You might be reading this post next to someone with loud music blaring from their headphones who has a ‘backpfeifengesicht’.
Then again the sight of a ‘bakku-shan’ might stir feelings of ‘forselsket’, though you would be wise to restrain yourself and avoid the need to ‘desenrascanco’.

That would be the best way to avoid a ‘litost’ and other people in the carriage feeling ‘pena ajena’.

Those German, Japanese, Filipino, Portuguese, Czech and Mexican/Spanish words don’t have counterparts in English.

Here is a list of the best words with no English counterpart assembled by the So Bad, So Good website - along with an addition or two of our own.

Lost in translation foreign words English
Age-otori is the Japanese word meaning to look worse after a hair cut

Roughly translated that  means ‘that annoying person has a face you want to punch while a Japanese girl best viewed from behind inspires a feeling of euphoria when you first fall in love.

An appropriate apology would end in ‘taarradhin’, an Arabic word implying a happy solution for everyone.

While some of the words could clearly be useful in everyday speech, others defy common usage and sense.

Take the Japanese word ‘arigata-meiwaku’, for instance.
It means (now take a deep breath): ‘An act someone does for you that you didn’t want to have them do and tried to avoid having them do, but they went ahead anyway, determined to do you a favour. Then things went wrong and caused you a lot of trouble, yet in the end you had to express thanks.’ The Chinese phrase “Ho, Jo mmh Jo” has almost the identical meaning.

how do you say that in English?

how do you say that in English?

Yesterday was one of those days where I got hunted by an Ohrwurm and I just couldn’t get rid of it for the whole day! The chase started early in the morning, when the unsuspecting, ohrwurm2sleepy me turned the radio on while having my first coffee of the day. There it was and it would follow me for the rest of the day. A song just popped into my mind while I was sipping on my lovely, aromatic brew, got stuck there and I seemed to hear it for the whole day. In Germany you call this an Ohrwurm (“earworm”).

This is one of the many bizarre words out there, but strangely enough unknown in the English-speaking world, the mother tongue of about 375 million people and one of the most spoken languages worldwide. Follow this link and find out more about some great words that don’t have an English counterpart, although you wish they did: http://sobadsogood.com/2012/04/29/25-words-that-simply-dont-exist-in-english

 

Tags: , ,

In response to the launch of the Olympic and Paralympic mascots, the UK’s top design magazine Creative Review commented.  “Both are clearly of the digital age. And we have to say, we think they look rather good…”

m-and-w1Being a linguist, not a designer, and with extremely limited spatial-visual intelligence, I don’t feel entirely qualified to argue. However I will admit that “Mandeville” and “Wenlock” confuse me on a number of levels. Their appearance, fictional history and symbolisms seem to juxtapose a number of clashing propositions:

-          They are futuristic, technological and digital, but have quaint, old-fashioned names, taken from English villages. “Much Wenlock” in Shropshire is where the Wenlock Olympian Society held its first Olympian Games in 1850, and “Stoke Mandeville Hospital” in Buckinghamshire  held The Stoke Mandeville Games, the inspiration for the Paralympics

 

-          They are supposed to represent 2 drops of steel from a steelworks in Bolton. A nice nod to Britain’s industrial heritage, but I’m not sure how well steel corresponds to a cuddly toy?

 

-          Lastly, there’s the single eye in the middle of the forehead. Iris the creative agency responsible for designing the mascots, say that this represents a camera, filming all the mascots’ adventures. This is a nice idea, but did no-one at iris notice the unfortunate resulting resemblance to the cyclops of Greek and Roman mythology?  In the Theogony by Hesiod the cyclops were bad-tempered giants with a single eye in the middle of their forehead .They were strong, stubborn, and “abrupt of emotion”.  Arguably not a great model for sweet, inspirational Olympic mascots.

220px-polyphemus1

 

But as I said, who am I to judge? The mascots are targeted at children of 5-15 years (sadly I fall just outside that particular age range…) and have reportedly received a “warm response”[1] from this group. Call me old-fashioned, but in my view the lack of any facial features (aside from the above-mentioned single eye) makes the “characters” somewhat expressionless. At best vacuous, at worst…nightmarish? But maybe I’m taking, ahem…a narrow view.

