HOW ABOUT I TALK ABOUT STRANGE NEW WORDS?
This is a quickie business blog.
While their content and general image may change over the years as much as humans themselves, languages have always existed as a result of the need for people to communicate. And we always use it to discuss or refer to our own experiences in life, but as far as this is concerned, every so often one becomes aware of a new concept in life which just requires some effort to come to terms with even if the concept itself is in fact easy for one to acquaint themselves with. Hence, you occasionally get an expression in a given language for which there is no straight equivalent in other languages; this blog discusses some of these.
All things considered, at the end of the day, this is just part of the largely random writings of a professional linguist – a self-employed translator – who thrives on linguistic inventiveness and discussion of language-related adventure. Here I talk about the terms referred to in the article that the link is to – what if it were conducive to learning in the subject which I make a living in (languages)? In each case, I’ve tried not just to “explain” the word by inferring my own offhand random response; I try to answer the questions of what their existence betrays and what kind of thinking it encourages (usually on a subconscious level).
“Shemomedjamo”: it doesn’t specifically say how this “word” is pronounced (like every word on this list, I suppose). Also, for an entry that is described as a single “word”, it seemingly is no “word” that can be categorised in any way. It’s not a noun or an adjective or a verb or whatever on its own. “This is so I accidentally ate the whole thing” , for example, doesn’t work as a proper sentence, so I’m guessing that it’s only used on its own, in a manner similar to an interjection. It’s not a portmanteau or based on an acronym or anything like that. And it doesn’t look like slang or anything. Like I said, I can’t imagine this being used as part of a bigger sentence; unlike this: about the closest thing I can come up with for it in English is “moreish”, and this is also a word used only to describe one’s attachment to a given kind of food. Of course, no-one can fail to acknowledge that people always need to eat, and that people like good food! So maybe, just maybe, it will end up a borrowed expression in other languages.
“Pelinti”: “to move hot food around in your mouth”. Great. Very specific in meaning and limited in scope, though. But one thing that strikes me here is that it’s hard not to focus more on the actual pain sensation. Merely moving hot food around in your mouth won’t help to cool it or anything; only somehow salivating enough quickly enough or consuming a bit of cool liquid (or simply spitting the food out!) will. Maybe they eat a lot of hot food in Ghana, I don’t know; but how did such a word with such a meaning really end up with a properly established existence? How likely is this idea to be discussed in conversation?
“Layogenic”: the first thing I think of here is the film “Clueless”. I haven’t actually seen it myself (mainly because – correct me if I’m wrong – it’s a chick flick) but I have a rough idea of what to expect. So I’m guessing: someone who may be attractive / have an image that it’s easy to envy but, ultimately, they’re just meretricious and vacuous and all and they cause more problems than they solve. Hillary from the Fresh Prince of Bel Air is another good example. Personally, I’m guessing that it’s easy to think of a type of person who is like that whatever culture you grew up in, however much the specifics may vary…
“Rhwe”: Really? I may have my share of episodes of doing stupid and / or (mildly) obstreperous things when drunk (at a younger age) but… seriously? Like “Pelinti”, just how can such a word end up with a properly established existence (only enough for an entry in the list in this article)? I hope that such a practice is not as popular as some people in some quarters might be encouraged to believe when they would hear of this word for the first time. Could they subsequently end up encouraged to be more likely to engage in such behaviour, with the result of it becoming… more common? Even if I am overreacting here, the whole idea, and how recognised it seems to be based on the very existence of this word, is just crazy!
“Zeg”: finally, a word whose meaning is just not that far away from everyday usage for anyone. And the French say “après-demain” for “the day after tomorrow”. And the Germans say “übermorgen”! Even if “après-demain” and “übermorgen” are both literal in translation or just meaning depending on how you want to look at it. I’m actually tempted to start using “zeg” in my own English speech – people borrow words from other languages all the time, don’t they?
“Pålegg”: I’m guessing the closest word in English is “filling”. But a specific word for “filling” for sandwich ingredients alone just seems like a waste of time. Think about it: chances are the only question anyone would be quick to ask about any sandwich (if they had any questions about it at all) is “what’s in it?”, even if they did not want to eat it! Not “does it have a filling or not?” And if it doesn’t then it’s just two slices of bread! Are the Norwegians really that proud about their alleged artistry with sandwiches? News to me! I don’t want to brag but the sandwich is a British invention anyway (look up the Earl of Sandwich). By the way, whoever heard of Doritos between two slices of bread? Did the author of this article know what Doritos are?
