21–30 of 261 posts
Isn’t this a description of native vs non-native speakers in many languages?
>The message, written in English, was sent by a native speaker to a colleague for whom English was a second language. Unsure of the word, the recipient found two contradictory meanings in his dictionary. He acted on the wrong one. >When such misunderstandings happen, it’s usually the native speakers who are to blame. So...somebody got a message they felt was ambiguous and confused them, didn't ask for clarification b…
That's not what the article said at all. It seemed to place the blame on the word. I'm with you that one person should have sought clarification since they knew there were two meanings, but that's not actually the root cause. Another person may have only been aware of one of those meanings and made the "mistake" without ever thinking they needed clarification. The problem was the use of ambiguous language.
I find it really amusing to see someone thinking they blamed the sender. It seems like another example of how English speakers are so used to having to interpret words.
You can learn how to be better understood as a native speaker without having to go abroad or even speak to a lot of people using English as a second language. In the UK, live in a city like Birmingham, for instance, with a strong local accent and even, in some parts like the Black Country, a unique syntax, e.g. "How am ya?". Now go live for a while in, for the sake of argument, Glasgow, with their own particular pato…
>The message, written in English, was sent by a native speaker to a colleague for whom English was a second language. Unsure of the word, the recipient found two contradictory meanings in his dictionary. He acted on the wrong one. >When such misunderstandings happen, it’s usually the native speakers who are to blame. So...somebody got a message they felt was ambiguous and confused them, didn't ask for clarification b…
Ahh well, most non-native speakers would be concerned about their English proficiency level. For some that would be a quality worth mentioning in the hiring process.
My experience would that most people will shut off and don't ask for clarification but try and fill the gaps. It's a rather common issue.
So what was the word?? This is like those articles about photos that don't actually include the photo.
- highly industry-specific
- has two contradictory definitions in some dictionary
- possibly identifying a multinational company
>The message, written in English, was sent by a native speaker to a colleague for whom English was a second language. Unsure of the word, the recipient found two contradictory meanings in his dictionary. He acted on the wrong one. >When such misunderstandings happen, it’s usually the native speakers who are to blame. So...somebody got a message they felt was ambiguous and confused them, didn't ask for clarification b…
>> but it was the person who sent the message originally's fault? That's not what the article said at all. It seemed to place the blame on the word. I'm with you that one person should have sought clarification since they knew there were two meanings, but that's not actually the root cause. Another person may have only been aware of one of those meanings and made the "mistake" without ever thinking they needed clarif…
I disagree with this premise and believe the problem could have been avoided had the receiver taken the self responsibility to make sure they fully understood the message before acting upon it and if they had doubts, such as when they found two contradictory meanings, should have just simply asked for clarification.
If you don't understand something, it's on you. I've been misunderstood, i've misunderstood other people and the easiest thing anyone can do in that situation is say:
'sorry i didn't quite get that' or 'sorry could you explain what you mean'
or something along those lines.
>The message, written in English, was sent by a native speaker to a colleague for whom English was a second language. Unsure of the word, the recipient found two contradictory meanings in his dictionary. He acted on the wrong one. >When such misunderstandings happen, it’s usually the native speakers who are to blame. So...somebody got a message they felt was ambiguous and confused them, didn't ask for clarification b…
>> but it was the person who sent the message originally's fault? That's not what the article said at all. It seemed to place the blame on the word. I'm with you that one person should have sought clarification since they knew there were two meanings, but that's not actually the root cause. Another person may have only been aware of one of those meanings and made the "mistake" without ever thinking they needed clarif…
In an age of trigger culture and micro aggressions this article is a prejudicial sucker punch to native speakers of English.
In my native language we use declension everywhere. I could awkwardly say the same in my language, something like "olyžicujte ma" (o=equip/cover, lyžica=spoon, ujte=keep doing something, me=ma) - it is technically correct, but english didn't need to change any of those words, it just worked. English can convey the same meaning without unnecessary complexity.
I like this simplicity in language, it feels somehow superior. Simpler is better.
One of the major shocks for me was when I heard the story of someone who broke a leg, and stopped a friend from calling an ambulance because it'd be too expensive and instead called a taxi to get to the hospital. A combination of me being younger and naive, and not knowing the US so well back then, so I literally thought they were joking while they were telling it.