29 messages over 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
Chung
Diglot
Senior Member
Joined 7158 days ago
4228 posts - 8259 votes 
20 sounds
Speaks: English*, French
Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish
| Message 25 of 29 02 July 2013 at 7:06pm | IP Logged |
songlines wrote:
Try Mighty Fine Words and Smashing Expressions: Making Sense of Translatlantic English, by Orin
Hargraves, published by Oxford University Press, 2003. (There doesn't seem to be a more recent edition.)
The author is a lexicographer who's worked on the Oxford, Cambridge, and Longman dictionaries.
The table of contents page from Amazon will give you some idea of the subjects Hargraves covers; but the
book deals with far more than just substituting one word or spelling variant for another. Certainly, those are
covered - especially in the first two chapters of the book - but those "mechanical differences - differences that
apply in nearly all contexts and ...can be reduced in many cases to simple substitutions of letters, words, or
phrases" are relatively easy to find outlined elswhere (online or in print format) and are what many people
think of when they compare UK and US English.
But Hargraves also covers the cultural, political, legal, administrative/bureaucratic, etc. differences between
the two countries. For example:
- Procedural differences in things like bankruptcy cases (e.g. the Chapter #s of the relevant statutes in U.S.
law, and the various options starting from "softest" ["administration order"] to most severe ["compulsory
liquidation/bankruptcy order"], in UK law).
legal/ institutional/structural differences: e.g,
- Legal /administrative bodies which may or may not exist in the other country: "employment tribunals in the
UK are empowered to adjudicate disputes in cases involving dismissals... Such matters in the US are
normally handled by private litigation and the courts.."
- Comparisons of the organization/administration of the respective health care systems.
- Excellent chapter on the US and UK educational systems: which level/type of school students might attend
at each age; nomenclature used for marks/grades given for coursework or exams; exams, whether
compulsory, or for college/university admissions; differences in the systems of higher education.
Functional equivalencies : in the case of employment disputes, Hargraves also notes that major
differences between management and unions are mediated by the NLRB in the US, and the ACAS in the UK.
(He explains the acronyms).
- Excellent chapter on government and the law, outlining the systems of government, how bills are passed in
each country, taxes (e.g. VAT vs sales tax), selective list of government ministries, departments, agencies,
organizations - their names, functions and acronyms.
Trademarked products which may not be familiar to readers in both countries, e.g. food products.
Where there is no comparable product, a description of the item is given.
Armed Forces: handy tables outlining equivalent ranks in the US and UK army, navy and air forces. Officer
training schools, some of which are known by the names of their locations (Annapolis, Sandhurst, West
Point). Different terminology used for veterans/ex-servicement, and organizations which support them.
Differing preferences in nomenclature used for major wars (US: "World War II" vs UK "Second World War";
both are used, but "each dialect uses the other's first choice as its second choice".)
Cultural references . A chapter on "The Stuff of Life" includes cultural references, esp from TV and
radio, e.g. "Blue Peter (UK): long-running children's programe that attempts to educate and inform in a
cheerful way; similar to Mr. Roger's Neighborhood in the US". (Keep in mind the book's publication date,
though: more recent cultural references will of course not be included.)
As you can perhaps guess, I found Hargraves book absolutely fascinating. It's also well-organized and
immensely readable, and would also be of interest to editors and copyeditors. Of course, a translator of a
non-fiction work is not going to be able to willy-nilly substitute one term for another (any action carried out by
the AFL-CIO will still have been done by that body, not the TUC, though both are umbrella organizations for
unions), but I think Mighty Fine Words... will be invaluable in giving people a better understanding of, and
context for, what they're translating.
And if you're translating fiction, then - depending on the style/preferences of your author/editors/publishers,
and to what degree they wish to retain the setting of the original work, you may well find Hargraves an
essential aid in "Americanizing" the text, or at least in making it more comprehensible to a US readership.
A caveat: I'm not a translator; nor am I living in either the UK or US, at that! But if anyone has an interest in
linguistic variants, or UK/US cross-cultural differences, you may enjoy dipping into this book. As a reference
librarian, I've found it to be an excellent resource, and a tremendously enjoyable one. (-One of the sections
on food, for example, has this preface: "As antidotes to human suffering, cakes occupy a cherished place in
the lexicons of all English speakers", after which follows a list of cakes possibly unfamiliar to the non-native of
one country or the other. )
Edited to add the link to Amazon: http://tinyurl.com/mfwase |
|
|
Fascinating. I just bought it but with the mental note that it shows how English is used in different areas as aligned to professional or cultural conventions superimposed on a territorial/jurisdictional (i.e. non-linguistic) distinction.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| montmorency
Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4830 days ago
2371 posts - 3676 votes
Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Danish, Welsh
| Message 26 of 29 02 July 2013 at 7:27pm | IP Logged |
espejismo wrote:
Another one is "he is in hospital" (UK) and "he is in the hospital"
(US). I believe they made fun of this on
Family Guy... |
|
|
Oh yes, they really love us Brits on Family Guy.
Peter was making fun of the British, and Lois came to our defence...
"Oh Pedah, don't be mean about the Briddish...they are lovely peeble....well, not their
teeth obviously....."
:)
2 persons have voted this message useful
| montmorency
Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4830 days ago
2371 posts - 3676 votes
Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Danish, Welsh
| Message 27 of 29 02 July 2013 at 7:41pm | IP Logged |
Getting back to that subjunctive-y mood usage difference I was mentioning earlier, I
was reminded of a variation on that, by a posting here (not by an American, as it
happens).
I can't remember exactly what that person said, but I will try to formulate my own
example of what I am getting at:
I might say something like:
"If I went to church every Sunday, I would feel quite virtuous".
I can imagine an American saying (have read Americans writing similar), something like:
"If I would go to church every Sunday, I would feel quite virtuous."
Now "went" looks a bit like a simple past, but if we rewrite as the more formal / old
fashioned:
"If I were to go to church every Sunday, I would feel quite virtuous".
...it looks more clearly (to me anyway) to be in the subjunctive mood (and rather
reminiscent of German "wäre").
And thinking of German, the German Konjunctive is very often like the simple past
(sometimes identical to), and I believe that constructions like
"If I went..."
show a common origin, or at least a similarity with the German equivalent.
Again, it seems that Americans, at least modern young Americans, seem to shy away from
this kind of usage. I may be wrong - my exposure to modern spoken American English is
relatively limited these days - but that's my perception, based on a lot of reading of
web articles and the like.
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------
EDIT: Just happened to spot an example of a related American usage that differs to
British (at least to what I would write). It's in the Wikipedia entry for "Stewie
Griffin":
"MacFarlane has also linked Stewie with David Hyde Pierce on more than one occasion,
saying he wants Pierce to play Stewie if a live action version of the show would ever
be created."
I would write ".....if a live action version of the show were [ever] to be created."
(some people might write "was", and so might I sometimes: but it still has a
subjunctive-y" feel to it).
Edited by montmorency on 02 July 2013 at 8:01pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Ug_Caveman
Newbie
United Kingdom
Joined 4784 days ago
32 posts - 31 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Dutch
| Message 28 of 29 14 July 2013 at 12:28am | IP Logged |
Mathematics:
Math becomes Maths and PEMDAS becomes BODMAS.
1 person has voted this message useful
| LanguagePhysics
Newbie
United States
Joined 4148 days ago
34 posts - 43 votes
Speaks: English*
| Message 29 of 29 20 July 2013 at 11:50pm | IP Logged |
As a native speaker of American English, I don't really see why you would feel the need to learn British English.
The difference between American English and British English is perhaps down to a small handful of words, to which the vast majority of American versions of the word are understood by Brits anyway.
The difference between the two are so small that I really don't think you would have to worry about formally studying British English.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
This discussion contains 29 messages over 4 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.4688 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|
Language Learning Forum : Language Programs, Books & Tapes
Printable version
