The educational pendulum – a step too far?

 

S

Something is wrong in the kingdom of Denmark, educationally speaking. or so it seems to me. The attitude towards and, consequently, of educational institutions has changed 180 degrees over my life. They have gone from being a provider of God-inspired, figuratively, wisdom to an issuer of career–required, literally speaking, certificates. The teacher, once the kingpin, has become a cog in a complicated system of wheels powered by money. I understand the change and appreciate how much it has improved education but I feel it is time for the pendulum to go in the other direction.

The journey of my generation began with the teacher as God’s assistant (or maybe vice versa). Teachers decided what we needed to learn, which was accepted without question by both students, their parents and administrators. The system created a dogma, often unjustified, that educators somehow knew what we, the students, needed to understand in order to be successful in life. Questioning was taboo, as I discovered as late as 2000 when I did my MBA at a British university. During my college years, in the 1970’s, at some universities, such as UCSC where I studied, it was possible to talk with teachers on a friendly basis and even disagree about interpretation. However, nobody, including the college administration, openly disputed the teacher’s basis for assessment and the right to fail those that did not meet their criteria.

Today, in many if not most institutes of higher education worldwide, students are the customers, i.e., the college needs their tuition to survive. As high school testing standards have deteriorated over the decades, the gap between the assumed and actual knowledge of students beginning their degree programs has widened significantly. This discrepancy, combined with the ever-increasing tuition fees, has created a serious financial dilemma for college administrators: colleges need paying students in order to be able to keep their doors open. At the same time, the academization of professional life has made attaining the appropriate certificates essential for attaining most jobs, e.g., BAs for nurses. Finally, fundamental faith in the system, the belief that the people up there know what they are doing, has dropped to critical levels, also often justifiably. These crises together have created an atmosphere where an unspoken agreement exists in which students, their parents, administrators and even many teachers believe that an institution, when faced with a conflict between a student’s lack of knowledge and need for the certificate, should opt to issue the latter. Colleges and universities have become, to one degree or another, factories for diplomas, not actual knowledge. Interestingly enough, most people recognize and accept this phenomenon.

I, as a “dinosaur” who will retire from institutional college teaching in Israel in three semesters, find it disturbing that too many first-year Israeli engineering students I teach can pass my English course without knowing how to write a proper sentence in English or even in their native tongue, let alone a paragraph, not to mention create an organized argument. For me, effective communication is an essential skill. The world does not care if English is the second or even third language. As I tell my students, if a customer asks whether or not a bridge will bear a given weight, you need to be able to produce a coherent answer. My college, to be fair, is slightly more insistent on keeping testing standards up than many others. However, the unspoken and spoken message is that it is not “good for the college or department” if too many students fail. Teachers, beware.

At the same time, students should be made aware that they will be shortly entering the world of real work without many of the tools they need to be effective and that this lack will impact their own professional lives, not to mention those affected by the results of their work. It is clear that the omniscient and omnipotent status of teachers not so long ago was unjustified and harmful. On the other hand, the perception of a teacher as a clerk functioning as a cog in the system is equally unjustified and harmful. It is time to find a reasonable medium between these two extremes. The pendulum needs to start swinging in the other direction.

Intuitive vs logical – complementary and necessary grammar approaches

 

Mastering the grammar of any language involves both intuition and rules. Clearly, every language user relies more heavily on one approach but neither by itself is foolproof. Both students and teachers require reinforcement of the weaker sense in order to hone their knowledge of a language. For example, ESL students benefit from grammar teaching that strengthens both approaches. Likewise, ESL teachers, whether native or non-native speakers cannot depend on intuition or knowledge of rules alone to master grammar and must invest in complementing their knowledge. I can attest to that process as I view my career as an ESL teacher.

Clearly, a good ear and an analytical mind both aid in learning in English grammar. Due to the quantity of English language material available worldwide, both audio and written, students can and do access English material from an early age and develop an instinctive grasp of “what sounds good”, sometimes almost to the level of those living in an English-speaking country. However, the grammar, vocabulary and register of much of this material are often very low, e.g., rap songs and TikTok videos. Thus, the learner may normalize a very low level or even incorrect sentence structure. By contrast, the formal grammar rules provide a certain scaffolding for correct grammar use. However, they also add an additional layer of processing before producing the sentence, which reduces fluency and confidence. Furthermore, formal rules may lead to artificial speech, i.e., structure that does not actually reflect actual language use. For example, it is possible to ask the question “With whom am I speaking” but the vast majority of English speakers say “Who am I speaking with”. Thus, overly rule-based speakers sound rather unnatural in terms of fluency and structure. Thus, it is not advisable to rely on only one approach.

Consequently, ESL students benefit from grammar teaching that creates both confidence and formal structure. For those students that hesitate to express themselves because they lack confidence in their knowledge or feel a need to be perfect, it is important that ESL teachers encourage spontaneous speech based on intuition. The solution is to emphasize that the listener will most probably fully understand the meaning even if there are grammatical errors. Moreover, the formal error may actually be the far more common form. For example, Americans tend to use past simple instead of present perfect in situations describing current consequences to past actions. Compare UK “I have eaten lunch.” (and am not hungry) to US “I ate lunch.” For “natural” speakers, learning the rules helps them identify and rectify improper use and interference from their native language. For example, in formal language like means "similar to", not "such as", as it is used in conversational speech. To err is not only human but actually better for communication in terms of fluency and natural language while a little knowledge of the rules can help them reduce grammar errors that create interference with meaning.

This issue also affects ESL teachers and their mastery of the material. On the one hand, native-language English teachers may have a highly-developed “ear” for the correct form. However, they often lack a formal knowledge of the rules as English classes in the US and UK generally do not teach grammar rules. For such teachers, it is vital to actively study the formal rules and, just as importantly, their similarities and differences with the first language(s) of the students. The former is required in order to properly explain while the latter is necessary to “hook” that information into the minds of the students. On the other hand, many non-native speakers develop an excellent understanding of the former rules as they have learned them in ESL classes. Unfortunately, many teachers, especially from those countries where governments have limited travel to English-speaking countries, have far less developed awareness of how people actually speak. Furthermore, they often are unaware of the nuances of grammar, i.e., the unspoken meaning that a native speaker would naturally pick up. When a parent asks a 15-year-old American girl what she was doing at 3:00 in the morning, the issue goes far beyond her physical location at the time. Thus, a complete teacher not only knows the rules but also the practice.

My journey as an ESL teacher reflects this dual need. Having educated parents and being a reader, my English was quite proficient. Yet, I failed standardized English tests because, having dyslexia, I read sentences instead of words. I applied my intuitive skills, including predictive reading, to become a highly effective reader but a poor analyzer of sentences. When I became an ESL teacher, I invested significant time and effort to understand how to teach grammar. I first grasped the rules and then sought (and seek) ways to transmit this information to my students not only to help them understand the concepts but also intuitively apply them in their use of English. After more than 30 years of English, my fellow staff members consider me an expert on grammar, which I find quite amusing. I even view it as a revenge on my 11^th grade English teacher, who gave me a “D” in her class. Learning how to teach English is an ongoing process.

In summary, language knowledge is a mélange of intuitive and formal knowledge of grammar and structure. Either one by itself is not sufficient to produce high-level language. Every language learner begins the journey with different levels of competency in the two aspects. However, to create the best language, both have to work in concert. It takes two to tango.

Eighty (well – ten) ways to leave your class behind – proven methods of losing your class’s attention

 

I do know something about teaching. With more than 30 years of experience teaching mainly in college but also at junior and senior high school, I can sense when the lesson was successful and when it was not. I would like to say that all my lessons were diamonds but the truth is that quite a few, admittedly less in recent years, had a closer resemblance to mud. I would like to share with you ten proven, personally tested, ways of how to lose the attention of your students.

1.   Put hard text in front of the students and proceed to read it out loud. Why should they listen to you?

2.   Talk too long (45 minutes or more) without giving the students a chance to practice the skill. You try keeping alert for that long without doing anything.

3.   For that matter, try to teach too much in a given lesson. Beyond the saturation point, students retain absolutely nothing regarding anything you said during the entire lecture.

4.   Talk to the front row or two and avoid eye contact with the back rows. For those distant students, it is now time to dream, text or pass messages.

5.   Lecture from behind a podium. it is as about engaging as listening to a radio lecture on an irrelevant subject. Get up and engage!

6.   Sit down –A proven Soviet torture technique, teachers that sit and lecture are far less effective than those that move around. No dynamics is somnabulent.

7.   Read your notes. Parents put their children to sleep by reading them a story. It has the same effect in class.

8.  Maintain a monotone speech – no ups or downs in tone. Anything is boring without some variation. For inspiration on voice modulation, listen to Christian preachers.

