EDIT - as another user highlighted this is a satire. A well done one. (I fell for it.)
The French academy has some really weird takes. And I’m not even talking about the kinks. (Props for them to actually talk about those things, though.)
linguistic borrowings were “a barrier to understanding”
Anecdote first. Years ago, I was helping some old lady with computers. And she was always confusing files with folders; for example, dragging the folder into the file instead of the opposite. Then it clicked me why - the local (Portuguese) names for both things:
file - arquivo; also meaning “archive” (furniture or building where documents are stored)
folder - pasta; also meaning “folder” (where you put paper sheets), “briefcase”
You put an offline folder inside an offline archive, but if you’re dealing with computers you do the opposite.
I’m sharing this because it shows that semantic widening - the resource the academy is prescribing - can be also a source of barriers. But the main barrier isn’t even the words you use to refer to a concept, it’s the concept itself.
Plus when the borrowing is old enough it stops being seen as one. It becomes part of the vocab, changes meaning, etc. (“Cervoise” vs. “bière” are a good example - both borrowings [Celtic and Germanic], and originally simply “beer”, but one eventually became associated with hop-less beers. I bet that, if those borrowings happened now, the academy would prescribe “vîn de grains” [grain wine].)
And the alternatives they offer aren’t even good. To call orgasms “little deaths” is kind of poetic; it’s OK in some situations but the opposite vibe of ahegao. Even plain “orgasme” would sound a bit better. (And perhaps “bouille” instead of “visage”, to make it a bit coarser? Or even, you know… let the community itself decide it? If they feel strongly against borrowings they’ll be probably able to come up with a good alternative.)
My experience is that using software translated into my native language, Croatian, is weird and confusing in general. As if it uses overly everyday vocabulary, without the adequately “techy” associations - when I paste (Cro. zalijepiti) something in real life, I do it with glue and it makes an object stand in place; when I paste (Cro. pejstati) something on my computer, I do it with ctrl+v and it results in a moved or duplicated file. Translated software uses the former Croatian word for the latter meaning as well, but to me the associations are much too different.
Alternatively, the terminology is coined consciously and spread top-down, so it’s alien both to the original English and to everyday Croatian. Some of these terms have ended up accepted (sučelje = interface; probably from the verb sučeliti, to face something), but even after years of exposure in school I can’t digest datoteka (Latin data + theca) for file. So, I stick to English whenever possible.
Croatian prescriptivists also love making up replacements for those pesky loanwords, but much like the French Academy’s proposals (even those that aren’t a parody: “jeu video de competition” instead of “e-sports”) are cumbersome, overly literal multi-word constructions. They’re not words at all, and I think they’re particularly likely to not be accepted by the speakers. (This could be related to Shkovsky’s idea of defamiliarisation, if you happen to be familiar with that by any chance…)
Same, I actively avoid using Croatian translations wherever possible because they’re typically bad and sometimes lead to confusion when they translate some feature or option you’re looking for in an unexpected way and then can’t find it.
Yup, the same as the old lady - all those associations you make between a word and its meaning working against you, in a way a borrowing wouldn’t. And if I had to guess:
“pejstati” is an adapted borrowing of EN “paste”
“zalijepiti” being perfective makes it even weirder in this situation.
Main difference is that “arquivo” and “pasta” are already well established within the community*; she isn’t tech-savvy.
Croatian prescriptivists also love making up replacements for those pesky loanwords, but much like the French Academy’s proposals
The Italian Crusca also behaves like this. I feel like those people are trying to treat a language like a bird, and “protecting” it by placing it in a cage.
(Note to self: check if the ABL or Pasquale [a local prescriptivist] prescribe something for ahegao, shimaidon, oyakodon, hentai, etc. They probably don’t.)
*there’s also “ficheiro” for “file”, but it’s mostly in European varieties. And “dire[c]tório” for “folder”, but it’s pretty much exclusive to Linux users.
EDIT - as another user highlighted this is a satire. A well done one. (I fell for it.)
The French academy has some really weird takes. And I’m not even talking about the kinks. (Props for them to actually talk about those things, though.)
Anecdote first. Years ago, I was helping some old lady with computers. And she was always confusing files with folders; for example, dragging the folder into the file instead of the opposite. Then it clicked me why - the local (Portuguese) names for both things:
You put an offline folder inside an offline archive, but if you’re dealing with computers you do the opposite.
I’m sharing this because it shows that semantic widening - the resource the academy is prescribing - can be also a source of barriers. But the main barrier isn’t even the words you use to refer to a concept, it’s the concept itself.
Plus when the borrowing is old enough it stops being seen as one. It becomes part of the vocab, changes meaning, etc. (“Cervoise” vs. “bière” are a good example - both borrowings [Celtic and Germanic], and originally simply “beer”, but one eventually became associated with hop-less beers. I bet that, if those borrowings happened now, the academy would prescribe “vîn de grains” [grain wine].)
And the alternatives they offer aren’t even good. To call orgasms “little deaths” is kind of poetic; it’s OK in some situations but the opposite vibe of ahegao. Even plain “orgasme” would sound a bit better. (And perhaps “bouille” instead of “visage”, to make it a bit coarser? Or even, you know… let the community itself decide it? If they feel strongly against borrowings they’ll be probably able to come up with a good alternative.)
My experience is that using software translated into my native language, Croatian, is weird and confusing in general. As if it uses overly everyday vocabulary, without the adequately “techy” associations - when I paste (Cro. zalijepiti) something in real life, I do it with glue and it makes an object stand in place; when I paste (Cro. pejstati) something on my computer, I do it with ctrl+v and it results in a moved or duplicated file. Translated software uses the former Croatian word for the latter meaning as well, but to me the associations are much too different.
Alternatively, the terminology is coined consciously and spread top-down, so it’s alien both to the original English and to everyday Croatian. Some of these terms have ended up accepted (sučelje = interface; probably from the verb sučeliti, to face something), but even after years of exposure in school I can’t digest datoteka (Latin data + theca) for file. So, I stick to English whenever possible.
Croatian prescriptivists also love making up replacements for those pesky loanwords, but much like the French Academy’s proposals (even those that aren’t a parody: “jeu video de competition” instead of “e-sports”) are cumbersome, overly literal multi-word constructions. They’re not words at all, and I think they’re particularly likely to not be accepted by the speakers. (This could be related to Shkovsky’s idea of defamiliarisation, if you happen to be familiar with that by any chance…)
Same, I actively avoid using Croatian translations wherever possible because they’re typically bad and sometimes lead to confusion when they translate some feature or option you’re looking for in an unexpected way and then can’t find it.
Yup, the same as the old lady - all those associations you make between a word and its meaning working against you, in a way a borrowing wouldn’t. And if I had to guess:
Main difference is that “arquivo” and “pasta” are already well established within the community*; she isn’t tech-savvy.
The Italian Crusca also behaves like this. I feel like those people are trying to treat a language like a bird, and “protecting” it by placing it in a cage.
(Note to self: check if the ABL or Pasquale [a local prescriptivist] prescribe something for ahegao, shimaidon, oyakodon, hentai, etc. They probably don’t.)
*there’s also “ficheiro” for “file”, but it’s mostly in European varieties. And “dire[c]tório” for “folder”, but it’s pretty much exclusive to Linux users.