On Saturday, 9 November 2013 at 08:32:24 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, November 08, 2013 23:51:16 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 11/8/13 11:43 PM, Raphaël Jakse wrote:
> I had a really hard time translating "slice". I opted for
> "tranche".
morceau?
I suppose that that would work, but I believe that tranche
would be the more
direct translation (certainly, it's what's used when talking
about slices of
bread). However, I don't know if there's another word that
happens to have
more accurate connotations in this case.
- Jonathan M Davis
French myself too, but I consider myself part of the English
community.
My personal feeling is that when it comes to translating
technical jargon, it is sometimes best to just keep the original
word, explain/learn what it means, and stick with that.
This is because the "words" are already loaded with more meaning
than what basic English gives them, for example,
"range"/"interval". Or "aggregate" or what not. All words with
very specific meanings in the context of a specific *programming*
language, that transcends the English language itself.
If you "translate" those words, you are actually creating new
words, which will require people to associate a new meaning to
said word, when the original English word was perfectly fine for
it.
The japanese seemed good at doing these kind of things when I was
there, talking about things like "regista", or whatnot.
On the contrary, the French seem to like *everything* to get
translated, to the point where the French themselves get confused
by the double standard. For example, for "stack"/"heap", the
French have "tas"/"pile". I'm French myself, and I can never
remember which is which! Why couldn't they just keep
"stack"/"heap"?
That's what I feel like anyways. Explaining things in your local
language is fine, but if technical words get translated,
oftentimes, you lose more from the loss of the context specific
definition, then the gain from replacing it with a word in your
own language, but with no added definition.
