# refuso



## joe86

> Moderator's note:
> This is a split thread. The statement that generated joe86's resonse was,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neuromatico said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sì, mi è scappato un refuso.
Click to expand...

Hi Neuromatico,

I couldn't help noticing that the word _*refuso*_ is often being used by you non-native speakers...just wanted to point out that I actually never heard anybody use it in whole of my life, at least as far as I remember. 
It must be quite formal I guess...I would more naturally say *è stato un errore di stampa/di battitura* or simply _*è stata solo una svista*_...yeah that's definitely the expression a native would use.
I'm not trying to correct you, just wanted you to notice that. 

_Joe_


----------



## neuromatico

joe86 said:


> Hi Neuromautico Neuromatico, (una tua svista )
> 
> I couldn't help noticing that the word _*refuso*_ is often being used by you non-native speakers...just wanted to point out that I actually never heard anybody use it in whole of my life, at least as far as I remember.
> It must be quite formal I guess...I would more naturally say *è stato un errore di stampa/di battitura* or simply _*è stata solo una svista*_...yeah that's definitely the expression a native would use.
> I'm not trying to correct you, just wanted you to notice that.
> 
> _Joe_


Thanks, Joe.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Joe..... that's EXACTLY the type of correction that you can only get on here and that's why it's a great place, those types of things are what we all really want correcting, so it sounds a bit more native, a bit more Italian, correcting common things that normally go uncorrected because it's 'technically' correct, but it's important to give opinions like you did.

So there's no need to explain yourself, I hope you can keep it up

I think at least me and neuro will start using svista, and it'll sound a bit more normal now, and I'm grateful for the explanation.

Do you agree neuro?


----------



## neuromatico

Couldn't agree more, Alex. It's why we're here!


----------



## Azazel81

May I beg to differ on the whole "refuso" thing?

Probably Joe86 never used it or heard it being used, and I have to admit it's not very commonly heard... so far it's fine, then.

But...

But I also have to say that the reason why it's not quite commonly used it's because most people don't even know what it means. I guess it's like hearing an English native-speaker use the word "hence". So, those who are actually a bit more "literate" actually DO use expressions like "refuso".


----------



## eyeswideopen

And I agree with Azazel upon the 'refuso' thing.
It is by no means a literary expression, I even found it in a rhymes book I used to read when I was a child 
It is not the most common word to describe 'errore di stampa', but the richness of vocabulary is something that is slowly getting lost nowadays


----------



## Azazel81

eyeswideopen said:


> And I agree with Azazel upon the 'refuso' thing.
> It is by no means a literary expression, I even found it in a rhymes book I used to read when I was a child
> It is not the most common word to describe 'errore di stampa', but the richness of vocabulary is something that is slowly getting lost nowadays


 
Definitely... Right there with you! And I have to say it's kinda sad. We have such a beautiful language, full of a large variety of expressions that can be used to speak in different ways, about different contexts, on different "levels".. And we're losing all this because of our laziness...


----------



## joe86

Azazel81 said:


> May I beg to differ on the whole "refuso" thing?
> 
> Probably Joe86 never used it or heard it being used, and I have to admit it's not very commonly heard... so far it's fine, then.
> 
> But...
> 
> But I also have to say that the reason why it's not quite commonly used it's because most people don't even know what it means. I guess it's like hearing an English native-speaker use the word "hence". So, those who are actually a bit more "literate" actually DO use expressions like "refuso".


 

Well Azazel...my experience speaks different. I'm not a literate, but I'm no ignorant as well and the word *refuso* is a word I suggest that _*non-natives avoid*_. 
This word is for those who can fully master the language and want to stand out in a crowd...play the smart if you will. It might be appropriate in *certain contexts* (among politicians, literates or perhaps journalists...) but is not what common people would say. 
I always laugh (in a good way ) at non-natives who use words that not even natives would use, just because they look them up in the dictionary which most of the times doesn't attach to the word any labels...it just sounds strange from somebody who is still learning the language. 
The reason why I wanted to point this out to *non-native speakers* it's that when they learn these words they then tend to use them on a day-to day basis because they don't realise how formal they are.
If you do want to play the smart then I guess you could use it...but as you said, most people don't even know what it means so you would just make communication harder, which is not quite what language is meant to be. 

