunk / car boot,
    * kindergarten / playschool,
    * restroom / toilet

and even some words pronounced the same are spelt differently:

    * center / centre,
    * standardize / standardise,
    * color / colour

You also see similar trend in other English-speaking countries as well (eg Australia refer to 'flip-flops' as 'thongs'; but in Britain, 'thongs' refer to a G-string-like garment).

So your argument about how modern terms should be static across languages doesn't even ring true amongst the different regions of the world speaking the same language.

Yep there is a civil service bureaucracy that comes up with new approved "french" words for example disque dur for a hard disk or DASD if your an IBM type.

A few years ago I had the job of installing Wordstar 2000 for our bi/tri ligual typing pool and had to refer to a french technical dictionary a lot :-)

News flash: different languages use different words!

News flash languages are mutable and borrow words from other languages all the time - not even UKIP complain about french or german loan words e.g. Café schadenfreude and so on.

It seem that only France seems to feel the need to have a bureaucracy to try (in a king canute like way) to hold back the tides.

Only France, hm? Let me google that for you:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=language+academies&l=1

Just because English borrows words more easily than most other languages ("We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." -- James Nicoll) and has no central language regulating authority, doesn't mean all languages ought to work the same way.

Complaining that the French say "disque dur" instead of "hard disk" is just silly, because "disque dur" means "hard disk" in French. It's a literal translation. There's no reason to use an English term when there's a perfectly good French one available! Why don't you use a German loanword and call it a Festplattenlaufwerk in English?

"Search engine" is not jargon. An English speaker from a century ago would understand what it meant - although they wouldn't know from what you were building the engine, or what it was meant to search.

Search engine? http://www.etoday.ru/assets_c/2009/11/sobaka2-thumb-600x462-...

> I suppose in france they also translate "main" and "void" in C programs?

Visual Basic was translated (keywords and all) to many european languages. Excel formulas still have translations.