# A los güeritos no se les puede decir nada



## ccbarbos

Hi everyone, 

I am translating a letter written by someone from Mexico that will be used in the US. In this letter he is explaining why he was fired and that he believes it was because of discrimination. After stating the reasons, one of those being that he would do his job and would also have to do everyone else's, he writes: 

"*... y a los güeritos no se les puede decir nada.*" 

I honestly do not know how to translate "güeritos" here. I know that they use this word to mean "blond" or "light-skinned", but in this context I am taking it to mean "Americans", and I wanted to start a thread to see what you guys would suggest. 

As of right now, my attempt is: 

"*... and you cannot say anything to the Americans*". 

I appreciate any suggestions! 

Thank you all!


----------



## donbill

Your idea is probably correct. "Güero" is often used to refer to people from the US, and, imprecise though it may be, "American" is probably the best translation.

Wait for other ideas.

Un saludo


----------



## onbalance

¿Dónde trabaja? ¿México o los EEUU? ¿Trabaja con blancos estadounidenses?


----------



## ccbarbos

Él trabaja en EEUU y basado en la frase que puse, la cual es la única donde él utiliza esta palabra, me lleva a entender que él trabaja con personas de tez blanca los cuales son estadounidenses.


----------



## calamario

Y ya que en español se está usando el coloquialismo "güeritos", no estaría mal usar "gringos" en el inglés. *"... and you cannot say anything to the gringos."*


----------



## onbalance

ccbarbos said:


> Él trabaja en EEUU y basado en la frase que puse, la cual es la única donde él utiliza esta palabra, me lleva a entender que él trabaja con personas de tez blanca los cuales son estadounidenses.



Sí. En este caso, yo diría white Americans porque se trata de una queja de discriminación y la "raza" de la gente mencionada en la queja podría tener importancia. Saludos.


----------



## onbalance

Pensándolo bien, no diría "white Americans" porque algunos de los güeritos pueden ser inmigrantes. Diría "whites" simplemente.


----------



## ccbarbos

¡Muchas gracias a todos por las sugerencias!


----------



## Cpt. Sqweky

I think Calmario probably has the best answer so far, since "gringo" a word that most white U.S. citizens recognize as a word to distinguish white Americans from Hispanics.


----------



## onbalance

Cpt. Sqweky said:


> I think Calmario probably has the best answer so far, since "gringo" a word that most white U.S. citizens recognize as a word to distinguish white Americans from Hispanics.



No, because some people think that gringo refers to all Americans, irrespective of color or "race."


----------



## iribela

onbalance said:


> No, because some people think that gringo refers to all Americans, irrespective of color or "race."



I don't know of anyone who takes "gringo" to mean anything other than the white Americans.

I'd use 'gringos'; they'll know who they are talking about.


----------



## onbalance

iribela said:


> I don't know of anyone who takes "gringo" to mean anything other than the white Americans.
> 
> I'd use 'gringos'; they'll know who they are talking about.



Well, then you don't know everyone. Indeed, some Hispanics use it as a synonym for American. Although I've seen this personally, it bears mentioning that the WR dictionary defines gringo that way: http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=gringo 


Besides, "gringo" is too informal for the context of a discrimination complaint.


----------



## D0MIN0

onbalance said:


> No, because some people think that gringo refers to all Americans, irrespective of color or "race."


I agree with onbalance. Besides, some people may think 'gringo' is kind of offensive ("a los güeritos no se les puede decir nada "). I suggest you use "white people" since it's a more specific term and fits better the situation. 

Saludos!


----------



## Cpt. Sqweky

onbalance said:


> No, because some people think that gringo refers to all Americans, irrespective of color or "race."



Are you sure about that? That hasn't been my personal experience. Even dealing with non-Spanish speakers, everyone I've known has more or less understood it to mean "white person". But, I will grant that just because I haven't come across it doesn't mean it's not true.

I suppose if you wanted to avoid the use of loan-words, you could also try something like "whiteys" or "crackers". However, those might be considered a bit too strong for the context given.


