Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Czechlist] Re: help ENG-CES non-enlarged meeting

Expand Messages
  • James Kirchner
    ... In searching, I have found -- under a massive pile of sources that say the opposite -- a couple of sources online that back up what you say. They also
    Message 1 of 40 , Apr 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      On Apr 1, 2007, at 8:42 AM, Bedrich Hadziu wrote:

      > "False cognates" would mean to me words that are falsely believed
      > to have identical derivation whereas they do not.
      >
      > I do not believe that it is what you have meant.

      In searching, I have found -- under a massive pile of sources that
      say the opposite -- a couple of sources online that back up what you
      say. They also mention that the term "false cognate" is often
      "misused" to mean "false friend".

      I can tell you, though, that at street level, outside the foreign
      language classroom -- even in university linguistics departments --
      the term "false friend" is almost never used, probably because it
      sounds like a term made up for kiddies. With no other term to take
      its place, even PhD professors wind up using the term "false cognate"
      for words that have the same etymological derivation but not the same
      meaning. People then wind up talking about two different types of
      false cognates -- one with similar meaning but different derivation,
      and one with the same derivation but different meaning.

      And here is the definition of "false cognate" in the "Longman
      Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics":

      "a word that has the same or very similar form in two languages, but
      which as a different meaning in each. The similarity may cause a
      second language learner to use the word wrongly. For example, the
      French word *expérience* means "experiment" and not "experience".
      French learners of English might thus write or say: *Yesterday we
      performed an interesting experience in the laboratory.*"

      Clearly the more specialized dictionary defines "false cognate" in
      the way I used the term.

      The Merriam-Webster dictionary is not always reliable as a source for
      current word usage, especially in specialized fields. It had "data
      base" 20 years after the world had begun writing "database". It is
      also prone to weird definitions, such as "Afro" being defined as
      "having the hair shaped into a round, bushy mass"; or "pinko" defined
      as "a person with advanced liberal or radical economic beliefs", when
      it really means a communist sympathizer; or "ice breaker" as
      "something to break the ice in a project or a meeting" with no
      mention of the idiom "to break the ice". Many of these bad
      definitions have been repaired by now, but the Merriam-Webster
      definitions can be very iffy and out of date. I used to see it cause
      fights between proofreaders and reasonable people at companies where
      I've worked.

      With the term "false cognate", you're fighting against the tide,
      because it's now almost universally used in the way I did.

      This reminds me of the experience I have had with some more pedantic
      Czechs who would tell me that Czech words I heard everywhere "don't
      exist". You hear the word coming out of people's mouths all over the
      place, you read it in the media daily, you encounter it in all sorts
      of settings, and then when you use it yourself, pan profesor inzenyr
      doktor Jan Hloupy, CSa, tells you the word "doesn't exist". He won't
      tell you it's wrong, or low-class, or ungrammatical, or slang, but
      actually that this word that's everywhere "doesn't exist". It makes
      you feel like Winston Smith in 1984.

      Jamie



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mihail Mihaylov
      In fact, the future of Trados as an independent CAT tool is highly problematic. SDL Intl. acquired Trados years ago and now offer it as a part of a CAT package
      Message 40 of 40 , Mar 29, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        In fact, the future of Trados as an independent CAT tool is highly
        problematic. SDL Intl. acquired Trados years ago and now offer it as a part
        of a CAT package (different versions of SDL Trados). In SDL Trados Studio
        2009 (the last version) Trados is already an integrated part of the package.
        In my opinion, in a few years Trados will be eliminated completely.

        Unfortunately, there is no such thing as SDLX Edit anymore. You'll need the
        full package.

        HTH,

        Mihail

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "James Kirchner" <jpklists@...>
        To: <Czechlist@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 12:06 PM
        Subject: Re: [Czechlist] SDLX


        > Thanks, Josef.
        >
        > On Mar 29, 2010, at 3:40 AM, Josef Hlavac wrote:
        >
        >> I have heard (from a PM that switched his projects from Trados to SDLX)
        >> that SDLX offers better project management features.
        >>
        >> Josef
        >>
        >> James Kirchner wrote:
        >> > Does anyone know what the motive behind using SDLX might be? Is there a
        >> > free version for contractors or some advantage like that?
        >> >
        >> >
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Translators' tricks of the trade:
        > http://czeng.wetpaint.com/
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.