> I'm no expert on this, but here's an operating tip I picked up from
> Nestle years ago. It has worked well for me.
In our country (South Africa) we have 11 major languages. Many people here
can witness to how well this operating tip works. Unfortunately, many
people believe that forcing one lingua franca upon people will work even
better. History shows differently - it causes conflicts, including many
wars.
> The notion is that people have great difficulty expressing themselves in
> a foreign language, more difficulty than they have in listening to a
> foreign language.
Me and my friend Ben Goslin have had many discussions on this notion. (Ben
is fluent in even more than the 11 languages mentioned above. He can be
contacted at goslin@libarts.up.ac.za). During one discussion on language
and creativty, he suddenely exclaimed: "Now I understand it - one's mother
tongue is one's primary creative language." Compare this with what Rick
said above.
> Therefore, the principle is that everyone speaks in whatever language
> they prefer. Others listen and ask for translation if necessary.
In other words, the principle is to promote the creativity of the other
person (through which even one's own creativity will be promoted).
> I've had good luck with this method working with foreign groups who "speak
> English." I speak in English, they speak in their language and I get
> translation help from the more fluent in the group. I find that their
> statements and questions are much richer than when they are forced to
> speak in English.
>
Obviously, this tip has its limits. For example, my mother tongue is
Afrikaans. Should I contribute to this forum in Afrikaans, it will cause
commotion even if I provide for the translations myself. But what you read
here, is in fact an English translation of thoughts which were originally
created in Afrikaans, together with some rearranging, etc. Thus, please
forgive me my English because it is not my primary creative language.
I have the following 'terrible' problem when communicating in any other
languages (4 of them) than my primary creative language: when I
concentrate on creating the semantics of a sentence, the syntax gets
srewed up. When I concentrate on creating the syntax, the semantics get
screwed up. So, when I write something, I have to go through it twice, 4
times, 6 times, etc., alternating between the semantical and syntactical
modes. Obviously, this is possible in writing (and reading) whereas it is
impossible in speaking.
^^^^^^^^^^
The weird thing is that whenever a translator is used during ACTIVE
dialogue, nobody gets annoyed if the translator screws up the syntax while
translating. I have observed translators even giving a full interlinear
(word for word) translation and still the participators do not get
annoyed. (Note which persons Rick suggests for doing the translation job.
It is very clever!) However, for some 'strange' reason, if the sender
(speak and write) and the translator becomes one and the same person, far
too many receivers get annoyed and abusive. Obviously, such a reaction is
not conducive to the dialogue.
I hope my contribution will give other "dialoguers" more insight in the
problem. As for the 'strange' reason above, it has to do with complexity
and the fact that "complexity intimidates".
Best wishes
At de Lange
Gold Fields Computer Centre for Education
University of Pretoria
Pretoria, South Africa
email: amdelange@gold.up.ac.za
--"Mnr AM de Lange" <AMDELANGE@gold.up.ac.za>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>