# Please, Don't Answer If You're Not Sure Of What You Say



## kitus

Hello guys,

I know that people don't do what I'm about to say on purpose but please don't answer a topic unless you are totally sure of the answer you're giving... It really puzzles me seing people keeping on translating literally from Spanish to English without being sure at all...

Please guys, don't get me wrong I know that you do it with your best intention but usually the literal translation is not the best solution at all and might confuse us... please refrain yourself from answering if you are not 100% sure. 

I wanted to quote here the case (it is not any of the topics I've started; it's something I found randomly) that has made me decide to post this topic but it wouldn't be fair to mention just one; thanks to god that a native mended it later.

Cheers guys,

kitus

P.S.: Again, don't get me wrong


----------



## DDT

Thanks for your clever suggestion.

You see, basically WR is open to everyone's contribution. Which also means that your suggestions are welcome like everyone else's, please don't hesitate to post more (no need to specify "don't get me wrong" as you did   )

IMHO what is important is that people point out whenever they're not sure about their own statements. Personally I adopt different verbs/words in order to distinguish between what I am aware of (because related to my mother tongue) and what I know according to my studies/direct experience (when posting about foreign languages). Moreover I prefer to avoid guessings

DDT


----------



## VenusEnvy

kitus said:
			
		

> Please guys, don't get me wrong I know that you do it with your best intention but usually the literal translation is not the best solution at all and might confuse us... please refrain yourself from answering if you are not 100% sure.


Well, personally, I post answers without being 100% sure. Who's ever 100% sure? I usually give an _attempted _ answer. Afterall, how can one learn if they don't at least try?

I also find that providing a wrong answer leaves room for others to correct you, which is great if you're learning. A variety of answers (right or wrong) is better, I think, than those that are simply 100% sure.


----------



## cuchuflete

Many thanks Kitus.

You raise an important point.  Often, a forero leaves a question without sufficient context or a full example of the usage they are asking about.

In that situation, we need to apply our knowledge and experience and logic in attempting an answer.  We cannot have absolute certainty.   This is quite distinct from just taking a guess.
The most important thing is to label our answers, if we feel there is some uncertainty.

Example:  "Given the lack of context, and the ambiguity of the phrase....this is my best guess:...."   or, "I'm not sure, but this is a possibility:..."
What is *wrong* is to use nothing but a quote from a dictionary, when the writer has no direct experience with the word.  This is often both incorrect and misleading, especially to other language learners.  

Thanks again for raising the issue.

Un saludo,
Cuchu


----------



## Papalote

And, in view of the distinct terminology used in every country  , one might use a term specific to one´s country which might seem wrong to other speakers of the language who come from a different region/country/generation  . 

Papalote


----------



## Antartic

VenusEnvy said:
			
		

> I also find that providing a wrong answer leaves room for others to correct you, which is great if you're learning. A variety of answers (right or wrong) is better, I think, than those that are simply 100% sure.


I agree. But I try to be very careful when I'm responding. If I have made a mistake I suppose that other members see and check the threads and fix the errors.
And to add something that 'concerns me' , from some time to now, the number of members has increased heavily , this causes that when I see the threads almost all the time they are already answered by someone with a correct answer so there's nothing more to add , I've got the feeling that I'm always late, which leads me to another concern: I guess some members are so excited to participate that simply post the same correct answers of other members but in their own words, I think that this can fill unnecessarily the head of the person asking a simple question or can take the foreros or mods to check again the same thread, wasting their valuable and unpaid time.


----------



## VenusEnvy

Antartic said:
			
		

> I've got the feeling that I'm always late, which leads me to another concern: I guess some members are so excited to participate that simply post the same correct answers of other members but in their own words,


Is this wrong? It's the same thing, said differently. Personally, as a learner, I like to hear more than one correct version of how to say one thing. 

Moreover, more than one correct answer does serve a purpose: it confirms or validates ones previously given.


----------



## Swettenham

VenusEnvy said:
			
		

> Is this wrong? It's the same thing, said differently. Personally, as a learner, I like to hear more than one correct version of how to say one thing.
> 
> Moreover, more than one correct answer does serve a purpose: it confirms or validates ones previously given.


Good point, Nicole.  If several native speakers give me the same answer, then I can be pretty sure that I have been given the best information.  It's like the scientific method: the hypothesis is verified when it holds true through repeated tests.  It's also like democracy: we want a majority vote.

Posting when you're not sure helps you the poster learn, and everyone is here to learn, not just the person who asked the question.  As others have said, it is important to indicate that you are not sure.  That's my MO.


----------



## Philippa

Interesting point, kitus!!
I agree with Venus. I'm never 100% sure of anything, so I would hardly post answers if I did what you suggest. I'd rather try if I'm reasonably sure and be corrected. 


			
				cuchuflete said:
			
		

> What is *wrong* is to use nothing but a quote from a dictionary, when the writer has no direct experience with the word.  This is often both incorrect and misleading, especially to other language learners.


Cuchu, I've just looked through my recent subscribed threads to find these examples of when I look something up, that I had no previous experience of and 'have a go' at answering. Would you say these were a bad idea? I often google for the word or phrase if it doesn't seem to ring true. I know I'm not sure, but I always say so or quote where the information comes from.
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=48826
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=48671
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=43599
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=38225
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=37470

Better whizz off to Spanish


----------



## cuchuflete

Hola Philippa,

I'll have a look at the threads, but you have already made the critical point..


> I know I'm not sure, but *I always say so *or quote where the information comes from.



What works badly is a dictionary citation with no disclaimer. Anyone can copy and paste a dictionary entry, but without some additional thoughts and words of caution, this is potentially misleading. If dictionary entries alone were sufficient, all posts would say nothing more than "Look it up in the dictionary". 


I'll get back to you after I review the threads.

Un saludo,
Cuchu


----------



## cuchuflete

Ok...just looked at all the threads.  You properly indicated your sources, expressed doubts where they existed, and didn't 'proclaim' that your answers were perfect.  Rather, you offered contributions to a discussion.  That's just right.

Sometimes I see other members citing a dictionary entry, and presenting it as if that were the ineluctable truth, even when the definition given doesn't fit with the context or usage in the original question.  That's when it gets dangerous.

Dictionary contributions to a translation discussion are obviouly useful, if presented with a little care.


Thanks for doing it so well,
Cuchu


----------



## elroy

At the risk of repeating what was said by others...

I think it's completely fine to "take a stab at it," *as long as you make it crystal clear that one of the following is the case:*

1.) you are guessing
2.) you are basing your answer on limited knowledge/experience
3.) you would need more context to offer a more definitive reply
4.) you are suggesting only _one_ possible answer (of which you may or may not be sure - which should also be specified)
5.) your proficiency in the respective language is not native - so you might always err without realizing it (although profiles, *when filled out properly so as not to include non-native languages without indicating that*, can help in that area)
6.) you are just plain _not sure_

Also, even the way you introduce your reply makes a huge difference. Instead of "This is the translation," it wouldn't hurt any of us to use one of the following instead:

1.) Here's my suggestion
2.) Here's my attempt
3.) Here's my attempted translation
4.) My two cents

If the original poster is insistent on demanding a black-and-white answer, i.e. _are you absolutely sure that is the only correct translation?_, he should indicate that in a subsequent post. Intelligent, insightful contributions are inevitable as the responder attempts to pinpoint his degree of certainty and other members chime in. The conclusion may be that the responder was not at all sure, at which point those with greater competence are welcome to clarify any doubts and offer _their_ two cents. 

Of course, some issues are more definitive than others. "The cats eats" is definitely incorrect in standard, written English. Is "Everyone ate their apple"? Take a look at the slew of threads dedicated to the issue and please let me know if there's a definitive answer. 

Regarding repeated posts, I think it's a question of moderation. It's ok the first three or four times, when members confirm their agreement with previous suggestions - especially considering the fact that cross-posting is disproportionately more frequent in the case of young threads. Sixty-seven posts later, though, when lengthy discussions have ensued and - in some cases - the thread has not been touched for five months, it is quite pointless to jump in and duplicate post #2. 

In any case, I usually try to offer some sort of alternative - situation permitting, of course - even when I am simply agreeing with a previous poster.

My two cents.


----------



## lauranazario

I completely agree with the premise of Kitus' thread title: "Please, Don't Answer If You're Not Sure Of What You Say".

I believe that people who are kind enough to provide answers are also kind enough to avoid providing misleading or half-baked replies. 

As I see it, "guessing" is not really helpful... and it goes to show that you didn't even bother to check up on your "guess" before hitting the submit button. IMO, that is rather inconsiderate towards the language learner.
If you're not sure, please allow someone else to provide a reply!

Backing up your posts with an informative resource link (when applicable) is also helpful... as is citing the source when you are quoting a dictionary or glossary entry. 

I don't happen to agree with Cuchuflete when he says 


			
				cuchuflete said:
			
		

> What works badly is a dictionary citation with no disclaimer. Anyone can copy and paste a dictionary entry, but without some additional thoughts and words of caution, this is potentially misleading


I don't believe it's _indispensable_ to "color" a quote from a dictionary with additional (and sometimes superfluous) personal comments. When Foreros are kind enough to provide dictionary entries, these are for the sole consideration of the person posting the original question (as are ALL other posts), since he/she ultimately decides which term is more convenient for his/her regional needs. I think both types of posts are valid and useful... just different in their approach. 