----------



## onbalance

Cpt. Sqweky said:


> Are you sure about that? That hasn't been my personal experience. Even dealing with non-Spanish speakers, everyone I've known has more or less understood it to mean "white person". But, I will grant that just because I haven't come across it doesn't mean it's not true.
> 
> I suppose if you wanted to avoid the use of loan-words, you could also try something like "whiteys" or "crackers". However, those might be considered a bit too strong for the context given.



As for Hispanics, I remember having a conversation with Puerto Ricans in which they told me that "gringo" means "American" to them. As for Americans, I have talked to several people (black and white), who despise that term. Although some Americans seem to find it amusing, I personally consider it to be a racial slur on par with "Gentiles" for non-Jews, "kikes" for Jews, "Spics" for Hispanics, and "niggers" for blacks.


----------



## iribela

onbalance said:


> Well, then you don't know everyone. Indeed, some Hispanics use it as a synonym for American. Although I've seen this personally, it bears mentioning that the WR dictionary defines gringo that way: http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=gringo
> 
> 
> Besides, "gringo" is too informal for the context of a discrimination complaint.



Of course, I don't know everybody, nobody does.
I know Hispanics use 'gringo', I am Hispanic, but I never hear Hispanics call a, say black American, or native American, a gringo. They are always white.
Also, how is "güero" any less informal than "gringo"? When you're translating you can't "clean up" de original.


----------



## onbalance

iribela said:


> Of course, I don't know everybody, nobody does.
> I know Hispanics use 'gringo', I am Hispanic, but I never hear Hispanicz call a, say black American, or native American, a gringo. They are always white.
> Also, how is "güero" any less informal than "gringo"? When you're translating you can "clean up" de original.



Güero means "rubio." It's not that informal. The translation is blond. We're reading between the lines and inferring that he means "whites" or "white people." "Gringo" just adds confusion, as it has done in this thread.


----------



## iribela

To translate, you have to interpret a bit, you can't just replace word for word. That's why we don't use machines and talk to colleagues and other people in the forum.


----------



## onbalance

iribela said:


> To translate, you have to interpret a bit, you can't just replace word for word. That's why we don't use machines and talk to colleagues and other people in the forum.



But "whites" is a better translation. It better conveys the idea of "güeros." I heard a Chilean use this word, "güero," to refer to a group of fair-skinned Argentinians who didn't exactly have blond hair. He said "Ustedes son bastante güeros." I understood him to mean: You all are rather white.


----------



## iribela

onbalance said:


> But "whites" is a better translation. It better conveys the idea of "güeros." I heard a Chilean use this word, "güero," to refer to a group of fair-skinned Argentinians who didn't exactly have blond hair. He said "Ustedes son bastante güeros." I understood him to mean: You all are rather white.



I didn't say 'blonde', you did. I know it refers to the skin color.


----------



## onbalance

iribela said:


> I didn't say 'blonde', you did. I know it refers to the skin color.



Actually, depending on the situation, it can refer to hair color, skin color, or both.


----------



## iribela

Well, we can continue to define and redefine 'güero' as we go along, but still, 'whites' in that context, much less likely than 'gringos', in my experience.
The translator will decide, based on this very productive exchange, what the best option is, but all my _gringo_ family members, friends, and colleagues know what we, Hispanics, mean by 'gringo', and we don't call them 'whites.'
And then again, no, I don't know absolutely everybody


----------



## Cpt. Sqweky

After talking to a hispanic colleague, I will concur with "whites". I had never considered gringo to be a slur before, but he said that when Mexicans use it, it's generally meant to be offensive. Güero, on the other hand, isn't meant to be offensive. So, yeah, in this context, "whites" is probably the best translation.


----------



## D0MIN0

onbalance said:


> Well, then you don't know everyone. Indeed, some Hispanics use it as a synonym for American. Although I've seen this personally, it bears mentioning that the WR dictionary defines gringo that way: http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=gringo
> 
> 
> Besides, "gringo" is too informal for the context of a discrimination complaint.





iribela said:


> Of course, I don't know everybody, nobody does.
> I know Hispanics use 'gringo', I am Hispanic, but I never hear Hispanics call a, say black American, or native American, a gringo. They are always white.
> Also, how is "güero" any less informal than "gringo"? When you're translating you can't "clean up" de original.



Probably we should stop generalizing all the Spanish-speaking countries. Instead of saying: "I'm hispanic and we call it xyz", why not: "I'm from Mexico" or "I have Cuban heritage" and we call it "acbd". Just because in some country they say some "xyz" word, it doesn't mean this applies in every Spanish-speaking country. I recommend you to always take in consideration that even when we share the same language, we are different countries, not a single nation. 

Depending on the country, we may have different concepts for words like "gringo". In my country, Peru, the use of the word "gringo" is not limited to people from the U.S; we use this word for every anglo-saxon looking person (light-skinned, blue eyes, blonde hair), especially if they speak a foreign language. 

The person that is writing this letter is from *Mexico* and in my opinion, I think the closest interpretation for "güeritos" might be "white folks" or "white people". 

Regards!


----------



## iribela

D0MIN0 said:


> Probably we should stop generalizing all the Spanish-speaking countries. Instead of saying: "I'm hispanic and we call it xyz", why not: "I'm from Mexico" or "I have Cuban heritage" and we call it "acbd". Just because in some country they say some "xyz" word, it doesn't mean this applies in every Spanish-speaking country. I recommend you to always take in consideration that even when we share the same language, we are different countries, not a single nation.
> 
> Depending on the country, we may have different concepts for words like "gringo". In my country, Peru, the use of the word "gringo" is not limited to people from the U.S; we use this word for every anglo-saxon looking person (light-skinned, blue eyes, blonde hair), especially if they speak a foreign language.
> 
> The person that is writing this letter is from *Mexico* and in my opinion, I think the closest interpretation for "güeritos" might be "white folks" or "white people".
> 
> Regards!



There's truth to what you say. However, we can't neglect to consider that while the person in question is from Mexico, the translation will be used in the U.S. (he was working here?) and that also changes things a little.
The vast majority of Hispanics where I live and work here in the Southwest are Mexicans, so I'm not speaking completely out of turn on this.
Regards!


----------



## caelum

_G__ringo,_ in my experience (studying in Guatemala), is used for any white, North American foreigner, and sometimes for those from Europe. However, in this case, since he said _güero, _it was probably meant to mean "white people", which in and of itself would be badly viewed in the States coming from a Mexican, so I'd probably translate it as "Americans" to soften it in this circumstance.


----------



## D0MIN0

iribela said:


> There's truth to what you say. However, we can't neglect to consider that while the person in question is from Mexico, the translation will be used in the U.S. (he was working here?) and that also changes things a little.
> The vast majority of Hispanics where I live and work here in the Southwest are Mexicans, so I'm not speaking completely out of turn on this.
> Regards!



I don't agree. We are trying to get an interpretation based on small clues about the cultural background of this person, specifically on the word "güerito". We know that person is Mexican and he's asking somebody else to translate his letter, so we can assume that he/she doesn't speak English, therefore she/he's a first generation immigrant. Subsequently we may say that he/she keeps his country's definition of words like "güerito". 
I see your point, but I don't think this argument about "some hispanics" saying this and "this hispanic" saying that, has something to do with the original question. Does something change because this person works in the U.S? I highly doubt it. 




caelum said:


> _G__ringo,_ in my experience (studying in Guatemala), is used for any white, North American foreigner, and sometimes for those from Europe. However, in this case, since he said _güero, _it was probably meant to mean "white people", which in and of itself would be badly viewed in the States coming from a Mexican, so I'd probably translate it as "Americans" to soften it in this circumstance.



I don't see any problem with calling them white people, whatever would be the nationality. Americans would be too general since there are african americans, asian americans, etc. However I prefer "white folks" in this situation. In my opinion it sounds less formal and closer to what this person is trying to say. 

Regards.


----------



## onbalance

white folks is too coloquial
white people is kind of rude
whites is less rude
white workers/coworkers/supervisors/etc. would be even less rude


----------



## SydLexia

I think we might have to step back a bit here - I doubt this person is really talking about "gringos" or "white folks". I suspect he is talking about "the bosses" and that in his working context the bosses are white/anglo/gringo//whatever.

I'm European and Mexico is one of the 'American' countries I haven't visited but it sounds to me as though the diminutive "güeritos" is probably how he and his fellow workers refer to their bosses.

I don't know if I'm right and I'm not offering a translation but I do think that "güeritos" is probably being used here 'inside the workplace' rather than referring to 'us gringos' as a whole, and much less to "whitey" or anything along those lines.

What do you think?

syd


----------



## onbalance

SydLexia said:


> I think we might have to step back a bit here - I doubt this person is really talking about "gringos" or "white folks". I suspect he is talking about "the bosses" and that in his working context the bosses are white/anglo/gringo//whatever.
> 
> I'm European and Mexico is one of the 'American' countries I haven't visited but it sounds to me as though the diminutive "güeritos" is probably how he and his fellow workers refer to their bosses.
> 
> I don't know if I'm right and I'm not offering a translation but I do think that "güeritos" is probably being used here 'inside the workplace' rather than referring to 'us gringos' as a whole, and much less to "whitey" or anything along those lines.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> syd



I think he's trying to specify the "race" of relevant actors. So, if they are his supervisors, I would say "white supervisors." However, it may be unclear into which class they fall, in which case "whites," in my view, is the most faithful translation.


----------



## SydLexia

onbalance said:


> I think he's trying to specify the "race" of relevant actors. So, if they are his supervisors, I would say "white supervisors." However, it may be unclear into which class they fall, in which cases "whites," in my view, is the most faithful translation.



But "whites" includes me, over here....

syd


----------



## iribela

@ DOMINO, Re: _Does something change because this person works in the U.S? I highly doubt it. 


_Yes, it does. And the translator is this person's voice. 

I don't know about where you live, it may be different in your circles, but where I live and work, do you know how frequently while collaborating with others on translations/interpretations or even in everyday conversations people find themselves at a loss for words because they can't think of how they used to say something 'back home'? (just like many who seek help here in this forum)
Mind you, I'm not saying this is the case here. Just responding to your question.

When you are in another country, whether you learn the language spoken there or never bother to do it, the way you speak your own language is definitely influenced by the environment and the community you become a part of, and the same is true the other way around. When I go back home and I hear people's conversations I recognize changes. The way we express ourselves adapts to changing circumstances.

Also, I did not say 'white people' was wrong. I simply said that in my experience, 'gringo' is much more likely to be used in this context, and that the translator would ultimately, knowing the full context of the situation, decide what's best.
We are just offering our opinions based on background and experience.

By the way, I appreciate your point of view, that's how I learn.


----------



## Bmm5045

This may not go over well, but I'm going to offer an alternative.  Rather than getting bogged down in the 'whiteness' issue, what about using a term like "suits"? When we use that term for corporate folk in power positions, invariably the image painted in your head is a white guy with salt-and-pepper hair, and acts as a slight pejorative, not in a sense that white people are negative, but moreso that the boss-men (who happen to be white) behave in a predictable, unfortunate way.  I think it takes care of (my uderstanding of) what the original intent was, i.e., to paint a stereotype that isn't necessarily racially charged, but has a definite slight negative overtone.  Take this with a grain of salt, please.


----------



## onbalance

SydLexia said:


> But "whites" includes me, over here....
> 
> syd



Se sobreentiende que se trata de ciertas personas "blancas" en la empresa.


----------



## D0MIN0

onbalance said:


> white folks is too coloquial
> white people is kind of rude
> whites is less rude
> white workers/coworkers/supervisors/etc. would be even less rude



Isn't the speaker using coloquial language as well? I think 'white folks' keeps the same informal tone of 'güeritos'. However I like 'whites' too.




			
				iribela said:
			
		

> @ DOMINO, Re: _Does something change because *this person* works in the U.S? I highly doubt it.
> 
> 
> Yes, it does. And the translator is this person's voice.
> 
> I don't know about where you live, it may be different in your circles, but where I live and work, do you know how frequently while collaborating with others on translations/interpretations or even in everyday conversations people find themselves at a loss for words because they can't think of how they used to say something 'back home'? (just like many who seek help here in this forum)
> Mind you, I'm not saying this is the case here. Just responding to your question._



That's why I underlined it. I agree with what you said, however what I was trying to explain is that this does not applies to *this person,* specifically to his use of the word 'güerito'. We only know three things about him: He's from Mexico, he works in the U.S, and he doesn't speak English. Isn't a little bit too risky to put him in the same circle as the 'hispanics' you know just based on your personal experience with other immigrants? In my opinion the safest route is to use 'whites' or 'white folks' and not 'gringos'.

Regards


----------



## nijota429

I agree "Americans" is probably the best translation here. To me, though, it sounds better to use replace "say" with "tell":

You can't tell [them/Americans/gringos] anything.


----------



## aztlaniano

"Gringos" (from Calamario, #5) seems like a good idea to me, too.
We don't have enough information to safely opt for "suits".


nijota429 said:


> better to replace "say" with "tell":


I agree.



onbalance said:


> a racial slur on par with "Gentiles"


?????

*gen·tile*

_noun_ \ˈjen-ˌtī(-ə)l\: a person who is not Jewish
*Full Definition of GENTILE*

*1*
_often capitalized_ *:*  a person of a non-Jewish nation or of non-Jewish faith; _especially_ *:*  a Christian as distinguished from a Jew


----------



## gengo

I vote for Calamario's "gringos."  Having lived in Mexico, I know that the word gringo can be anything from a rude insult to a perfectly neutral descriptor, depending on the context, tone of voice, etc.  I was routinely called a gringo by my friends in Mexico, and they were not being rude or even joking around.  They were just using it to mean "a white guy from the US."  And that seems to be what is meant in the context here.  The speaker is saying that the system doesn't allow him (or whomever) to say anything (i.e., to complain) to the whites in charge.  To the gringos.


----------



## SydLexia

Traductor traidor.

We seem to be looking at "gringo" the wrong way round. He didn't write it in Spanish - _we_ are recommending _he_ write it in _his_ letter, in English.

 "gringo" is often or usually seen as pejorative in English (see http://www.wordreference.com/definition/gringo) and this adds an unfortunate nuance in a case involving racial discrimination.

I get the picture of an unsophisticated guy in a factory where either the management, or the shop-floor supervisors, the/his bosses in this context, are white/anglo/blond/English-speaking, or whatever.

We have to assume that he's not using a 'racial' term. We have no evidence he is and, come on guys!! indirectly contractually we are on his side. 

"the bosses/the supervisors/the guys in white coats/......" he's simply taking about the guys who tell him to do double shifts.

And in a wider context, this letter is at some point going to land on a gringo's desk. 

syd


----------



## iribela

SydLexia said:


> Traductor traidor.
> 
> We seem to be looking at "gringo" the wrong way round. He didn't write it in Spanish - _we_ are recommending _he_ write it in _his_ letter, in English.
> 
> "gringo" is often or usually seen as pejorative in English (see http://www.wordreference.com/definition/gringo) and this adds an unfortunate nuance in a case involving racial discrimination.
> 
> I get the picture of an unsophisticated guy in a factory where either the management, or the shop-floor supervisors, the/his bosses in this context, are white/anglo/blond/English-speaking, or whatever.
> 
> We have to assume that he's not using a 'racial' term. We have no evidence he is and, come on guys!! indirectly contractually we are on his side.
> 
> "the bosses/the supervisors/the guys in white coats/......" he's simply taking about the guys who tell him to do double shifts.
> 
> And in a wider context, this letter is at some point going to land on a gringo's desk.
> 
> syd



Many words, 'gringo' included, can be seen as pejorative depending on the situation and the tone.

You say, '_he didn't write it in Spanish_,' and you are right. 
His words were 'los güeritos.'

If someone says 'los güeros', I might consider they mean 'blancos/whites.' This person said 'los güeritos.' That sets a specific tone (unless you think he's talking about tiny white people.) 
And he's obviously not '_simply talking about the guys_'. Saying something like '_a los güeritos no se les puede decir nada_' is not just shooting the breeze about your superiors.

Also, we are not '_on his side_.' We are not his advocate. The translator's job is to translate, accurately, not color the statement to favor one side or the other. And the 'other side' can also hire an interpreter


----------



## SydLexia

> That sets a specific tone (unless you think he's talking about tiny white people.)




This is exactly the point, what is that specific tone? Is it intrinsically racist? 



> And he's obviously not '_simply talking about the guys_'. Saying something like '_a los güeritos no se les puede decir nada_' is not just shooting the breeze about your superiors.