That's all I wanted to make Neuromatico (and all the other non-natives) understand, so as to advised them on what would be the more natural way to say it, and I think my contribution was appreciated.
Then I agree with you that the word exists and we should try to maintain the variety of the language, but you will likewise agree with me that being able to fully master the language also implies using _*the right register in the right situation*_, otherwise you just risk giving a bad impression.


----------



## federicoft

The fact natives don't use refuso is an assertion of yours. I beg to disagree too. 
According to De Mauro, refuso is "comune". 

If anything, I would say something on the lines of "_ops, scusate il refuso_" rather than "_mi è scappato un refuso_" (which does indeed sound a bit unnatural, although I can't explain why).
It is a bit pompous, this means you can even use it humorously ("_che increscioso refuso!_"), but provided you know how to use it, it's perfectly fine for me too.


----------



## Azazel81

joe86 said:


> Well Azazel...my experience speaks different. I'm not a literate, but I'm no ignorant as well and the word *refuso* is a word I suggest that _*non-natives avoid*_. And I suppose you're here as a spokesperson for all natives, then... which by the way I am.. (a native). I wouldn't say that... I'd say: we use it when we need it, which is way different from saying "we would never use it" or even worse "we would avoid using it".
> This word is for those who can fully master the language and want to stand out in a crowd...play the smart if you will. It might be appropriate in *certain contexts* (among politicians, literates or perhaps journalists...) but is not what common people would say. I partially agree with you here... it's for those who know its meaning.. just like every other expression.
> I always laugh (in a good way ) at non-natives who use words that not even natives would use, just because they look them up in the dictionary which most of the times doesn't attach to the word any labels...it just sounds strange from somebody who is still learning the language.
> The reason why I wanted to point this out to *non-native speakers* it's that when they learn these words they then tend to use them on a day-to day basis because they don't realise how formal they are.
> If you do want to play the smart then I guess you could use it...but as you said, most people don't even know what it means so you would just make communication harder, which is not quite what language is meant to be. alright, point taken.. but do you also admit that a language is made of a lot of words most of which share meanings, which could make it sound like they were useless? If so, then why bothering in trying to learn words and expressions? why making communication harder when it can very well be easier?
> 
> That's all I wanted to make Neuromatico (and all the other non-natives) understand, so as to advised them on what would be the more natural way to say it, and I think my contribution was appreciated. In fact it was. I just wanted you to see that if there are people like me and eyeswideopen who have a different opinion compared to yours, then probably it's not true what you STATE. The thing is: you stated that it is the way you said, when in fact you probably should have said "in my opinion...". It would have made a huge difference here.
> Then I agree with you that the word exists and we should try to maintain the variety of the language, but you will likewise agree with me that being able to fully master the language also implies using _*the right register in the right situation*_, otherwise you just risk giving a bad impression. Yes, I'm definitely right there with you.


 
Like I said, I just didn't want Neuromatico (and other non-natives) to get the wrong idea about the word "refuso" which definitely belongs to "high-level Italian", but it IS used.

And also: I don't want you to take it personally.. it's nothing personal of course.. I just wanted to say my opinion on this (which is also supported by others, as I can see). No harm, no foul.. right?


----------



## Liuk99

Per me refuso è una parola molto comune, la uso quotidianamente (purtroppo!!). Certo se  la sentissi dire da uno straniero rimarrei sorpreso, ma positivamente.


----------



## london calling

Liuk99 said:


> Per me refuso è una parola molto comune, la uso quotidianamente (purtroppo!!). Certo se la sentissi dire da uno straniero rimarrei sorpreso, ma positivamente.


E da una straniera? Anch'io la uso, non quotidianamente, ma molto spesso (sul lavoro), perchè è più breve di "errore di stampa/battitura" o simile!


----------



## furs

And I still can't understand why in joe86's opinion non-natives shouldn't use the word "refuso" (which, just to add my 2 cents, is quite common, and not necessrily in a formal register only).