Saludos,
LN


----------



## Antartic

VenusEnvy said:
			
		

> Moreover, more than one correct answer does serve a purpose: it confirms or validates ones previously given.


Well, I see the things in a different form. I assume that other foreros check regularly the threads and if they find something wrong in the answers they will post some kind of correction or will enhance it (which is very important), if not, I suppose that the original response is right and end of story. 
But, on the other side, I know that some people like to read as many opinions as possible and that's right too, however I don't know in which threads I should follow this standpoint.


----------



## kitus

I do understand people it is a common practice to translate their thoughts and everything surrounding them to the language desired to be learned.  I'm still learning English and of course I keep on doing it. That's perfect and it really helps a lot... but it should be kept in secret!!! 

The main aim of my post was to avoid situations like this fiction situation (it happens the same the other way around) the other way around :

Poor_english_guy:

     "Hey guys, how would you translate to spanish: are you laughing at me?? COME ON, DON'T PULL MY LEG!!!"

clever_non_native:

     "Hey, what's up??? I would say it should be something like: Os reis de mi? va, NO ME ESTIRES DE LA PIERNA!!!"

I've been using wordreference for one year now and I really love it B U T I've noticed recently that the first thing I do when reading answers is to check which is the country where who gives the answer comes from and as soon as I realize he is not native, I skip his answer... It may sound quite rude but after several non-senses, I've automatically got myself used to it eventhough I may miss a correct answer... mmmm, actually I don't skip them, I read them but don't rely much on them...

Even If I start a topic, Spanish set phrases are totally different in south america than in spain and even when speaking the same language (Castellano) we/they might not get the meaning of it, if it is not an already settled set phrase in our/their language. 

So i might be a fault of who posts something for non metioning that what he/she is asking is a set phrase, but it really puzzles me when someone comes up with "NO ME ESTIRES DE LA PIERNA!!". 

It's kind of a non-sense, to me it's kind of admiting that "I DON'T HAVE A BLOODY IDEA WHAT IS IT LIKE, I DON'T CARE AT ALL, IT HAS NEVER CONCERNED ME BUT I GIVE YOU MY GUESS FOR FREE PROUD OF MY OWN IGNORANCE".

again guys, don't take me wrong!!! 

cheers,

/kitus


----------



## fenixpollo

Great idea for a thread, kitus!


			
				kitus said:
			
		

> the first thing I do when reading answers is to check which is the country where who gives the answer comes from and as soon as I realize he is not native, I skip his answer...


I also look to see if there is a native language, but I don't discount the non-natives' anwers... sometimes, they have better insight than I do about English matters! But "caveat lector" should definitely be the rule of thumb for the forums.

I agree that more right answers are always better... especially because so many questions are open to interpretation or have various possible translations.

I think that those of us who know how to cite our sources and to qualify our educated guesses should continue to do so and set a good example. Others will follow.

The thing that bothers me is not the quality of the _responses_, rather the *quality of the questions*... especially now that schools are back in session  ...  Why do people post contextless queries? (thread, thread)   Why don't people know how to use the search function, and how can we motivate them to use it? (edit: I couldn't find a thread in this C&S forum about _people not searching before posting a new thread_)


----------



## cuchuflete

fenixpollo said:
			
		

> The thing that bothers me is not the quality of the _responses_, rather the *quality of the questions*... especially now that schools are back in session  ... Why don't people know how to use the search function, and how can we motivate them to use it? (thread) Why do people post contextless queries? (thread, thread)



Hi FP,

Be just a little more patient.  As soon as VBulletin 3.5 is up, we will use a thread starter form that will strongly encourage people to give context.

Have a look at the Spanish ST forums for an idea of what it might be like, without the regional codes.


In the meantime, feel free to copy and use these little guys down below.

cheers,
Cuchu


----------



## fenixpollo

Thanks, cuchu!  Love the smilies!   

I know and like the forms in the Spanish Terminology forum, and figured that, sooner or later, they would migrate into the rest of WR.  

But why won't they have regional codes?  Like I said, I think more information is usually better... and sometimes those clues can help find the most desired translation with less running in circles and second guessing.

Also, is there any way that new-thread posters could be prompted or reminded to use the dictionary and search first?  





> Wait... Did you remember to consult the dictionary and/or do a forum search?


  with links to each tool above the "Submit" button?


----------



## cuchuflete

fenixpollo said:
			
		

> Thanks, cuchu!  Love the smilies!
> 
> I know and like the forms in the Spanish Terminology forum, and figured that, sooner or later, they would migrate into the rest of WR.
> 
> But why won't they have regional codes? Like I said, I think more information is usually better... and sometimes those clues can help find the most desired translation with less running in circles and second guessing.
> 
> Also, is there any way that new-thread posters could be prompted or reminded to use the dictionary and search first? with links to each tool above the "Submit" button?



Regional codes?  Hmmmm  we might make them available, but not obligatory for the general language forums.
The dictionary and search link ideas is splendid!

Goodness is where you find it, so I'll be happy to promote that recommendation as if it were my very own
The feathers will be a dead giveaway of the source, anyhow.  

Thanks FP,
Cuchu


----------



## duder

I agree with Kitus and Lauranazario on this one; I have seen too many threads where less-than-proficient foreros have offered inaccurate translations that are distracting at best and downright misleading at worst. I understand that the desire to continue learning and improving often leads one to try to give an attempt at the risk of being wrong, and Elroy makes some good suggestions about how this can be done in the right manner. In the end, however, I think that just as much can learned by keeping one's guesses to oneself and reading and digesting responses that reflect more experience with the language. 

I think everyone wants to help, and so it is tempting to compose a reply and be one of the first to contribute to a thread despite not having enough background to provide a good answer. Part of this is compounded by poorly phrased questions lacking in context or examples, but in general keeping this thread's title in mind is not a bad idea.


----------



## elroy

kitus said:
			
		

> I've been using wordreference for one year now and I really love it B U T I've noticed recently that the first thing I do when reading answers is to check which is the country where who gives the answer comes from and as soon as I realize he is not native, I skip his answer... It may sound quite rude but after several non-senses, I've automatically got myself used to it eventhough I may miss a correct answer... mmmm, actually I don't skip them, I read them but don't rely much on them...


 
I would just like to point out the fundamental contradiction in that attitude.  The title of your thread specifies that it is *uncertainty* that should stop a would-be poster from posting, not native/non-native status.

Sometimes a non-native is in fact certain about something; depending on the particular question, a native may not be entirely sure.  That's why I said that the crucial element that should always be present is a clear and unambiguous declaration of how certain the poster is.

Your remarks aren't rude at all; your habit is just quite illogical.


----------



## elroy

duder said:
			
		

> I understand that the desire to continue learning and improving often leads one to try to give an attempt at the risk of being wrong,


 
I definitely don't think an uncertain member should post out of a desire to learn.  After all, the risky nature of the post, by definition, could lead to more confusion than benefit.

If a potential poster who is uncertain about a particular issue would like to learn more about it himself, he should either wait quietly until someone more experienced/knowledgeable comes along, or start a new thread specifically delineating the source of his particular uncertainty.


----------



## fenixpollo

duder said:
			
		

> I have seen too many threads where less-than-proficient foreros have offered inaccurate translations that are distracting at best and downright misleading at worst.


Here is an example of such an inaccuracy, but that contradicts duder and the others who believe that inaccuracy is the enemy. (thread)  

It proves the point that a native speaker can think he knows the answer  , but it turns out that he is wrong  ; and when he is corrected by several more-knowledgeable foreros, _everybody_ learns something.  

The only confusion that results from inaccurate answers is when:
a) nobody corrects the inaccuracy, or  
b) people who view the thread don't read it carefully.  

I think somebody famous once said something profound about learning from one's mistakes.

_edit: I'm not being hard on myself... In fact, I still think I am right!  _


----------



## elroy

fenixpollo said:
			
		

> Here is an example of such an inaccuracy, but that contraicts duder and the others who believe that inaccuracy is the enemy. (thread)
> 
> It proves the point that a native speaker can think he knows the answer  , but it turns out that he is wrong  ; and when he is corrected by several more-knowledgeable foreros, _everybody_ learns something.
> 
> The only confusion that results from inaccurate answers is when:
> a) nobody corrects the inaccuracy, or
> b) people who view the thread don't read it carefully.
> 
> I think somebody famous once said something profound about learning from one's mistakes.


 
A perfect case in point that nicely supports my earlier point that native status should not be the single deciding factor when evaluating a post (not to mention the fact that, unless you think someone's deliberately trying to mislead you, it's rather inconsiderate to ignore the time, effort, and energy dedicated to answering your question - no matter how incorrect it may be!).

PS - Don't be too hard on yourself.  I wasn't familiar with the expression at all.


----------



## leenico

What too many people forget, is that a person being fluent in his/her own language, does not necessarily mean that they are fluent in the language they are attemping to translate to. Who's to say that their translation is accurate. I have seen this so often that I tend to agree with Venus's approach. I think what is imporant, is the exposure. With time, you can sort out the differences, and become more proficient.




> Well, personally, I post answers without being 100% sure. Who's ever 100% sure? I usually give an attempted answer. Afterall, how can one learn if they don't at least try?
> 
> I also find that providing a wrong answer leaves room for others to correct you, which is great if you're learning. A variety of answers (right or wrong) is better, I think, than those that are simply 100% sure.


----------



## elroy

leenico said:
			
		

> What too many people forget, is that a person being fluent in his/her own language, does not necessarily mean that they are fluent in the language they are attemping to translate to. Who's to say that their translation is accurate. I have seen this so often that I tend to agree with Venus's approach. I think what is imporant, is the exposure. With time, you can sort out the differences, and become more proficient.


 
That goes without saying, Leenico. 

Nevertheless, if everyone waited until they could confidently translate every sentence without a doubt,...

For example, I can confidently translate something like "The apple is red" into French, but might have some trouble translating "The primary effects of constant exposure to sunlight can manifest themselves in various ways."  Were I to attempt such a formidable translation, however, I would make it crystal clear that I was not certain.

After all, this isn't Askjeeves.  This is a forum - and a forum, by definition, is an avenue for discussion, debate, and mutual learning.


----------



## panjandrum

People use different ways of expressing themselves in their posts.
Often, it is very clear that they are giving a personal opinion - or that they are quoting from a reference work of some kind. That is very helpful indeed, especially if they include information about the source. For difficult issues, a range of different opinions is often very helpful in coming to a sensible conclusion. If nothing else, it is interesting.

Sometimes they say "that is wrong", "that is right", "here is the answer", without qualification. That can be difficult to interpret - although experience in these forums of their previous "form" is a big help.

Sometimes they assertively quote dictionary definitions - resulting, from time to time, in a battle of the dictionaries. Especially as many of these are available online, this doesn't always contribute a lot.

Sometimes they express reservations even when they are quite - or completely - sure the answer is right. Sorry, you are just going to have to learn to live with my gentle and non-assertive personality 

Unfortunately, sometimes they mix statements of personal opinion with statements of certainty - this can be very misleading, especially when the statements of certainty turn out to be wrong.

Guessing completely blind is surely not going to be any more help than machine translation. At best, it confuses; at worst it can be seriously misleading.

My view on the topic of the thread?
Taken literally, I couldn't agree.
But I would agree with WR Forums Rule #11:


> Any information, translations and definitions posted in these forums must be accompanied by a reasonable attempt to verify accuracy. Give sources for extensive quotations. If you are unsure of the accuracy of your information or translation, please say so.


The difficulty, of course, lies in the poster's understanding of "If you are unsure of the accuracy....."


----------



## sergio11

kitus said:
			
		

> ...I've noticed recently that the first thing I do when reading answers is to check which is the country where who gives the answer comes from and as soon as I realize he is not native, I skip his answer... It may sound quite rude but after several non-senses, I've automatically got myself used to it eventhough I may miss a correct answer... mmmm, actually I don't skip them, I read them but don't rely much on them...


That would be good, Kitus, if someone could be a native of both languages, the one *from* which he is translating and the one *to* which he is translating. But in practical situations, most people are natives of only one language. So, which one are you going to trust? The translation *"from"* the native language, or the one *"to"* the native language?

Another issue is the character of the forum. What are we doing in the forum? Are we just discussing linguistics in a light spirit and having fun with issues of language? *Which, by the way, is what I have always done and still am doing,* or trying to make this an official resource for registered licensed public translators? I think if you want to make it the latter, you need a private forum with a fee to join and a fee to remain a member and allow only the membership of licensed translators, who, with all due love and respect, also may make mistakes. Of course, this is not something for us to decide, because it falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of our great and fearless leader Mike McKellogg, but at least we can express our wishes, and mine are that it may remain a semi-formal, fun and free reference forum where one can have entertaining discussions and debates about all issues relating to words, languages, usages, and sometimes make side comments about a marginal issue, however unrelated it may be. In summary, I like it just the way it is!

And our moderators are doing a great job at keeping it more or less in line. Congratulations to all our great moderators!


----------



## kitus

Hi everybody,

it looks like I was wrong... After this huge number of answers I think I got the point. The idea of my post was to stop a kind of bad habbit, answering with a literal answer when this literal answer can be usually found in a dictionary... 

If you are looking for something funny or you wanna lose sometime reading incorrect answers, I've totally misunderstood the idea of wordreference. After finding some threads I just got fed up with finding incorrect answers to them, and it really made up my mind to post this topic. I still don't really and won't really understand how someone dares to translate a set phrase to/from his/her non-native language, but if you agree and want that, that's fine with me guys...

I just wanted to contribute, revealing what to me was a problem and if possible, settling a handful of rules when posting a new thread that could help in avoiding random answers specifying that what it's being asked is a set phrase, the source language and so on... 

but hey, fine with me...


----------



## panjandrum

kitus: I think you are _very nearly_ right 

Posts that sound authoritative but are way off target are extremely misleading.

I've come across threads in different forums where an apparently-authoritative post, often based on partial understanding of the question, has led to an entirely fruitless exchange.

Speaking for myself, I have learned so much about the different ways words are used across the world that much of what I believed to be truth turns out only to be truth in my context. On many issues regional, national and contextual variations mean that no matter how certain I am that my answer is right, it may still be wrong. So I have learned to be cautious in my few months here.

That is also why Rules #11 & 12 (in particular for this issue) are so important to the value and integrity of these forums.


----------



## LV4-26

sergio11 said:
			
		

> Another issue is the character of the forum. What are we doing in the forum? Are we just discussing linguistics in a light spirit and having fun with issues of language? *Which, by the way, is what I have always done and still am doing,* or trying to make this an official resource for registered licensed public translators?


I don't think it's ever come to that point. Anyway, my opinion is that we are doing this and that and everything else... And this is one of the things I like here. 
What I mean is this. If you ask me "how are we answering the questions ?" my answer would be "it all depends on the question".
There are as many kinds of answers as there are  of questions. The main thing is to *carefully read* each other's posts and adapt our replies accordingly.

Surely that question
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=32618
doesn't need the same kind of answer as this one
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=3928

but I'm happy to answer both kinds of questions.


----------



## El Estudiante

kitus said:
			
		

> I still don't really and won't really understand how someone dares to translate a set phrase to/from his/her non-native language, but if you agree and want that, that's fine with me guys...


I know a few people who were born in the U.S.A. to parents who are bilingual (english/spanish). These people truly have two native languages. But the overwhelming majority of people have only one _native _language, no matter how fluent, knowledgeable and proficient they may be in other languages. I suspect that most simultaneous interpreters working at the U.N. only have one native language. I don't believe that this should disqualify them from being interpreters or translators. The standard that you are advocating is both illogical and counterproductive.


----------



## cuchuflete

I like the variety Jean-Michel highlights.  We have serious translator questions in the Specialized Terminology forum, and more casual discussions elsewhere.  For me, the key to the usefullness of an answer is not in the country of origin of the forero.  At times a beginner may have a linguistic insight that is overlooked by a more qualified (!) person.

It is, rather, the honesty of the reply.  Uncertainty is not a defect, if it is clearly labelled.  Little phrases such as "I'm not certain, but..." or even "I think that..." can help to avoid giving the impression that the writer is speaking authoritatively. 

What are most troubling are the wild guesses proffered as if they were obviously correct.  These are as misleading as they are egotistical.


----------



## moodywop

sergio11 said:
			
		

> but at least we can express our wishes, and mine are that it may remain a semi-formal, fun and free reference forum where one can have entertaining discussions and debates about all issues relating to words, languages, usages, and sometimes make side comments about a marginal issue, however unrelated it may be. In summary, I like it just the way it is!


 
Sergio

You couldn't have put it any better - I agree with you completely.

I would like to comment on your interesting remark about "marginal issues, however unrelated". 

I have sometimes been told that something I said - while trying to explain the more subtle nuances asssociated with a specific Italian word or phrase - really belonged in the Cultural Forum. I find this to be an extremely limiting/limited approach. Sometimes you just cannot convey the full semantic value of a word without even just a cursory reference to the culture behind it. I could give countless examples but I will spare you 

OK. Just a silly example. Staring is taboo in Britain, perfectly acceptable(sadly) in Italian(esp. Southern Italian) culture. When I lived in England I kept hearing mothers say "Don't stare! It's rude!". If you want me to believe an Italian mother would ever say that I'll demand you produce a recording 

So why do I have to be told off for digressing when I post comments like that - when all the foreros who PM me say they appreciate them.

We were all taught in our Linguistics courses at college that language and culture are inextricably bound together. Why keep them artificially separate here?

Oh and in response to Lee's post - you are dead right. Because of the very poor standards of language teaching in Italian schools(I'm a language teacher in a high school myself) most Italians barely reach a pre-intermediate level. Therefore we keep getting young new foreros providing misleading or totally incorrect translations. So you are right - a forero's native-speaker status is indeed no guarantee that his/her translations/explanations are correct.

