# Alfabetizzazione digitale



## cettolox

Ciao,
qualcuno sa come si traduce in inglese "alfabetizzazione digitale", cioè l'atto di insegnare le basi delle tecniche digitali ?

Hi,
who knows the english for "alfabetizzazione digitale", that is the act of teaching basics about the digital world ?

Grazie,

/Stefano


----------



## sciarada

as easy as digital alphabetization, I suppose.
But wait for the natives


----------



## cettolox

I thought about it, but I have found that "alphabetization" seems to be used only with the "put in alphabetical order" meaning...

Let's wait


----------



## ElaineG

> I thought about it, but I have found that "alphabetization" seems to be used only with the "put in alphabetical order" meaning...
> 
> Let's wait


 
I agree -- alphabetization means put in alphabetical order, it has nothing to do with literacy, as in Italian.  A false friend.

Direi: Digital literacy education/training.


----------



## You little ripper!

sciarada said:
			
		

> as easy as digital alphabetization, I suppose.
> But wait for the natives


----------



## cettolox

Ok per training o education, ma "alfabetizzazione" rende in italiano maggiormente l'idea che si tratta di un "very basic training", di un insegnamento di base a persone che non sanno nulla della materia. Non c'è nulla di simile in inglese?

/Stef

Leggendo Charls Costante sembra che "alphabetization" vada bene...

/Stef


----------



## sciarada

ElaineG said:
			
		

> I agree -- alphabetization means put in alphabetical order, it has nothing to do with literacy, as in Italian. A false friend.
> 
> Direi: Digital literacy education/training.


 
In psyhological sciences it is not used like that, I found it in a lot of scientifical articles meaning teaching the basis of something to someone.
For example to deafs.
Do you think it is wrong?Or an improper use?Or just jargon?


----------



## ElaineG

Non sono d'accordo con Charles, sentiamo gli altri.

Secondo me, "literacy" ha questo senso di "teaching the basics" ma puoi anche dire "teaching the ABCs of the digital world."



> In the psychological sciences, it is not used like that; I found it in a lot of scientifical articles meaning teaching the basis of something to someone.
> For example to deaf people.
> Do you think it is wrong?Or an improper use?Or just jargon?


 
I don't know; I'm not a psychologist.  I only know its meaning in ordinary speech.  Could you show an example of what you mean?


----------



## You little ripper!

I've just googled it and that expression is used a reasonable amount. 
I don't know if there are any others that are used more.


----------



## ElaineG

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> I've just googled it and that expression is used a reasonable amount.
> I don't know if there are any others that are used more.


 
The first page of Google hits that I got googling "digital alphabetization" were all discussing foreign programs or were otherwise evidently translations from a foreign language.

The meaning of alphabetization in English is:



> *. *To arrange in alphabetical order.
> *2. *To supply with an alphabet


, according to the American heritage dictionary.

Google:  "digital alphabetization" 201 hits
             "digital literacy" 289,000 hits


----------



## You little ripper!

> The first page of Google hits that I got googling "digital alphabetization" were all discussing foreign programs or were otherwise evidently translations from a foreign language.
> 
> The meaning of alphabetization in English is:
> 
> Quote:
> *. *To arrange in alphabetical order.
> *2. *To supply with an alphabet
> according to the American heritage dictionary.
> 
> Google: "digital alphabetization" 201 hits
> "digital literacy" 289,000 hits


One of those links was Microsoft. It's obviously new terminology and it is used in the context we are talking about here.


----------



## ElaineG

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> It's obviously new terminology and it is used in the context we are talking about here.


 
I really found very scarse evidence it was used by native English speakers.  Maybe you could share some example?


----------



## You little ripper!

ElaineG said:
			
		

> I really found very scarse evidence it was used by native English speakers. Maybe you could share some example?


One of those links was Microsoft. Link


----------



## ElaineG

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> One of those links was Microsoft. Link


 
Yes, and the quote in that link is:



> Microsoft Unlimited Potential (UP) first partnered with this organization in FY03 in support of the project National Program of *Digital Alphabetization* for the School and the Community, the largest digital-inclusion project in Chile.


 
It is the translation of a Chilean phrase, not an English phrase.

The first Google hit on "digital alphabetization" is a Brazilian page that brings up the following discussion:



> The Digital Literacy Project brings new opportunities to the local communities and goes beyond the literacy process. One opportunity is to qualify its work force and have access to the new technology.


 
http://www.alfabetizacao.org.br/en/projetos/alfabetizacao.asp

The second hit on "digital alphabetization" brings up the following:



> Portuguese term or phrase:*alfabetização digital*English translation:*computer literacy*


 
You don't have to agree with me, but I maintain that "digital alphabetization" doesn't make much sense in English and that "literacy" is the correct term.


----------



## You little ripper!

> It is the translation of a Chilean phrase, not an English phrase.


Just because it is a translation of a Chilean phrase doesn't make it incorrect. It's obviously new terminology.



