[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC French translation project [was Chinese Translation Project]

[Dan Krimm]

I am not a French speaker, however I would say the following:

We should not compare with usage in any other language, including English,
when deciding usage within a host language.  Native *idiomatic* usage
should prevail, and native speakers are probably the best judge of the
idiom, as long as there are no serious contentions within the
native-speaking community.  This is ultimately a cultural judgment.

I concur with this statement below:

> It is *not* because it is grammatically incorrect to use indefinite
> articles that we will go for definite articles in the end, it is because
> French speaking people have decided here (and I think they represent the
> majority feeling of what's out there) that they prefer to use "the
> ICANN", all the time.

In short, what "feels right" to those who speak the language in the course
of everyday discourse -- let's do that.

By comparison, in the English language there are the "grammar police" who
sometimes try to impose top-down pronouncements on what is "right" and
"wrong" in speech and writing.  But any living/breathing language is
ultimately shaped from the bottom up by speakers in their day-to-day and
moment-to-moment interactions.  It is communal, not authoritarian, in the
end, and linguistic authoritarians are doomed in practice -- if they don't
"get out in front of the parade" they will ultimately be ignored when the
parade takes a different turn on its own momentum.  The parade simply does
not care what linguistic authoritarians have to say.

I would side with a bottom-up approach to this, rather than a top-down
approach.  Let those who *live* the language tell us what flows most
easily in their ears.  (And yes, consider the audience as well, if that
makes any difference, and how any such choices reflect on our own "self
presentation" in terms of style and relationship-role.  We want to be
quickly and clearly understood, and we want to present ourselves in a way
that readers will tend to engage with us as "one of their own.")

In English we never say "the ICANN" -- it sounds awkward and confusing
(even though if expanded we would always say "the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers").  But that is narrowly confined to idiomatic
English and one ought not assume that the idiom necessarily transfers to
any other language at all.

Dan


-- 
Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and
do not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.