9.  Fail to relate to current student knowledge. Understanding the abstract demands close attention, a capacity most students lack. Practical, relevant, especially amusing, stories can make the irrational rational.

10. Fail to confirm understanding by not actually checking it in real-time. The fact that the teacher explained something has no correlation with the result of a student understanding it at any level. A teacher physically going around the room while the students do a short class exercise will identify which percentage of the material, if any, actually made it to their brains.

If any teachers take this personally and believe that I am mocking them in any manner, rest assured that I still fall into a few of these traps from time to time. As I wrote, I have personally committed each of these pedagogical sins. Live and learn.

The words behind the speech – English terms for oration

 

[silver frame]

Speech is silver, as it is said, and is as malleable as the metal. Humans shape words to express a variety of meanings and purposes. English, as do all languages, reflects this complexity by having specific terms for a verbal compositon, each one reflecting a locale, purpose and/or organization.

Some speeches only occur at specific locations. For example, a person gives a keynote speech only at conferences and similar events, thus introducing the topic of the gathering. To give an address requires a crowd to whom the speaker wishes to make a point. The most famous address in American history is Lincoln’s Gettysburg address. Reporters, official or de facto, provide live reports from a disaster scene, telling listeners what happened and/or is happening. At a school assembly or cultural event, a person may give a recitation, a rendering of a famous speech or poem. Smaller children may do a show and tell, which is an opportunity for younger children to present their interests to their peers. Likewise, at schools of all levels, teacher give lectures, which parents also do, for the purpose of explaining some matter with a wide variance in the level of attention by the audience. In sports, coaches in the locker room often give a pep talk, either before the game or at half time, in order to motivate the players, e.g., Knute Rockne’s “win it for the Gipper”. Apparently, sometimes it helps. Finally, who needs an audience at least formally? A monologue is when a person, often an actor, speaks to himself/herself on stage in front, granted in the presence of an audience. Unfortunately, many matrimonial arguments sound like simultaneous monologues. Shakespeare’s “to be or not to be” from Hamlet is the most famous soliloquy, a stage word for a monologue. The proper choice of word may depend on where it is taking place.

The correct term must also reflect the purpose of the speech. When praising people, it may be a panegyric or a eulogy, if it at a funeral after the person died. By contrast, a diatribe is a short directed critical speech while a harangue tends to be a bit longer. More is not better in this case. A strange mixture of both praise and criticism is a roast, in which various people humorously and publicly discuss the personality aspects, both good and bad, of a famous person, which can be positive if you accept Oscar Wilde’s comment: “the only things worse than being talked about is not being talked about.” If the purpose of the speech is a call for action, it is called an exhortation, something that Communist leaders were rather fond of. On a more specific level, an appeal calls for some action from the heart, such as the giving of a donation, while a pitch tries to persuade people to buy a product. The “why” of the speech may determine the correct word.

Finally, the choice of word may express the level of organization of a speech. A discourse is an attempt to provide a complete picture while a presentation tries to show the important aspects in an understandable way. By contrast, a rant is an almost stream-of-consciousness, i.e., chaotic, release of ideas such that the listener has a hard time following the ideas. A tirade generally has a clear point but suffers the loss of its focus and that of the listeners due to its duration.

All speech involves the oral use of words and sounds. Yet, these words involve many other aspects of communication beyond their literal meaning, including the location, their intent and their structure or lack thereof. Thus, speech is as important and differentiable as silver.

The more, the merrier? – the mult-presenter experience

 

[3 perfomers]

In my final year at UC Santa Cruz more than 40 years ago, I took a senior seminar entitled “History of Socialism”. What was remarkable and memorable about this course, aside from the amount of work and information involved, was the presence of two teachers, each an expert in a different aspect of the topic. Seeing two experts openly disagreeing on the interpretation of various events gave us students the feelings of awe and freedom, significantly enhancing the course. Last week, I was part of a group of three lecturers giving an ATA (American Translator Association) webinar on preparing a professional website, a topic that I had previously presented to the Israel Translators Association in collaboration with Uri Bruck. I and my colleagues, Dmitry Beschetny and Ben Karl, discussed the rational and manner of preparing a profession translator/interpreter website. I found the experience enriching, challenging and worthwhile.

This combination of expertise provided a texture to the course in that each person contributed his knowledge, style and voice. In the case of the course, we covered three aspects of website construction, specifically the rationale, approach to third party providers and doing it yourself, each of us sharing his experience and point of view. As expected, the presentation styles differed in terms of organization and terminology. More importantly, the voice differed as every individual has a unique presence, ranging in formality and technical vocabulary. The webinar had three noticeable separate parts.

