Informal English usage and possible translation issues

[haertig]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

If people from other countries are present English may well be used by everybody at the meeting. So it is quite possible for a meeting in Europe be taking place in English with no participants having English as a first language.

This is quite true! I remember a work (phone) meeting where I was there (American), my boss was there (Belgian - French was his native language), and we had other participants from China, India, Argentina and Singapore. We were all speaking English because that was the only language in common between all of us.

Since I am usually the jokester of a group, after a while I said "Does anyone here understand what anyone else is saying?" I think this was the first thing that everyone actually understood. And the entire group broke out in laughter. We all worked together for many years after that. After that first phone call, we decided to have subsequent calls being audio plus sharing of computer screens (with a chat window to the side). We found that typing in what we were trying to express into chat helped immensely, because everybody could easily join in in real time and decipher as a group what one person was trying to say. We gave up the false pretense of pretending we could understand each other. That pretense was done for politeness, but it wasn't very functional. What's funny, is that after a few meetings it got to the point where we actually could understand each others speaking. We grew accustomed to pronunciations and weird ways of saying things. And after that, we were always just talking like a big family, with everybody relaxing and talking about their kids, what they liked to do, etc. No more pretense. No more failure to understand each other.

To this day I still sometimes get into a conversation with someone and they will say "I'm sorry, my English is not good." My response to that is always "You speak at least two languages. I speak only one. I respect you more than you should respect me." That usually breaks the ice and prevents any future expressions of embarrassment. And communication flows much better.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You All is a southern US term. It's usually shortened to Y'all.

I know you all/y'all is a US southern thing. But I find that a lot of southernisms seems backwards/wrong to me. It's like the states with a southern accent is on another planet.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You've not even considered the possibility that what was posted was just plain offensive, with no thought necessary?

(I am assuming that when you say "what was posted" you are meaning "what I, haertig, just posted")

Oh no, I realized that possibility from the get-go. I knew that the perpetually offended - the very people I was talking about - would most certainly be offended. But my whole intent was to point out that the perpetually offended will always be offended, no matter what you say. And there's no way to state that belief without offending them further. I knew that.

I also knew that I would probably receive a challenge for stating my opinion. And part of that knowledge includes knowing that the challenger most assuredly has skin just as thick as mine. So although the challenger may feign offense, I knew they probably wouldn't truly be offended. So I hope everything is cool.

[DiapDealer]

The difference between you and I is that I would never presume to be any kind of expert on what others should (or shouldn't ) take offense to. Let alone whether or not they should respond to said offense. Even if I said it. The notion that people are waiting to be offended is a one only proffered by those who wish to be able to say whatever they want with no repercussions.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The notion that people are waiting to be offended...

I never meant to say that some people were "waiting to be offended". I meant to say that some people are "actively trying to be offended".

I would never presume to be any kind of expert on what others should (or shouldn't )...

Indeed. You are the least presumptuous person that I know.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by haertig

I see that differently. What I see the real problem as, is a thread about print books vs. audio books was grabbed by the throat and drug into an argument about terminology describing men and women. Starting a sentence with "Men" may have seemed slightly unusual to many of us, but that does not mean it was intentionally offensive. But that is exactly what some tried to make it out as.

Hmm. I take it you're a man. There's no way it would not feel offensive if you're a woman.

Your argument reminds me of those times when it was common for men to make public comments about women's physical appearance. They also didn't understand why many women felt offended. Their comments were not meant to be offensive in the least!

In short, what may feel slightly unusual to you may easily feel far less innocent to someone with a different gender/age/skin color/physical condition and so on. Saying that those other people seek to be offended is the height of arrogance IMO.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by hildea

I tested with Google translate, English to Norwegian:

• "Come on guys" --> "Kom igjen folkens" (= folks or people, gender neutral)
• "All the guys" --> "Alle gutta" (= boys or men, definitively gendered)

As someone with English as a second language, my immediate impression is that "guys" is gendered. If someone used "guys" about a group I was part of, I'd assume I was included, but I'd be mildly (very mildly) annoyed. (And if someone said "Come on, guys and Hilde" I'd be much more annoyed )

Thank you, although I'm more insterested in translations in the opposite direction. I assume folkens would be most likely to translate to folks and certainly not to men. I haven't heard folks used in quite a while, and it hasn't been suggested in this thread, but it seems like a reasonable alternative.

As to thee and thou, I've only encountered them in a scriptural (religious) context or depictions of ancient times. I had always assumed they were formal in olden times.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by haertig

I never meant to say that some people were "waiting to be offended". I meant to say that some people are "actively trying to be offended".

A difference without a distinction. My opinion still stands. The notion that people are "actively trying to be offended" is typically only proffered by those who wish to say whatever they want with no repercussions.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by issybird

Uh, "Come on, let's get moving." Or "people." Or "everyone." Etc.

In fairness, there might be a lot of people with not good memories of exasperated teachers starting an admonishment to a naughty class with "People".

[haertig]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Saying that those other people seek to be offended is the height of arrogance IMO.

I never said "all those other people". I only referred to "some" people. The actual people who triggered this thought on my part - who will not be named - can be counted on one hand. You are certainly not one of them, if that's what you were thinking. You are one of the, if not the, least offensive and argumentative person on this forum. People like you are what keeps this forum together IMHO, a reason to come visit and read posts despite some of the stuff that goes on (stuff that I readily admit I participate in).

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by haertig

I never said "all those other people". I only referred to "some" people. The actual people who triggered this thought on my part - who will not be named - can be counted on one hand. You are certainly not one of them, if that's what you were thinking. You are one of the, if not the, least offensive and argumentative person on this forum. People like you are what keeps this forum together IMHO, a reason to come visit and read posts despite some of the stuff that goes on (stuff that I readily admit I participate in).

I'm actually shocked reading this Seriously. Being described as one of the least offensive and argumentative persons here is pretty unexpected and I'm sure there are many posters here who don't agree with you. You must have missed a lot of my posts. But thank you for the compliment.

I didn't actually think you meant me in the post I quoted. It was more of a general observation.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

In fairness, there might be a lot of people with not good memories of exasperated teachers starting an admonishment to a naughty class with "People".

Addressing a group of people as "people" is actually common here (I mean the Estonian equivalent, of course) and not offensive in the least. Teachers don't use it much, or at least they didn't when I went to school. I had no idea the word might have unpleasant memories for former students in English. Live and learn!

[John F]

I thought that teachers used "class" when addressing students, but maybe I was thinking of this:

https://youtu.be/TuRo6SLY44k?si=091JeDWF4EvDMv-o

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Addressing a group of people as "people" is actually common here (I mean the Estonian equivalent, of course) and not offensive in the least. Teachers don't use it much, or at least they didn't when I went to school. I had no idea the word might have unpleasant memories for former students in English. Live and learn!

I think it is or used to be common in the US without negative connotation, especially by authority figures. I just now hypothesized it could potentially trigger PTSD light in former students. But it might be true.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by John F

I thought that teachers used "class" when addressing students, but maybe I was thinking of this:

https://youtu.be/TuRo6SLY44k?si=091JeDWF4EvDMv-o

Classic!

I think teachers use of "Class" is/was much more common than "People", but that isn't appropriate to non class settings.