On Thu, March 19, 2015 8:26 am, Nicolas Adam wrote:
> I disagree that that would be the most grammatically correct form and I
> suggest you only have this impression from bad habits. Please check your
> rules on articles définis vs articles indéfinis
> <https://encrypted.google.com/search?sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=articles+d%C3%A9finis+ou+ind%C3%A9finis&btnG=Search&pbx=1&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=>.
>
> I have seen, and I think it is a majority uses too, "À propos *de
> l'HTML*" for instance, which is I think an unassailable misuse of
> /article défini/ and that serves to demonstrate that the majority use
> isn't necessarily right (it should be "À propos du HTML"). So to Tim's
> point, the use of the article défini is the jargon, IMO, and not the
> other way around. But Tim's finer point is adapt to your target and it
> is a reasonable point.
>
> "Au sujet d'Internet", "brève présentation d'Internet", are
> unequivocally right, grammatically.
>
> *With ICANN*, there is some room for it to call for an /article défini,/
> but I believe we answered this when we decided to use "ICANN" like we
> did, in English, at the begining of this very sentence.
>
> "Brève présentation d'ICANN" is in my opinion *grammatically* better
> than "brève présentation de l'ICANN" would be.
>
> "J'aurais dû joindre ICANN"
>
> The ICANN, Internet, and the like, are more like sugar, tea and love
> than they are like cups of them, and warrants the use of an /article
> indéfini/ (and not of an /article défini/).
>
> "Il a procédé sans l'aval d'ICANN", "il a étudié toutes les
> organisations internationales pour son examen sauf ICANN" are way better
> than the alternative IMO and I will not be convinced otherwise.
>
> It is *not* because it is grammatically incorrect to use indefinite
> articles that we will go for definite articles in the end, it is because
> French speaking people have decided here (and I think they represent the
> majority feeling of what's out there) that they prefer to use "the
> ICANN", all the time.
>
> You can always stand corrected, but I don't think this preference stems
> from any grammatical rule at all.
>
> I am not bitter that we have had this discussion, btw, it was a very
> interesting discussion that made me think. And you are right that the
> "Brève présentation ..." style is warmer, thank you for that, we should
> use it like you suggest JJ.
>
> Cheers
>
> Nicolas
>
> On 19/03/2015 9:11 AM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> regarding translation into French, the most grammatically correct would
>> be "Au sujet de l'ICANN". Additionally, one may wish to use a more
>> user-friendly expression, e.g., "Brève présentation de l'ICANN".
>>
>> My remark here stems not so much from an interest in linguistics as from
>> personal experience in international fora. In the long run, clarity is
>> never a luxury.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jean-Jacques.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Mail original -----
>> De: "Jean Guillon" <jean at guillon.email>
>> À: "Nicolas Adam" <nickolas.adam at gmail.com>
>> Cc: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> Envoyé: Mercredi 18 Mars 2015 08:41:14
>> Objet: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC French translation project [was Chinese
>> Translation Project]
>>
>>
>>
>> Troisième.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jean Guillon
>> www.gTLD.club
>>
>>
>> Mobile : +33.631109837
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Nicolas Adam < nickolas.adam at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a more complex question than meets the eyes ;)
>>
>> There is probably 3 ways to go about it.
>>
>> À propos de ICANN
>> À propos d'ICANN
>> À propos de l'ICANN
>>
>> and I guess the last one is the one I liked the least. But I'm more than
>> willing to go with it though.
>>
>> It is true that we commonly say l'ONU, and that we have used the l' most
>> everywhere else when it comes to International orgs. However, it's
>> sometimes wrong. And more often than we might think.
>>
>>
>>
>> L 'élision consiste, en règle générale, à remplacer par une
>> apostrophe une des voyelles finales "a, e, i" d'un mot, lorsqu'il ce mot
>> est suivi d'un autre commençant par une voyelle "a, e, i, o, u" ou
>> commençant par un " h " muet.
>> However, we do not think about ICANN (at least I don't) as "L a ICANN"
>> or "L e ICANN" that we could strip that a or that e and replace it with
>> an *'* .
>>
>> For me, it's more of a "de ICANN" situation, as in "le problème d e
>> ICANN est que bla bla" and not "le problème de l a ICANN ..." (where
>> you would have two déterminants in front of the word) and that's why I
>> abbreviated it like I did, using the above rule. In essence, I
>> determined that the sentenced to be shortened by the élision was
>>
>> 1) À propos d e ICANN
>>
>> and not
>>
>> 2) À propos de l a ICANN
>>
>>
>> So that was one grammatical reason. But a grammatical reason that hinges
>> fully on the first determination being right (a determination that could
>> be challenged: it *is* possible to have "de la" in front of a word: "de
>> la tarte"). So the determination itself seems to hinge on what is the
>> most appropriate word category for ICANN. Is it like a pie or more like
>> Internet? Notice, not the Internet.
>>
>> So the reason ceases to be solely grammatical and becomes logical and
>> relates to a category mistake that is often made with many process or
>> phenomenon that are (wrongly, IMO) thing-ified (reified).
>>
>> I may have been too polluted by English (please take no offense, I love
>> Poe's idiom), but for the same reason I do not feel it right to say "The
>> ICANN is ..." and that it sounds better to say "ICANN is", for instance;
>> and for the same reason that it sounds better to say "UNICEF is" rather
>> than "The UNICEF is ...", I feel it it is ugly form on top of bad
>> philosophy to emphasize a reified (thing-ified) outcome, for some words
>> referring to processes and phenomena.
>>
>> Yes, English uses "The UN ..." quite a bit when it comes to the United
>> Nations. I have no idea why and I'll grant that it almost feels wrong
>> today to say "UN is ...". I feel this form ("... the UN ...") is a wrong
>> that will endure because it has, basically. But at the same time it
>> doesn't look like we are going there with ( the ) ICANN or ( the )
>> UNICEF ...
>>
>> I think that logically, it is a category mistake, the same that many
>> people make when they say "*the* Internet" (or, its French equivalent,
>> "l'Internet"). Internet is not a thing, and language shouldn't
>> thing-ified it. Internet is a process, an emerging phenomenon. So is
>> ICANN!
>>
>> So ... the fact that ICANN's first letter means, precisely, Internet,
>> the same word people so often wrongly use a "the" in front of, kinds of
>> stack on that first determination on which the grammatical rules is then
>> applied.
>>
>> When we use the "ONU" acronym, it is the translation of the UN acronym,
>> and it stands for "Organisation des Nations Unies". The word
>> "Organisation" calls for the l' in a way that seems impossible to
>> resist, but I would argue that sometimes, it is indeed wrong to think
>>
>> "la mission de la ONU"
>>
>> and that we should have probably thought
>>
>> "la mission de ONU"
>>
>> and that, as a result, we should have probably said "la mission d'ONU"
>> instead of "la mission de l'ONU".
>>
>> But I am well aware that I will not find that "correct" élision
>> anywhere and that usage has deeply ingrained "de l'ONU".
>>
>> I wouldn't make a case for ceasing to use l'ONU, you know. But I would
>> resist (as I have in the past) any attempt by proofreaders to make me
>> change ICANN into l'ICANN in a personal text of mine . This not being a
>> personal text of mine, I will go with whatever you think is best. I
>> guess I felt like I would preemptively right a soon to be aesthetical
>> wrong :) and you caught me red handed in language activism ;)
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>> On 17/03/2015 9:56 AM, Mathias HOUNGBO wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello Nicolas
>>
>> why you write "À propos d'ICANN" and not "À propos de l'ICANN" ?
>>
>> we said "À propos de l'ONU" here http://www.un.org/fr/aboutun/
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> "And then God said Noah make me a backup I need to format"
>> "Mefies toi de la médiocrité, c'est la moisissure de l'esprit"
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>