I'd very much welcome your feedback on the language/culture issue.

Thank you

Carlo


----------



## panjandrum

kitus said:
			
		

> I still don't really and won't really understand how someone dares to translate a set phrase to/from his/her non-native language, but if you agree and want that, that's fine with me guys...


Picking up on this point ... some very rewarding threads come from exactly this kind of problem - but with a more interactive process.

Here is a real example:

Native English-speaker learning French has found a French saying and wants the best equivalent in English. 
Are you with me so far?
Guessing won't work.
Literal translation won't work.

If there happens to be a truly bilingual French-English speaker then the answer will appear quickly - but probably the easy ones have all been done already.

What really helps is if a native French-speaker with some knowledge of English has a go at giving a literal translation AND explains the actual meaning of the saying - in English.

Then along comes a native English-speaker with some knowledge of French who can understand what the saying means and the literal translation. 

Now the native English-speaker has an excellent chance of identifyng the nearest equivalent in English.

When it works, happy days.
When it doesn't, we've all enjoyed the exercise and understood a lot more about each other's language and culture than we did before.
It works as long as it is clear to the participants what each is bringing to the discussion.

The thread in question is HERE.
It didn't end with a solution, but I enjoyed it - I hope the others did too.


----------



## Swettenham

panjandrum said:
			
		

> Picking up on this point ... some very rewarding threads come from exactly this kind of problem - but with a more interactive process.
> 
> Here is a real example:
> 
> Native English-speaker learning French has found a French saying and wants the best equivalent in English.
> Are you with me so far?
> Guessing won't work.
> Literal translation won't work.
> 
> If there happens to be a truly bilingual French-English speaker then the answer will appear quickly - but probably the easy ones have all been done already.
> 
> What really helps is if a native French-speaker with some knowledge of English has a go at giving a literal translation AND explains the actual meaning of the saying - in English.
> 
> Then along comes a native English-speaker with some knowledge of French who can understand what the saying means and the literal translation.
> 
> Now the native English-speaker has an excellent chance of identifyng the nearest equivalent in English.
> 
> When it works, happy days.
> When it doesn't, we've all enjoyed the exercise and understood a lot more about each other's language and culture than we did before.
> It works as long as it is clear to the participants what each is bringing to the discussion.
> 
> The thread in question is HERE.
> It didn't end with a solution, but I enjoyed it - I hope the others did too.


What you've described is a very human process, full of kinks and brilliance.  That's what makes this forum work.

If you want to take an algebraic approach to language, try your luck with a digital translator.


----------



## elroy

kitus said:
			
		

> I still don't really and won't really understand how someone dares to translate a set phrase *to/from his/her non-native language*, but if you agree and want that, that's fine with me guys...


 
The part in bold is very ambiguous, Kitus.

Are you saying you have to be a native speaker of *both *languages in order to qualify as a credible, legitimate translator? Sergio made a good point: I daresay 90% of our members, if not more, are natives of *one* language, as are most people in the world.

Nobody wants incorrect, systematic translations: that is quite exactly the *opposite* of the goal of these forums. I was not aware that the discussion was about mindlessly pasting dictionary entries: that is of course asinine and fruitless. The title of your thread is far broader than that, seeming to prohibit any and every instance that comes short of full and complete confidence in one's reply.

With the proper signals, I believe such "educated guesses" are acceptable and in order.


----------



## kitus

kitus said:
			
		

> I still don't really and won't really understand how someone dares to translate a set phrase to/from his/her non-native language



I've just double checked what I said before and maybe it wasn't a clear approach... I'll try to make myself a little more clear. As you can appreciate, I'm just an spanish native, my english skills aren't ENOUGH FOR DEARING TO TRANSLATE an English set phrase guys... Recently I made out reading a book what "To kick the bucket" meant and of course I would never find the correct spanish translation if I would have tried to translate it by guess. What I wanted, and I mentioned it before was to find a method for asking the things making clear enough that what is being asked is a "coined phrase" (this is the name you give to them, right?). What If someone like me finds this expression and simply translates it to "chutar el cubo" and no one checks it over afterwards? I would totally mislead the one who asked to a huuuuuuge mistake, right?

I think that would be really useful settling a kind of fast formular specifying the context, whether it is a set phrase or not, source language and so on...



			
				kitus said:
			
		

> I just wanted to contribute, revealing what to me was a problem and if possible, settling a handful of rules when posting a new thread that could help in avoiding random answers specifying that what it's being asked is a set phrase, the source language and so on...



And so for the person that answers specifying as well the grade of security in what he/she answers. As you may have seen in other posts, The Spanish set phrases have sometimes nothing to do with the Mexican ones for instance... 

I'm not criticizing anybody guys, I just try to avoid having people aswering by guess using literal translations... I can OF COURSE translate it literally myself with wordreference or with any dictionary. 

Cheers,

P.S.: I'm totally sure that there are thousands of mistakes in my answers... Could someone correct me?? Please, pleaseeee.....  

P.S.2: Don't get my wrong, this is just something I propouse to improve this already amazing dictionary, forum...

/kitus


----------



## elroy

kitus said:
			
		

> I've just double checked what I said before and maybe it wasn't a clear approach... I'll try to make myself a little *clearer*. As you can *tell*, I'm just *a* *S*panish native*;* my *E*nglish skills aren't *good ENOUGH* FOR *me to dare* TRANSLATE a *set phrase in English,* guys... Recently, *while reading a book, *I *figured* out what "To kick the bucket" meant. *Of course,* I would *have* never *found* the correct *S*panish translation if I *had* tried to translate it by *guessing*. What I wanted, *as* I mentioned it  before*,* was to *come up with* a method for asking the  *questions* (se dice "preguntar las cosas" en castellano???) *and* making *it* clear enough that what is being asked *about* is a "*fixed/idiomatic expression*" (this is the name you give to them, right?). What If someone like me* were to find* this expression and simply *translate* it to "chutar el cubo*,*" and no one *checked* it over afterwards? I would *have* totally *misled* the one who asked *by leading him* to a huuuuuuge mistake, right?
> 
> I think that *it* would be really useful *to devise* a kind of *efficient form* *requesting the user to specify* the context, whether it *involves* a set phrase or not, *along with the* source language and so on...
> 
> 
> *The person who answers would also be expected to specify his **degree* of *certainty* in *his answer*. As you may have seen in other posts, The  Spanish set phrases *sometimes *have nothing to do with the  Mexican ones for instance...
> 
> I'm not criticizing anybody*,* guys. I *am* just try*ing* to avoid having people a*n*swering by guess*ing* *or* using literal translations... I can OF COURSE translate *things* literally myself with wordreference or with any *other* dictionary.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> P.S.: I'm totally sure that there are thousands of mistakes in my answers... Could someone correct me?? Please, pleaseeee.....
> 
> P.S.2: Don't get my wrong*;* this is just something I* am proposing* to improve this already amazing dictionary *and* forum...
> 
> /kitus


 
Since you asked for corrections, here they are... 

I completely understand where you're coming from. It seems to me that you are annoyed at *one* particular nuisance: non-natives translating idiomatic phrases from another language literally into their own language. I think both a clarification on the part of the poster stating that he is aware of the literal translation but not the meaning in context, as well as a recognition on the part of the one who answers that he is not certain of his reply, can avoid a great deal of confusion. 

Thank you for bringing this important issue up!


----------



## Swettenham

kitus said:
			
		

> As you can appreciate, I'm just an spanish native, my english skills aren't ENOUGH FOR DEARING TO TRANSLATE an English set phrase guys...


Your English is excellent.  There may be some mistakes, but there are constantly mistakes in my English, too!  A person with your skills would be a real asset to this forum.   I hope you will have some time to help us.


----------



## leenico

I think if everyone waited for 100% sure answers, this forum would come to a standstill.


----------



## sergio11

kitus said:
			
		

> ...my english skills aren't ENOUGH FOR DEARING TO TRANSLATE an English set phrase guys...


First of all, let me tell you that your English seems better than mine. You don't need to apologize. 



			
				kitus said:
			
		

> ...Recently I made out reading a book what "To kick the bucket" meant and of course I would never find the correct spanish translation if I would have tried to translate it by guess. What I wanted, and I mentioned it before was to find a method for asking the things making clear enough that what is being asked is a "coined phrase" (this is the name you give to them, right?). What If someone like me finds this expression and simply translates it to "chutar el cubo" and no one checks it over afterwards? I would totally mislead the one who asked to a huuuuuuge mistake, right?


You might be surprised to find out that "patear el balde" appears in the Dictionary of the RAE with exactly the same meaning. It was a surprise for me, too. I just found out a few minutes ago. I had never heard it in Spanish. 



			
				kitus said:
			
		

> ...I'm not criticizing anybody guys, I just try to avoid having people aswering by guess using literal translations... I can OF COURSE translate it literally myself with wordreference or with any dictionary.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> P.S.: I'm totally sure that there are thousands of mistakes in my answers... Could someone correct me?? Please,
> 
> P.S.2: Don't get my wrong, this is just something I propose to improve this already amazing dictionary, forum...


