[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] méthodes de travail normales
On 22:24 27/05/03, Sotiris Sotiropoulos said:
I am not saying that people who do not speak English ought not to be
represented. I think they ought to be represented by people who do speak
their language, but also speak, write, and understand English at a high
proficiency level. Your English, for example, is much better than Maur's
and I had no problem understanding your message.
I do not say that people who represent English speaking countries should
understand others' idioms. I think they ought to be represented by people
with enough multinational background to understand the international ways
and language. The international language is a kind of lingua franca based
on poor basic English with very low interest in semantic and grammar. Its
purpose is not to satisfy purists, but to permit the largest number of
people to understand each others. Its achievement is that I fully
understand Mauro in using it. I am sorry if you have dificulty with it: you
should only do as we did, to learn it - in a different way, but you
obviously did not get yet up todate with us.
The problem of such International English is that it certainly gives the
feeling to some American people (Bristish and most of the other English
brands speakers are more sophisticated or still less internationally
involved) that their language is a language of reference. It is not. What
is of reference is what is ported (concept, ideas, references, etc) by
such an International English "transcoding". Such concepts, ideas,
references, etc. can be carried through this way - and when necessary
worded in a more conventional American when published in America (what is
not necessarily the case in Europe and at ITU). But they remain the
products of the culture which produced it; and its "after-sales" will need
the tool of its language.
We see that after the Sept 11th: the major problem that US Research and
Universities meet is with the foreign searchers who cannot come back. This
kills the cultural melting pot. If cultures and languages were no direct
part of the technical blend, American archives and e-mail would permit to
replace them.
It is true that the "melting-pot (old English) American" is poor at
supporting concept working (as we may see it from the failure of IAB to
come up for years with an Internet architecture) but is an excellent vector
for midle-level cross-culture understanding, when contained at low
complexity (America is probably the only place where language complexity is
legally graded). We have legal and technical examples with the DoD
requirements, Boeing basic English using 800 words, Airbus one only 400.
As for ICANN, may I ask you to go to http://www.icann.org/general/jobs.htm
and look at the second job opportunity with ICANN, the position of :
I hardly object that a US Government Agency - in particular at a time it
recenters its organization inorder to eventually fulfill its legal duties -
asks its own managers to have a good command of the local language. But I
think it is a usual mistake of ICANN - of the kind we all object - not to
take into account its own Melbourne resolution concerning multilinguism
support. In partlcular for a position of relational responsiblities. This
demonstrates that ICANN wants to concentrate itself on US business and
market aspects. Incidently this confirms also that ALAC is to be used as a
US policy tool, and that our action is the only one having a chance to
eventually represent the international users.
jfc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de