# dialogue de sourds



## Cath.S.

Hi people, 
I just read the "playstation" thread  
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=17213
and the exchange that took place between Sdesmares and  El Hondurano made me realize that I did not know how to express "_un dialogue de sourds_" in English.

Literally it means: "a deaf people's dialogue" and we use this expression to describe a situation where two persons engage in dialogue and keep talking back to each other without actually understanding what the other person is trying to say.

Thanks in advance for your kindly help!


----------



## Eddie

Hi, Egueule!

One of the English equivalents that you're looking for is _to speak at cross purposes_. Now we've learned something new from each other. I like the French expression. It gets the idea across much more effectively through its imagery than the English version.

Ed


----------



## Nico5992

Voilà ce que dit le Oxford:



> *d.* *dialogue of the deaf* [tr. F. dialogue de sourds], a discussion, meeting, etc., in which neither side understands or makes allowance for the point of view of the other.
> 
> *1970* _New Yorker_ 17 Oct. 171/1 This lack of understanding+has made the Paris talks a dialogue of the deaf for many months. *1974* _Times_ 15 Feb. 14 Better communication is no panacea for every industrial dispute.+ But English reserve does seem to lead, all too often, to a muted dialogue of the deaf. *1979* H. Kissinger _White House Years_ xxi. 880 The Nixon-Gandhi conversation thus turned into a classic dialogue of the deaf. *1980* _Ghanaian Times_ 23 Jan. 4 The PFP are conducting a dialogue of the deaf among themselves. *1985* _Financial Times_ 10 July 4/1 The talks were little more than a dialogue of the deaf and broke down essentially over the vexed issue of sovereignty over the islands.


----------



## Nicp

A conversation that's going nowhere peut-être, mais cela a des connotations un peu méchantes, comme si vous êtes tellement exaspéré par l'autre personne.

Je réfléchis...


----------



## Nicp

Ou "going round in circles" je suppose.


----------



## Jean-Michel Carrère

Surfing the Internet enabled me to find it out that the same phrase (*dialogue of the deaf*) is actually used in English.

Thank you for enabling to realize I didn't know how to translate that common French expression.


----------



## frenchfan4

'Not on the same wavelength' is an English phrase that could also apply quite well here and aligns with the Oxford definition appearing earlier in this thread. I just had to look up this French phrase too...


----------



## fishbulb_teen

Sorry to re-open this forum years later, but could "to turn a blind eye" be a similar translation?


----------



## ph_l

sorry to disappoint you, but 'to turn a blind eye' means 'to willingly ignore', which is quite different. refer to post #22.


----------



## lone elm

fishbulb_teen said:


> Sorry to re-open this forum years later, but could "to turn a blind eye" be a similar translation?



Glad you did fishbulb_teen otherwise I would not have learned the meaning of _dialogue de sourds_ as originally posted by Cathy. S. I think "to turn a blind eye" has a different meaning.

I might write something like: "In their conversation, they talked without listening".


----------



## ph_l

Would "their conversation was concurrent monologues" make sense? (this refers to the explanation provided earlier above).


----------



## Kelly B

It does make sense, yes, though I don't think it's equally idiomatic. 
I'd lean toward to talk/to be at cross-purposes, as someone else suggested up near the top.


----------



## franc 91

Neither side had any intention of listening to what the other had to say.
The dialogue between them was inexistent (paraphrases, I know, but it's the kind of thing we would say in English - 'dialogue of the deaf' might exist on the web, but it's not English.)


----------



## Itisi

I agree with *franc* - something along the lines of 'neither (side/party) was listening to the other'.


----------



## transresist

I have to agree that 'dialogue of the deaf' is really not a current expression in BE, whatever Google or the OED say - certainly not as easily recognizable as 'dialogue de sourds'. And agree with Catay about the problematic nature of the expression anyway. In the context of the translation I'm currently doing, it's used for two people who are just refusing to budge from their position (repeating the same two phrases over and over). I really like 'duet of monologues' - and might just purloin it for use here!


----------



## Itisi

'Talking at cross purposes' does not quite apply to the situation where two people refuse to budge from their position; it's what people do who accidentally misunderstand each other.

How about 'they were talking _at_ each other' (for 'dialogue de sourds').


----------



## Enjay

An interesting discussion. In nigh on 65 years (!) I had never heard nor read the phrase “dialogue of the deaf”.

I am now wondering whether such a “dialogue de sourds” (presumably a more usual expression in French) implies a deliberate act of neither attempting nor wanting to understand the other person rather than a mere failure to understand (talking at cross purposes / on a different wavelength).

Does “dialogue de sourds” have a similar, deliberate, lack of intent to understand as « there are none so blind as those who will not see » which I have heard re-phrased as « there are none so deaf as those who will not hear »….. ?

