« UAE shifting reserves to Euro | Madre de puta »


July 16, 2006

Travel; Wealth & Arabic & Superficial Gits Pimping Idiocy

On the road, last preps for me home base return. Will return soon to ordinary commentary.

A side note on something that both annoyed and amused me, thanks to Comrade Hogan:
From this silly article Language and wealth.

The arty wonders "Does the language you speak or use help influence how wealthy you are?" in a faux naive fashion and notes that when "When trying to determine why some countries are wealthier than others, economists rarely, if at all, consider language. However, if you look at the list of wealthiest countries on a per capita income basis, you will notice almost all the top 20 are English-speaking, or use some other Germanic language, with the exception of France, Japan, and Finland (however, most Finns know German and English as well as Swedish, and many Frenchmen know German and/or English)."

Unsurprisingly we find a naive, poorly informed and superficial pretend argument that English is uniquely great for business, as a language. Terribly 19th century logic and thinking.

There's a good reason why serious economists don't waste their time with such bollocks.

Now, back to the basic question: Is there something about the English language itself that helps make one wealthier, and is there something about the Arabic language itself that inhibits economic development?

No, there isn't. Not the language certainly.

Several years ago, before his death, the distinguished musician, historian, philosopher and columnist Balint Vazsonyi told me he did not think it was possible for people who did not understand the English language to fully understand the English and American concepts of liberty, freedom and rule of law (and this from a Hungarian who did not learn English until he was in his 20s).

Big fucking deal. Idiot, so some "dinstinguished" git tells you something, and you lap it up without looking into what the science the area tells you? Of course, because it fits preconceived notions.

Now moving on to some truly idiotic propositions based on half-informed and half-understand information:
It turns out a body of Arabic scholars determines what words can be used in the Arabic language.

No, there is not. There are a couple of bodies that pretend to do so.

As there are in English. They have zero power, outside mere persuasion.

Originally, no word could be used that was not found in the Koran, but this obviously became too restrictive as technology and ideas developed, so there is now the official approval body.

What?

Where do idiots get this idiocy?

There is no fucking official approval body nor was there ever a period where only Quranic words could be used. Ever.

What a complete moron.


Did you know there is no word for "enterprise" in Arabic?

No, I did not. As a matter of fact, I can think of three perfectly decent synonyms, of which at least one is nearly perfect fit.

With more penetration of ideas from English, I am sure the concept will slowly transform itself as one of the several synonyms can and will take on that meaning - if and when the society using the language needs the concept.

Posted by The Lounsbury at July 16, 2006 08:42 PM
Filed Under: Economics , Perso

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/2802


Comments

Ah yes, the naive Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, beloved of freshman linguistics majors everywhere.
It's still a hypothesis, and has been for as long as Brazil has been the country of the future. Like Brazil, it probably always will be.

Posted by: pantom at July 16, 2006 09:14 PM

Good for a laugh, until you look this guy up:

Richard W. Rahn currently serves as Director General of the Center for Global Economic Growth. . . In the 1980s, Dr. Rahn served as Vice President and Chief Economist of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States.

I don't know much about economics, but I would think that basic fact-checking ability might come in handy once in a while.

Disturbing clowns in high places aside, would you say that the variety of Arabic terminology makes life a little harder? Offhand, it seems like multiple translations of imported notions can sometimes remain in active usage for quite a while. I don't know whether that's mainly because I'm being exposed to small amounts of information from multiple countries, or maybe it's also because there's less pressure to standardize terminology when everyone can easily back-translate it.

Posted by: Michael at July 16, 2006 11:59 PM

Oh yes, indeed. Taking simply financial sector jargon, the variety is a real pain.

Given the most important transactions, generally internatinoal (but not all transactions) occur in other languages and are translated, and given generally only international transactions would pressure standardisation....

Posted by: The Lounsbury at July 17, 2006 12:16 AM

I am often surprised at the number of Wax Cabinet people in high positions in American politics. I don't get it. The Brits have banished these people to the House of Lords, and those aren't that bad anyway. Some of the inane stupidities from the Senate just take my breath away. So who caught Ted Stevens' soliloquy on the internet?

http://blog.wired.com/27BStroke6/?entry_id=1512499

He's the chairman of the committee that regulates the net. Blimey.

Posted by: Klaus [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 17, 2006 01:27 AM

Comment Subscription

Email Address: