06.17.09
My Musings on Language and More Drawings
I’m currently in between books, but I do have some on hold at the library, which I should be able to pick up soon. I found a couple titles that I’m looking forward to reading–Exterminate All the Brutes: One Man’s Odyssey into The Heart of Darkness and the Origins of European Genocide by Sven Lindquist and Me Against My Brother: At War in Somalia, Sudan, and Rwanda by Scott Peterson to name a couple. The reviews looked intriguing, so we’ll see when I get a chance to read the books if they will enlighten me more. I’m sure they should. . . I’ve always been interested in learning about different cultures, but for some reason I never really learned much about Africa, so now I’m getting my fill.
I have always found different cultures fascinating because not only do we all speak different languages, but the different cultures shape the languages we speak and thus no two languages can be translated word for word into the equivalent meanings. I ran into one example of this in the latest book I read, A Fist Full of Diamonds by John B. Robinson. On page 140 Alice and Lonny meet an injured priest who just went through a barrage of gunfire. Alice asked what he was doing there and this is the following paragraph:
“The priest responded in a flat monotone: ‘Tomorrow they hacked my congregation.’ It was unclear exactly what ‘tomorrow’ meant. Lonny could tell the priest was thinking in his own language. In Kinyarwandan, ejo means both yesterday and tomorrow. . .”
I can relate to the part about “thinking in his own language” when speaking another language because since I grew up speaking English as my first language whenever I try to speak in Tagalog or Spanish I am thinking in English. And I can see why some people use the wrong words when speaking in a foreign language but still thinking in their own language. For instance years ago my Italian teacher was sharing a story of when he stayed at a friend’s house while visiting Italy. He asked the lady of the house if “he could take a shower.” And that’s how he translated it in Italian. The woman replied in Italian, “Where do you want to take the shower?” As if he was going to “take” the shower like you take a book somewhere. He had used the wrong word because he was thinking in English and was using our American way of thinking/speaking. So in that instance while he did translate “word” for “word,” the meaning was wrong. One thing I’ve noticed about Filipinos is that they tend to confuse or interchange the pronouns “he” and “she.” I think the reason for that is because they don’t commonly use “he” and “she” in Tagalog like we do in English. He or she is “shia.” I’m not sure if I’m spelling that right, but basically it’s one word for both he and she. And to say “his” and “hers” is also the same–Ang kanyia, for both male and female. Aaron has been studying Mandarin, and he has told me that they don’t have “yes” like we do. So if you ask a question like, “Are you going to the store?” Then you don’t answer yes or no like we do in English. If the answer is “yes,” then you answer, “I go to the store.” There is no “yes.”
Soooo, back to my Kinyarwandan example. Not only are words not equivalently translated from language to language, but so are “cultural ideas” not easily translated. After all, I think it’s a very foreign concept to use the “same” word in English for “yesterday” and “tomorrow.” In English those two words are very distinctly different, but apparently not in Kinyarwandan. I think about these things when reading the Bible. The New Testament was originally written in Greek, but some words are not completely interchangeable with English words. One example is the word “love.” The original Greek had two words for love–agape and phileo. Some Greek scholars claim that the difference between the two words is that phileo is a brotherly love, while agape is a deeper Christ-like love. But there are others who claim that there is “no” difference between phileo and agape and that the words can be used interchangeably. I disagree with that because no two words have the exact same meanings. Some are very similar, but they are not exacts. Particularly in the example of the Bible where Jesus asks Peter if he loved Him. John 21:15-17 reads:
15So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
In Greek Jesus first asked Simon Peter do you “agape” me? Peter answers, “yes, I “phileo” you. Jesus asks a second time, “Simon, do you “agape” me? Peter responds a second time, “yes, I “phileo” you. Jesus asks a “third” time, Simon do you “phileo” me? Peter answers, yes, I “phileo” you. I do not think it was “accidental” or “incidental” that both agape and phileo were used in the same passage. I think a person who doesn’t understand the culture well enough would not appreciate the subtle language usage changes and think that those two words are interchangeable when they are not. Another area in the Bible that I wonder why they translated it the way they did is in 1 Cor 13 regarding the greatest gift being “love.” The Greek word used in that chapter is “agape,” yet the King James Version translated that word into “charity.” Why would they do that?
Anyway, it’s getting late and I need to get up early tomorrow so better wind this down. Oh wait, one quick thing. . . today’s drawings. . . Here’s Aaron and my drawings for the day. His is on top, and mine is on the bottom.
Here’s a closeup of Aaron’s drawings. Apparently he isn’t much interested in shells. . .
He just hurriedly sketched and ran off, ha!
Here’s mine. I still managed to get that “cartoon” look for some reason. . .
I’m a little bothered with my “cartoon” tendency, so I thought I would try drawing a little larger to try to get more detail in to see if that helped me. Here’s my second drawing today. I got tired before I could get to the second shell and had other things that I had to do, so I quit here.
Since Aaron doesn’t like shells much, I think I’ll have to figure out what else we can use for subject matter next drawing session.
Marlakins