> You don't have to agree with me, but I maintain that "digital alphabetization" doesn't make much sense in English and that "literacy" is the correct term.


_Literacy _is just *a* term that is used more frequently, so if cettolox wants to use a phrase that is more common, he should use that. If he wants to use terminology that is closer to the original then he could use _digital alphabetization._


----------



## ElaineG

> Just because it is a translation of a Chilean phrase doesn't make it incorrect. It's obviously new terminology.


 
I disagree. I would say that it's obviously a false friend. But, I think we know that you and I are not going to agree on this one!


----------



## cuchuflete

Try the obvious, simple meaning: Digital ABCs.

That's what the Português Brasileiro and Español de Chile phrases mean in English translation.

Or...continue to be literal...at your own risk.   

Mi due lire, dos pesatas e também os dois escudos o reais.
Cucciu


----------



## Elisa68

Could it be _Digital Familiarization_?


----------



## erick

ElaineG said:
			
		

> I agree -- alphabetization means put in alphabetical order, it has nothing to do with literacy, as in Italian.  A false friend.


Elaine is right on this one.  If someone were to speak to me in English about "digital alphabetization" my immediate reaction would be, "WTF is he talking about ...?"  It would seem to me either horrendous technobabble or something mistranslated by a non-native.  I've never heard this expression used in English, and a good number of my friends are tech people in Silicon Valley -- they always use geek speak and even they haven't used this term.  Keep it simple and use "computer literacy," which every English native will understand.
P.S. the Italian "alfabetizzazione digitale" sounds to me like a cute version of our "computer/digital/IT literacy" or "ABCs."  Doesn't work the other way around though.


----------



## You little ripper!

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Try the obvious, simple meaning: Digital ABCs.
> 
> That's what the Português Brasileiro and Español de Chile phrases mean in English translation.
> 
> Or...continue to be literal...at your own risk.
> 
> Mi due lire, dos pesatas e também os dois escudos o reais.
> Cucciu


A couple of the links I checked had the expression in quotation marks and one made reference to the _so-called digital alphabetization _which to me is an indication that it is not a false friend and that the translators were well aware of how they were translating the terms. I think it is a neologism that will eventually end up in the dictionary along with _computer literacy._


----------



## carrickp

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> A couple of the links I checked had the expression in quotation marks and one made reference to the _so-called digital alphabetization _which to me is an indication that it is not a false friend and that the translators were well aware of how they were translating the terms. I think it is a neologism that will eventually end up in the dictionary along with _computer literacy._


Well, if it does, remembering the digital alphabet will be a lot easier that the other one, since it has only two "letters." Meanwhile, anyone who tries to digitally alphabetize _me_ is getting a poke in the nose -- he can keep his digits to himself.


----------



## cuchuflete

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> A couple of the links I checked had the expression in quotation marks and one made reference to the _so-called digital alphabetization _which to me is an indication that it is not a false friend and that the translators were well aware of how they were translating the terms. I think it is a neologism that will eventually end up in the dictionary along with _computer literacy._



That's an interesting speculation.  Time will tell.  For now in reply to the original question, " qualcuno sa come si traduce in inglese "alfabetizzazione digitale", cioè l'atto di insegnare le basi delle tecniche digitali ?" it is wrong to translate it as digital alphabetization.  Note the perfectly clear statement in the question, which properly and accurately paraphrase the *meaning* of the expression.  

Digital alphabetization is meaningless in today's English, other than as a description of alphabetical ordering by computer application code.  I shouldn't be quite so abolutist.  Perhaps there is an Australian usage of the term I am not familiar with.  Do we any Google evidence, or even hearsay, about such usage?


----------



## You little ripper!

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> That's an interesting speculation. Time will tell. For now in reply to the original question, " qualcuno sa come si traduce in inglese "alfabetizzazione digitale", cioè l'atto di insegnare le basi delle tecniche digitali ?" it is wrong to translate it as digital alphabetization. Note the perfectly clear statement in the question, which properly and accurately paraphrase the *meaning* of the expression.
> 
> Digital alphabetization is meaningless in today's English, other than as a description of alphabetical ordering by computer application code. I shouldn't be quite so abolutist. Perhaps there is an Australian usage of the term I am not familiar with. Do we any Google evidence, or even hearsay, about such usage?


Cuchu, when do start calling it evidence of usage? Obviously the 200 odd hits it gets with Google is not enough for you. Does it need to get to 300, 600 or maybe 1,000 before it's considered acceptable usage?


----------



## plabrocca

In the US it's very often called _computer literacy_. I taught it for 15 years. More advanced, that is more technical, study is called _computer science_.

Pat


----------



## cettolox

Grazie a tutti quelli che hanno risposto: ho imparato due cose: 
- come rendere in inglese "alfabetizzazione digitale";
- che esiste una stupenda comunita' di appassionati di lingue come voi !

Grazie,

/Stefano


----------



## ElaineG

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> Cuchu, when do start calling it evidence of usage? Obviously the 200 odd hits it gets with Google is not enough for you. Does it need to get to 300, 600 or maybe 1,000 before it's considered acceptable usage?


 
Google hits when they consist _almost uniformly_ (I still haven't found one that isn't) of translations from Romance languages containing the same false friend can never make something considered "acceptable usage". The incorrectly spelled word "wierd" gets _16,900,000 hits_. Does that constitute "acceptable usage"?

Here, you have 201 hits -- which is truly minuscule in Googlian terms -- so we have evidence of a somewhat rare translation mistake. Moreover, at least some of those "hits", as noted above, really talked about "digital/computer literacy" saying that that was the _translation_ of "alphabetization". So the sample that actually uses this phrase is somewhat less. 

And I've yet to see _one _example of this phrase being used in a native _Anglophone_ context, as apart from translation of a foreign program or concept. 

Therefore, at this point, there is no evidence at all that it is "acceptable usage."

Google hits alone never make anything "acceptable" but here you don't even have any Google hits (perhaps you've discovered anglophone examples further down the list, but as I far as I've gone, I haven't found any.).


----------



## cuchuflete

200 google hits? That's like an odd gnat snot floating in the cyber winds. One may type damned near anything into google and find some hits. Try 'digital fart' for example:



> Results *1* - *20* of about *344* for * "digital fart"*.



Clearly with substantially more hits than digital alphabetization, it's much closer to becoming part of the standard English lexicon, is it not?


----------



## la reine victoria

We have to remember that Google picks up the key words we type.  

I have just conducted a random survey:

Cuchuflete = 95,800
Panjandrum = 150,000
La Reine V (abbr.) = 6,100,000
Elaine G = 16,300,000
Kelly B = 68,100,000 **
Moodywop = 16,800
Elroy = 1,740,00
Agnes E = 15,100,000
Timpeac = 33,300

** Of Kelly B it is said

Personal services from UK Yorkshire escort kellyb,including sexy photo gallery and booking details,specialising in sensual domination,fantasy fetish ... 

A gross distortion of the truth.   


*Conclusion:  Put not thy faith in Google.*


LRV


----------



## You little ripper!

> The incorrectly spelled word "wierd" gets _16,900,000 hits_. Does that constitute "acceptable usage"?


I think that spelling mistakes are something quite different to a deliberate translation of specific words Elaine.


> Try 'digital fart' for example:





> One may type damned near anything into google and find some hits. Try 'digital fart' for example:
> Quote:
> Results *1* - *20* of about *344* for *"digital fart"*.
> Clearly with substantially more hits than digital alphabetization, it's much closer to becoming part of the standard English lexicon, is it not?


 If you had checked some of those links Cuchu, you may have understood why "digital fart" is listed in Google. It does have a specific meaning and is recognized in the telecommunication industry. And yes, I do think that eventually it will become part of the standard English lexicon. 

_The old CODECs often experience what some people have called a "digital fart". It's a loud, short duration, noise that hits you at random. EVRC never suffers from that phenomenon. Not hearing such a sound doesn't prove you have EVRC, but hearing one proves you don't. When the Bit Error Rate gets really high, EVRC substitutes a soft buzz (or dead air) in place of the missing audio. The standard ..._ Link

"Digital alphabetization" are words that have been deliberately translated from "alphabetizzazione digitale". As we all know there are many words that are in common use that still haven't reached the dictionary. It doesn't mean they are not valid. This is how language evolves.
Having said that, it is probably better that Stefano uses _digital literacy_ or one of the other suggestions made earlier, since the majority have such strong and negative opinions about its use.


----------



## ElaineG

I know you respect Garzanti, Charles, so I'll offer this as my last word on the subject:



> *literacy*Traduzione_s._ alfabetismo, alfabetizzazione, grado di istruzione / _computer -_, alfabetizzazione informatica.


----------



## You little ripper!

> I know you respect Garzanti, Charles, so I'll offer this as my last word on the subject:


As I've already said Elaine, just because something isn't in a dictionary doesn't make it less valid. It just means it hasn't reached the dictionary as yet. As you well know there have been many words and phrases that we have discussed in this forum that have meaning in popular use that are not in the dictionary.



> I really believe that those translations by non-native speakers are not _deliberate_ but a mistake of the word "alfabetizzazione" which means literacy, for "alphabetization" which means putting things in alphabetical order. A translation mistake is no different than a spelling mistake in my book; I don't know how you can tell one is deliberate and the other isn't.


 
As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, Some of those links had the words in inverted commas and some actually said _the so called digital alphabetization. _It was not a mistake in those cases; it was deliberate.
Anyway, that my last word on the subject. Stefano is probably better to go with one of the other options since they are obviously much more recognized.


----------



## cettolox

I forgot (thanks Charles) to mention which was my final translation of "alfabetizzazione digitale": it was "digital literacy".

Bye

/Stefano


----------

