I noticed that the "Eliminate sliver polygons" option in QGIS 2.4. has wrong translation in Croatian language (translated as silver), so I decided to report it.
In official page there are instructions how to become translator: http://www.qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/translate.html#translators-mailing-list Registration is required for access to mailinglist, so I did it. After registration, there was next message: "Your subscription request has been received, and will soon be acted upon. Depending on the configuration of this mailing list, your subscription request may have to be first confirmed by you via email, or approved by the list moderator. If confirmation is required, you will soon get a confirmation email which contains further instructions."
Few days have passed, and there is nothing in my mailbox. So, the question is: How to SIMPLY report a wrong language translation in QGIS? I hope that the Croatian translator will see this.
Werner Macho just posted the following information on the mailing list:
Regarding translation it is now easier than ever before to contribute and change the things yourself. Just get an account on transifex https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/QGIS and apply for the italian language - search for the typos and change them by yourself. That way you make sure the correct string will find it's way into the next release.
Try sending an email to the translators mailing list from the email account you registered. Most likely it works even though you might not have received a confirmation mail for whatever reason.
An alternative is to create a bug report. There is a category for Translations there. See also Where to report QGIS and QGIS-Plugin bugs?.
Since the QGIS team was very busy with launching QGIS 2.6 over the last days, your subscription may have come at the wrong time.
Try to subscribe again, or contact Werner Macho directly. You will find his address at http://www.qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/organisation/governance.html#gui-translation
Apart from that, you might have to sign in to transifex, as Anita explained.
Language Access in Clear Communication
Language can be a clear, profound barrier to health literacy. Language barriers and the inability to read or understand health information can pose serious health risks to individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). Language is therefore a critical component of any effort to improve communication and access to quality health care for patients, their family members, caregivers, and friends.
Challenges to removing language barriers include the following:
- Often, there is no right or wrong in translating certain concepts and words.
- Some words and ideas, especially complex or technical ones, may defy simple translation, making comprehension difficult.
- There is great diversity and variation in the language skills and abilities of individuals, including translators and interpreters.
- Context — geographic and cultural, for example — is often the most important component in health communication.
To improve access for individuals with limited English proficiency, the NIH implemented an agency-wide Language Access Plan (LAP). The goal of the plan is to improve access for eligible LEP persons to many of the agency’s public programs and activities. The focus of the LAP plan is to provide for communications in the preferred language when a patient has limited English proficiency.
Language Access is integral to the NIH’s commitment to the development of accessible and effective health, science, and medical information for broad public dissemination.
The NIH Language Access Program is coordinated by the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.
1 Answer 1
The line being translated here is actually the preceding line, Odyssey 6.159:
οὐ γάρ πω τοιοῦτον ἴδον βροτὸν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν
Literally, this means "for not yet have I seen such a mortal with (my) eyes". The words "like you" are not in the Greek, though they're implied. This means there isn't a simple change you could make that would turn the meaning from "like you" into "but you".
Still, if you want to say "anyone but you", you need a Greek word meaning "but" in the sense of "except". δέ, ἀλλά and other such words won't work because they mean "but" in the sense of "however". Instead, you could use the preposition πλήν "except", which takes the genitive, so πλὴν σοῦ "except you". Or you could use εἰ μή "if not", which is idiomatically often used to mean "except" in this case it would be εἰ μὴ σέ, with the accusative because "you" acts as the direct object of "seen".
It's hard to fit either of these into a Homeric hexameter line. The following is a bit strained in terms of word order, but at least it scans:
How memories are formed, stored, and recalled
Since the 1940s scientists have surmised that memories are held within groups of neurons, or nerve cells, called cell assemblies. Those interconnected cells fire as a group in response to a specific stimulus, whether it's your friend's face or the smell of freshly baked bread. The more the neurons fire together, the more the cells' interconnections strengthen. That way, when a future stimulus triggers the cells, it's more likely that the whole assembly fires. The nerves' collective activity transcribes what we experience as a memory. Scientists are still working through the details of how it works.
For a short-term memory to become a long-term memory, it must be strengthened for long-term storage, a process called memory consolidation. Consolidation is thought to take place by several processes. One, called long-term potentiation, consists of individual nerves modifying themselves to grow and talk to their neighboring nerves differently. That remodeling alters the nerves' connections in the long term, which stabilizes the memory. All animals that have long-term memories use this same basic cellular machinery scientists worked out the details of long-term potentiation by studying California sea slugs. However, not all long-term memories necessarily have to start as short-term memories.
We work with companies like yours. Servicing the United States, Europe, and Asia, from big companies to small.
Translate.com is a leader in the market for professional human translations, software localization, and advanced language services since 2011, with the headquarters in Newark, USA. Trusted by the leading enterprises and companies worldwide, our company helps clients succeed in international markets with quality tools and talented people. We disrupt the old translation models with our online-powered high-quality translation solutions and a native-speaking expert translator team that delivers on-demand and accurate language translation services in over 90 languages.
Yes. We translate large amounts of content in many fields, extending from general business texts to those requiring the expert’s knowledge or industry expertise.