What do you think?



[1] See Digital Arts online magazine http://www.digitalartsonline.co.uk/news/?newsid=3224807

welcome1In case you’ve been in hibernation for the last 7 years, you might be aware that in about 80 days time, London will welcome visitors from more than 220 countries of the world. Many British people are notoriously incapable when it comes to uttering more than a few words of French or Spanish so it’s a good job that London is now home to so many immigrants.  With 200 ‘ethnic communities’ covering 300 languages we shouldn’t have too much difficulty finding multilingual volunteers to make all the visitors feel at home. There is of course an overwhelming demand for professional linguists as well, such as translators to translate official Olympics documents and guidelines, and interpreters to work at press conferences and to accompany athletes and their coaches during the 4 weeks. However, all professions from catering to the retail profession, ticket sales to hotel staff, police to the doctors and ambulance staff, will benefit from having multilingual staff in their midst over the course of this summer’s games.

The official languages of the games are French and English, with the language of the host country as a third official language. However, as the games were invented in Ancient Greece (along with very many other things), I would like to propose that Greek is honoured and remembered by making it an official language as well. Well, the country could do with a boost at the moment…

Let’s start learning Greek with this fun Olympic Quiz from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/greek/olympics/

Facebook adAccording to scientists, social media tools can help prevent the distinction of endangered languages. There are about 6,000 languages spoken worldwide, and it is thought that approximately half of them will be extinct within the next 100 years. One of the causes for their extinction is seen in globalisation, as it encourages speakers of rare languages to assimilate, to “abandon” their mother tongue and switch to more common, spoken languages.

However, some elements of today’s globalised world are said to work against this trend and could actually save these endangered languages. How? Speakers of rare languages use social media, like YouTube and Facebook “to expand their voice and expand their presence,” explained K David Harrison, an associate professor of linguistics at Swarthmore College and a National Geographic Fellow. This is said to help speakers of less spoken languages to pass their language on to younger generations and as consequence to prevent the language’s extinction.

See also http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17081573.

Tags: , , ,

In the 1930s, the comedy double act Clapham and Dwyer had their own version of the Cockney Alphabet (also known as the Surrealist alphabet):

Comedy Cockney Alphabet Translation

A for ‘orses (hay for horses)
B for mutton (beef or mutton)
C for ‘th highlanders (Seaforth Highlanders)
D for ‘ential (deferential)
E for Adam (Eve or Adam)
F for ‘vescence (effervescence)
G for police (Chief of police)
H for respect (age for respect)
I for Novello (Ivor Novello)
J for oranges (Jaffa oranges)
K for ‘ancis, (Kay Francis), or K for undressing
L for leather (Hell for leather)
M for ’sis (emphasis)
N for ‘adig (in for a dig, or infradig)
O for the garden wall (over the garden wall)
P for a penny (pee for a penny)
Q for a song (cue for a song), or Q for billiards (cue for billiards)
R for mo’ (half a mo’)
S for you (it’s for you)
T for two (tea for two)
U for films (UFA films)
V for La France (Vive La France)

W for a bob (double you for a bob)
X for breakfast (eggs for breakfast)
Y for Gawd’s sake (why, for God’s sake)
Z for breezes (zephyr breezes: see West wind)
There are many alternative ‘definitions’ offered for each letter, some of which include:

B’s for honey (bees for honey)
B for you go (before you go)
C for miles (see for miles)
C for ships (sea for ships)
C for yourself (see for yourself)
D for dumb (deaf or dumb)
D for ‘cate (defecate)
D for ‘mation (deformation)
D for ‘ential (differential, as part of a vehicle)
E for brick (heave a brick)
E for ‘ning Standard (Evening Standard)
G for crying out loud (gee, for crying out loud)
H for beauty (age before beauty)
H for consent (age for consent)
H for a film (age for a film)
I for an eye (eye for an eye)
I for the Engine (Ivor the Engine)
I for or (either / or)
K for ‘teria (cafeteria)
K for Sutherland (Kiefer Sutherland)
N for ‘lope (envelope)
N for ‘lade (enfilade)
N for ‘lid’ (invalid)
O for crying out loud (oh, for crying out loud)
O for the wings of a dove (oh, for the wings of a dove)
O for the rainbow (over the rainbow)
P for relief (pee for relief)
P for ‘ming seals (performing seals)
P for nanny (pee for nanny)
P for a whistle (pea for a whistle)
Q for chips (queue for chips)
Q for a theatre (queue for a theatre)
Q for tickets (queue for tickets)
Q for hours
Q for a pee
S for Rantzen (Esther Rantzen)
S for Williams (Esther Williams)
U for ‘mism (euphemism)
U for me (you for me)
W for quits (double you for quits)
Y for girlfriend (wife, or girlfriend?)
Y for Heaven’s sake (why, for Heaven’s sake)
Y for crying out loud (why, for crying out loud)
Y for a husband (wife for a husband)
Z for his hat (his head for his hat)

Naming a dog “Deefer” (as was common in the ’50s) is an example of the reverse of this phenomenon, based on interpreting the line D for dog in an everyday alphabet verse as “deefer dog”.

What if its a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?

What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?

An excellent TED talk buy Chris Bliss about Translation, Comedy and Communication.

Links to the video and a full transcript appear below.

LOW RES: ChrisBliss_2011X-light.mp4

ON YOUTUBE: v3-ZTqj2_kw

HI RES ON TED: Chris Bliss: Comedy is translation

An excellent TED talk buy Chris Bliss about Translation, Comedy and Communication.

Here’s a full transcript of the talk:

Gabriel García Márquez is one of my favorite writers, for his storytelling, but even more, I think, for the beauty and precision of his prose. And whether it’s the opening line from “One Hundred Years of Solitude” or the fantastical stream of consciousness in “Autumn of the Patriarch,” where the words rush by, page after page of unpunctuated imagery sweeping the reader along like some wild river twisting through a primal South American jungle, reading Márquez is a visceral experience. Which struck me as particularly remarkable during one session with the novel when I realized that I was being swept along on this remarkable, vivid journey in translation.

Now I was a comparative literature major in college, which is like an English major, only instead of being stuck studying Chaucer for three months, we got to read great literature in translation from around the world. And as great as these books were, you could always tell that you were getting close to the full effect. But not so with Márquez who once praised his translator’s versions as being better than his own, which is an astonishing compliment.

So when I heard that the translator, Gregory Rabassa, had written his own book on the subject, I couldn’t wait to read it. It’s called apropos of the Italian adage that I lifted from his forward, “If This Be Treason.” And it’s a charming read. It’s highly recommended for anyone who’s interested in the translator’s art. But the reason that I mention it is that early on, Rabassa offers this elegantly simple insight: “Every act of communication is an act of translation.”

Now maybe that’s been obvious to all of you for a long time, but for me, as often as I’d encountered that exact difficulty on a daily basis, I had never seen the inherent challenge of communication in so crystalline a light. Ever since I can remember thinking consciously about such things, communication has been my central passion. Even as a child, I remember thinking that what I really wanted most in life was to be able to understand everything and then to communicate it to everyone else. So no ego problems. It’s funny, my wife, Daisy, whose family is littered with schizophrenics — and I mean littered with them — once said to me, “Chris, I already have a brother who thinks he’s God. I don’t need a husband who wants to be.”

Anyway, as I plunged through my 20s ever more aware of how unobtainable the first part of my childhood ambition was, it was that second part, being able to successfully communicate to others whatever knowledge I was gaining, where the futility of my quest really set in. Time after time, whenever I set out to share some great truth with a soon-to-be grateful recipient, it had the opposite effect. Interestingly, when your opening line of communication is, “Hey, listen up, because I’m about to drop some serious knowledge on you,” it’s amazing how quickly you’ll discover both ice and the firing squad.