Clearly, this cooperation demanded extra effort, compromise and vision. Specifically, as there was a need to create unity among three parts, the planning involved many emails and several Zoom conversations to ensure that everybody was on the same page. In such cases, it also involved a certain loss of individual preference in order to create a unity of not only of theme but spirit. To make and accept this compromise, the parties must create a single overall vision and identify how each element contributes to it without insisting on a single path. This whole process involves far more time and effort than solo presenting.

However, this investment was worthwhile for both the learners and lecturers. The attendees received far more information and advice than would have received from any single lecturer. Furthermore, the lack of complete consensus among the lecturers reinforced the message that many roads lead to Rome. Thus, the issue become which method is more appropriate, not one size does or does not fit all. The division into three sections and three voices also made it easier to concentrate for two hours, an important benefit. For me as a lecturer, I enjoyed hearing the experience of my colleagues and will benefit from it when I redo my site at some time. All the participants gained.

In teaching and presenting as well as other areas of life, synergy can have important benefits, adding knowledge, texture, perspective and variety. Of course, it involves more time investment but the results can justify it. More may not always be merrier but it is almost always richer.

You are not alone – the benefits of student self-identification as a classroom activity

 

[university classroom*]

The first lesson of any course sets the tone for the whole class. The students size up the teacher and make assumptions about his/her approachability, flexibility and personality. After 45 minutes of technical details on the course, the students have identified the technical specifications of the teacher, often correctly.

Unfortunately, the process is a bit one-way. The teacher is focused on presenting an organized and comprehensive description of the course and providing the relevant information. In the first hour, at minimum, the students sit quietly and politely, with maybe a few questions from the more confident ones among them. In practice, the teacher knows absolutely nothing about the students except their names. They are literally a sea of faces.

I teach English to first-year engineering students from all departments at the Braude School of Engineering in Karmiel, Israel. I have more than 30 years of experience and have learned that, regardless of the students’ age, which in my case ranges from 18-30, learners that feel some connection with the teacher try harder and have a greater chance to succeed.

Our task schedule is rather tight, especially with the war-shortened semesters this year, in terms of the amount of material to be covered as we aim to teach four skills: reading, writing, speaking and listening. Notwithstanding this pressure, I choose to dedicate the second 45-minute period of the first lesson to student self-introduction, which can take 30-40 minutes with a class of 30 students. I ask each student to state their name, what type of engineering they are studying, where they are from and something that makes them special, such as a hobby, skill or achievement. I always pose a short question after each introduction regarding some matter about which I am curious. I am aware that this activity is at the expense of a formal learning experience, e.g., articles and sentence structure, but I do not regret this choice as both the teacher and students receive far more benefit.

My benefits include:

1.   It slightly increases the chance I will remember their names although I tell them on the first lesson that I tend not to retain names (unless the students has a “special” personality or the name and face seem to match perfectly).

2.  More importantly, I catch of a sense of who they are in those few sentences, including their level of confidence and skill, emotional state and general personality.

3.  I quickly learn to appreciate and respect them as adults as I discover their amazing achievement as such an early age. I have had students that won awards in numerous sports, founded businesses and, in general, achieved more than I would have thought possible in such a short time as an adult. I may know more English than they do but they are far more talented than me in other areas. It teaches healthy humility.

The students also benefit:

1.     They discover the other students, especially the ones outside their department.

2.    They begin the process of believing that that they can orally express themselves coherently in English. Granted, it is a small step towards the final large presentation before the class. However, for many, especially the more timid among them, this success leads to more confidence.

3.    It allows them to express themselves as adult individuals and see how unique and talented they are. Chronical age and emotional age are far from identical. By being treating as an adult, they tend to take responsible for their actions, one of the key elements in effective learning.

For these reasons, I invest 45 minutes of class time to get to know my students, however slightly, as individuals. Learning is an activity that involves two parties, a teacher and a student, not merely a distant figure talking to the air. We are not alone, neither students or teachers, in this process. It is for teachers, who have the power to set the tone, to create the connection.

* Picture captions help the blind access the Internet.

