• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    1 minute ago

    First of all…“Sexist and misogynist” redundant…sort of…because women can be sexist too. Misandry is what that’s called.

    And a lot of stuff that’s called “misogynist” today isn’t actually misogynist. Some misandrists out there think any scene in a movie or book depicting a brothel with any kinds of events that follow afterward or before to be misogynistic

    The same goes for any scene where a man rescues a woman from anything. I’m not kidding. some women out there literally think that old as dirt trope that’s been in every story ever written is somehow sexist.

    I judge people only by the content of their character and then by their qualifications

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5110 hours ago

    As I recently saw in a video about bible translations: Greek used (uses?) generic masculine forms for plurals. So a mixed group of stewarts and stewardesses would be called “these stewarts”. If there’s no context added, it’s impossible to tell whether the group was actually all male or not.

    • @Capricorn_Geriatric
      link
      English
      4210 hours ago

      I think that’s how a large part of European languages still work.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        259 hours ago

        In many aspects English doesn’t distinguish between genders at all.

        I chose the words above specifically because they are gendered. I’m not a native speaker, but as far as I know, teacher, butcher, officer, warrior, president, welder, etc. can each mean male or female. There’s maybe a connotation, but the words are not gendered. English also has no concept of a grammatical gender. Articles, adjectives, etc. are gendered in most European languages.

        • @Aqarius
          link
          English
          32 hours ago

          English absolutely has grammatical gender, it just defaults to “male” so much people forget there’s other options. For example, “teacheress” is a real word, it’s just so archaic that the male word now means both, same with how “you” is both singular and plural.

          • @AngryCommieKender
            link
            English
            3
            edit-2
            40 minutes ago

            I mean if you want to go that far, there’s an argument to be made that the gendered terms wifman, werman, man, woman, and men were all simplified, to the gender neutral term of man and the feminine specific term of woman. We seem to have gone back and forth linguistically.

            • @Aqarius
              link
              English
              12 minutes ago

              Well, uh, yes. The thread OP notes greek (as in bible) uses generic masculine forms for plural. Modern English takes that tack much more broadly, using the theoretically masculine term for everything. And you can tell it’s masculine, not neuter, because, eg. a steward (of Gondor) is a steward, but a (-n air) stewardess is now a flight attendant.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 hour ago

            Take “The <noun> has a yellow <noun>”. Which gender do these nouns have? In German, I could tell you. Both articles and the adjective have a gender.

            Of course, you can use gendered nouns, but only a very small minority of nouns actually have female forms.

            • @Aqarius
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              48 minutes ago

              Being immediately identifiable isn’t the standard, for example in languages that don’t use the definite article (Slavic languages, for example) the first noun wouldn’t necessarily exhibit it’s grammatical gender, but it wouldn’t mean it doesn’t have one. Also, the brackets you used get parsed by boost as html tags.

              The very existence of gendered nouns and pronouns means English has gender. It’s just less noticeable because unlike the German “-innen” approach, English typically shoves most things into neuter and mostly defaults to male for persons and then hides it behind “he or she” or a singular “they”. You can argue it’s archaic or vestigial, and I’d agree, but it is there. Same how nouns don’t exhibit cases, but pronouns do. Compare:

              “The man stood there, the man’s hand on the coffee cup, the cup warming the man”.

              “He stood there, his hand on the coffee cup, the cup warming him.”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            45 hours ago

            Nobody says waitman or actsman. I had to fight my phone’s autocorrect just to type those.

            • @AngryCommieKender
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              30 minutes ago

              No one uses Wifman and Werman anymore either. Doesn’t make them any less some of the last gendered nouns for humans, in English, since if one goes back that far man is neutral gendered, and while woman exists, it’s for a woman that is a spinster.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            35 hours ago

            Consider that German and French gender basically everything. Your desk has a gender in those languages. English is almost genderless on comparison.

      • @AngryCommieKender
        link
        English
        125 minutes ago

        Well it’s not like we use the words Wifman and Werman anymore.

    • @AngryCommieKender
      link
      English
      1
      edit-2
      18 minutes ago

      I would wager that will be possible about 5-6 years after the AI singularity. Currently all translations have some sort of bias and cannot grok both the source and destination languages natively.

      Edit: I hope I used grok correctly. Someone older than I am that actually used that slang when it was popular please correct me. As I understand it Grok means: To intuitively know and understand the deeper meaning of a word, concept, meme, sociological nuance, or process.

  • @idiomaddict
    link
    English
    6712 hours ago

    But to answer your question, yes. If an unbiased translation is impossible (which it is), the solution is to have versions with as many contradictory biases as possible, so they hopefully cancel each other out.

  • Jake Farm
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3012 hours ago

    Classicist sounds hyper specific to classical Greece.

    • @PugJesusOP
      link
      English
      3712 hours ago

      Classicism can be broadly applied to Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, because of how often the sources intermingle (with many older Greek sources transmitted through Roman copies, and many Roman sources themselves written in Greek), but there’s usually an element of specialization in one or the other for any given classicist.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1111 hours ago

        I like the way we handle it in German, where Klassische Altertumswissenschaft is the study of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome as pioneered by Friedrich August Wolf in the 1700s, and Altertumswissenschaft is used for the more broad study of antiquity.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          119 hours ago

          The German impulse to just smoosh words together is perpetually amusing and awe inspiring

            • @Maultasche
              link
              English
              15 hours ago

              Können wir aus dem Namen ein langes zusammengesetztes Substantiv draus machen?

  • @Katana314
    link
    English
    1010 hours ago

    For a while, I would get YouTube recommendations with “Translators DID IT again - when do they learn???” videos highlighting what they viewed as horrendously biased censorship in translation.

    Every once in a while, I give these idiots a minute of my attention and by their own data they look stupid. Whatever inaccuracy they thought was there pales in comparison to getting the writing to flow well in English.