You are not logged in.

  • "lizardman" is male
  • "lizardman" started this thread

Posts: 568

Date of registration: Jun 3rd 2011

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translation Proofreader
LTI Administration Group

Location: Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Thanks: 22364 / 483

  • Send private message

1

Sunday, March 17th 2013, 9:09pm

Jacque Fresco - Oct 12, 2010 - Investigating Behavior 1/5 - translation problems

Link to video: http://dotsub.com/view/fa5fa5da-975e-44c9-9a4f-7bf6a32bda67

Hi friends,

I need a little help here with this section which starts at 11:12.

If a person is very simple,
he says "God wanted it that way. That's why it's that way."
That doesn't tell you a damn thing, except that person's reaction.
Using reason with them does not work
unless you equip them with the tools of reason.
There are no tools of reason except specific tools of reason:
how to fly a kite, how to build a wheel.
That's specific reason,
but general reasoning can not be imparted to people,
particularly if they like things the way they are,
meaning if their reactions are very simple.


The problem is with the word 'reason'. Would you agree that it can be translated as "logical arguments", "logical thinking" (at least when the word 'reason' is introduced) and after that as just "thinking"? Especially when he says "specific tools of reason" and gives example with flying a kite, and then talks about "general reasoning" - do you think that 'reason' and 'reasoning' in these cases can be translated as 'thinking'?

As I understand it, the point he makes is that you can teach people how to think about a specific thing, but not about things in general. They have to have a certain attitude in order to do the latter. But that's just my understanding and I'm not really sure about it, so any thoughts would be helpful. :)

1 registered user and 64 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

Ray

  • "Ray" is male

Posts: 1,086

Date of registration: May 23rd 2011

Language Team: Global

Focus Group: LTI Administration Group

Location: Michigan, US

Thanks: 42450 / 6391

  • Send private message

2

Friday, March 22nd 2013, 7:34am

In practical terms, the use of the words 'reason' & 'reasoning' here infer a deeper thinking based on presented facts &/or direct observations that sometimes contradict one's current beliefs or expectations. In many cases, it has to do with topics/subjects that have not previously been thought through much, if at all, by the person needing this ability to reason, where they had simply accepted something that they had heard about it in their past as fact.

On a related note, the punctuation within the passage that you're quoting is not very accurate and provides an easy to misunderstand flow.
Without having heard/read the surrounding context, the following appears to be much more appropriate to me.

If a person is very simple,
he says "God wanted it that way. That's why it's that way."
That doesn't tell you a damn thing, except that person's reaction.
Using reason with them does not work,
unless you equip them with the tools of reason.
There are no tools of reason except specific tools of reason.
How to fly a kite, how to build a wheel;
that's specific reason.
But general reasoning can not be imparted to people, <-- Might this actually be "But generally, reasoning cannot be ..."?
particularly if they like things the way they are; <-- I've never heard of him speak of "general reasoning" before
meaning if their reactions are very simple.
Signature from »Ray« Earth For Sale:
Slightly Used; inquire within

43 guests thanked already.
  • "lizardman" is male
  • "lizardman" started this thread

Posts: 568

Date of registration: Jun 3rd 2011

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translation Proofreader
LTI Administration Group

Location: Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Thanks: 22364 / 483

  • Send private message

3

Friday, March 22nd 2013, 10:55am

Thanks, Ray. The way I understand it, the person who says that it was god's will would be in most cases used to a more emotional thinking, thinking that makes one feel good, and not have a strong disposition towards understanding how reality actually is (or getting closer and closer to it), regardless of how that makes us feel. The specific thing that Jacque points out is that if you explain to the person, for example, that there is a causal relationship (which does not necessarily include god) that leads to the present state of things, s/he would need certain tools of reasoning/thinking in order to be able to understand you to a more full degree.

Then Jacque goes on to expand this.

You can hear from the link in the first post that he clearly says "general reasoning", and I think that it very much fits the context. As I understand it, he means thinking about a particular situation (specific reasoning) and applying your thinking to a wide variety of situations (general reasoning). That would mean taking those specific tools of reason and applying them in broader contexts (example: the scientific method to social problems). Sort of like how a tightly specialized scientist might be unable to apply a more scientific thinking to situations outside his specialty. A generalist, on the other hand, would have many specific tools of reason (or thinking) and be educated as to how to apply them in a wide variety of situations (i.e. if you think in terms of degrees rather than absolutes, you would, for example, see things as being more or less scientific and more or less rational, but not as being either scientific or non-scientific, or either rational or irrational).

So, these interpretations of mine determine how I see this word being translated in the contexts Jacque presents here.

By the way, about the punctuation, from what I hear, the punctuation as it is now corresponds more fully to Jacque's words, with perhaps...

That's specific reason,
but general reasoning can not be imparted to people,


...possibly being divided into two sentences. But I don't know if that would make much difference.

41 guests thanked already.

Posts: 40

Date of registration: Feb 6th 2012

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translator
Translation Proofreader

Thanks: 1412 / 5

  • Send private message

4

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 9:45pm

Hello there :)
I need your help, the Bulgarian team (well, part of it) has some serious discussion about this nice little sentence here:

The goal of those cities is to make things relevant to people that they respond to.

The question is who responds to whom?
One interpretation is that the city offers things to the people and the people respond to those things, and the other is that the city responds to the people. Which one do you think it is?
It goes on like this:

There's no other way. Now, people that live in the city, have many different reactions to the city: "It's my home." "My grandfather was born there." "[It's] my favorite city."

1 registered user and 67 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

Ray

Posts: 91

Date of registration: Jan 16th 2013

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translator
Translation Proofreader

Thanks: 3573 / 66

  • Send private message

5

Friday, July 12th 2013, 1:55pm

I have as well a problem with the translation of this part:

"Now if you beat down one wing with more pressure,
you turn the wing into the wind, and beat down, he will bank."

Does he mean that if you use physical force you'll beat down the bird's wing or when it flies against the wind his wing will beat down?

1 registered user and 42 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

nomada

Posts: 2,335

Date of registration: May 24th 2011

Language Team: English

Focus Group: Timestamp Adjustment Team
Public Relations Group

Location: Malmö, Sweden

Thanks: 81535 / 2397

  • Send private message

6

Friday, July 12th 2013, 2:46pm

I think he means the bird in its flight action. "Bank" means incline? I wonder.

Can you post a link to the video and the timestamp where he says that, so others can more easily help you?
Signature from »nomada« Click to know how to: - Receive email notifications - Join the LTI biweekly Meetings

40 guests thanked already.

Posts: 91

Date of registration: Jan 16th 2013

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translator
Translation Proofreader

Thanks: 3573 / 66

  • Send private message

7

Sunday, July 14th 2013, 10:47am


1 registered user and 40 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

nomada

Posts: 2,335

Date of registration: May 24th 2011

Language Team: English

Focus Group: Timestamp Adjustment Team
Public Relations Group

Location: Malmö, Sweden

Thanks: 81535 / 2397

  • Send private message

8

Sunday, July 14th 2013, 6:31pm

"Now if you beat down one wing with more pressure,

you turn the wing into the wind, and beat down, he will bank."
Does he mean that if you use physical force you'll beat down the bird's wing or when it flies against the wind his wing will beat down?
Neither. What he means is: If ONE beats down the wing with more pressure, (or if) one turns the wing into the wind (more pressure when there is wind against) and beat down, one will bank. It will work like that for a bird, a flying machine, whatever. So, when he says "You" he means anyone, but he is actually giving the example of a bird.
Let me know if it became clearer?
Signature from »nomada« Click to know how to: - Receive email notifications - Join the LTI biweekly Meetings

1 registered user and 38 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

angelov

  • "ralle4" is female

Posts: 136

Date of registration: Jul 27th 2012

Language Team: English

Focus Group: English Transcriber
English Proofreader
Public Relations Group

Location: Los Angeles

Thanks: 4616 / 195

  • Send private message

9

Sunday, July 14th 2013, 7:50pm

Here, Lizzie: this is the definition of "bank" that Jacque is using.

bank 1

7. The lateral inward tilting, as of a motor vehicle or an aircraft, in turning or negotiating a curve.


v.
banked, bank·ing, banks v.tr.

5.
a. To tilt (an aircraft) laterally and inwardly in flight.
b. To tilt (a motor vehicle) laterally and inwardly when negotiating a curve.

v.intr.
1. To rise in or take the form of a bank.
2. To tilt an aircraft or a motor vehicle laterally when turning.

bank2n

6.
(Engineering / Aeronautics) the lateral inclination of an aircraft about its longitudinal axis during a turn

bank1 (bæŋk)
n
[b]6. the lateral inclination of an aircraft, esp. during a turn.
11. [/b] to tip or incline (an airplane) laterally.

And I'm just throwing this one in in case it helps with a visual in any way:

v. banked, bank·ing, banks v.tr.
4. To construct with a slope rising to the outside edge: The turns on the racetrack were steeply banked.

so the bird is caused to "bank"-- to be pushed by the wind from behind the wing, (or maybe in front) so he is tilting rather than flying straight, if my explanation makes sense, here. At least this should help you figure it all out in context. :)

All from the Free Dictionary.

2 registered users and 41 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

nomada, angelov

Posts: 91

Date of registration: Jan 16th 2013

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translator
Translation Proofreader

Thanks: 3573 / 66

  • Send private message

10

Tuesday, July 16th 2013, 1:04pm

No, nomada, because I can't understand what he means by "beat down". I've found all of its meanings in the dictionary and none of them seems to fit with the context.