----------



## annadifrancia

Hello, I dare re-open this thread  
First off, I disagree that "this word is for those who can fully master the language and want to stand out in a crowd... play the smart if you will" and agree that it is quite common (especially if you work with texts, of course, if you work in a restaurant you will have less chances to use it). 
But the reason I re-open this thread is that I am not satisfied with the meaning of "typo" in Italian: typo, in my understanding, is a misprint, an error, as if I wrote "beautifull" (out of ignorance or mistake, doesn't matter). But what I want to say is "un chiaro refuso del lavoro di revisione": there is repeated text on different pages of the manuscript, and I know that crafting a paper is a progressive work where sometimes you copy / paste paragraphs... so I want to say that the repeated text is "un chiaro refuso del lavoro di revisione". Can you see how this is different than a typo in the sense of "beautifull"? Refuso, in my native Italian head  carries the meaning of something that remains, inherited, a tail, uno strascico, un rimasuglio. Don't you have a word in English to express this "rimasuglio" del processo di lavorazione?  Thank you!


----------



## AlabamaBoy

I think "typo" is used today with a much broader meaning than your example of "beautifull." It can refer to any editing mistake, repeated words, or misplaced text. "Typographical error" is the correct form. "Typo" is actually slang that has come into acceptable use.


----------



## annadifrancia

Hm, thank you. I know that typo is used in a broad sense. So I will try to make my point one last time: in Italian there is a slight nuance between a mistake (orthographical error) and the by-product of the writing process. Actually [unintentional] "by-product" is exactly the meaning of "refuso" I want to use. Can you see the difference? One is an "accident" and one is a "by-product". Makes sense? If not, I'll let it drop


----------



## johngiovanni

Don't let it drop, it's too interesting.  It is difficult for a non-native to understand "refuso" in this context.
Are we left with a mishmash, a hodgepodge?  It sounds like a typographical disaster.


----------



## byrne

johngiovanni said:


> Don't let it drop, it's too interesting.  It is difficult for a non-native to understand "refuso" in this context.
> Are we left with a mishmash, a hodgepodge?  It sounds like a typographical disaster.



Well no.... it just means that something has erroneously been left in a piece of writing -be it a letter/word/sentence/paragraph/chapter(!)- which was overlooked during re-reading or editing.

I doubt we have a precise term for it..


----------



## johngiovanni

Is it an editing oversight?  Editing _remnant_?  It sounds like an _editing remnant_. (By definition, that's something "left in place".)


----------



## rrose17

annadifrancia said:


> But what I want to say is "un chiaro refuso del lavoro di revisione": there is repeated text on different pages of the manuscript, and I know that crafting a paper is a progressive work where sometimes you copy / paste paragraphs... so I want to say that the repeated text is "un chiaro refuso del lavoro di revisione".


I also doubt there's anything as elegant to express this. I was thinking of "sloppy editing".


----------



## Paulfromitaly

Why not *literal*?


> literal - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
> 
> n.
> 
> a typographical error, esp. involving a single letter.


----------



## rrose17

Sorry but I have never heard the word literal used like that. I doubt it would be understood.


----------



## johngiovanni

I agree with Rrose.  Never heard it before in this context.
However, examples of a "refuso" I have read just seem like typos - "vaso" al posto di "caso", “sparì” invece di “sparò”, etc.
_Treccani_ gives a fairly detailed definition, but ends with "In senso lato, errore tipografico in genere, o anche di fotocomposizione."


----------



## annadifrancia

Wow thank you for all your comments. It touched me that I was asked "not to drop" the attempt to describe the meaning of "refuso", but sometimes people disagree on the usage of this word and they might think I am being too particular on this one, but it can also be that English in fact does not have an equivalent for "refuso". I am used to using synonyms that don't satisfy me, but I don't work in translation (I'm a researcher in multimedia arts) so most of the time my peers will just tell me I am being nitpicky (or a "mierenneuker", beautiful word the Dutch have for this ). 