Finally, after about 10 years of alienating friends and strangers alike, I finally got it, a new personal truth all my own, that if I was going to ever communicate well with other people the ideas that I was gaining, I’d better find a different way of going about it. And that’s when I discovered comedy.

Now comedy travels along a distinct wavelength from other forms of language. If I had to place it on an arbitrary spectrum, I’d say it falls somewhere between poetry and lies. And I’m not talking about all comedy here, because, clearly, there’s plenty of humor that colors safely within the lines of what we already think and feel. What I want to talk about is the unique ability that the best comedy and satire has at circumventing our ingrained perspectives — comedy as the philosopher’s stone. It takes the base metal of our conventional wisdom and transforms it through ridicule into a different way of seeing and ultimately being in the world. Because that’s what I take from the theme of this conference: Gained in Translation. That it’s about communication that doesn’t just produce greater understanding within the individual, but leads to real change. Which in my experience means communication that manages to speak to and expand our concept of self-interest. Now I’m big on speaking to people’s self-interest because we’re all wired for that. It’s part of our survival package, and that’s why it’s become so important for us, and that’s why we’re always listening at that level. And also because that’s where, in terms of our own self-interest, we finally begin to grasp our ability to respond, our responsibility to the rest of the world.

Now as to what I mean by the best comedy and satire, I mean work that comes first and foremost from a place of honesty and integrity. Now if you think back on Tina Fey’s impersonations on Saturday Night Live of the newly nominated vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, they were devastating. Fey demonstrated far more effectively than any political pundit the candidate’s fundamental lack of seriousness, cementing an impression that the majority of the American public still holds today. And the key detail of this is that Fey’s scripts weren’t written by her and they weren’t written by the SNL writers. They were lifted verbatim from Palin’s own remarks. (Laughter) Here was a Palin impersonator quoting Palin word for word. Now that’s honesty and integrity, and it’s also why Fey’s performances left such a lasting impression.

On the other side of the political spectrum, the first time that I heard Rush Limbaugh refer to presidential hopeful John Edwards as the Breck girl I knew that he’d made a direct hit. Now it’s not often that I’m going to associate the words honesty and integrity with Limbaugh, but it’s really hard to argue with that punchline. The description perfectly captured Edwards’ personal vanity. And guess what? That ended up being the exact personality trait that was at the core of the scandal that ended his political career.

Now The Daily Show with John Stewart is by far the most — (Applause) (Laughter) it’s by far the most well-documented example of the effectiveness of this kind of comedy. Survey after survey, from Pew Research to the Annenberg Center for Public Policy, has found that Daily Show viewers are better informed about current events than the viewers of all major network and cable news shows.

Now whether this says more about the conflict between integrity and profitability of corporate journalism than it does about the attentiveness of Stewart’s viewers, the larger point remains that Stewart’s material is always grounded in a commitment to the facts — not because his intent is to inform. It’s not. His intent is to be funny. It just so happens that Stewart’s brand of funny doesn’t work unless the facts are true. And the result is great comedy that’s also an information delivery system that scores markedly higher in both credibility and retention than the professional news media. Now this is doubly ironic when you consider that what gives comedy its edge at reaching around people’s walls is the way that it uses deliberate misdirection.

A great piece of comedy is a verbal magic trick, where you think it’s going over here and then all of a sudden you’re transported over here. And there’s this mental delight that’s followed by the physical response of laughter, which, not coincidentally, releases endorphins in the brain. And just like that, you’ve been seduced into a different way of looking at something because the endorphins have brought down your defenses. This is the exact opposite of the way that anger and fear and panic, all of the flight-or-fight responses, operate. Flight-or-fight releases adrenalin, which throws our walls up sky-high. And the comedy comes along, dealing with a lot of the same areas where our defenses are the strongest — race, religion, politics, sexuality — only by approaching them through humor instead of adrenalin, we get endorphins and the alchemy of laughter turns our walls into windows, revealing a fresh and unexpected point of view.