Picture credit

Onions and teaching

 

[red onion cut open*]

I suddenly realized that I am in the middle of my fourth decade of teaching. Not only that, in some four years, I will retire (please note: not get to or will have to) from teaching (but not translating). Clearly, I am a much different teacher today than I was twenty years ago or even ten years ago. As I thought about that evolution. I realized that I had finally reached the third layer of teaching, the emotional connection, which only could follow after attaining thorough knowledge and skillful communication, at least in my case.

To explain, the first step in becoming an effective teacher is exceptional knowledge of the subject matter, which creates both teacher self-confidence and student belief in the teacher. It would seem obvious that teachers master the subject matter but it actually takes years to attain the complete control of all the details required to properly teach the material. “Student” level is not enough to effectively teach anything. It is necessary to know the material backwards and forwards, at 4:00 AM in the morning. That assurance provides the teacher with the backbone to stand in front of a sea of faces and explain a matter as “the expert”. Students quickly identify any lack of certainty. They recognize on whom they can depend for reliable information, which creates their trust in the teacher.

Freed from the stress of subject matter management, teaching becomes the art of classroom management and communication with students. Effective teachers learn what techniques aid students in learning and which actually harm. For example, if a teacher hands out written material that mirror the spoken words, the students will probably not listen. In terms of preparing material, outstanding teachers know now to break down complicated processes into short simple steps, a vital skill for reaching those students that struggle with the material. On a one-to-one basis, student-teacher communication involves openness and patience mixed with wisdom in cultivating and maintaining the learning relationship even when rejecting the substance of the student message. Clearly, teachers being human beings, educators have their own individual style, which must be authentic, as well as strengths and weaknesses. Fine-tuning the techniques takes years and is always a work in progress.

In my opinion, the next, maybe last, stage goes beyond subject matter teaching  and expands to educating, even mentoring in some cases, which involves significant self-confidence and emotional intelligence on the part of the teacher. Students of all ages are people that are developing, often without guidance. They are searching for a way to cope with the challenges of the present and a direction for the future. On the other hand, teachers are also human, also coping with numerous demands not only from the students but also from their own situations, including a decreasing amount of energy as they age. It is clearly impossible for a teacher to take on students as their own children. That is not a practical or even desirable role. Yet, a teacher can influence students by providing words of encouragement and support, suggesting solutions and approaches and merely just listening. For example, a teacher can go the extra mile if a student is going through a crisis or requires extra help. Sometimes, a teacher’s faith in the ability of the student to learn a given skill is far more effective than a grade. Teachers can identify students lacking self-confidence and encourage them. This task require significant time and energy, which is generally only available once the teacher masters the other aspects of the profession.

To avoid any misinterpretation, even with my long experience, my teaching is far from perfect. Teaching is an art, not a science, and is never fully mastered as each class and each day are unique. Moreover, experience and skill do not necessarily have a causal relationship, i.e., there are amazing newbie teachers and awful experienced teachers. Yet, while the material of teaching any material is clearly finite, we teachers are dynamic, changing with the circumstances and age. In the twilight of my teaching career, I am still evolving and discovering new ways to help students, which helps me maintain my enthusiasm for the actual teaching part of the profession. Teaching is truly a bit like an onion not only it can be both taste sweet and cause tears but also because it demands time and effort to master its many layers even if they are not obvious at the beginning.

* Picture captions help the blind fully access the Internet.

Picture credit

 

Housing foundations

 

[Foundations of an old house*]

English is the ultimate collector of words, building on roots from any language it encounters. Yet, sometimes, meanings get lost or significantly changed in transition. To demonstrate, I present an interesting short survey of various words in English for a dwelling.

[Colorful town houses]

Both house and home originated from the same proto-German root khusan but went slightly different directions later on haim keeping its original idea of a permanent residence and hus, derived from hide, both the verb and noun, referring to a shelter.

[Irish manor]

Of course, not houses are created equal. For the rich and famous, their abode may be a mansion, from the Latin root manere, to stay, implying where the land owners actually spent lived most of the time. A slightly more modest option is a villa, clearly a Latin/old Italian word, which originally referred to a summer home, like a dacha in Russia, but now implying a permanent detached residence. For the super-rich, they may even own a chateau, literally a castle, although it has been quite few centuries since its residents needed protection from attack aside from paparazzi. On the other scale, in hot climates, a bungalow is a very reasonable option, logical as it refers to a Bengalese traditional house. The old forest cottage, merely a hut, is now rather common in the cities and has grown in size. A temporary soldiers tent in Spanish, a  barraca, became a fixed residence for soldiers, i.e., barracks. A  a home away from home in the mountain for herders known as a chalet is rather expensive now.

