<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Good point, Don. I was reading an article by a linguist studying Australian
Aboriginal languages who referred to a textbook on nuclear physics, if I
remember correctly, that had been translated into a certain Aboriginal language.
For many indigenous languages, the resources, will, or perceived need to
do such translations is lacking, but that doesn't mean that these translations
cannot be done. <br>
<br>
People tend to get very hung-up on lexicon when they get the idea that you
somehow cannot express certain thoughts in certain languages. The problem
is, most of the pretty much infinite number of ideas that the human brain
is capable of thinking up don't have vocabulary items to go along with them.
For every concept that has a specific term, there are many that are expressed
by combinations of words. In other words, most of the meaning that we make
with language is not expressed by single words, but by putting words together.
What I am writing here is a good example: there is not a single word for
the idea I am expressing, but that doesn't stop me from expressing it.
This is one reason why human language is so flexible: when a vocabularly
item is lacking, one can paraphrase or otherwise explain. <br>
<br>
Of course, there are concepts that are difficult to understand because of
people's cultural backgrounds, but it's not a case of people being unable
to think certain thoughts because their languages lack the "right resources,"
as the original article unfortunately put it. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Donald Z. Osborn wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid1093566231.412e7f1729d5c@webmail.kabissa.org">
<pre wrap="">I'm not sure what the late Senegalese scholar Cheick Anta Diop would do with
regard to language were he were alive today, but a half-century ago he made a
point of translating an explanation of the theory of relativity as well as
several literary passages from European languages into Wolof (published in
Présence Africaine in 1955). I don't speak that language, but as I understand
it he was not relying on borrowed words but rather using terms existing in
Wolof. Still an interesting example and point of reference when discussions
such as this come up.
Don Osborn
Bisharat.net
Quoting Matthew Ward <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mward@LUNA.CC.NM.US"><mward@LUNA.CC.NM.US></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I would suspect that if such words exist in tribal languages, they were
recently coined or borrowed--after all, many of them are relatively new
concepts even in the cultures which they originated in. Words for these
terms exist in all the languages that I speak, but many are relatively
recent coinaged created to deal with new concepts. The important thing
is that both languages and cultures are flexible, and can accomodate new
concepts as needed.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->[ . . . ]
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>