What are words?
This is the question tackled by all three of the articles presented this week. Haspelmath
discusses how words relate together in word families and lexemes, describing
the overall morphological relationship between words. The articles discusses
how words are altered within their categories to create new meaning or add a
layer of information to their meaning such as with the use of suffixes, affixes
and allomorphs, in addition to describing the different types of compounds and
their structures. Atikins-Levin analyzes
the meaning of words in contexts, and uncovers why we use words with nearly
identical meaning in different contexts. While Slobins combines all the
features of words to explain how create systems of languages (Verb vs.
Satellite Langauges).
I found the
Slobins piece very interesting as I study French because I finally understand
why it takes so many words just to translate one sentence from English. I know
see it is because of the different systems that govern the combination of these
words. The French lexicon is not connected in the same way as the English
lexicon and in turn more information can be relayed with less English words
than with French words. It makes sense to me now why the French have very specific
words for very specific contexts. The example in the texts is as follows: “sort
un hibou” (an owl leaves) versus in English “an owl popped out” which
highlights the limits of French verbs. The verb “sortir” cannot be used in all
contexts where the subject is exiting, and still there is not one verb in
French that encompasses the connotation as the word “popped” in the English
version. The French version would have had to add a lot more adjectives and
description like “comme un balle” ( like a bullet).
For this reason, I
disagree with the idea that there are too many lexical variations and options
as proposed by Atkins and Haspelmath. I appreciate the variety in English that makes
our verbs so rich and descriptive. In other languages, the verbs have no
personality, no context, no feeling. The verbs come across as route and automatic
and fail to incorporate the real life sentiments with which they are executed. Dictionaries
organize words by their lexemes by default because it is easy to search for the
words from a neutral standpoint and then browse for that word in a specific
context. I love that our verbs can do so much rather just explain action! I
wish French were like that sometimes- it would make their paragraphs a lot more
concise.
I also studied French and high school, and I drew very similar conclusions to you about understanding translations. However, I disagree that french verbs have no personality - I think that while the structure is very different to what I have been accustomed to, I think that they still have personality, just in a different way - let's look at dépayser for an example. While it literally means to decountrify, realistically it means to leave your comfort zone. It the same way that the french don't have one way to express 'popped out' we don't have a simple way to express this. I think that no matter what language you are looking at, there will be certain constructions that are simpler, and some that are much less elegant and concise.
ReplyDeleteI study Spanish, and I was interested in these articles for the same reason as you - because similarly, in Spanish as in French, it takes many words to say the same thing as in English. An example I used in my response was if you wanted to say "he dashes out the door" in Spanish, you would need to say "él corre rápidamente hacia fuera la puerta." So similarly to French, Spanish lacks descriptive verbs, so you need to add various adverbs to verbs to get the same effect that you do with a single verb in English.
ReplyDelete