Lost in Translation: Arabic to English and vice versa

My knowledge of Arabic is limited to a few useful words like makesh, meaning that there isn't any. This was annoying after driving through the North African desert for hundreds of kilometres only to be told at the next petrol station that it didn't have any. It was even worse when I asked at the petrol station after that.

In the first year I was in the nether regions of the Sahara. I had radio contact once a week with an English-speaking Arab some 500km away who might assist me in case of difficulties. Also, I could tell him about the week's progress. He was so impolite. Downright rude, one could say. Of course, I always discussed matters with him in perfect conversational Australian-English, just as if I were a newsreader on the ABC.

His rudeness, even crudity, worried me. I gave it much thought during the hot summer and equally frigid winter nights. What had I done to make him so angry? After much discussion with the many Arab friends I made and also with some of my expatriate workmates, our conclusion was thus. In polite English, there are many courtesy formulas. For example, "would you mind if", "if you don't mind", "excuse me", "I would like you to", "you may", "I suggest that" and so on. A skilled translator, when translating between a male English speaker and an Arab will remove the curtesy phrases. The translator will also replace all the "should" words with "must" and otherwise make the sentences more direct. It seems that, if this is not done, the Arab may well question the English speaker's sexual preferences.

Similarly, when translating from Arabic to English, the translator should insert curtesy formulas and change words if necessary to reach the appropriate level of English politeness.

Is any good translation exact? It all depends because if the purpose of the translation is good communication with a specific audience, then the words delivered should be chosen for not only their context but also for that audience.

The good thing about Ray Martin's interview was that you got to see and hear the Sheik explain himself. Also, the Sheik was in his own setting contrived to suit his purposes.

I sense that I would not be alone in saying that I found his explanations and manner entirely unconvincing.

In kindness I would say his defence was akin to that of Humpty Dumpty in Lewis Carroll's 'Alice through the Looking Glass':

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

One of the downsides of multiculturalism in this country is that we are often too polite to call the bluff of those who deliberately insult us as the mufti did. Our 'politeness' is seen as weakness in character, beliefs and values. It is to John Howard's credit that he elected not to return fire in kind, but very generously and respectfully called on moderate muslims to pull the mufti into line.

Australian muslims can only draw disgrace upon themselves if they excuse the mufti's offence and allow him to continue to flout universal standards of decency and good manners.

This OLO thread occasionally looks little more than a forum for single-issue anti-Islamists. Some level heads here but a lot of bile as well, a little echo-chamber of fear, paranoia & racism, visited by those looking for confirmation of their bias.

If you believe "it is very much an us versus them situation", consider that muslims make up a tiny percentage of the population, and only a tiny percentage of them subscribe to their ancient scriptures. A "gradually increasing, more dangerous problem" lies in us painting all Muslims as the same. Do you also think of (for example) America as fundamentalist? Consider the restrictions being placed on women's rights there regards contraception and abortion, both under sustained attack from the powerful, evangelical right.

Has no-one ever met an Aussie Mossie? You gotta get out more, peoples!

Everytime there is outrage against something vile yet another muslim has caused, the cry goes up,"but the majority of the muslims are moderate, they would never do this"
If that is the case, why do the majority of supposed peace loving law abiding muslims tolerate these misfits in their communities?
Why allow radical preachers contact with their youth? Why allow the likes of Hilali any position at all?
Because to allow this means they must be judged as being on that side and being sympathetic to those outmoded,unAustralian ideas.Which means they are deemed as bad citizens.
I think the choice is in the hands of the 'majority' of muslims.By their actions or lack of ,they show where their loyalty lies.

“If you believe "it is very much an us versus them situation"-Bennie, we all believe that, even when I play soccer, it is an us versus them situation, where not unified because where playing in the same league, it is our differences that will always make it an us vs them issue, it is our differences in which we will fight, none more then Race and Culture (which religion is a part of). You need to understand human nature
.
“A "gradually increasing, more dangerous problem" lies in us painting all Muslims as the same”-bennie
A problem that can not be categorized is a problem that cannot be fixed, without a more radical solution! (eg new strain of virus, faulty component on car(problem fxed because it was catergorized), or an important fundamental issue such as Muslims in Australia).
Do us white people live in a culture of fear? We need to Categorize it (Muslims), then fix it.

“Consider that Muslims make up a tiny percentage of the population, and only a tiny percentage of them subscribe to their ancient scriptures”-bennie, well consider this, that percentage is increasing. Thus my 1 of my 3 pronged solution “#Need to stop problem getting bigger, in terms of amount of Muslims immigrating to Australia (stop Muslim immigration)< I believe that policy would have a lot of supporters” where s the vote on such a fundamental issue?

It would be wise to listen to an expert on why religion exists in humans, and why it can have dangerous consequences. There is a link between it and survival. Would the people who belive in the god of war, have a better chance of survival then the people who believed in the god of peace?

See Richard dawkins articale. Note- not the essay a quick summary in wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viruses_of_the_Mind

cont...

“"Australia re-adopts racist immigration policy" would be hard to refute.”-Bennie. Unfortunately, you, me and most white Australians, are presently living in a culture of fear, in which we’d far rather not come across as racist, then address the problem, and protect our family, friends and free peaceful way of life. I do ask why you’d make up a circumstantial and ficticous heading to an article, instead of thinking about what path this policy is taking Australia down.
We are not racist! Deaths in the middle east, mass genocide in Africa, japans all so strict(and correct) immigration policy. Now the west’s racism “ah hmmm, can you, can you please not wear that burker (can’t spell it), and please don’t say our women asked to be raped” do they compare?

Unfortunately, I and many others have spotted a meteorite, and Bennie and many others will only see it, when it is so big and overwhelming, when it is on their doorsteps, that action must be immediately taken.

Remember, people once beleived that sacrificing people would make the crops grow. people now think that diversity brings strength and unity to a country.

(not db)