Strategic studies: there are world references that are well-known by some peoples, but remain unnoticed by others; importing sigmatoids may mean trivialising a culture or a people; de-characterisation/trivialisation does not have to be something bad, and it might actually be a good thing for human kind as a whole; and so on.

Saudosista is a sigmatoid from the Portuguese language that does not find a match in the English language.

So, why not saudosist?

Background, on the other hand, is a sigmatoid from the English language that does not find a match in the Portuguese language.

Background is not as nice as saudosista because it has too many degrees of vagueness in its set of world references, and it is wise having Words for Science as a main target in Communication in general, so also in Translation.

Cracking, as on cracking on you; hit, as on hitting on you; doll, as in on the doll; concession, as in concession card; and stuck, as in you are stuck on me are other elements from The Gap.

The theories exposed in The Gap Article may be good also for the identification of new world references, so that there is still a huge amount of sigmatoids to be imported into the English language from the Portuguese language, and vice-versa.

Discussing Universalization of Communication (UC) is making peoples learn more about other peoples.

The target is a world that is integrated not only in the sense of the machine, but in the sense of the mind; the spirit.

The target is bridges because cultural differences do have a meaningful impact - usually negative - on any randomly chosen individual.

Yet another item of concern is de-characterisation: if the sigmatoid saudosist is added to the English language, how much loss does that represent to the target-culture?

This sigmatoid gets added, and the native Australian person starts thinking about the past because now they associate the sound of the sigmatoid in their language with the Inner Reality images from the source-language.

It might be the case that James Gleick had the best way of stating that details matter: "if a butterfly chances to flap his wings in Beijing in March, then, by August, hurricane patterns in the Atlantic will be completely different".

The mentioned de-characterisation might be a good thing: it might increase the levels of solidarity, and empathy in the individuals who are part of the society that imports terms.

Perhaps this should be regarded as something that is as valuable as studies on subliminal messages.

This is also about domination: domination of one people by another.

Copyright, 1999-2006. All rights reserved. -
De-characterising or Enriching?
Author: Marcia Pinheiro
English to Portuguese translator 
By Marcia Pinheiro
Published on 06/23/2017
Sign in to your account...

Your current localization setting


Select a language

All of
  • All of
  • Procura de termos
  • Traballos
  • Foros
  • Multiple search