# to dumb down



## xxavier

Hi everybody, 
In a textbook, I have read a sentence with the verb "to dumb down" in it. Although I've found in a dictionnary that it meant "to lower the level of difficulty and the intellectual content of something", I still cannot find its nice idiomatic equivalent in French.
Hope you'll be able to help me,
Best wishes, 

Xav


----------



## emma42

There probably isn't one, which is why French is so beautiful!


----------



## Overton

My dictionary says "niveler par le bas", although it's not as nice as in English... maybe "simplifier", but then you don't get the idea of dumbness...


----------



## Markus

I'm not sure, I think the French would find the entire idea of dumbing something down distasteful or even offensive! Doing such things is popular in anglosaxon culture so that's probably why it has developed an idiom. For anglos we don't feel bad saying "can you dumb that down for me?" It's sort of a way of giving an appearance of humility. Where a Frenchman calling himself dumb would not make himself look humble in his culture but rather like an idiot. So I propose simplifier as the most culturally adaptive translation.


----------



## pieanne

xxavier said:
			
		

> Hi everybody,
> In a textbook, I have read a sentence with the verb "to dumb down" in it. Although I've found in a dictionnary that it meant "to lower the level of difficulty and the intellectual content of something", I still cannot find its nice idiomatic equivalent in French.
> Hope you'll be able to help me,
> Best wishes,
> 
> Xav


 
It would be nice to have the full context, please?  Thanks!


----------



## xxavier

Oh sorry, I don't remember the sentence by heart but it was something like that:
"This survey shows an increasing dumbing down of TV programming"


----------



## emma42

I agree with Markus, although I try not to use the phrase because I just don't like it.  I think Germanic languages lend themselves to this sort of construction and Romance languages don't.  It's an Americanism and, whilst I know that language has to live and to change, I baulk at such words/constructions because, for me, they are illustrative of the Americanisation of world culture - quickfire, consumerist, business-speak.  This is a world and a tendency I do not like culturally or politically. I mean no offence at all to our American foreros, who are all absolutely gorgeous and intelligent.


----------



## la_cavalière

I'm American and I'm not too fond of the phrase "dumbing down." However, it is a fitting way to explain much of what is happening in our country!


----------



## emma42

And mine!


----------



## Gil

"vulgariser" n'a pas cette connotation péjorative.


----------



## emma42

I am glad you brought that word up, Gil.  It's a real *faux ami, *n'est-ce pas?  I have learnt something useful.


----------



## carolineR

dans le contexte "This survey shows an increasing dumbing down of TV programming", pourquoi ne pas parler d'abrutissement ?


----------



## emma42

That sounds good.  Could we not use *baisser* or its relations in some way?


----------



## french4beth

Markus said:
			
		

> I'm not sure, I think the French would find the entire idea of dumbing something down distasteful or even offensive! Doing such things is popular in anglosaxon culture so that's probably why it has developed an idiom.


As an _anglophone_, I find 'dumbing down' to be extremely _distasteful_ and _offensive _. I don't know that it's *'popular'* in Anglo-Saxon culture (whatever that may be), but it's a disturbing trend, regardless of where it occurs.

Here's an interesting article on this phenomenon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumbing_down



> For anglos we don't feel bad saying "can you dumb that down for me?"


I'm guessing you don't have too many 'Anglo' friends, with those kind of disparaging comments.  
When I put in this smiley, it meant that I was just kidding... and I can't imagine any circumstances under which I would ask someone to 'dumb' something down for me .

And I don't think that you speak for the francophone users of this forum, either, as they are friendly, helpful, knowledgeable, and courteous to anglophones and other non-native speakers, too.
Thought that the author of this post was a non-native speaker due to lack of capitalization, etc.  I stand corrected.


----------



## emma42

This phrase has so much cultural significance!  I hear intelligent people forever bemoaning the "bringing down to the lowest common denominator" of television programmes, tabloid journalism, education etc.  I think it's true and it doesn't do anyone any good. 

Note that I have avoided the phrase "*D'ing D*"!

Maybe this should be in the Cultural Discussions Forum.


