Ujumbe: 52
Lugha: English
sudanglo (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 12:10:39 alasiri
Where does this idea come from? What feature of English are they picking up on.
Given the enormous vocabulary of English and that the verb system is much subtler than in many Continental languages, it seems a strange reaction.
geo1963 (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 12:38:08 alasiri
sudanglo:I have read comments from speakers of other languages that English is not a precise language.Read articles of Claude Piron and you will get the idea. English is not precise. It is only that the English do not notice that fact. Enormous vocabulary, especially with not phonetically connected words (city - urban, moon - lunar, year - annual) is not an advantage but a burden.
Where does this idea come from? What feature of English are they picking up on.
Given the enormous vocabulary of English and that the verb system is much subtler than in many Continental languages, it seems a strange reaction.
Example of English ambiguity:
He could not agree with the amendments to the draft resolution proposed by the delegation of India.
At first glance a native speaker of English has no problem with this sentence. However, as Piron points out, the sentence as written is unclear about what the delegation of India proposed. Did the delegation propose (a) the draft resolution to which someone else offered amendments or did it propose (b) the amendments to the draft resolution? There is a big substantive difference between (a) proposing a resolution and (b) proposing amendments to that resolution. The English sentence is unclear regarding this vital distinction.
More:
Union Demands Increased Unemployment.
Thanks for dinner. I’ve never seen potatoes cooked like that before.
Prostitutes Appeal to Pope.
We saw her duck.
darkweasel (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 12:46:28 alasiri
Roberto12 (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 12:54:42 alasiri
geo1963:Example of English ambiguity:I just want to point out that the ambiguity in that sentence can be easily removed by the introduction of a relative clause, i.e.
He could not agree with the amendments to the draft resolution proposed by the delegation of India.
He could not agree with the amendments to the draft resolution which was/were proposed by the delegation of India.
The choice of "was" or "were" determines the meaning.
Of course, if both nouns were singular or plural, the problem would come back, but in that case, could any language solve the new problem?
Genjix (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 1:01:42 alasiri
Ambiguity saves time otherwise we'd all be speaking in code like machines.
geo1963 (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 1:10:21 alasiri
Genjix:What the hell you need to be that precise for in English? We're not robots! It's just not worth wasting time thinking about as that extra information doesn't help a sentence. If it's important then state it separately.You do not have to be precise. But translators do! Especially when they are translating very important documents - and they often encounter such ambiguities in English texts, and English is supposed to be used internationally in politics, economy and so on. Think of it.
Ambiguity saves time otherwise we'd all be speaking in code like machines.
rusto (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 1:50:34 alasiri
philodice (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 2:10:46 alasiri
I have ducks. Well, 'have' has a couple meanings in English but I wanted it to mean "I own ducks". If I type 'own' into the translator it gives me 'posedi' not 'have
havi (to have), ricevi (to receive), devi (to have to, must; I have to go = Mi devas iri), -is (I have gone = mi iris)'
So if you said "We saw her duck" and you were talking about me, you might have seen an actual anaso.
Esperanto is already more precise than English in this sentence.
The word 'set' has the most definitions in English of any three letter word, anywhere. Over two hundred.
darkweasel (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 2:17:29 alasiri
Vilius (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 15 Desemba 2010 2:59:53 alasiri
sudanglo:What feature of English are they picking up on.This sentence itself is a good illustration. Let's say I'm somewhat advanced, yet not native, English speaker. This is what happens in my mind when I'm reading something like that (in slow motion):
First comes the meaning of "to pick" which helps a little. Now I know that we are picking some feature of English. That makes sense, but then comes "up". Oh wait, forget "to pick", we have something else here. Hmmm... "to pick up". That's about lifting stuff, right? What could "to pick up a feature" mean?.. Oh forget it, there is something else. Then "on" strikes. I've really never heard combination "to pick up on" before. Or at least never paid attention to it. Now I'm in quite strange situation, I know all the words in the sentence perfectly well, but yet I have a very vague understanding of the question. "To pick up a fight" comes to my mind (from some film probably
), nah not that. "To pick on", which means "to make fun", right? Maybe that? But it also has "up"... And so on. Sure, all languages use idioms which cannot be understood by knowing the words only, but in English those bastards are all over the place. And they are anything but precise.
Ironically, even after checking the meanings of "to pick up on", I do not fully understand the question.