Now let me give you an example from my act. I have some material about the so-called radical gay agenda, which starts off by asking, how radical is the gay agenda? Because from what I can tell, the three things gay Americans seem to want most are to join the military, get married and start a family. (Laughter) Three things I’ve tried to avoid my entire life. (Laughter) Have at it you radical bastards. The field is yours.

And that’s followed by these lines about gay adoption: What is the problem with gay adoption? Why is this remotely controversial? If you have a baby and you think that baby’s gay, you should be allowed to put it up for adoption. (Laughter) You have given birth to an abomination. Remove it from your household. Now by taking the biblical epithet “abomination” and attaching it to the ultimate image of innocence, a baby, this joke short circuits the emotional wiring behind the debate and it leaves the audience with the opportunity, through their laughter, to question its validity.

Misdirection isn’t the only trick that comedy has up its sleeve. Economy of language is another real strong suit of great comedy. There are few phrases that pack a more concentrated dose of subject and symbol than the perfect punchline. Bill Hicks — and if you don’t know his work, you should really Google him — Hicks had a routine about getting into one of those childhood bragging contests on the playground, where finally the other kid says to him, “Huh? Well my dad can beat up your dad,” to which Hicks replies, “Really? How soon?” (Laughter) That’s an entire childhood in three words. (Laughter) Not to mention what it reveals about the adult who’s speaking them.

And one last powerful attribute that comedy has as communication is that it’s inherently viral. People can’t wait to pass along that new great joke. And this isn’t some new phenomenon of our wired world. Comedy has been crossing country with remarkable speed way before the Internet, social media, even cable TV. Back in 1980 when comedian Richard Pryor accidentally set himself on fire during a freebasing accident, I was in Los Angeles the day after it happened and then I was in Washington D.C. two days after that. And I heard the exact same punchline on both coasts — something about the Ignited Negro College Fund. Clearly, it didn’t come out of a Tonight Show monologue. And my guess here — and I have no research on this — is that if you really were to look back at it and if you could research it, you’d find out that comedy is the second oldest viral profession. First there were drums and then knock-knock jokes.

But it’s when you put all of these elements together — when you get the viral appeal of a great joke with a powerful punchline that’s crafted from honesty and integrity, it can have a real world impact at changing a conversation. Now I have a close friend, Joel Pett, who’s the editorial cartoonist for the Lexington Herald-Leader. And he used to be the USA Today Monday morning guy. I was visiting with Joel the weekend before the Copenhagen conference on climate change opened in December of 2009. And Joel was explaining to me that, because USA Today was one of America’s four papers of record, it would be scanned by virtually everyone in attendance at the conference, which meant that, if he hit it out of the park with his cartoon on Monday, the opening day of the conference, it could get passed around at the highest level among actual decision-makers.

So we started talking about climate change. And it turned out that Joel and I were both bothered by the same thing, which was how so much of the debate was still focused on the science and how complete it was or wasn’t, which, to both of us, seems somewhat intentionally off point. Because first of all, there’s this false premise that such a thing as complete science exists. Now Governor Perry of my newly-adopted state of Texas was pushing this same line this past summer at the beginning of his oops-fated campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, proclaiming over and over that the science wasn’t complete at the same time that 250 out of 254 counties in the state of Texas were on fire. And Perry’s policy solution was to ask the people of Texas to pray for rain. Personally, I was praying for four more fires so we could finally complete the damn science.

But back in 2009, the question Joel and I kept turning over and over was why this late in the game so much energy was being spent talking about the science when the policies necessary to address climate change were unequivocally beneficial for humanity in the long run regardless of the science. So we tossed it back and forth until Joel came up with this. Cartoon: “What if it’s a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?” (Laughter) You’ve got to love that idea. (Applause) How about that? How about we create a better world for nothing? Not for God, not for country, not for profit — just as a basic metric for global decision-making.