43 guests thanked already.
  • "ralle4" is female

Posts: 136

Date of registration: Jul 27th 2012

Language Team: English

Focus Group: English Transcriber
English Proofreader
Public Relations Group

Location: Los Angeles

Thanks: 4616 / 195

  • Send private message

11

Tuesday, July 16th 2013, 5:08pm

Angelov, (and Sorry, I thought you were Lizzie :)...When I see "Bulgarian" I think "Lizardman", lol; I guess more people live in Bulgaria and are on the Bulgarian team than just Lizardman, lol!! :):))... I think Jacque is referring to the building up of pressure thru the action of "beating down"...I mean that (and he is saying "if 'you' ") but he is (I think) referring to the bird doing it, -- ohhh, it's really hard to explain in words, lol!..:) If the bird (or anyone in the same scenario, but of course we don't have wings) -- but, if the bird OR you could say, as the bird "beats down his wings" -- in other words: pumps the wings up and down -- it builds up pressure, from that pumping action, from the beating up and down of the wings, it builds up pressure, w/ the air -- sorta like a pump, maybe, in a way, how if you pump a pump, it builds up air pressure w/in it so then it does something -- or if you turn that wing into the wind (again there is pressure against the wing from the action and pressure of the air, obviously, that is the wind) you cause the bird to tilt. -- That action, of beating the wings up and down, therefore building up the air pressure thru the action of the beating, or turning that wing into the wind -- will create a reaction: the bird will turn, tilt, bank. This is what he is saying. (Whatever mechanism is taking this action, coupled w/ the physical -- outcome, I guess -- or reaction you achieve from the air, by taking this action upon it, (ie: beating it down, thereby building up the pressure)-- creates the reaction on the bird to tilt.

I think this is right and I hope that helps, :)

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "ralle4" (Jul 18th 2013, 2:38pm)


2 registered users and 40 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

angelov, ossi11111

Posts: 2,335

Date of registration: May 24th 2011

Language Team: English

Focus Group: Timestamp Adjustment Team
Public Relations Group

Location: Malmö, Sweden

Thanks: 81535 / 2397

  • Send private message

12

Tuesday, July 16th 2013, 11:38pm

No, nomada, because I can't understand what he means by "beat down".

Ok. got you now. "beat down" the bird's wing refers to the movement of the birds member (wing) from up to down.
"Now if you beat down one wing with more pressure,

you turn the wing into the wind, and beat down, he will bank."

The second part of the sentence starts with "you turn the wing into the wind", because he is giving an example of when the bird's wing will find more pressure when beating down.
Signature from »nomada« Click to know how to: - Receive email notifications - Join the LTI biweekly Meetings

1 registered user and 72 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

angelov

Posts: 91

Date of registration: Jan 16th 2013

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translator
Translation Proofreader

Thanks: 3573 / 66

  • Send private message

13

Thursday, July 18th 2013, 4:48pm

Thank you, guys! Finally I get it. You've been very helpful.
I really like this one and I think it's one of his greatest lectures.

1 registered user and 41 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

ralle4

Posts: 91

Date of registration: Jan 16th 2013

Language Team: Bulgarian

Focus Group: Translator
Translation Proofreader

Thanks: 3573 / 66

  • Send private message

14

Tuesday, July 30th 2013, 4:34pm

7,51 - 7,57
"...but a book about how Seminole Indians treat fish
would have no use in space."
What do you think about the verb "treat". I'm not sure if it can be translated like "the way Seminoles do fishing".

1 registered user and 50 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

ralle4

  • "ralle4" is female

Posts: 136

Date of registration: Jul 27th 2012

Language Team: English

Focus Group: English Transcriber
English Proofreader
Public Relations Group

Location: Los Angeles

Thanks: 4616 / 195

  • Send private message

15

Tuesday, July 30th 2013, 5:54pm

Angelove, yeah, he's talking about relevance, here -- how relevant and
useful something is to a person: what they actually need in a given
situation, and if they have (and are being given) what they will need. You could conceivably
say "do fishing" or "how the Seminole Indians 'deal with fishing' ",
maybe, or 'handle fishing'.

Here, from Dictionary.com. These are relevant definitions of the word 'treat' as being used here:

treat
[treet] Show IPA verb (used with object)


1. to act or behave toward (a person) in some specified way: to treat someone with respect.

2. to consider or regard in a specified way, and deal with accordingly: to treat a matter as unimportant.

3. to deal with (a disease, patient, etc.) in order to relieve or cure.

4. to deal with in speech or writing; discuss.

5. to deal with, develop, or represent artistically, especially in some specified manner or style: to treat a theme realistically.

(Definition #1 above may also be used in reference, not only to "a person", as in
parentheses, but it also can be used: 'toward [any object] in some
way'...as in "relate to a 'thing'/act towards or interact w/ something
mentally", maybe. This is NOT part of the dictionary definition, I have added it to help with clarity.

Additionally, I have emboldened portions of the definitions above and below, also -- to help with clarity. The word 'treat' may be used in the emboldened context, alone, separate from the context used in the definition, to my understanding)



World English Dictionary

treat (triːt)

vb (usually foll by of )
4. ( tr ) to deal with or regard in a certain manner: she treats school as a joke

8. formal to deal (with), as in writing or speaking

Hope this helps, Angelov. :)

1 registered user and 55 guests thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

angelov

© Linguistic Team International 2018
Context In Motion