I don't think anyone took it as a personal critcism, Kitus. We answered more in the hope of helping you lighten up and enjoy better your experiences in the forum. I hope we did. 

Anyway, you do have some very valid points and suggestions, and I don't want to deny the merit of your proposals. You are right in that anything that can be done to improve is worth the effort. This is truly an amazing and wonderful forum. However, we all have to keep in mind that it is from aficionados to aficionados, amateurs to amateurs, laypersons to laypersons, and none of us claims more authority than others. 

And as Leenico said, 





			
				leenico said:
			
		

> I think if everyone waited for 100% sure answers, this forum would come to a standstill.


 
Saludos


----------



## kitus

Swettenham said:
			
		

> Your English is excellent. There may be some mistakes, but there are constantly mistakes in my English, too! A person with your skills would be a real asset to this forum.   I hope you will have some time to help us.



you are blushing me Swettenham...  Thank you for those support words I would be glad to help you guys just let me know what do I have to do... 

My god elroy I think I should consider learning a new language and giving up learning this one!!!  hehehe I hope I made myself clearer enough  though but tons of thanks for correcting me 

I would say I would use 

*"preguntar las cosas"* when you have already made up your mind... you already know what to ask (preguntar las cosas que he estado pensando). 

On the other hand, *"preguntar cosas"* is more general... you are not determining which things do you wanna ask

Think of "preguntar nombres" and "preguntar los nombres"... 


cheers,

/kitus


----------



## kitus

sergio11 said:
			
		

> First of all, let me tell you that your English seems better than mine. You don't need to apologize.
> 
> You might be surprised to find out that "patear el balde" appears in the Dictionary of the RAE with exactly the same meaning. It was a surprise for me, too. I just found out a few minutes ago. I had never heard it in Spanish.
> 
> I don't think anyone took it as a personal critcism, Kitus. We answered more in the hope of helping you lighten up and enjoy better your experiences in the forum. I hope we did.
> 
> Anyway, you do have some very valid points and suggestions, and I don't want to deny the merit of your proposals. You are right in that anything that can be done to improve is worth the effort. This is truly an amazing and wonderful forum. However, we all have to keep in mind that it is from aficionados to aficionados, amateurs to amateurs, laypersons to laypersons, and none of us claims more authority than others.
> 
> And as Leenico said,
> 
> Saludos



Patear el balde??? No me jodas....  heheheheh

Hey, thank you Sergio11 I'm getting blushed again!!! It's nice to hear that after all, my efforts worked out... It is quite painful for an spanish speaker to talk in english  moreover  I 've unfortunatelly  I didn't have up to now the posibility of spending some time in England or the States...

Cheers Sergio11 and cheers everybody!!

/kitus


----------



## elroy

kitus said:
			
		

> you are *making me blush* me Swettenham...  Thank you for those support*ive* words (or "words of support") I would be glad to help you guys*;* just let me know what do  I have to do...
> 
> My god elroy I think I should consider learning a new language and giving up *on* learning this one!!!  hehehe I hope I made myself clearerenough  though  but tons of thanks for correcting me
> 
> I would say I would use
> 
> *"preguntar las cosas"* when you have already made up your mind... you already know what to ask (preguntar las cosas que he estado pensando).
> 
> On the other hand, *"preguntar cosas"* is more general... you are not *specifying* which things do  you wanna ask
> 
> Think of "preguntar nombres" and "preguntar los nombres"...
> 
> 
> cheers,
> 
> /kitus


 
A few more corrections. 

One important one: "blush" is intransitive. You can say "I am blushing," "You are making me blush," etc. But a person does not _blush_ you.

As for "preguntar las cosas," I think you misunderstood my question.  Of course I know the difference between "preguntar las cosas" and "preguntar cosas." What I meant was do you say "preguntar las cosas" to mean "hacer las preguntas." You had said "ask things," which I changed to "ask questions" - so I was wondering if your word choice had been influenced by Spanish. Your answer leads me to assume that you can indeed say "preguntar (las) cosas" in Spanish. 

By the way, I just noticed that you have less 30 posts! Such a new member, but such an impact!

My commendations on spotting a weakness right away and not hesitating to comment on it!


----------



## kitus

elroy said:
			
		

> A few more corrections.
> 
> One important one: "blush" is intransitive. You can say "I am blushing," "You are making me blush," etc. But a person does not _blush_ you.
> 
> As for "preguntar las cosas," I think you misunderstood my question.  Of course I know the difference between "preguntar las cosas" and "preguntar cosas." What I meant was do you say "preguntar las cosas" to mean "hacer las preguntas." You had said "ask things," which I changed to "ask questions" - so I was wondering if your word choice had been influenced by Spanish. Your answer leads me to assume that you can indeed say "preguntar (las) cosas" in Spanish.
> 
> By the way, I just noticed that you have less 30 posts! Such a new member, but such an impact!
> 
> My commendations on spotting a weakness right away and not hesitating to comment on it!



hehehehe, we do say "preguntar cosas"  I didn't notice before how strange it sounds but hehehe indeed we use it 

Yappppp, 30 posts but looking forward posting a thousand more and if possible even more transcendental 

cheers Elroy and tons of thanks for your corrections,

looking forward being corrected again

/kitus


----------



## LV4-26

Two points. The first one will seem very silly but as it hasn't yet been mentionned...
1. It sometimes happen that the literal translation *is* the correct translation. (to me, it's so much the better. Why then use a different one ?)

The second one has already been discussed by Panjy. I guess I'm just summarizing it.
2. For various reasons a literal translation is often useful as a temporary helper to find the best equivalent.

That said, I partly agree with you, kitus, in that one shouldn't throw in any literal translation without any comment just for the sake of answering a question. But I guess we all agree on that.


----------



## elroy

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> Two points. The first one will seem very silly but as it hasn't yet been mentionned...
> 1. It sometimes happen that the literal translation *is* the correct translation. (to me, it's so much the better. Why then use a different one ?)
> 
> The second one has already been discussed by Panjy. I guess I'm just summarizing it.
> 2. For various reasons a literal translation is often useful as a temporary helper to find the best equivalent.
> 
> That said, I partly agree with you, kitus, in that one shouldn't throw in any literal translation without any comment just for the sake of answering a question. But I guess we all agree on that.


 
I think your point #1 is excellent.

All too often, translators overdo it with "free" translations: it's almost like there's a stigma associated with literal translations.

Unless a literal translation distorts the meaning or renders the construction awkward, it should always be preferred over a "metaphorical" one that adds to or takes away from the intended meaning.

Just to tie things together with our broader discussion, literal translations should be indicated as such.  That way everyone's on the same page (not "sur la même page"! )


----------



## me82

oops... i just posted something and i said i wasn't sure at all... :-/ sorry about that.

In the meantime, when i try to translate something and say i'm not sure, some persons might tell me if it is correct or not, so i can learn and the thread starter won't be confused.

i hope i explain correctly.


----------



## cuchuflete

Thanks Me82,

You made me think of a possibly important detail that has not yet been mentioned.  When you are very sure, even certain, that a translation is correct, it is useful to say so!

If, for example, someone asks for a translation of perro SP=>EN, and I know that this means 'dog' and nothing else, it may be beneficial to say,

Without any doubt, the translation is 
dog

I have verified this in the WR dictionary and with three other sources.

Of course this can still be misleading if no context was given and the original usage was figurative.   But that would be the fault of the person stating the request...








			
				me82 said:
			
		

> oops... i just posted something and i said i wasn't sure at all... :-/ sorry about that.
> 
> In the meantime, when i try to translate something and say i'm not sure, some persons might tell me if it is correct or not, so i can learn and the thread starter won't be confused.
> 
> i hope i explain correctly.


----------



## kitus

Thumbs up Cuchuflete I totally agree,

/kitus


----------



## Outsider

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> It is, rather, the honesty of the reply.  Uncertainty is not a defect, if it is clearly labelled.  Little phrases such as "I'm not certain, but..." or even "I think that..." can help to avoid giving the impression that the writer is speaking authoritatively.
> 
> What are most troubling are the wild guesses proffered as if they were obviously correct.  These are as misleading as they are egotistical.


I agree with what Cuchuflete wrote here, and others have also said, in principle.

However, sometimes people feel sure about something, but they're actually mistaken. I've seen that a few times in the forum: an authoritative reply given by an otherwise very knowledgeable poster, that nevertheless turned out to be wrong. It's not always a matter of honesty; sometimes, people simply echo misconceptions.

So, I don't think there's an easy solution for the problem raised in this thread, although I do support the appeal to state that you're not sure whenever you _know_ you aren't.

In the end, I think the golden rule does come down to "caveat lector", as Fenixpollo wrote on the first page of this thread.


----------



## Ynez

fenixpollo said:


> The only confusion that results from inaccurate answers is when:
> a) nobody corrects the inaccuracy, or
> b) people who view the thread don't read it carefully.
> 
> I think somebody famous once said something profound about learning from one's mistakes.



If you correct someone, you end up being cruel for hurting his/her feelings, or you find yourself in the middle of a fight.