----------



## Markus

french4beth, I wasn't trying to make a claim at individual personalities, I'm sorry if you were offended. I was making a more general cultural obervation based on my experiences living in both French and anglosaxon culture. In anglo culture we tend to play down our intelligence more. Saying "can you dumb that down for me, I'm not too bright" -- in the _right_ context, can be a self-disparaging way of appearing more humble and approachable. In France you would not see this as it is more shaming to appear unintelligent. As an example, it's a common practice in schools in France to make class rankings open for all students to see. At least in Canada we would find this sort of thing distasteful. In fact, when I was in school kids tended to think it was cool to not excel too much and those who did get very good grades tended to keep quiet about it. Now, say what you like about whether this is good or bad or right or wrong or stupid or immature, that's not really my discussion. Just a general cultural observation, if you don't like that about your culture it's fine, no one completely matches every single one of their cultural values.

If you don't believe me, try to find a good translation for "nerd", and then think about how commonly this word is used in English.

Also, I don't think the part about not having too many friends was really necessary. My original message wasn't meant to be inflammatory but I can feel this thread going that way, let's keep it civil okay?

PS: I'm guessing that you've made the mistake of thinking that I'm French. I'm anglo-Canadian. If you thought I was French I can imagine better why you were offended -- at least in anglo culture, it's more acceptable to criticize your own culture than someone else's.


----------



## xxavier

emma42 said:
			
		

> This phrase has so much cultural significance! I hear intelligent people forever bemoaning the "bringing down to the lowest common denominator" of television programmes, tabloid journalism, education etc. I think it's true and it doesn't do anyone any good.
> 
> Note that I have avoided the phrase "*D'ing D*"!
> 
> Maybe this should be in the Cultural Discussions Forum.




I'm glad to see that this mere vocabulary question has led to such an intense debate! 
 I am maybe going to annoy again some of you but what does "D'ing D" mean please?

 Thanks a lot to all of you, 
 Xav


----------



## emma42

Oh, Xav!  It means *dumbing down!  *I was trying to avoid actually using the phrase as I have already said that I don't like it!  But now you've made me say it!


----------



## xxavier

Sorry, I couln't know.. Is D'ing D also commonly used or have you just made it?


----------



## emma42

Hey Xav.  I am only joking with you!  No,* D'ing D* is not commonly used.  I just made it up.  No one will understand what you mean if you use it.


----------



## xxavier

Ok cheers. Maybe, if we all start to use "D'ing D" (Could you DD this for me please? don't you think it sounds much less offensive in this way? ), it will become a proper word within the next years. Imagine Emma, author of a phrase you hate..


----------



## emma42

Oh, you are awful, xav!  No, we must NOT start using DD.  I refuse to allow it.


----------



## ChiMike

emma42 said:
			
		

> I agree with Markus, although I try not to use the phrase because I just don't like it. I think Germanic languages lend themselves to this sort of construction and Romance languages don't. It's an Americanism and, whilst I know that language has to live and to change, I baulk at such words/constructions because, for me, they are illustrative of the Americanisation of world culture - quickfire, consumerist, business-speak. This is a world and a tendency I do not like culturally or politically. I mean no offence at all to our American foreros, who are all absolutely gorgeous and intelligent.


 
Oh thank you!  The problem you have with this construction (and that I have) is that it is improperly formed; is, at best, only worthy of the language of advertising.

The reason is that in English, as in all Germanic languages, one can only add a separable prefix (in German or Dutch, where it comes at the front of the infinitive, but after the simple present or past: eingreifen, ich greife ein) or, in English, an adverbial suffix (stand up), to a verb that already exists. 

The verb "to dumb" with the meaning: "to make stupid" or even "to trivialize" does not exist (although the OED shows an obsolete form which means "to render mute" or "to silence".

Therefore, one cannot add the adverbial suffix "down" to it.

Starting in the Renaissance, English (like French) borrowed or borrowed and then modified Latin and Greek words when a Germanic form was not easily available. The OED gives the following third definition for "vulgarize"
"3. To make vulgar or commonplace; to debase or degrade" (after second definition: to make common or popular) and quotes Hazlitt:
"They vulgarize and debase whatever is interesting or sacred to the mind."