And this cartoon hit the bull’s eye. Shortly after the conference was over, Joel got a request for a signed copy from the head of the EPA in Washington whose wall it now hangs on. And not long after that, he got another request for a copy from the head of the EPA in California who used it as part of her presentation at an international conference on climate change in Sacramento last year. And it didn’t stop there. To date, Joel’s gotten requests from over 40 environmental groups, in the United States, Canada and Europe. And earlier this year, he got a request from the Green Party in Australia who used it in their campaign where it became part of the debate that resulted in the Australian parliament adopting the most rigorous carbon tax regime of any country in the world. (Applause) That is a lot of punch for 14 words.

So my suggestion to those of you out here who are seriously focused on creating a better world is to take a little bit of time each day and practice thinking funny, because you might just find the question that you’ve been looking for.

Thank you.

Tags: ,

sign-languageThat’s not a question you hear every day! Well, it seems that Johnny Depp and Natalie Portman used incorrect sign language gestures in McCartney’s new music video for My Valentine. Although the British Deaf Association is thrilled that the video is raising awareness, maybe McCartney should have used signing experts instead of celebrities to avoid any mistakes. Despite their best efforts, signers have pointed out that Natalie Portman signed the word ‘tampon’ instead of the word ‘appear’ and Johnny Depp signed the word ‘enemy’ instead of the word ‘Valentine’…not quite the same lyrics McCartney was going for!

teacher3

It has been reported that the number of pupils set to sit language GCSEs next year has increased from 30% to 52%. This huge jump has forced the Training and Development Agency (TDA) to frantically recruit more modern foreign language teachers in order to cope with the surge!

 

This sudden rise is thought to be connected to the introduction of the English Baccalaureate, which requires one language to be taken at GCSE, among other subjects. Before this, the number of modern foreign language teachers had declined due to the fall in the number of pupils wanting to study languages at GCSE and A-level. This unfortunately led to a decrease in the number of students studying languages at university.

 

British students are not generally known for their tip top language skills and according to the TDA’s Chief Executive Stephen Hillier, “the UK had lagged behind the rest of Europe in modern foreign languages for too long.” So, with this unexpected, yet encouraging increase of pupils wanting to take their languages further than ‘Bonjour, ça va?’, can we assume that the teaching gap will be filled in on time?

 

Russell Hobby, the general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, has said, “People really struggle with recruiting language teachers, so it is a concern - particularly after a long period of time when modern foreign languages were in decline…it can take years to re-staff your language faculty.”

 

It is said that there are a large number of current teachers who are not teaching modern foreign languages despite being adequately qualified. What’s more, there are many unemployed teachers who have previously failed to get jobs, although it is not clear how many of these are likely to be language specialists. Despite the huge increase in pupils sitting GCSEs next year, the government’s target for new teachers has only increased by 85, much to the disappointment of the National Association of Head Teachers who has questioned how useful these additional teachers will be in such small numbers.

 

One incentive to get new ‘highflying’, potential teachers to apply is a new bursary of up to £20,000 which is available for high-achieving graduates wanting to enter teacher training.

 

Whichever way the TDA decides to fill in the teaching gaps, let’s remember the encouraging statement by Russell Hobby: modern foreign languages is “one of those subject areas where you definitely need a qualification - it’s one subject that you cannot fake.” And what about the rest…?

 

Tags: , , , , ,

dictionariesAccording to recent studies, bilinguals not only benefit from communicating with a wider range of people but are said to be smarter too.

The reason for this apparently lies in the fact that both language systems of bilinguals’ brains are active at the same time – even if just one of the languages is being used – and therefore obstruct each other. For decades this obstruction was considered to have negative impacts on intellectual development.

However, various studies have shown that it actually strengthens the brain’s cognitive muscles and can be seen as a workout for the mind.

Research has indicated that this allows people who speak more than one language to be more skilful, quicker and efficient when solving specific types of mental puzzles, for example. Studies also highlight that bilingualism affects people from the very young to the very old and can even prevent dementia!

Isn’t this a great incentive to finally get started with that long delayed language course?!

See also: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/the-benefits-of-bilingualism.html?_r=3&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Tags: , ,

« Older entries