----------



## kitus

Ynez said:


> If you correct someone, you end up being cruel for hurting his/her feelings, or you find yourself in the middle of a fight.



You're right, I wouldn't have explained it any better


----------



## Antpax

Ynez said:


> If you correct someone, you end up being cruel for hurting his/her feelings, or you find yourself in the middle of a fight.



Hi,

I do not see it this way. If the correction is made in a polite way it doesn´t have to end up in a fight or seem you are cruel. I have corrected and been correct as well, lots of times and most of the them none of these happened.

Cheers.

Ant


----------



## Ynez

It is not my experience.

I sometimes reply strongly, but it is because people make strong remarks.

People here dare to make very strong remarks, like saying a huge percentage of the population speaks in an uneducated manner because they use a normal word. I don't even agree with RAE making that type of comment, not to mention when it is some users here who have not proved themselves an authority to speak like that. Theirs is just a totally subjective, biased perspective that, from my point of view, should not be allowed.

Well, my other example was about someone I directed to the dictionary. He was truly hurt.


----------



## fenixpollo

Ynez said:


> It is not my experience.
> 
> I sometimes reply strongly, but it is because people make strong remarks.


 If you reply strongly, then people may take offense to the *way in which you are correcting them*, not to *the fact that you are correcting them*.



Ynez said:


> People here dare to make very strong remarks, like saying a huge percentage of the population speaks in an uneducated manner because they use a normal word. I don't even agree with RAE making that type of comment, not to mention when it is some users here who have not proved themselves an authority to speak like that. Theirs is just a totally subjective, biased perspective that, from my point of view, should not be allowed.


 The moderators cannot prevent people from being arrogant, or from looking down on people for speaking in a particular way, or for stating that there is "one correct way" to speak. The only thing that we foreros can do when we encounter this kind of attitude is to suggest to the person that they should consider multiple alternatives.

_It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth._
-- John Locke


----------



## Ynez

fenixpollo said:


> If you reply strongly, then people may take offense to the *way in which you are correcting them*, not to *the fact that you are correcting them*.
> 
> The moderators cannot prevent people from being arrogant, or from looking down on people for speaking in a particular way, or for stating that there is "one correct way" to speak. The only thing that we foreros can do when we encounter this kind of attitude is to suggest to the person that they should consider multiple alternatives.
> 
> _It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth._
> -- John Locke




I am afraid that is my only way to correct. I did not say he was wrong. I just made a question and pointed him to the dictionary. 

If you say they are wrong, you need to give much longer explanations, which would go to basic things, like "what is a synonym".

If fact, that is a problem sometimes...people are able to give very very long explanations that are totally meaningless. Those are impossible to be really contradicted. The only thing you can say is "that's bullshit".


If people can say those using a normal word are uneducated, I should also be able to call them uneducated. They started.


----------



## Nunty

There are ways to make corrections without saying "you're wrong". Sometimes I say "I disagree" or "I strongly disagree" or even "I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me". Speaking in the first person is one way to avoid being confrontational. Another way is to ask for references: "I've never heard that before. Do you have a reference or a link for it?" I need to bear in mind that I might be the one who is wrong! It is much easier to avoid climbing up high trees than to climb down from one once you're already stuck up there.

It is very hard not to respond in kind, but that is usually a good way to keep an interaction (in person or in a forum) from becoming hurtful and attacking. If someone calls me an idiot I can always choose not to reply. That's really hard, of course. 

If someone is, in my opinion, stubbornly sticking to a wrong answer and insisting to other people that it's right, there isn't anything I can do to change that. I can post a brief quotation from an authoritative text, but I might post simply "I guess we just disagree on that" and drop it. We can be sure that in a place like WordReference other people will also see the error and usually someone else will step in to comment.

I don't always follow my own excellent advice.  Even so, the things I try to bear in mind are:

* We can all make mistakes. Me too.
* No one appointed me the Righter of All Errors. 
* There are real people with real feelings sitting on the other side of that screen.
* This is an Internet forum, not a matter of life and death. Keep things in proportion. (A hard one sometimes!)
* There is no confrontation if one of us walks away. I can choose to walk away.


----------



## Ynez

Yes, you are totally wise in some of your comments, Nunty, and I should know better since I am not a child.

For you to have an idea, I was searching the word "accuracy" when I found this thread.

Then, we have that other topic you did not comment about: I get insulted when someone says only uneducated people use a particular word.

When someone starts like that, normally the rest won't say "I do use it!", because then they show themselves as uneducated.

So those posts are insulting, and misleading learners. All a big disgusting lie.





> There is no confrontation if one of us walks away. I can choose to walk away.



For me it is not really so difficult to walk away, but if I do and everybody does...what happens then? That's my bottom question in this thread.


----------



## sergio11

Nunty said:


> ...There are ways to make corrections without saying "you're wrong"...


 
Hola, Nunty,

You are right in that there are ways to make corrections without saying "you're wrong", but that not always makes it less hurtful. Sometimes the asking of questions may be viewed as too condescending and hurt more than a direct confrontation. 

Being this a forum of friends, there is a certain familiarity among the members, that allows for a degree of directness without offending each other. 

Saludos


----------



## Wordsmyth

Regarding the original suggestion in this thread, I put myself firmly in the "Do answer but make it clear that you're not sure" camp — not surprisingly, considering the signature quotation I've been using for a while . After all, this *is* a *discussion* forum.

But even if I held the same view as _kitus_, I wouldn't expect the "Don't answer ..." suggestion to work, because of human nature ...

There's a well-known TV quiz show where one of the 'help-out' jokers is 'Ask the audience'. The presenter asks the audience to choose one of four possible answers, and stresses that audience-members should reply *only if they're absolutely sure of the answer*. And usually *every one* of the four answers gets a significant number of 'votes'!! 

So the instruction fails utterly: probably some people are absolutely sure, but are wrong; others may just not have listened to the instruction; but I reckon the majority are people who aren't sure, but want to make their best guess known, to have their say, to participate (even if they know they're not sure).

Ws


----------



## danielfranco

And sometimes it is actually useful to have somebody say something completely off the wall and completely wrong, so that other people can chime in and give their opinions as to why such answer could be actually wrong.

Then again, I've learned in these forumses that one can always hide under the safety blanket of "well, that's how they speak where I'm from" (yah, even using prepositions at the end of sentences… The horror!).

It's good entertainment to see all those people reducing the geographical circle of their lexicon influence to "in my country…," to "in my town…," to "in my block…," until we reach the "well, that's how I say it, what of it?"

And then we can actually hear them pouting as they type.
Good fun, eh?
D


----------



## MkRoz

Hello,

Are the *best* anwers those which are coming* from Native* *Teachers?*

I don´t think so!!

*MkRoz*


----------



## danielfranco

Which reminds me… There are a couple of threads exactly about how natives can also be oh so wrong, and how non-natives usually know the grammar rules back and forth, side to side, up and down, but can't deal with idiomatic crud for nuthin'!

Sorry, my search button is broken… 
D


----------



## emm1366

No veo nada peor que pedir un intento de traducción a una persona que no sabe. Por eso pide ayuda. Dar respuestas erradas no es tan grave como pedirle a alguien que se equivoque voluntariamente. ¿No creen ustedes?


----------



## swift

Buenas noches Emm y buenas noches a todos :

Tienes razón: nadie pediría asesoría lingüística o traductológica a un ignorante. Sin embargo, me parece que el espíritu de este hilo iba por otra dirección.

Hasta ahora no me había pronunciado pues me parece que el asunto ha sido "suficientemente discutido". Sin embargo, creo yo, se puede señalar algunos aspectos interesantes:

1) Cuando respondemos con cierto titubeo, lo moralmente correcto es que lo indiquemos y solicitemos ayuda, y que quien esté más informado nos corrija y nos oriente. Ahora bien, no hay razón para encenderse por el error ajeno (y por cierto, tampoco por el propio). Ya sabemos de varios foristas que perdieron el privilegio de formar parte de esta comunidad debido a que constantemente se enardecían. La regla, aunque cueste aplicarla, es abstenerse. En efecto, la abstención se agradece cuando uno busca guía y no regaños y mucho menos invectivas.

2) Por lo general, cuando alguien introduce un comentario con "A mí me parece / Para mí / Desde mi perspectiva" y similares, existe un margen de duda ya que, como se ha dicho y redicho, la opinión personal de un individuo no representa necesariamente el sentir de una comunidad lingüística. Lo anterior es tanto más obvio cuanto más vasto es el territorio cubierto por una lengua (tomemos a América Latina como ejemplo). La duda no es desconfianza, es asumir de un modo responsable que todos estamos expuestos a errar.

3) La lingüística popular, esto es, las representaciones del común de los locutores no debe ser aprehendida como una opinión desinformada. Si lo vemos con amplitud de miras, reconoceremos que todo locutor es, en cierta medida, un experto en su idioma. Desgraciadamente, existen diversos factores que podrían restarle autoridad a la lingüística popular; sin embargo no deja de ser ilustrativa e interesante.