So, without a doubt, "to dumb down" is, itself, debased English.


----------



## emma42

As far as *vulgariser* is concerned, I was only referring to the French meaning.

Whether or not the "verb" *to dumb down* is "debased English" is a matter of opinion, in my opinion (!)  Does every change in language debase it?  You are getting all Academie Francaise.


----------



## Gil

emma42 said:
			
		

> As far as *vulgariser* is concerned, I was only referring to the French meaning.


 I just found that vulgarize has both meanings in English:


> vul·gar·ize     P   Pronunciation Key  (vlg-rz)
> tr.v. vul·gar·ized, vul·gar·iz·ing, vul·gar·iz·es
> To make vulgar; debase: “What appalls him is the sheer cheesiness of TV iniquity. Television has even vulgarized hell” (Jack Kroll).
> To disseminate widely; popularize.
> 
> Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Editio


----------



## emma42

Interesting, Gil.  I would think that, unless talking to academic linguists, most people would understand the verb to mean "make vulgar/debase".


----------



## Gil

emma42 said:
			
		

> Interesting, Gil. I would think that, unless talking to academic linguists, most people would understand the verb to mean "make vulgar/debase".


C'est un vrai faux-ami que je vais éviter


----------



## ChiMike

In the 9th (current) edition of the Dictionnaire de l'Académie Française, I find the following:
(1)**CRÉTINISER* v. tr. XIXe siècle. Dérivé de _crétin._
Fam. Abêtir, abrutir. _Ces émissions stupides risquent de crétiniser les enfants._

It's at least interesting that the example given is exactly what you are talking about: "les émissions stupides"


But, our native speakers would have to tell us whether, in addition to people one can also "crétiniser" a text, a subject, or a book. This a also the problem I encounter with: 
abêtir 
avilir 
ravilir

In former days, I would have written "rabaisser le style et le contenu".

Now, I might try: vulgariser jusqu'à l'insipidité (ou "à la stupidité" ou "au niais")


----------



## emma42

I like those suggestions, Chimike.  Let's see what the natives say about *cretiniser* and the others.


----------



## Auryn

Markus said:
			
		

> In anglo culture we tend to play down our intelligence more. Saying "can you dumb that down for me, I'm not too bright" -- in the _right_ context, can be a self-disparaging way of appearing more humble and approachable. In France you would not see this as it is more shaming to appear unintelligent.


So true! It always amazes me how many British people are proud to say they're thick and/or ignorant, even if it isn't true. It's a rather extreme form of self-deprecation, as if being (or sounding) bright might be offensive to others.

A typical exemple of "dumbing down" would be a TV presenter talking about, say, a cardiologist and then quickly adding "that's a heart doctor to you and me". This happens so often it really irritates me.


----------



## emma42

That is true, actually.  I don't like the fact that you've got to pretend to be modest.  I won't do it.  For example, when people find out I'm a singer, they ask me if I'm any good and I say that I am, in fact, bloody good!  Surprisingly, I still have friends.

The proposition that the French are not like this rings true to me, but I must add that I have never lived in France and don't know much about cultural things like this.  If it is true, then I admire the French even more than before.


----------



## Gil

emma42 said:
			
		

> I like those suggestions, Chimike.  Let's see what the natives say about *cretiniser* and the others.


Désolé.  Il semble qu'on ne crétinise que des personnes.
J'avais pensé à créer le néologisme "stupidiser" qui serait sûrement compris.  Vérification faite, Google a relevé quelques utilisations de "stupidiser" et même de "dé-stupidiser".  Possible que ça réponde bientôt à un besoin... malheureusement.


----------



## emma42

Chapeau, Gil!  Sur ce Forum-ci on ne stupidisera jamais!


----------



## sophinette

I'm so falling in love with this forum I've discovered ! Toutes ces discussions sont si passionnantes... et loin de nous crétiniser, you're dead right Emma !


----------



## zam

'Abêtir/abêtissement' could be used as well.


