Number theory

Numbers have significance well beyond their quantitative meaning.  For example, the term 24/7 is universally understood to mean around the clock without mention of the units, i.e., hours and days per week. The challenge for translators and non-natives is understanding the localized meaning, which may or may exist in the culture of the person trying to understand the term. Misinterpretation can lead to confusion at best and wrong conclusions at worst.

The most obvious number issues are quantities, dates and time.  Some languages, notably English, use the decimal point to distinguish the whole numbers from the decimal and lower numbers, e.g. 5.547 percent is 5 and 547/1000 percent.  By contrast, the comma is used to divide between each three places in whole numbers, e.g. 7,890 is seven thousand and eight hundred and ninety. By contrast, the French, among others, reverse this convention such that 5.547 is five thousand, five hundred and forty-seven while 7,890 is 7 and 890/1000 percent.  What a difference a punctuation mark can make.  The date issue can be critical.  The United States is almost the sole country that places the month before the day with most other countries starting the date of the month. Thus, translators often write out the name of the month to avoid any potential confusion. Europe traditionally has used a 24-hour clock such that each hour has a specific number. For example, 12:00 and 24:00 are clearly different times.  By contrast, in the United States, while few institutions use “military time” as the 24-hour clock is referred to, most people add am or pm or morning and evening. The problem is even Americans are confused whether 12 am is midnight or noon (it is the latter). 

In some cases, each county has its own variation of important numbers.  For instance, to call for an ambulance in the United States, you dial 911 while in France it is 112, Israel 101 and Russia 02, to name just a few.  For those who still have perfect vision, in the United States, you have 20/20 vision, meaning that you can see a certain image at 20 feet while France you have 10 vision and Israel 6/6. As they say, to each his own.

The United States has some of its specific terms.  A company filing Chapter 7 or 11 is going bankrupt. 9/11 is day of mourning that will not be forgotten for many decades. Any baseball fan knows that a 300 hitter is pretty good (for those not in the know, he gets a hit 30 percent of the time) while a 500 team has the same number of wins and losses.  In colleges, any 101 course is introductory, e.g., Economics 101 is the initial course. On the financial front, most Americans file a 1040 form of some type and know that the IRS requires it if they may not know how to fill it in. For that matter, Israeli get a 106 form from their employer every year reporting their income and deductions for the entire tax year. You got to be there to understand.

Culture also has added significance to numbers but the effect is often generational. Depending on the age, people may remember Adam 12, a patrol cop show from the 1960’s, Room 222, a TV program about a school in the early 1970’s and Beverly Hills 92010 for those a bit younger.  In terms of books, 1984 is a well-known book by George Orwell. Of course, all living generations know that 007 is a spy.

If I live until 120, as they say in Hebrew, I will probably witness the appearance of num(b)erous digital terms. Some will stick while others will be forgotten as in Bug 2000. Yet, numbers are here to stay.

Machine translation and Orwell

For many translators, machine translation is a combination of nuclear war and global warming. There is a sense that it will wipe them out from the map but they hope that it won’t happen in this generation. This week, I skimmed through two articles discussing MT. My thoughts were led not the future of the profession but to the future of English.

The first article, written by Florian Faes and cited by Slator in its weekly newsletter, discusses the linguistic differences between texts translated by MT as compared to human translation after editing. Among the writer’s conclusions, albeit on a limited literary sample, was MT texts tend to have a higher resemblance to their originals in terms of structure even when this structure differs in the target language as well be “simpler and more normalized”.

In another article, also cited by Slator, Jochen Hummel, the creator of the Trados computer assisted translation (CAT) tool, declared that his tool would no longer be used in the future but instead all human translation would be based on MT. In other words, the opus of previously written text will standardize our language. As I see it, what was will be in a much stronger form than today and subject to manipulation by corporate and governmental organization.

These two observations led me to recall Orwell’s 1984. For those who have forgotten or simply never read the book, he described a world where the government controlled everybody (Big Brother). Interestingly, one of its main tools was its control of language. English vocabulary had been reduced to the bare minimum. For example, a negative was expressed by adding “un” to the positive, e.g., unhungry. All texts were online (yes, this book was written 1949) and amended as political winds changed so that the public never had any proof of any change in policy or thinking. Looking at North Korea in 2019, Orwell would be appalled but not shocked.

Given that English is the dominant language of communication worldwide for the foreseeable future and assuming that machine language, however “artificial” it sounds initially, becomes the statistical and controlling norm, it is not hard to imagine a world in which people’s thoughts are expressed in intentionally simplified language and form. It would be undoing Dickens and Shakespeare, to name a few.

It is clear that MT has its place and will not disappear. It also clear that MT will have a huge influence on translation project management. Looking at the development of chat language, which is also simplified in many ways, it can be argued that this language is no less rich and individual. However, I still fear the gradual “poorification” of English not as a result of government action but instead due to industrial pressures.  I hope Orwell was wrong in this prediction and that 1984 will never come.

Notty Tendencies

Language and culture influence each other strongly. For example, formal English society tends to be rather formal and evasive. Thus, there is a rather common tendency to understate matters when speaking.  Some of the common techniques involve not, un, in, double negatives, a bit and its modern cousin, challenged.

Being direct  would create an uncomfortable amount of tension.  So, one solution is using the opposite word preceded by the word not. It is clear that the phase it is not a good time means you should get out of here. Likewise, if something is not a good idea, it is rather stupid in fact.  For that matter, if someone not looking her/her best looks awful really.  You are simply not allowed, that is to say forbidden, to say exactly what you want.

We cannot forget that confusing preposition in when it means not and not in. (Now that is an unclear sentence.) An inconsiderate remarking is rude while an inopportune time stinks. For that matter, inappropriate behavior means that you are acting like an ass while if someone says you are just impossible, it does not mean that you cannot exist but instead he doesn't know what to do with you.

Un can be just as indirect. An action that is unthinkable, truly horrid, is quite feasible in thought but completely unsocial and unacceptable, i.e., rude. For that matter, crude unsavory thoughts about an attractive female in the office would be, alas, unbecoming, actually quite wrong, meaning you can get fired for sexual harassment, to say the least, if she is unwilling, or if that refuses, to cooperate. In this matter, unassuming has nothing to do with your assessment of the situation and all to do with your uniqueness, meaning completely ordinary.

Of course, a person can double down the negative, creating complete downsizing.  If the gift is not inexpensive, it cost a pretty penny. People are quite aware of a problem that is not unknown.  A woman who is not bad looking is pretty.

For understatement, sometimes a bit means a lot, so to speak. If the weather is a bit chilly, most adults are wearing a warm sweater. If the date is a bit overweight, she's better have a good personality. If you receive a text message from a friend saying that s/he will be a bit late, you have plenty of time to check Face book. People with limited budgets should stay away from restaurants that are a bit expensive.

Finally, in our increasingly politically correct words, people don't have problems. They are challenged. Dumb people are intellectually challenged while short people are vertically challenged. A klutz is physically-challenged. I myself am highly follicly challenged, almost bald you might say.

If all this sounds a bit Orwellian, from 1984, I would agree. We all need to be more aware of our language and say what we mean more often. In other words, be naughty, not notty!