En la lingüística tradicional se ha dejado de lado los juicios (o prejuicios, ya que por lo general tienen un valor evaluativo) de las comunidades lingüísticas sobre sus propios idiomas. Por ello es de rescatar que en estos foros se deje cierto margen para el error y para la reflexión lingüística menos formal. Todos los locutores tienen derecho a informarse acerca de su propia lengua.

En definitiva, se requiere humildad, modestia y buen juicio de parte de todos. Reconocer nuestros errores puede no ser fácil, pero produce un ambiente de serenidad y convivialidad. Es cierto que las respuestas de autoridad nos dan mucha seguridad, pero también tenemos que admitir que atreverse a emitir una opinión sabiendo que miles de miembros nos leerán es un acto de valentía . Pero también se espera que quien emita su opinión la asuma . Como dijo cierto forista en alguna ocasión: una regla de oro es no adoptar posturas de erudito confirmado, sino cultivar la reputación de conocedor precavido. 

Como habrán visto, me he alargado un poco. Espero que mi comentario sea de algún interés. Quizá hasta contenga materia para un nuevo debate.

Saludos cordiales,


swift


----------



## Nanon

Emm ¿te refieres al intento de traducción que se le pide a la persona que abre un hilo? En este caso se le pide para que la relación entre la persona que hace la pregunta y el resto de la comunidad sea simétrica, de acuerdo con las reglas del foro. Tanto su aportación como las de los demás serán discutidas. No le estamos pidiendo que "se equivoque voluntariamente": de hecho, ella puede no estar del todo equivocada y su propuesta puede ser validada.

El hecho de que este recurso sea libre y abierto no significa que no tenga precio. El precio que hay que pagar no es un aporte financiero sino un pequeño esfuerzo, un intento, el ínfimo riesgo de verse expuesto a las miradas del público a través de nuestros escritos (insisto en que el riesgo es pequeño, no se trata de un examen y mucho menos de un asunto de vida o muerte). Ahora bien, quienes respondemos no debemos desvalorizar a las personas que cometen errores sino ver los errores y las correcciones como una posible fuente de reflexión.

Sobre el "dogma de la Natividad" se ha escrito mucho, pero hasta los nativos se equivocan. Para beneficio de todos, pues tenemos más hilos abiertos...

Humildad, modestia como bien lo dijo swift, y un espíritu de cooperación amistosa, muchas veces con una cierta dosis de afectividad, en vez de respuestas de autoridad. Además, somos libres de aceptar y aplicar las respuestas que se nos dan, o de no hacerlo.


----------



## swift

Buenas tardes:

Recordemos otro aspecto importante: el foro cuenta con las herramientas necesarias para resarcir y recortar: los botones de edición y de supresión de mensajes, además de un plazo razonable para realizar modificaciones, enmiendas y adendas.

Saludos,


swift


----------



## Argónida

Estoy totalmente de acuerdo con Swift y Nanon.

Si se tratara solo de encontrar respuestas correctas, entendiendo por corrección todo aquello que pueda ser validado por cualquier libro de gramática o diccionario, para mí el foro dejaría de tener sentido. Hay respuestas (yo misma he incluído a veces mensajes de ese tipo) que enlazan directamente con la autoridad (diccionario, enciclopedia, manual...) y son relativamente útiles, según el contexto pueden resolver una duda definitivamente. Pero a mí no son el tipo de mensajes que más me aportan. Las cosas más importantes que he aprendido en este foro surgen precisamente de la subjetividad, de la relatividad, de lo que para unos es correcto o usual pero para otros no. Precisamente lo más importante que he aprendido es que la palabra "correcto" no tiene sentido en muchas ocasiones cuando hablamos de lengua. También aprendo mucho de los errores (de los míos y de los demás). De los hilos en los que hay múltiples aportaciones, correcciones, puntualizaciones... más que de las preguntas que encuentran una sola respuesta erudita que no deja lugar a más. Yo he corregido en múltiples ocasiones, y me he mostrado en descuerdo también muchas veces con lo que han aportado otros foreros. El noventa por ciento de las veces la cosa no ha derivado en pelea ni nadie se ha sentido humillado, y el resto de las veces seguramente ha sido culpa mía por contestar con demasiada vehemencia. También me han corregido muchas veces, y lo que suelo hacer en estos casos es dar las gracias y si todavía estoy a tiempo corregir mi mensaje para no dar lugar a confusión. Nunca me he sendido ofendida por ello, ni porque alguien manifieste una opinión distinta a la mía. En cualquier caso, una gran parte de mis mensajes incluyen frases del tipo: "Yo creo...", "en mi opinión...", "no estoy segura...", "pero no soy una experta en la materia...", "espera otras respuestas...".

Todo esto es humano, y es comunicación. Y es lo que hace de WR un sitio interesante en el que se aprende mucho. Para lo otro ya están las máquinas que traducen automáticamente, cuya "objetiva" y desapasionada ineficiencia está más que comprobada.


----------



## PABLO DE SOTO

Argónida said:


> Estoy totalmente de acuerdo con Swift y Nanon.
> 
> Si se tratara solo de encontrar respuestas correctas, entendiendo por corrección todo aquello que pueda ser validado por cualquier libro de gramática o diccionario, para mí el foro dejaría de tener sentido. Hay respuestas (yo misma he incluído a veces mensajes de ese tipo) que enlazan directamente con la autoridad (diccionario, enciclopedia, manual...) y son relativamente útiles, según el contexto pueden resolver una duda definitivamente. Pero a mí no son el tipo de mensajes que más me aportan. Las cosas más importantes que he aprendido en este foro surgen precisamente de la subjetividad, de la relatividad, de lo que para unos es correcto o usual pero para otros no. Precisamente lo más importante que he aprendido es que la palabra "correcto" no tiene sentido en muchas ocasiones cuando hablamos de lengua. También aprendo mucho de los errores (de los míos y de los demás). De los hilos en los que hay múltiples aportaciones, correcciones, puntualizaciones... más que de las preguntas que encuentran una sola respuesta erudita que no deja lugar a más. Yo he corregido en múltiples ocasiones, y me he mostrado en descuerdo también muchas veces con lo que han aportado otros foreros. El noventa por ciento de las veces la cosa no ha derivado en pelea ni nadie se ha sentido humillado, y el resto de las veces seguramente ha sido culpa mía por contestar con demasiada vehemencia. También me han corregido muchas veces, y lo que suelo hacer en estos casos es dar las gracias y si todavía estoy a tiempo corregir mi mensaje para no dar lugar a confusión. Nunca me he sendido ofendida por ello, ni porque alguien manifieste una opinión distinta a la mía. En cualquier caso, una gran parte de mis mensajes incluyen frases del tipo: "Yo creo...", "en mi opinión...", "no estoy segura...", "pero no soy una experta en la materia...", "espera otras respuestas...".
> 
> Todo esto es humano, y es comunicación. Y es lo que hace de WR un sitio interesante en el que se aprende mucho. Para lo otro ya están las máquinas que traducen automáticamente, cuya "objetiva" y desapasionada ineficiencia está más que comprobada.


 


¡Qué bien lo has expresado Argónida!
Coincido contigo.
Yo busco y muchas veces encuentro la opinión de la gente que me aporta visiones que de otro modo no puedo conseguir.
En el caso del foro Sólo español, es sumamente enriquecedor leer opiniones de todo el ámbito hispano que ayudan a conocer como va el idioma por el mundo.
Con el tiempo aprendes a discernir qué mensajes te merecen mayor o menor credibilidad.
A mí no me interesan tanto los mensajes que aluden a la opinión académica o a lo que dijo tal lingüista en tal libro, como lo que aporta la gente en la que confío, y aquí confío en la mayoría.
Yo creo que todos tenemos nuestros foreros a los que valoramos en especial y en mi caso son los que me hablan del lenguaje de la calle.

Lógicamente, otros foreros buscarán la opinión académica y la mayoría de las veces la encuentran.
También hay foreros que aúnan las dos virtudes, la académica y la callejera. Esos ya son lo más.


----------



## MkRoz

¡*Argónida y Pablo* habéis *resumido justo lo que yo también pienso y opino con respecto a mi anterior preguntilla* (sugerida-_con un doble sentido-_)!.

¡Saludos a todos/as!

*MkRoz*


----------



## PABLO DE SOTO

Cada foro es un mundo. Hay un foro, que no es el foro Sólo Español, en el que alguna vez cuando alguien, especialmente alguien nuevo, hace una afirmación genérica o expresa una creencia popular o simplemente una opinión personal, aparecen otros que se tiran al cuello a rebatirle con aquello de "¿en qué te basas?, ¿ puedes concretar tus fuentes?, ¿ tienes bibliografía para apoyar tal afirmación? ".

Yo encuentro eso bastante limitador. Una opinión personal sobre el tema en cuestión no tiene que apoyarse en fuentes biblográficas. A mí me puede bastar la experiencia personal de quien opina.
Si alguien dice "los hispanohablantes tienen dificultad en pronunciar la ese líquida a principio de palabra" puede estar basándose simplemente en su capacidad de observación y ya es función mía pensar sobre ello y ver si la opinión en cuestión me merece credibilidad o no.

Hay otro foro donde sin embargo se palpa la libertad, la educación y el buen rollo: el foro de lenguas nórdicas.


----------



## Outsider

I just wanted to say that reading this thread has made me review my posting practices. I must plead guilty to being one of those who have had a habit of often replying to new users in their native language, instead of their learning language.

In my defense, beginners may not be comfortable with their target language, and prefer a reply in their own language. This situation may be more common in the Portuguese forums than elsewhere.

In any event, I've been trying to make a greater effort to respect the subject language of each forum lately. If the users are not comfortable with it, they can say so, and then I will switch to their native language if I can.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

PABLO DE SOTO said:


> Cada foro es un mundo. Hay un foro, que no es el foro Sólo Español, en el que alguna vez cuando alguien, especialmente alguien nuevo, hace una afirmación genérica o expresa una creencia popular o simplemente una opinión personal, aparecen otros que se tiran al cuello a rebatirle con aquello de "¿en qué te basas?, ¿ puedes concretar tus fuentes?, ¿ tienes bibliografía para apoyar tal afirmación? ".
> 
> Yo encuentro eso bastante limitador. Una opinión personal sobre el tema en cuestión no tiene que apoyarse en fuentes biblográficas. A mí me puede bastar la experiencia personal de quien opina.
> Si alguien dice "los hispanohablantes tienen dificultad en pronunciar la ese líquida a principio de palabra" puede estar basándose simplemente en su capacidad de observación y ya es función mía pensar sobre ello y ver si la opinión en cuestión me merece credibilidad o no.
> 
> Hay otro foro donde sin embargo se palpa la libertad, la educación y el buen rollo: el foro de lenguas nórdicas.


Jeje, en el foro nórdico no hay miles de foreros de distintos países que cada uno habla un variante de esas lenguas. Si una afirmación parece incorrecta según la opinión de la mayoría de los de habla sueca, por ejemplo, en general sí pedimos bibliografía también. Si se trata de variaciones regionales, respetamos que sí las hay, o sea, lo que es correcto en el sur puede ser incorrecto en el norte... 

/Wilma


----------



## sabroso164

Argónida said:


> Hay respuestas (yo misma he incluído a veces mensajes de ese tipo) que enlazan directamente con la autoridad (diccionario, enciclopedia, manual...) y son relativamente útiles, según el contexto pueden resolver una duda definitivamente. Pero a mí no son el tipo de mensajes que más me aportan. Las cosas más importantes que he aprendido en este foro surgen precisamente de la subjetividad, de la relatividad, de lo que para unos es correcto o usual pero para otros no.


 
Perhaps we should change the name of this thread to "pet peeves" 

I whole-heartedly agree with this comment as well.  I don't think most of us participate in the forum so we can copy and paste chapter-and-verse from reference books.  It helps make a point at times, but it is irritating when that is all the person posting has to say.

I believe we are here because we feel that we have personal expertise in the subject matter.  *We may not always be right*, and we should admit when we stand corrected.  We know that the learning process never, ever ends.

Language and its usage originate with the consensus of those who use it as a communication tool.  Language changes constantly, and so do the meanings of words and expressions.  We contribute to the forum to document that process of consensus and change.


----------



## swift

Buenas noches:

He seguido con interés este hilo (Mensaje que proviene de este hilo. Martine (Mod...)), pues en él se ponen de manifiesto una serie de elementos muy llamativos y relevantes desde el punto de vista de la lingüística popular. Quienes hemos podido intervenir en innumerables discusiones como miembros activos de estos foros desde hace cinco años o más hemos observado la diversidad de antecedentes personales de quienes se han ido sumando al conjunto de foristas que conforman esta variopinta comunidad: estudiantes de idiomas, filólogos, lingüistas, abogados, médicos, azafatas, psicólogos, educadores, diseñadores gráficos, ingenieros, publicistas, bibliotecólogos, contadores, periodistas, traductores, informáticos, economistas, químicos, aviadores, electricistas, monjas, veterinarios, restauradores... Representantes todos ellos de decenas de países, con distintos orígenes, historiales educativos, intereses, y que vinieron a parar a estos foros, donde los reúne un interés común: el idioma. Pero si hay algo que salta a la vista es que cada una de las discusiones que se publican a diario ponen de relieve la variedad de actitudes lingüísticas -reconocibles por una serie de rasgos discursivos- y de niveles de pericia o de especialidad con que abordan las consultas en las que participan y con que comentan las respuestas de otros contertulios, ya sea para expresar su adhesión a lo que en ellas se expone, o para refutarlas, o para criticarlas en parte.

La experiencia de quienes llevamos más años contribuyendo en los foros nos conduce a menudo —con mayor o menor certeza— a formular suposiciones respecto de la aptitud de un forista u otro para emitir una respuesta bien sustentada, y en no pocas ocasiones tenemos que replantearnos nuestros prejuicios. Quizás una de las características más significativas de quienes participan asiduamente en foros de discusión en Internet es que los foristas más experimentados tienden a basarse en tres tipos de datos para validar las contribuciones de los miembros nuevos: la información sobre la ocupación y los intereses que constan en el perfil del forista, el grado de elaboración o el esmero puesto en la redacción de sus mensajes y la calidad de las fuentes en que basa sus aportes.

Acerca de las últimas resulta interesante comprobar que, con el paso del tiempo, se ha llegado a establecer un catálogo común más o menos colegiado de fuentes recomendables. Muchas de ellas constan en extensos listados de recursos y se puede apreciar la coaparición de obras científicas y académicas junto con glosarios compilados por aficionados y documentos técnicos provenientes de sitios especializados. Para los foristas experimentados es fácil anticipar las fuentes de las que podrían extraer información relevante para resolver las consultas y en la gran mayoría de las ocasiones dichos miembros dan por sentada la validez de esas fuentes, pues forman parte del repertorio común y se puede suponer que tarde o temprano alguien añadirá una cita sacada de ellas. Aquellos que están en proceso de familiarización con ese conjunto de fuentes validadas se exponen a crítica cuando emplean citas de documentos no respaldados o que no han sido suficientemente compulsados.

Y lo que se ve aquí no es distinto de lo que ocurre en "el mundo exterior". Para muchos será familiar la escena de un grupo de amigos que, reunidos en torno a una mesa de tragos, se ponen a discutir sobre la corrección de una frase, luego de que uno sacara a relucir que en cierto anuncio de la televisión se oye "en base a estudios científicos". En el calor del momento, la conversación se podría poner tensa y acabar armándose la de Dios es Cristo. O si se lo toman con desenfado, a lo mejor acabarán riéndose del que introdujo el tema. Y en ese grupo bien podría haber un profesor de Estudios Sociales, una secretaria, una relacionista pública, un enfermero y un filólogo miembro de WR.  Tal como sucede en el foro, todos ellos aportarán al debate distintos elementos, en función de sus actitudes lingüísticas y de su grado de conocimiento experto. Uno se apresurará a emitir un juicio de valor: _¡tenía que ser un anuncio de esa gente!_; otro recordará alguna clase de Español de secundaria: _yo creo que si mi profe no nos dijo unas setecientas veces que lo correcto es "con base en"..._; otro mencionará lo que leyó a propósito de la misma publicidad en una nota periodística; otro todavía dirá que "en base a" aparece todo el tiempo en _Selecciones_ y también en una canción de Joan Sebastian, y por tanto debe de ser válido.

Ahora bien, dada la atmósfera "seria y académica" promovida por estos foros, parece natural el sobresalto de quienes señalan con tono reprobatorio una respuesta irreflexiva o un juicio de valor infundado. Pero es saludable relativizar un poco las cosas y tener presente que no todos los que participan aquí son filólogos o lingüistas, y eso se ve a las claras por la ausencia de elementos característicos del discurso experto en sus contribuciones. Aun así, tal como se ha podido comprobar en tesis universitarias en el campo de la lingüística popular, existen comentarios semejantes al sistema experto y comentarios del tipo prescriptivo o normativista emitidos por hablantes que no tienen formación académica en lingüística o en filología. Las valoraciones negativas o positivas emitidas en muchos mensajes publicados en estos foros constituyen pruebas fehacientes de que existe un grado de consciencia en los hablantes del idioma acerca de las variaciones idiolectales, sociolectales, generacionales, estilísticas... Por supuesto, el discurso experto y el aficionado presentan distintos matices y pueden llegar a extremos: desde el comentario arcano, repleto de tecnicismos, pasando por los comentarios normativistas inflexibles, hasta las respuestas agrias en las que abundan argumentos _ad hominem_.

Entonces, para concluir, llama la atención un hilo como éste porque revela que existe en estos foros un material riquísimo para el análisis académico desde la perspectiva de la lingüística popular. Aparece asimismo de nueva cuenta cierta intolerancia a algunos comentarios que sólo demuestran la variedad de modelos culturales y de antecedentes personales de quienes participan en estos foros. Y se puede observar que en la dinámica de los foros de WR se da una interacción muy particular en la que parece estar sobreentendido que toda respuesta es susceptible de ser sopesada y refutada con nuevos elementos no considerados por el autor. Se puede decir, en definitiva, que existe una regla implícita y es la de *verificar lo que se dice antes de publicarlo*.


----------