----------



## ChiMike

Gil said:
			
		

> Désolé. Il semble qu'on ne crétinise que des personnes.
> J'avais pensé à créer le néologisme "stupidiser" qui serait sûrement compris. Vérification faite, Google a relevé quelques utilisations de "stupidiser" et même de "dé-stupidiser". Possible que ça réponde bientôt à un besoin... malheureusement.


 
Merci Gil!! 

C'est bien le problème que j'ai trouvé en cherchant. Il y a bien de mots français qui s'emploient pour décrire l'action de déprécier des personnes et leurs rangs ou de rabaisser les attributs des personnes, et même des emplois réflexifs (je m'abête, que existe aussi en allemand: ich verdumme (je deviens stupide)) mais j'ai eu de grande difficulté à trouver un mot qui s'applique à des sujets entiers.

En cherchant, j'ai trouvé une référence intéressante à Bossuet:

Jean-François Féraud: Dictionaire critique de la langue française (Marseille, Mossy 1787-1788)

RAVILIR, v. act. Rabaisser, rendre _vil_ et méprisable. _Actif_, il régit les _chôses_, qui ont raport à la persone. Il ne faut pas _ravilir sa_ dignité. — _Réciproque_, il se dit des persones même: en s'humiliant, on ne _se ravilit_ pas. = _Bossuet_ faisait un grand usage de ce verbe. "Il _se sont ravilis_. "Les Vaudois _ravilissoient_ l'Église et _le_ Sacerdoce. 


Mais il me paraît que la tournure est aussi obsolète que l'orthographie de Féraud! LOL

Encore une fois, Merci beaucoup!


----------



## Bastoune

To me "to dumb down" is extremely pejorative -- it really means you are too stupid to understand so you have to condescend to them.

Can we add "avec condescendance" in this case?


----------



## emma42

I think the "avec condescendance" est bien entendu, alors il ne faut pas le dire.


----------



## donques

Décerveler


----------



## emma42

Je ne trouve pas ce mot-ci dans mon dico.  Est-ce qu'il est une petite invention a vous?  Je l'aime bien!


----------



## donques

2. La société a besoin de magistrats et de militaires, elle n'a pas besoin des Shakespeare et des Flaubert. Ceux-ci ne passent qu'en contrebande, et parce qu'ils ont évité la _machine à _*décerveler*.
THIBAUDET, _Réflexions sur la litt., _1936, p. 174.
Also on this subject, you can listen to  today's addition of Café Bazar on France Inter


----------



## emma42

Cheers for that.  Is France Inter on the Net or the TV?


----------



## donques

www.radiofrance.fr/chaines/france-inter01/emissions/cafe
It's today's, so you may want to bookmark it before midnight


----------



## emma42

Thanks, donques.


----------



## ChiMike

donques said:
			
		

> 2. La société a besoin de magistrats et de militaires, elle n'a pas besoin des Shakespeare et des Flaubert. Ceux-ci ne passent qu'en contrebande, et parce qu'ils ont évité la _machine à _*décerveler*.
> THIBAUDET, _Réflexions sur la litt., _1936, p. 174.
> Also on this subject, you can listen to today's addition of Café Bazar on France Inter


 
Magnifique!

Et l'Académie paraît être d'accord:
(1)**DÉCERVELER* v. tr. (se conjugue comme _Amonceler_ 

). XIIIe siècle. Dérivé de _cervelle, _« cerveau ».
Extraire la cervelle d'un animal ; blesser mortellement par atteinte à la cervelle. Fig. Abêtir.

C'est bien ce que font ces programmes: nous blesser mortellement par atteinte à la cervelle ou pour nous au cerveau!


----------



## KaRiNe_Fr

Pourquoi pas "décérébrer" alors ?


----------



## Gil

If we are talking about:

"to lower the level of difficulty and the intellectual content of something" like a television program text...