Qu’en pensez-vous, les Français?


----------



## wildan1

I am personally familiar with _a dialog of the deaf,_ and it seems quite transparent in meaning in English, too.

But there is also _talking past each other..._


----------



## Squiggle

I would say the difference is "dialogue de sourds" is used in everyday French by normal French people in a mundane discussion. "Dialogue of the deaf" does exist in English but not in an everyday kind of way - it seems to be pretty much the preserve of academic circles, magazine articles and the like.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

Hi, We say "It's like talking to a/the wall." if someone seems not to be listening to you or doesn't seem to [want to] understand what you're saying, so here's a try at a neologism: "two walls talking (to each other)".


----------



## transresist

Thank you, Itisi, I think 'talking at each other' works quite well in my context - although I still like 'duet of monologues' because the two keep repeating the same appeal and refusal over and over.


----------



## squishee

Hi,

I just had one of these, unfortunately!
I believe we don't really have a direct BE translation because culturally it's just not as common (in UK for example) to hold conversations in this way where both parties are trying to talk at the same time so they can't listen to each other 

I would say "talking at each other".


----------



## Wordsmyth

squishee said:


> I believe we don't really have a direct BE translation because culturally it's just not as common (in UK for example) to hold conversations in this way where both parties are trying to talk at the same time so they can't listen to each other


I see exactly what you're referring to, squishee, though I'm not sure that's what Cath was describing:


Cath.S. said:


> a situation where two persons engage in dialogue and keep talking back to each other without actually understanding what the other person is trying to say.


 They may not actually be talking across each other, but simply not understanding (or refusing to understand) the other's point of view.

But "talking at each other" would still work in that scenario.

Ws


----------



## tacitus1

How about paraphrase? For example: "the interminable back-and-forth" or, to make the sense yet more explicit, "the interminable (and ultimately sterile) back and forth of..."


----------



## Graine de Moutarde

I think the most idiomatic expression in English would be, like wildan1 mentioned, "to talk past each other." 

But maybe you could also say "everyone was talking but nobody was really listening." Or maybe "everything that was said went in one ear and out the other for both parties."


----------



## Aristide

Graine de Moutarde said:


> "but nobody was really listening."


Habituellement, les journaux parlent d'un dialogue de sourds quand il y a vraiment de la mauvaise volonté des deux côtés. Je ne suis pas sûr que ce soit le cas avec "talk past each other".
"Nobody was really listening" ne convient pas non plus. Il faut dire (comme indiqué plus haut) : "neither (side/party) was listening to the other".

Mais dans la vie courante, c'est possible aussi de parler de façon moqueuse d'un dialogue de sourds quand on assiste à une discussion avec des malentendus accidentels de part et d'autre, sans qu'il y ait aucune mauvaise volonté. Dans ce cas-là, il faut traduire autrement.

À mon avis, "talking past each other" et "speaking at cross purposes" sont utilisées quand deux personnes abordent une question sous des angles très différents qui rendent l'échange difficile. Mais ça ne convient pas forcément s'il y a simplement eu une suite de malentendus.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

I've also heard an "expanded" version: "dialogue des sourds et muets". "talking without listening" brings to mind those exact words in the Simon and Garfunkel song "The Sounds of Silence". My try: "a mutual waste of breath".


----------



## DearPrudence

ain'ttranslationfun? said:


> "dialogue des sourds et muets"


Comment des muets peuvent-ils parler ? 🤔 Ceux qui ont créé cette expression n'ont pas dû bien comprendre ce dont il s'agissait.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

DearPrudence said:


> Comment des muets peuvent-ils parler ?



Sign language?


----------



## DearPrudence

If they speak the same one, then, they should understand each other


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

If two deaf people are "talking (i. e. signing) over [the preposition I'd use here] each other", they're not "listening to each other" (not looking at the other's hands/gestures) because they're so insistent on making their own point. If they could speak*, they'd each be speaking more loudly than the other.
*Note that some signers are deaf and dumb mute, some are deaf but not mute, and still others mute but not deaf.


----------



## rrose17

I think an expression that you hear a lot of these days when people come together with their own pre-set and rigidly held beliefs and have absolutely no intention of being convinced of anything different is each to be talking "in their own echo-chamber". But it would appear that English has no one expression that covers the broad yet succinct "dialogue de sourds". I guess a way to get around this is to improvise as when two politicians "discuss" issues there's a _lot or words spoken and nothing much said_.


----------



## Magenta Wizard

I have recently seen the use of "dialogue of the deaf" by British journalists. No doubt a straight translation of the French, but it works just as well in English as it does with French.


----------

