Brian M. Scott wrote: > On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 07:13:23 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in > <news:email@example.com> > in > sci.math,sci.physics,sci.lang,alt.usage.english,alt.philosophy: > >> On Dec 28, 8:00 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote: > >>> Peter T. Daniels wrote: > >>>> On Dec 27, 8:20 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote: > >>> <snip> > >>>>> However, that is one of the reasons English was used to >>>>> describe science and technical specs instead of >>>>> another Western Civ language. There are no government >>>>> rules that prevent creation of new words in countries >>>>> where some form of English is spoken. > >>>> Not in France, not in Israel, not anywhere else that >>>> there's an Academy of Language do "government rules >>>> prevent creation of new words." New words continue to >>>> come into languages as they are needed, whether or not >>>> they get into some official wordlist somewhere, and >>>> there's nothing a "government" can do about it. > > True, but not particularly relevant to the incident in > question. > >>> The purpose of the law which required JMF's presentation >>> to be translated was to keep the language pure. All it >>> did was > >> "The purpose of the law" can be determined from what in >> the US is called the "legislative history" and its >> interpretation in the courts. > >> "The purpose of the law" is not invented by someone with >> paranoiac notions of "language purity." > > BAH is probably right about the underlying purpose of the > law in question. > >>> prevent training and, thus, production. If the government >>> wants to purge non-French words from the country, let them. >>> But insisting that those public meetings be conducted in >>> French is nonsense. The seminar should have been scheduled >>> for 6 hours instead of 1 so the time needed for translation >>> could be done. The content of the seminar was technical >>> and most of the words used would have been English anyway. > >> Or ... the speaker could actually have had the courtesy to >> have their speech translated into French (if they >> couldn't handle the language themself). > > Wouldn't have helped much, since the seminar was far too > short anyway. Wasn't necessary, since everyone involved > spoke English.
JMF assumed that there were some people who didn't speak English and endured the delays. After the formal presentation ended, he found out that everyone could understand English and the translation was due to that law about purism.
Try to pretend that his seminar was about baking a chocolate cake; he didn't even get to finish listing the ingredients due to the time constraint, especially the chocolate piece of the material.
> >> Is "CIV" going to turn up in your little narratives one of >> these days? > > No, though a couple of poker decks might be an acceptable > stand-in. >
The sentence, "Subtract one hundred four" is supposed to be appended to my posts. Somehow, somewhere, it disappeared.