You are getting too surgical for me with _décerveler_ et _décérébrer_


----------



## KaRiNe_Fr

Gil said:
			
		

> If we are talking about:
> 
> "to lower the level of difficulty and the intellectual content of something" like a television program text...
> 
> You are getting too surgical for me with _décerveler_ et _décérébrer_


Métaphoriquement, pour décérébrer... Ta cervelle est sauve.  
_P. métaph. Il faut surveiller l'Université. Elle contribue à détruire les principes français, à nous décérébrer; sous prétexte de nous faire citoyen de l'humanité, elle nous déracine de notre sol, de notre idéal aussi_ (BARRÈS, _Cahiers, _t. 2, 1898, p. 54).


----------



## donques

Gil check out the link I posted.


----------



## Gil

donques said:
			
		

> Gil check out the link I posted.


Vu:
décerveler un public qui en redemande

Mais on décervèle des gens, pas des textes ou des émissions...(qui sont peut-être décervelantes)


----------



## Cath.S.

emma42 said:
			
		

> That sounds good. Could we not use *baisser* or its relations in some way?


Bonne idée : _le niveau des émissions de télévision baisse de jour en jour._


----------



## edwingill

banaliser?


----------



## emma42

Oui, j'aime banaliser (le mot, pas l'action).


----------



## Gil

emma42 said:


> Oui, j'aime banaliser (le mot, pas l'action).


Moi aussi, comme dans:
L'appauvrissement croissant de la programmation banalise le crétinisme.


----------



## ChiMike

Gil said:


> Moi aussi, comme dans:
> L'appauvrissement croissant de la programmation banalise le crétinisme.


 
Puisque je reçois des petits courriels chaque jour au sujet de cette expression et de sa traduction, j'ai fait des recherches.

J'avais pensé que l'expression datait de la contre-offensive entamée par la droite aux EU pour répondre aux efforts des instituteurs et institutrices de rendre les sujets d'étude ux écoles plus accessibles aux élèves défavorisés, une partie, alors, de la réaction au langage PC.

Mais, bien que ce soit à mon avis, la raison pour la diffusion du concept, ce n'en est pas l'origine.

Il paraît que ce mot (qu'on doit épeler: dumb-down (avec trait d'union)) date des années 1930 et faisait partie du jargon des rédacteurs de journaux américains (oui, Emma avait raison!!).

Merriam-Webster on line:
Main Entry: dumb down 
Function: transitive verb 
Date: 1933 
: to lower the level of difficulty and the intellectual content of (as a textbook); also : to lower the general level of intelligence in <the dumbing down of society>


1. C'est la première définition qui date de 1933, et cela fait toujours partie des conseils donnés aux journaliste, comme ce texte en internet, l'atteste:

Write so most seventh or eighth graders will understand what you're saying. Use five cent words instead of five dollar words.
***
In closing, "Dumb down" your copy. It may be the smartest and most lucrative thing you’ll ever do.

[Noter: Dans ce texte et en général quand il s'agit du journalisme ou des réclames, le mot "copy" désigne le texte d'un article que le journaliste ou le concepteur d'une réclame soumet à la rédaction. Le mot répond (au moins aux EU) à cette définition de "brouillon" dans le TLF:

*B. *Ébauche plus ou moins griffonnée et corrigée destinée à être mise au propre. 

Mais le sens aux EU apparaît dans des expressions de l'argot de la presse française (du TLF):
_Fam. Être en mal de copie. _Manquer de sujets d'articles, (p. oppos. à _être pisseur de copie,_ arg.)]


Ces définitions citées par Webster ont pénétré au RU:

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/uptodate/pdf/uptodate2_dumb_down_plan.pdf

(Voir: à la page 4, Listening Sections 1 et 2 (qui confirme l'orgine de l'usage et sa modification récente). 


Je pense, alors, que pour cette première definition (celle des années 1930), le mot juste serait probablement toujours: vulgariser.

Il semble que ce mot ait eu au milieu du XIXième un sens péjoratif en français (phrase tirée du TFL):

Vulgariser une _science,_ mon mignon, c'est la délayer, l'affadir autant que possible...É. ZOLA, _Contes à Ninon, _1864, p. 292.

Mais, de nos jours, on donne comme synonymes de ce mot:
démocratiser, diffuser, faire connaître, généraliser, naturaliser, populariser, propager, répandre, trivialiser. 
dont seulement le dernier me semble avoir une connotation négative.


Le mot "vulgarize" dans le sens de rendre le texte plus accessible existait en anglais en 1933 et existe toujours. Mais je gagerais que les rédacteurs des journaux aux EU n'osaient pas l'employer parce que le mot "vulgar" à cette époque était déjà employé comme euphémisme pour "obscene" (obscène). Alors, on aurait craint que si l'on dise: "Vulgarize this copy", le journaliste aurait compris de la rendre "vulgar"! 


2. C'est l'ajout récent de la deuxième définition (de Webster et confirmée par la BBC) et qui est devenue, il me semble, la définition la plus courante de nos jours, qui présente la difficulté que nous discutons.

Pour cet usage en anglais il me semble que: "niveler par le bas", que qq'un a suggéré s'approche le mieux à l'idée de l'anglais.


Pourtant, dans le TLF, j'ai trouvé (sous "niveler") une phrase de Cocteau qui offre une deuxième tournure:

_Il fallait agir vite. Le temps était trop bref afin d'éduquer le peuple et l'élever jusqu'à la vraie langue turque. Il a fallu niveler, descendre le langage, le mettre coûte que coûte à la portée de tous_ (COCTEAU, _Maalesh, _1949, p. 155)


Alors, pour le deuxième sens, j'ai pensé qu'on pourrait peut-être ajouter à cette tournure et dire:
descendre le niveau intellectuel ou
descendre de plusieurs crans


Mais, n'étant pas gradi en francophone, je resterai à "niveler par le bas" pour ce deuxième sens pour le moment.


----------



## }{SPQR}{

Dans mon dictionaire j'ai trouvé ce verb ci. "infantiliser" Est ce que ca marcherait?

SPQR


----------



## Gil

Dans l'exemple de Malreaux


> « les grands films infantilisent leurs spectateurs » (Malraux)


je note qu'on infantilise les gens, pas les films.

Par ailleurs, je ne suis pas sûr ici que le terme "infantiliser" soit aussi péjoratif que "dumb down".


----------



## ChiMike

}{SPQR}{ said:


> Dans mon dictionaire j'ai trouvé ce verb ci. "infantiliser" Est ce que ca marcherait?
> 
> SPQR


 
ce verbe ne se retrouve pas ni dans le Dico de l'Académie ni dans le Trésor de la Langue Française (en ligne), ce qui ne veut pas dire qu'on ne l'emploie pas, puisque le mot "infantilisme" se retrouve dans les deux.

Mais la définition du nom est: 

INFANTILISME. n. m. T. de Physiologie. Persistance chez l'adulte de certains caractères de l'enfance. _Signe d'infantilisme._

Le verbe "infantilize" (ou : infantilise) existe en anglais aussi, mais plutôt dans le domaine de la psychologie et s'applique aux tendances des parents (ou autres) de faire persister dans les enfants des caratères infantiles. (On le dit souvent aussi de certains maris vis à vis de leurs femmes; des représentants de certaines religions envers les croyants; et parfois du gouvernement envers les citoyens.)

Il est probable qu'en anglais des gens l'emploient aussi en parlant des choses, mais le sens devrait être plutôt d'employer ces choses qu'on a infantilisées comme moyen de faire perdurer des caractères infantiles chez certaines personnes. 

Le sens de "dumb down" est de vulgariser des textes pour les rendre plus compréhensibles aux écoliers, aux étudiants, ou au grand public mais pris de son côté négatif. Je ne me souviens pas d'avoir entendu cette tournure vis à vis de personnes, mais il est bien possible que certains l'aient employée de cette façon. En ce moment-là, cela reviendrait dans le domaine de "infantilization." Mais la tournure s'applique en premier et dans la grande majorité des cas aux choses.


----------



## Gil

«infantiliser» se trouve dans le Petit Robert:


> infantiliser [RfStilize] v. tr. (Conjug. : 1)
> • av. 1966; de infantile
> ¨ Rendre infantile, donner à (qqn) une mentalité, un comportement d'enfant. « les grands films infantilisent leurs spectateurs » (Malraux). — N. f. INFANTILISATION.


----------