[Apartment building]

For those of us that cannot afford or choose not to live a detached life style, an apartment is the standard option. Curiously, the word literally means as it sounds, a separated place in Italian. Somehow, when I hear the neighbors moving furniture above me, I don’t feel so separated. Its English cousin, a flat, also has a bit of twisted journey. It is derived from an old French word for flat, the adjective. It is funny how today many English housing units are on two if not more stories. In the US, an apartment that is bought, not rented, is called a condominium, which literally means shared living, which is at least honest. Its upscale neighbor, the penthouse, was apparently an addition to the building as originally referred to an appendage, an added building in old French, apparently someone similar to the luxury suites that stadiums add to establish stadiums to increase revenue.

[Shanty town]

Alas, not everybody is fortunate enough to enjoy reasonable quality housing. Some people live in tenements, dilatated apartments, which originally implied actually owning the place, unlike today. In the country, many poor families grow up in a shack, a Mexican-Spanish word for an adobe hut,  a structure that experienced a material switch to wood. A lumberjack’s temporary home, a shanty, became a last resort of the unemployed and homless in some countries. With a history that is no less sad, crowing up on a croft in Scotland was no pleasure but it did have land and provide something to eat as it was a short land allotment until the English threw the residents off the land.

[Yurt]

Some housing is temporary by definition. The basic English word tent is derived from the Latin verb tendere, to stretch, which makes sense to any person that ever put one up. Other cultures considered home to be where the hearth is regardless of its permenance.  The Turkish root of tree lent its name to the yurt as it provided a root to those tribes. Likewise, the teepee literally means they dwell, technically the truth. The more northern igloo is merely a house. Some homes are born to roam, as Bruce Springsteen would say.

[Toy house on lawn]

So, whatever your pad, technically a bundle of straw, is, be thankful for a roof over your head and consider the magnificent collection of words the English language has succeeded in hoarding over the centuries, thus creating a fine foundation of words to describe your humble abode, often with changes to their original meanings.

* Picture captions help the blind fully access the Internet.

Picture credits – Pixabay

Shoe-sing names – a foot-long lexicon

 

[two foot soles*]

Many years ago, I translated a lease agreement between French and Israeli opera companies involving the performance of a certain opera in Tel Aviv. The contract part was quite standard but the appendix at the end was a killer: a list of the clothing, some of it typical of the 17-18th century, to be included in the lease, including a list of shoes, specifying their style type. That was my introduction to the complexity of shoe names. For those that may have thought that, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein, a shoe is a shoe is a shoe, the reality is far more complex. from minimalist to maximalist, shoes take on many different forms, use many different materials, serve many different purposes, have many different origins and thus have many different names.

Sandals

[flip-flops on beach]

are the simplest and most ancient of all footwear, dating back at least to Persian times and existing in one form or another in all cultures. Originally made of wood (sandal wood), often constructing from leather, even rope and more currently from plastic, sandals cover the sole of the foot and contain enough over-foot blinding to keep the sole attached. Country-specific versions include opanci and opinga (Balkans), huarche (ancient Mexico), zori (Japan) and bast shoes (Finland). Beachgoers can put on thongs, bangers, flip-flops and jandals, depending on where you are from. All these shoes protect your sole.

[slippers]

For those that also worry about their toes, the major option is a slipper, which is open-healed in order to allow you to “slip in” to it easier. My wife enjoys hers fur-filled in the winter, which keeps her toes nice and warm. Local versions include Peranakan beaded slippers (Malaysia), galesh and kiveh (Iran) and Cantabrian albarkas (northern Spain), to name a few. Clogs and sabots are made of wood and are solid if noisy. These shoes are home comfort and convenient.

[pair of canvas shoes]

There are many varieties of light full shoes. Espadrilles, made of rope, originated in the Pyrenees but now can be found everywhere. Jelly shoes are plastic, far more modern obviously. Likewise, people can purchase moccasins worldwide. Boat shoes, made from canvas or leather, are also prevalent. Some more local versions are Peshawri chappal (Himalayas) and tiger shoes (China). Sneakers (or trainers in the UK) are omnipresent and received their name because they allowed to children to sneak, i.e., make no noise, as compared to leather shoes. These are perfect for warm weather.

[pair of hiking boots]

For reasons of length, ignorance and discretion, I will slip the seeming endless list of types of standard shoes and boots for men and women. The nomenclature is simply far too long and dynamic, almost to the level of the pain they may cause us when we wear them. Instead, it is more interesting to consider the number of vocation-specific shoes. For example, boating shoes have features that allow them to grip and repel water. Steel tip and pointe shoes have reinforced tips, albeit for different reasons. Rock climbing shoes remove all reinforcement and feature sticky soles. Jazz shoes are lighter but have a small heal in order to facilitate dance. Sea boots are waterproof, a very useful property at sea, while snow boots have a similar feature but more appropriate for walking. Hiking boots are strong all over and protect the foot from the punishment of rocks and long days on one's feet. To get exotic, Chinese women with bound feet wore lotus shoes while, in more modern times, diabetic shoes can help with food circulation. On the field, players can wear football-style or soccer-style shoes, depending on the length of the cleats with cross country and tennis players each having their own forms. Running shoes are for runners, obviously, with extra reinforcement in the appropriate areas. Today, every activity has its shoe.

As I discovered then, the sheer variety of shoe types is enough to drive any person crazy, aside possibly from late Imelda Marcos. If the significance of an object to society can be measured in the number of words to describe it, apparently shoes are of great importance in most societies. Walking into a shoe store is confusing not only due to the rainbow of colors and shapes but also for the plethora of styles. The lexicon of shoes styles is far longer than a foot. I only wish that the number of comfortable options was as long. People can be quite shoe-sy.

* Picture captions allow the blind to fully access the Internet.

Picture credits - Pixabay

Thing One, Thing Two, Thing No – a mild diatribe about the use of thing in writing

 

["Nothing"*]

I teach English writing to first-year engineering students in Israel. As their written communication skills in their own language are limited, partly as a result of the adopted European policy to completely separating humanities from sciences as if science people do not need to write, I assume no prior knowledge of writing and teach the basic rules of sentence writing and paragraph organization as well as a few tips on vocabulary. Among them, I tell them that I will not accept the use of the word “thing” and even deduct points for it. This insistence may sound extreme at first glance but one major distinction between speaking and writing is that in the latter the writer has the privilege and duty to carefully consider each word and choose precise terms, which almost always exist in English. My approach is similar to “thing”’s cousins, something and nothing but these words may be appropriate in certain cases.

The justification for being so particular in assessing writing skill is that the process of writing involves not only the initial expression of the thought but also the further refining of its form. As the expression says, there is no good writing, only good rewriting.Readers do not want to read a first draft and naturally expect a carefully phrased text. While true for all languages, English requires extra polishing due to the plethora of language roots that have been integrated, often rather violently, into the language. From Gaelic to Germanic to French Latin and ancient Greek, English is the Frankenstein of world languages, rather imposing but a bit ugly, to the ear at least, as compared to more homogenous languages such as French, Italian, Hebrew and Russian, to name a few. Thus, to produce diamond of a text in English requires effort (and why I appreciate the prose of George Orwell). Furthermore, aside from emotions, English has a word for almost every existing object, especially in science, making it possible to use the precise term. Given the multitude of roots, many of the vocabulary options are far from high-falutin, with the average 11^th grade able to understand if not necessarily spell them. Thus, it is appropriate to demand that writers of English, both native and non-native, use an exact term.

The word thing implies around 325,000 terms as well an additional 375,000 technical terms, according to Dr. Google. As an example, the phrase “things” can be replaced, as relevant, by reasons, excuses, factors, elements, data, objects, feelings, results, causes, effects, events, products and facts, to name just a very few that most English users would recognize and be able to use. As for specific technical terms, people specializing in a specific subject area need to know the exact word in order to express their ideas accurately. In some cases, this precision is a matter of life and death or at least large sums of money. Given the privilege of being able to refine a text before showing to the audience, as compared to spoken language, it is brazenly lazy to write thing unless a person is writing for small children.

As for something and nothing, the same statement is true with some exceptions. A given company may have something special about it but the investor would like to know whether it is the marketing strategy or actual product. There may be nothing you can do about a situation when speaking but somehow having no solutions sounds much more impressive in writing. Granted, if the attribute is so ethereal that a person cannot identify its attributes, something may be appropriate as James Taylor sings: “Something in the way she moves”. Of course, mathematical zero is nothing as Billy Preston noted in “Nothing from nothing leaves nothing”. Sometimes there simply is no precise word to describe all the items as in “These are a few of my favorite things” of Sound of Music fame. So, I never say never and occasionally accept these things.

Fairly or unfairly, people heavily judge writers of English by their choice of vocabulary. Clearly, non-native writers have a lower bar in term of vocabulary choice but that allowance does not waive the requirement to use precise, albeit simple, words when preparing a written text. Clearly, things lead to chaos as Dr. Seuss so well described in this book. However, even he added a number to the shirt of his things to specify them. Proficient writers should have no things.

 

* Picture captions allow the blind to fully access the Internet.

Picture credit

A spotlight on English to Hebrew legal translation – an interview with Adv. Yael Segal

[spotlight*]

It is often illuminating to get an opposite perspective on any matter. As I translate from Hebrew to English, I was curious to know it looked from the other side. I posed several questions relevant to translation and learning translation to Adv. Yael Segal, an experienced English to Hebrew legal translator as well as teacher of translation. In terms of background, she studied law and psychology in Tel Aviv University, interned in Shibboleth law firm, was admitted to the Israeli Bar in 2011 and has been translating ever since.  She teaches legal translation in Beit Berl College and Versio Academy. She lives in Herzliya with her partner and 3 boys.

1.  What would you consider a proper background to be a legal translator into Hebrew (aside from a law degree)?

I think that anybody can be a legal translator. I even teach it (at Beit Berl) for that reason. Legal language appears daunting but once you learn how to recognize it, it no longer seems impossible. Some students break through that barrier as early as the second lesson. However, it should be noted it requires serious investment, especially to those that do not have any legal background (which is not limited to a law degree and may be attained in other ways). Ultimately, I learned legal translation as I learned English: I simply read a tremendous amount. In my opinion, a person that wants to enter this field and has the analytic ability will succeed.

2.  What are some specific challenges translating English to Hebrew legal material?

 

First and foremost - terminology. There are many words in English without an equivalent in Hebrew or whose equivalent terms is not exactly the same. For example, think about how many words there are in English to say lien or mortgage. In Hebrew there are barely two words, שעבוד [sha’avud] and משכון [mishkun]. I would love to meet an Israeli attorney that could tell the difference between them. Another related challenge is the difference in the legal systems. An equivalent concept does not always exist. Furthermore, Hebrew has no capital letters and thus cannot emphasize terms using them. Sometimes it in necessary to find creative solutions.

 

3. What are some mistakes that distinguish a poor legal translator from a proficient one?

 

In general, bad translators produce a text that I cannot understand despite my significant experience reading legal material. They stick too closely to the English text, ignoring the actual meaning. Although the material is legal, it is sometimes necessary to change a word or two to render the material readable. Many attorneys think that English syntax creates a higher register. For example, they write In Hebrew that “the document will be signed by the company.” I do not agree. As I see it, the Hebrew should read: “the company will sign the document.”

 

Furthermore, there are translators that believe that it is possible to find everything in the dictionary and simply translate the word without understanding the legal terminology. As a result, we see jewels like “capitalized terms” translated into Hebrew literally as “conditions involving capital”, תנאים מהוונים [tnaim mehuvanim], instead of defined terms מונחים מוגדרים [munachim mugdarim] or “prejudice” into the Hebrew prejudgment דעה קדומה [deya kduma] instead of the Hebrew word for damage, נזק [nezeq].

 

4.  In regards to the issue of agencies vs end clients, which do you prefer and why?

I have no preference. Agencies pay well, have your back if there are problems with the customers, treat me nicely and provide me with interesting material just as do private customers, who pay well, treat me nice and provide me with interesting material. I will not work with an agency that is not appropriate for me nor will I work with such a customer. I have no problem giving an agency a percentage of my charge as an agency fee if it is worthwhile for me.

5.  What advice would you give a customer seeking translation of legal document into Hebrew?

 

Ask for a sample, paid or free. Choose on the base of recommendations, not the lowest price. Provide translators with as much background as possible. If there is specific terminology, let them know in advance. Finally, of course, pay on time.

Taking into her broad background, specifically law practice, translation and teaching, her answers emphasize that legal translators require thorough understanding of both law and language. The attainment of these skills requires significant investment of time. This point is vital importance to prospective and current translators as well as purchasers of legal translation. I wish to thank Yael (Ygoraly@gmail.com) for shining light on this specialization and wish her and future English-Hebrew translators success.

* Always label to picture to allow the blind full access.

Picture: Image by <a href="https://pixabay.com/users/clker-free-vector-images-3736/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=303864">Clker-Free-Vector-Images</a> from <a href="https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=303864">Pixabay</a>