“Lagom”: like “zeg”, I can readily regard this as an everyday convenient word, and one which the masses will also regard as such. I most associate it with the tea I drink (whether I or anyone else made it): I always wait a bit before drinking it. I may like my tea hot but I certainly don’t want the inside of my mouth scalded by it. Exactly how long I should wait before it is “lagom” is very hard to determine by any means other than sipping it (although watching the steam that radiates from the surface helps).
“Tartle”: this is described as an onomatopoeic word, which makes it sound like sniggering or trying not to laugh from my point of view. I wonder how often “that panicky hesitation just before you have to introduce someone whose name you can’t quite remember” really is for the Scots. And a word for a panicky hesitation which is only for a specific kind of occasion? I just don’t get it, and I wonder: what are the chances of the word “tartle” ending up a general word for awkward silence at some point in the future (or just a brief moment of it, most likely)?
“Koi No Yokan”: is this romantic or just soppy / corny? How “serious” is it anyway? You tell me (although, I have read that it differs from “love at first sight”, which makes me personally think “relatively serious”). There are some attitudes the Japanese have toward love and relationships (in actual real life society) that are well worth mentioning. “Love hotels” originated in Japan. And somewhere, sometime, there was this dating advice booklet in Japan which included such tips as “to break the ice, make eye contact” and the “advanced” “talk to her”. Now, for all the merits that can be attributed to Japanese society and culture… what does THAT say about it?
“Mamihlapinatapai”: this is a very interesting entry. It is words like this that I want to write about here; read on to understand why. It is not specifically stated whether the thing that two such people want done is “good” i.e. something romantic or game-changing or whatever, that they are both, for example, shy about, or “bad” i.e. something which is indeed a difficult or unpleasant or even taboo subject – maybe they are in denial about it. They certainly don’t want to talk about it. It seems like a concept easy enough to… uh… “understand”, although I have to say that I have never really imagined any “special look” between two people in any such case – and is this supposedly “special” look recognised only when the two are looking at each other? But I’m not that upset that the author of this article never cared to illustrate their thoughts that much (assuming that this piece of writing is even actually based on whatever authentic thoughts they had and not just hearsay; but that doesn’t mean I’m strictly suggesting that the former always has more value than the latter).
“Fremdschämen” / “Myötähäpeä”: I have to say that I don’t speak Finnish, but I do speak German, and “Fremdschämen” translates literally as “stranger shame” – and while I’ve never watched “Meet the Parents”, shame is not the same as embarrassment. Still, I can agree that it is common for “shame” to amount to awkwardness or humiliating disappointment rather than anything truly bad or objectionable. So, in my view, one might think of “Fremdschämen” as being nervous of strangers, but strictly with the condition that the stranger has more power or authority than you, especially if you expect them to become a genuine part of your everyday life, whether directly or indirectly.
“Cafune”: I like this word. As gregarious and energetic as the Brazilians tend to be, this word is a good reminder that they often have a quieter, more sensual side. This is a relatively intimate act which is not explicit, and relatively discreet, and not done only between lovers. At least… in my experience, someone stroking someone’s else’s hair tenderly is a common act done by, for example, a parent to their sick child – but it might be different with the Brazilians, who may strictly regard “cafune” as somewhat sensual or sexy as if on principle…
“Greng-jai”: to me the meaning of this word sounds like something we are all familiar with. But I do wonder if this word arose in particular more from concepts concerning situations involving guilt in the person who felt it, or maybe it was more of a commitment to hospitality that they felt, or maybe they were intimidated by the person that they felt it for? It’s just that it’s hard to imagine this word existing outside of a sentence that is basically like “I just felt all ‘greng-jai’.” Although it’s only a word, it is essentially a word whose mere existence can prove enough to increase the chance of getting any otherwise mutually tacit concept out in the open, the result of this being a relationship being changed in a big way, or maybe even more of society being changed in a big way. Presumably always for the better; or is that just me?
“Kaelling”: do you think that all such women are essentially Chavette-like – trashy, fat, stupid, irresponsible and all the rest of it all in accordance with the well-known Chav trope? Chavs are, by definition, not Danish, of course – not that I am suggesting that no Danish women behave in this way – but I get that the actions mentioned for this entry amount to conduct which certainly doesn’t befit a lady, at any rate.