Versatility?

Sun Mar 20 08:48:02 UTC 2011

Yes, this sounds extremely reasonable (hence = 'contused wound') (<w> 
instead of <q>, and the final <r> being just a 'hypertrophy'): I have 
asked my children what they would associate with this term (by itself 
totally unknown to them). All they said is that it could be some kind of 
bruise ('Quetschung'), neglecting the second part of the compound 
'Wunde' (wound).

To add one point:
Alex wrote
> German medical terms are often more readily tranparent to
> their speeakers than English ones are.
Well, you should bare in mind that in Germany, true medical (technical) 
terms are strongly related to some kind of Latin/Greek-based special 
language rendering a doctor's verbalized diagnostics often a secret 
code. The use of this code is part of the habitual language of doctors 
etc., symbolizing their 'power' over both illnesses and patients. The 
everyday nomenclature of medical terms is usually avoided by doctors 
etc., because it is said to be correlated with non-expertise. Maybe that 
in English, the same contrast had once been present. But contrary to 
German traditions, the 'doctor's language' seems to have been widely 
adopted in everyday speech in the English culture.... I guess others 
will know much more about that point than I.
Best
Wolfgang

Am 20.03.2011 09:23, schrieb Alois Heuboeck:
> "Wuetschwunder" - if I may venture a conjecture: perhaps a double typo 
> for "Quetschwunde"?
>
> Best wishes,
> Alois
>
>
>
> On 20/03/2011 07:36, alex gross wrote:
>> Dear Wolfgang,
>>
>> Thanks so much for your query. The obvious source in this interview is
>> the interviewer herself, at that time a noted medical translator named
>> Sandra Celt. I doubt if she would have used the term if she had not just
>> come across it in a medical text she had been translating. Many odd
>> terms can crop up in such texts, though none of them detract from the
>> reality that German medical terms are often more readily tranparent to
>> their speeakers than English ones are.
>>
>> Very best!
>>
>> alex
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wolfgang Schulze"
>> <W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de>
>> To: "alex gross" <language at sprynet.com>
>> Cc: <FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu>
>> Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 8:14 AM
>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Versatility?
>>
>>
>>> Dear Alex,
>>> let me just ask one thing: Where did you get the 'German' word
>>> "Wuetschwunder" (for contusion ?) from? Being a native of German, I've
>>> never heard this term, and I doubt whether it's current among German
>>> children either. Any reference for this word? By the way: The German
>>> equivalent of contusion would be 'Prellung, Erguss, Quetschung',
>>> coming close to English bruise.
>>> Best,
>>> Wolfgang
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 19.03.2011 10:39, schrieb alex gross:
>>>> Suspect some languages may have problems becoming more versatile due
>>>> to unconscious esthetic factors, for instance a preference in English
>>>> for high-flown latinate names over more basic equivalents, even when
>>>> such equivalents might be theoretically available. Which of course
>>>> can lead to greater "complexity," though not in a positive way. Gave
>>>> some examples of this in a 1987 interview on translating medical
>>>> terms across Chinese, English, and German:
>>>>
>>>> "A. Take the two bones in our lower arm. The only names we have for
>>>> them today are ulna and radius. These are the 'scientific names,' the
>>>> ones medical people--and few others--learn. Those bones are important
>>>> to you every day, yet you have no everyday way of referring to them
>>>> at all. But there is clear evidence from historical linguistics that
>>>> these bones once had other names. The ulna was once called the 'el,'
>>>> the radius possibly something like the 'spoke.' We know about the
>>>> 'el' from Seventeenth Century poetry (maid to lover: 'if I give you
>>>> an inch, you'll soon take an el') but also from modern German, where
>>>> the words are die Elle and die Speiche."
>>>>
>>>> "Even in modern English the place where the 'el' makes a bend or
>>>> 'bow' (sich beugt) is called the elbow. In Chinese these words
>>>> translate as foot-measure bone (close to the meaning of 'el') and
>>>> rowing bone. All bones and all locations in the body have similar
>>>> down-to-earth names in Chinese. Which people is likely to be on
>>>> better terms with their bodies--one that has names such as these or
>>>> one where everything is linguistically off-limits except to doctors?
>>>> German continues to a better job here even today with such words as
>>>> Gehirnhautentzündung and Harnröhre for meningitis and urethra.
>>>>
>>>> "Q. It also occurs to me that a German child could understand words
>>>> like Riss- und Wuetschwunder, whereas an English-speaking child would
>>>> not understand 'lacerations and contusions.'"
>>>>
>>>> Full text of this piece is available at:
>>>>
>>>> http://language.home.sprynet.com/lingdex/chinmed.htm#totop
>>>>
>>>> All the best to everyone!
>>>>
>>>> alex
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tahir Wood" <twood at uwc.ac.za>
>>>> To: <FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu>
>>>> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 8:07 AM
>>>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Versatility?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the wake of all this discussion about increasing complexity, I
>>>> wonder if anyone here has thoughts on versatility. Does language
>>>> become increasingly versatile?
>>>> Tahir
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer
>>>>> http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> *Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schulze *
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Institut für Allgemeine & Typologische Sprachwissenschaft
>>>
>>> Dept. II / F 13
>>>
>>> Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
>>>
>>> Ludwigstraße 25
>>>
>>> D-80539 München
>>>
>>> Tel.: 0049-(0)89-2180-2486 (Secretary)
>>>
>>> 0049-(0)89-2180-5343 (Office)
>>>
>>> Fax: 0049-(0)89-2180-5345
>>>
>>> Email: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de
>>> <mailto:W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de>/// Wolfgang.Schulze at lmu.de
>>> <mailto:Wolfgang.Schulze at lmu.de>
>>>
>>> Web: http://www.ats.lmu.de/index.html
>>>
>>> Personal homepage: http://www.wolfgangschulze.in-devir.com
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Diese e-Mail kann vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte
>>> Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind
>>> bzw. diese e-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte
>>> umgehend den Absender und vernichten Sie diese e-Mail. Das unerlaubte
>>> Kopieren sowie das unbefugte Verwenden und Weitergeben vertraulicher
>>> e-Mails oder etwaiger, mit solchen e-Mails verbundener Anhänge im
>>> Ganzen oder in Teilen ist nicht gestattet. Ferner wird die Haftung für
>>> jeglichen Verlust oder Schaden, insbesondere durch virenbefallene
>>> e-Mails ausgeschlossen.
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------

*Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schulze *

----------------------------------------------------------

Institut für Allgemeine & Typologische Sprachwissenschaft

Dept. II / F 13

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Ludwigstraße 25

D-80539 München

Tel.: 0049-(0)89-2180-2486 (Secretary)

0049-(0)89-2180-5343 (Office)

Fax:  0049-(0)89-2180-5345

Email: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de 
<mailto:W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de>/// Wolfgang.Schulze at lmu.de 
<mailto:Wolfgang.Schulze at lmu.de>

Web: http://www.ats.lmu.de/index.html

Personal homepage: http://www.wolfgangschulze.in-devir.com

----------------------------------------------------------

Diese e-Mail kann vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte 
Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind bzw. 
diese e-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte umgehend 
den Absender und vernichten Sie diese e-Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren 
sowie das unbefugte Verwenden und Weitergeben vertraulicher e-Mails oder 
etwaiger, mit solchen e-Mails verbundener Anhänge im Ganzen oder in 
Teilen ist nicht gestattet. Ferner wird die Haftung für jeglichen 
Verlust oder Schaden, insbesondere durch virenbefallene e-Mails 
ausgeschlossen.