Languages first translated.

[Sammy-San]

How do you think they were first translated?

I remember somebody said something about how adults are more of a risk in understanding a language properly than a person born into it. Do you think languages like the ones from india and the orient were translated from people born hearing both (like the Europeans had children with foreign women who grew up hearing both languages), or who had a special ability due to a certain relevance to their life the language had?

People say kids learn a language because they are immersed in it, but if I started listening to Japanese renditions of songs for some time every day, it would be as if I was a child in japan? No more risk? When I heard this it barely made sense.

 

[Radagast]

How do you think they were first translated?

Either by people who grew up bilingual (like Jews speaking Aramaic and Greek in Palestine in Jesus' day) or by people who learned second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, ... languages as adults.

For example, when Europeans first went to China, they learned the languages and made translations both ways. Generally, these were people with a talent for languages.

 

[Sammy-San]

Either by people who grew up bilingual (like Jews speaking Aramaic and Greek in Palestine in Jesus' day) or by people who learned second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, ... languages as adults.

For example, when Europeans first went to China, they learned the languages and made translations both ways. Generally, these were people with a talent for languages.

Japanese seems so hard to pick up without extensive study.

 

[Radagast]

Japanese seems so hard to pick up without extensive study.

Both the US State and Defense Departments list it in the hardest of 4 categories (along with Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, and Arabic).

That's partly because of the difficulty in reading and writing. Japanese is a bit easier if you can avoid kanji.

Here's a three-way classification:

 

[Sammy-San]

Both the US State and Defense Departments list it in the hardest of 4 categories (along with Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, and Arabic).

That's partly because of the difficulty in reading and writing. Japanese is a bit easier if you can avoid kanji.

Here's a three-way classification:

Where do you think Japanese would fall under if learning it just involved romaji?

 

[Radagast]

Where do you think Japanese would fall under if learning it just involved romaji?

I think the basic language might come in 3 out of 4 in that case. But the complex sociolinguistics (e.g. varying politeness levels, the sublanguage used by women, etc.) would still keep it in the hardest category, I suspect.

There are indeed teaching strategies that approach Japanese with just romaji; even more with just katakana/hiragana (that's what young Japanese children do).

 

[Sammy-San]

I think the basic language might come in 3 out of 4 in that case. But the complex sociolinguistics (e.g. varying politeness levels, the sublanguage used by women, etc.) would still keep it in the hardest category, I suspect.

There are indeed teaching strategies that approach Japanese with just romaji; even more with just katakana/hiragana (that's what young Japanese children do).

like watashi?

 

[Sammy-San]

I think the basic language might come in 3 out of 4 in that case. But the complex sociolinguistics (e.g. varying politeness levels, the sublanguage used by women, etc.) would still keep it in the hardest category, I suspect.

There are indeed teaching strategies that approach Japanese with just romaji; even more with just katakana/hiragana (that's what young Japanese children do).

Japanese uses very vague expressions. The Japanese version of what a beautiful name has , "tsutsunda ai ni yori". Somebody told me it means love was my undoing, in context it sounds like it refers to Jesus suffering on the cross.Tanoshii Japanese

With mr roboto, its hard to say for sure if its Mata o hima de, or mata au hi made (mah de is again, hi (hee) is day)

People say its more clear than Chinese (sound wise it is), but they use the most vague expressions. How languages like that were first translated is a fascinating subject.

 

[Sammy-San]

I think the basic language might come in 3 out of 4 in that case. But the complex sociolinguistics (e.g. varying politeness levels, the sublanguage used by women, etc.) would still keep it in the hardest category, I suspect.

There are indeed teaching strategies that approach Japanese with just romaji; even more with just katakana/hiragana (that's what young Japanese children do).

I guess there were people who were exposed to both English and Arabic (or oriental or native american) since early childhood and they were the translators.

 

[Sammy-San]

I think the basic language might come in 3 out of 4 in that case. But the complex sociolinguistics (e.g. varying politeness levels, the sublanguage used by women, etc.) would still keep it in the hardest category, I suspect.

There are indeed teaching strategies that approach Japanese with just romaji; even more with just katakana/hiragana (that's what young Japanese children do).

So Japanese and native american were translated the same exact way italian was? how did europeans and native americans first communicate? - Page 8 - Historum - History Forums

"As soon as I reached these regions, I forcibly seized some Indians from the first island, so they could learn from us and also give us information about what they knew of these parts. Everything went according to our wishes; it was not long before we understood each other, first by gesture and sign, then by words; and this was of great advantage to us." (italics added) (Christopher Columbus to Gabriel Sanchez in a letter translated by Donald B. Clark)

In that situation, I sure would scramble to pick up the language of my captors. Fear is a great motivator.

from another page.

The very earliest communication would probably have involved smiles, grunts, basic body language, and improvised sign language, if all parties involved were inclined to be friendly. War-dances, cannon-fire, and the launching of projectiles if anybody on either side wasn't feeling inclined to be friendly.
I think the simple truth is that an overwhelming majority of Indians and whites were never able to communicate in the first place. Once trade routes were established on the North American continent, many merchants on both sides tended to use sign language and hybrid/pidgin jargon, rather than developing a well-rounded familiarity with each other's tongues. Well into the 19th Century, treaty-brokers and army officers often communicated with the Lakota and Apachean peoples through translators, not directly.

When Natives and Europeans did learn each others' languages in detail, it would have been a bumpy road for most people. Actually, I think the movies Dances With Wolves and The Last Samurai give a feel for what this would be like - the white man using the 'native' tongue like the proverbial bull in a china shop, but managing to get his point across. As with anything, practice would make perfect.

 

[Sammy-San]

Either by people who grew up bilingual (like Jews speaking Aramaic and Greek in Palestine in Jesus' day) or by people who learned second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, ... languages as adults.

For example, when Europeans first went to China, they learned the languages and made translations both ways. Generally, these were people with a talent for languages.

What about Arabic being first translated? At my age I cant really have an ear for Arabic-its like asking me to hear a sound that only a dog can hear.