Text 3911, 85 rader
Skriven 2010-01-28 15:44:49 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Dale Shipp (1:261/1466.0)
Ärende: Perception
==================
Hello Dale,

On Wednesday January 27 2010 23:43, you wrote to me:

 DS>> If you want to stick to the wrong definitions and concepts even
 DS>> after being informed of the truth,

 MVDV>> I used the term *before* somebody told me that what we call
 MVDV>> government is not the same what you call government.

 DS> Perhaps you should learn to look up your terms in a dictionary.

How the hell do you think I got the idea that "regering" translates into
"government" in the first place?

 DS>> then don't be surprised when people don't understand you and/or
 DS>> call you out about your errors.  So Be It.

 MVDV>> Life would be a lot easier if guys like you would put some
 MVDV>> more effort in trying to understand what I want to say
 MVDV>> instead of constantly pinning me down on launguage issues.

 DS> We cannot understand what you want to say when you use terms
 DS> incorrectly.

"Incorrectly" is not an absolute. When the disctionaries hat I consulted in the
last half century say that "regering" translates into "government" then from my
POV that is the correct term.

Things like that happen when crossing language and cultural barriers. Sometimes
things get lost in translation. But of course a monolingist would never
understand that.

 MVDV>> Over here the government is what you seem to call the
 MVDV>> executive branch. IOW, the White House. Over here
 MVDV>> parliament is not part of the government. And neither are
 MVDV>> the courts and the judges and what goes with it.

 DS> If Parliament, courts and judges are not part of the government --
 DS> then what are they a part of?

Here I run into a translation problem. The Dutch word for it would be
"overheid". The problem is that according to my dictionaries "overheid" also
translates into "government".

Apparently English does not have a word for "regering" and the dictionary
makers have decided that "government" is the best approximation they can come
up with.

These problems are not uncommon when translating cross culture.

 DS> The first makes the laws, the second passes judgement on on their
 DS> application.

Not here. The legislative branch consist of parliament PLUS the cabinet
ministers.

 DS> Those two things are a central tenet of the definition
 DS> of what a government is and does.

In YOUR culture.

 MVDV>> These kind of misunderstandings are unavoidable when
 MVDV>> crossing language and cultural barriers. Playing a deaf ear
 MVDV>> to that and bluntly insisting that your definition is right
 MVDV>> and mine is wrong, does not help communication.

 DS> As Robert said, then why do you do just that.

I don't. In my perception it is YOU who is doing it to me. You are the one
playing a deaf ear to the fact that language and cutural barriers can lead to
misunderstandings. YOU are the one insisting your and only your definition of
terms is right and mine is wrong.

 DS> It does not help communication when you refuse to check the
 DS> definition, but insist on continuing to use it wrongly.

DAMMIT! What do think I have been doing the last 50 years? Don't be so damned
condescending.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)