I expressed myself very badly. I should have said "referring to" (and "simply" was not a good choice instead of "probably referring to the people"). 

I assumed the problem was that he 'can't talk' to his immediate superiors because they won't listen to his complaints about the implications of their orders to him. Although, come to think of it, he might be saying that he always has to clear up after some of his co-workers and actually be complaining about _their _attitude.



> The translator's job is to translate, accurately, not color the  statement to favor one side or the other


. 

I completely agree. My concern is that we might be colouring the statement unnecessarily by recommending a word which is fundamentally more pejorative in English than is the same combination of letters in Spanish, which he didn't use anyway. 

Also, it's true that we are not his advocates, but we are translating the words of his own advocacy.

I think we really need to know about this "specific tone" in this context and who exactly he is complaining about.

(and regarding "gentile", it's used in the Christian Bible, by Christian translators, as an equivalent for "goyim". see Matthew 10:5)


syd


----------



## aztlaniano

SydLexia said:


> (and regarding "gentile", it's used in the Christian Bible, by Christian translators, as an equivalent for "goyim". see Matthew 10:5)


Jesus Christ uses it in his order to St. Paul:

And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.
http://biblehub.com/kjv/acts/22.htm


----------



## onbalance

aztlaniano said:


> Jesus Christ uses it in his order to St. Paul:
> 
> And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.
> http://biblehub.com/kjv/acts/22.htm



Gentile connotes that Jews are superior to non-Jews. To me, it is one of the most offensive racial slurs. I have spoken with Muslims who feel the same way. But I don't think we should get any further off topic.


----------



## aztlaniano

onbalance said:


> Gentile connotes that Jews are superior to non-Jews. To me, it is one of the most offensive racial slurs. I have spoken with Muslims who feel the same way. But I don't think we should get any further off topic.


So what IS the proper term? ¿Non-Jews?


----------



## onbalance

aztlaniano said:


> So what IS the proper term? ¿Non-Jews?



If one ever needs to make this distinction, one should say "non-Jews" or, preferably, "people who are not Jewish."


----------



## aztlaniano

onbalance said:


> If one ever needs to make this distinction, one should say "non-Jews" or, preferably, "people who are not Jewish."


I dunno. Martin Luther King's "Dream" wouldn't have the same ring if it were 
... that day when _all_ of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, _people who are not Jewish,_  Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing...


----------



## onbalance

aztlaniano said:


> I dunno. Martin Luther King's "Dream" wouldn't have the same ring if it were
> ... that day when _all_ of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, _people who are not Jewish,_  Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing...



I have read the speech more than once and do not like the reference to Gentiles. He has been accused of pandering to certain elements in the American media. Anyway, he easily could have said "Jews and non-Jews" if, for whatever reason, he wanted to draw the line there.


----------



## duvija

Interesting discussion. I was baffled by the diminutive 'güeritos'. It can be either more pejorative or trying to be less so (and we don't know enough to decide). 
In order to be a 'güero' you need to be vaguely white. Most people (particularly Mexicans) tell me I'm a 'güera' in spite of my totally Spanish accent - I mean, for Mexicans, I'm not one of them but a güera, don't know why. (Just in case, I'm from Uruguay but Jewish. So I don't fit in any perfect square).

That removes the translation as 'Americans' and leaves 'whites'. 

I really believe I would translate it as 'bosses'. Those are the people you can't tell/say anything to. I feel it's more a matter of power or class, than race. But that's me, of course...


----------



## gengo

duvija said:


> I feel it's more a matter of power or class, than race.



You could be right, but Latinos in the US who have immigrated from Mexico feel a strong sense of discrimination by the whites who are still largely in power here, and I think that is why the speaker used this word.  So while it's true that he's talking about The Man (the people in power), from his viewpoint that man is probably white.

I agree that it's an interesting translation problem, and personally I would have to read a large chunk of the original to feel sure about what the best translation was.


----------



## calamario

A bit late, but I am Chilean and the term "güero" doesn't exist in our vocabulary. We say "rubios." "Güero" is used by Mexicans. You may have misheard. We call Argentinians many other words. Perhaps "huevones"?


----------

