Print

Print


Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote:
>
> Charles:
> >I consider that separate from "false friends" but related.
> >In any eurolang, there will be many words with the old Latin
> >compounding style, de-mit re-mit trans-mit etc, and one must
> >either love them or not. I feel them as inextricable from English
> >as well.
>
> It is not that such metaphors exist, but that in different Euro languages
> there has been different choices as to which literal and which metaphorical
> meanings are preserved.  This means that Euroclone designers have to decide
> which meanings to apply to their words and then people learning Euroclones
> have to shuck their native language assumptions of the meanings of those
> words when they differ.  This is identical to the false friend problem
> except that because of etymological matches the false friends MIGHT
> actually be true.  But how does one know?  The Occidental claim that you
> don't NEED to know, but that you just assume that you native language words
> have the same meaning in other languages sounds like it intentionally
> ignores the problem.
>
> >  An "Oriental" auxlang would use different metaphors.
>
> Which means that you would earn the language by learning the metaphors, not
> by importing and assuming that your native language metaphors will work.
>
> >One can always add a modifier to indicate concrete vs. literal.
>
> Lojban has this as an option.
>
> >Metaphorical extension is deeply built into our minds.
> >Metaphor vs. precision in language is a deep philosophical debate,
> >but at this time, I simply choose metaphor, by the feel of it.
> >Of course I am interested to see how far Lojban can go, the other way.
>
> Again, I have no problem with metaphor.  My problem is with the assumed
> internationality of metaphors that might be specific to ones native
> language based simply on etymological "friends" that might be false.
>
> Lojban does not in fact go the other way - it is quite tolerant of a
> certain kind of metaphor, maybe more tolerant than other languages.  But
> these metaphors are 1) analytical, and you are implicitly expected to be
> willing/able to analyze them if you use them and 2) freshly derived and not
> subject to false etymological friendship with anyone's native language
> metaphors because the words look unlike the native language words.
>
One does not understand these things until one has stumbled over them. I must
admit that I am not so frightened by the false friend syndrome as there is
plenty of it already in Swedish dialects and Scandinavian. Like:
 
>From Norwegian (or was id Danish) into Swedish:
The ship had to reach a port because of a marble mangle. (Instead of):
The ship had to reach a port because of coal shortage.
 
But remember Kjell's rule:
Contextus omnia!
(Don't know if this is good, but it sounds OK and is lapidary enough to be
hewn in stone)
Le contexto es toto.