Back to "refuso": 
In MY understanding, in English, "typo" normally refers to single-letter misprint; while errors like two exact sentences repeated in different paragraphs don't really have a name. Maybe "typo" can be used, but I'm not sure how many would feel this as a natural choice. "Sloppy editing" is pretty spot-on, but you can't go around telling people they are sloppy  "refuso" is way more elegant, although you are telling them the same thing ;p  
In MY understanding, in Italian, it feels natural to call single-letter mistakes "errori di stampa" or "errori di battitura", and if the focus is on the human that did the mistake, then this type of error is definitely a "svista" (unintentional, done while being absent-minded); if the author is ignorant and spells the word wrong, it's not a "svista", it's a *mistake* - period! ONLY in the scientific community, you will hear "typo" (pronounced "tee-poh") referring to "errori di battitura"... just because we also say "ho sottomesso il papero" and "devo logarmi per backuppare i files che ho downloadato" -- so much for being nitpicky 
And here's my point again: "refuso del processo di lavorazione" or "di scrittura" is not a "refuso di stampa" or "errore di battitura". It must be something related to how you compose a (long) text. Example: leaving in the text a whole paragraph you were meaning to cut out. Repeating a sentence or a concept twice in different paragraphs. 

Wikipedia does not really support my argument, though:
Un *refuso* (dal latino _refūsus_, participio passato di _refundĕre_, riversare) è un errore di stampa causato dallo scambio o dallo spostamento di uno o più caretteri durante la composizione manuale di un testo tipografico con caratteri mobili. Il termine è rimasto nel linguaggio comune anche dopo il tramonto della stampa a caratteri mobili ed è sinonimo di errore di battitura o di semplice errore di distrazione nella scrittura di un testo.

In context: 
I am reviewing an article that was already rejected once. It's still questionable in many ways, but I credit the authors for improving it a great deal since last time. I found the same sentences repeated twice in different paragraphs. When you re-work an article, you always move stuff around, copy-paste, so I understand how this mistake could happen. So I don't want to be too hard on them, I want to acknowledge the fact that they *have* re-worked the article (the "refuso" is proof of that) but at the same time you get the feeling that they didn't even re-read the whole thing from top to bottom, or they would have probably spotted the repetition  
so I wanted to use a "condescending" tone with them, acknowledging the work by not calling them "sloppy", allowing that such mistakes happen while re-working a text, while nonetheless suggesting that they haven't re-read the thing. In Italian I would have said: "frase ripetuta nei paragrafi X e Y – chiaramente un refuso di lavorazione"). 
Last remark: sometimes authors will repeat the same concept in different paragraphs literally because they don't remember they've already introduced it. In that case it's no "refuso". In that case is "check the structure of your paper", express this concept here or there for the sake of clarity, to help your reader, etc. 

I can't believe I just let all my "mierenneukerness" out  so, anyone empathizes? anyone?
thank you @johngiovanni


----------



## rrose17

I think in English, could be me, but often we go for a back-handed approach.
_Thank you for all your hard work (please note you copy/pasted a few sentences and left both in) but I think you might tighten the structure a little more..._


----------



## annadifrancia

Thank you @rrose17, I like "please note you copy/pasted a few sentences etc." very much. It is nothing like a direct linguistic mapping (frustrating!), but it says exactly what I wanted to say, exactly like I wanted to say it. I say bingo  thanks


----------



## rrose17

You're most welcome.


----------



## johngiovanni

rrose17 said:


> Thank you for all your hard work (please note you copy/pasted a few sentences and left both in) but I think you might tighten the structure a little more...



I think Rrose either was in the diplomatic service or should have been in it!


----------



## rrose17

...or years spent trying to be a good boss.


----------



## spelleg1

Hi,
I'm not English mother language. So excuse me for any imprecision.
It's fantastic Annadifrancia for her effort!
I agree with her in order to her concept expression.

I try to giv a little contribute.
To be more simple with a classic example for "refuso" (at first, I would to say that there is not adequate word in English to express this concept).

A business that issues invoices, and uses pre-compilated modules to issue the successive invoice.
I'm issued the 1 invoice :
Address
Mister John Deer
1st avenue, 4302
San Francisco

For the second invoice, I'm using the previews template.
Address
*Mister *Laura White
2st avenue, 523
Los Angeles

Ops! I have forget to correct Mister in Miss!

This is a classic example for "refuso".

So, typo error is an error "while" I'm writing.
The "refuso" is a forgetfulness of correction to a previous version (used just for convenience)


----------