We support commonly used text formats (DOC, PDF, TXT) and deliver our customers' files in the original format after translation. Please contact our Support team for more details.
We offer instant machine translation in over 90 languages and an accurate human translation in 39 language pairs.
You can leave a note for the translator before the translation process starts. You can also include some comments in the order form or contact our Support team, and they will forward your comments to your translator.
For years we’ve been building industry-leading translation technology to ensure your website is translated quickly. Website localization is focused on the highest linguistic and technical accuracy and is being kept up-to-date with your source webpage changes and updates. Trusted by global companies worldwide, Translate.com provides quality end-to-end website translation solutions that your business can depend on for years to come.
Translate.com offers two translation options: machine or online translation and translation by a qualified human translator. What option to choose depends on what your requirements are.
Machine translation is instant and translates any volume of content directly to the language you've selected. Unlike a professional translation, it doesn't focus on nuances such as context or tone of voice. Machine translation doesn't offer the highest quality, but it is a free online translator.
Professional human translation offers higher quality, SEO-friendly translations.
Our highly-trained professional translators and subject-matter experts understand the importance of linguistic accuracy and work with utmost precision to provide you with the highest quality business, medical, and technical document translation.
Translate.com offers business translation and localization services for your website, software, applications, technical or medical documents, and reports (Website Localizer Widget and Translation API).
Also, we offer integrations with popular online platforms, including Zendesk, HubSpot, WordPress, Weebly, etc.
The timeline depends on the order size. It will typically take us about 1-2 days to deliver a quality translation of a project containing 3-4 pages. If you want the translator to handle your project within hours, you can use our fast turnaround service.
We do our best to meet your expectations, and if there is a reason that we may not meet the deadline, we will inform you in advance.
Yes, our Translate API allows you to create translation projects, monitor progress easily, and receive the translated results. The entire translation workflow is fully automated with intuitive API to ensure just in time delivery and professional content adaptation.
Simply sign up for Translate.com to receive a unique API key for your application. Next, integrate the Translation API within your app. Afterward, create new orders and stay on the same wavelength as customers.
Improve a multilingual online store, blog, or customize your support effortlessly integrating with such platforms as Zendesk, HubSpot, WordPress, and Weebly. With a straightforward plugin installation, you can easily access Translate.com's powerful platform to translate your website content or a support ticket in a hassle-free environment.
If you can’t find the necessary platform on our integrations list, you can either integrate with our API or request a custom integration.
Tracking the status of your orders is simple. Sign up on our website, log in to your account and check the Order List Page. For more information, please contact our Support team.
If you are a qualified language translator, we'll be happy to have you on our professional translator team. Sign up and take the assessment test in your language pair(s).
Once you have passed the assessment, you’ll be able to become a regular translator and translate blog articles, social media posts, support tickets, and more in your account. You'll have a chance to manage your time and create the office of your dreams at home.
Our translation and localization services are based on the subscription plans that can be adjusted according to your needs and preferences (access to a Premium Translator, additional setup, personal Account Manager, etc.).
If you are not sure which plan is best suited to your company's needs, our Sales team will help you choose the best plan possible or create a custom plan for you.
How to translate proper name that contain one diacritical mark?
I'm currently writing an English report, and I have to include a street name in it. Unfortunately, this name includes a character that is not present in the English alphabet: an è . Every other letter is writable in English.
How should I translate this name? I know usually proper names don't have to change when translated from a language to another, but what about this special character? I wonder about it because someone who never learned French wouldn't know how to pronounce it. But if I replace it with an e , it won't sound the same.
For precision, people who will correct my work do speak French, so would be able to read it. But I ask for a potential future case of this problem.
6 Answers 6
Preliminari is perfectly fine (and if it brings to mind only sexual references you should probably read less magazines. :)). Furthermore it is already widely used.
- Prerequisiti: This has a somewhat scholastic tone. I'm not sure I'd use it in a scientific paper but on the other hand maybe yes.
- Fondazioni: I'm a bit uncertain about this but I wanted an alternative that emphasizes the "foundational" aspect of the English word background. Moreover I could swear I've seen it used like this somewhere, although I do not remember the exact place.
And remember: a scientific paper should be also enjoyable to read and not overly formal. There are already too many boring papers.
EDIT: I'll add a couple of sentences about how I see the Background section of the paper, so that it might be clear the context of this answer. In my mind it is different from the Introduction, where you briefly explain the contents of the paper without many details (of course this might involve the exposition of some background). Instead it is the section where you quickly review material which, while present in the literature, cannot be taken for granted but it is nonetheless important for the remainder of the paper. Let me give an example of the structure of an imaginary paper:
1) Introduction: This paper is about descending thick subcategories along flat maps. This is important because blah blah and it will be done by realizing the simplicial objects as blah blah.
2) Background on GHM obstruction theory: Let us quickly review the foundations of GHM obstruction theory. A more comprehensive account can be found in . Blah blah.
How does culture affect international business?
In a globalised economy, cultural sensitivity is essential. As more companies grow, and the global marketplace becomes more accessible for small businesses, multinational and cross-cultural teams are becoming more common. This means that it is crucial, now more than ever, for businesses to understand the culture of their foreign market if they wish to succeed internationally.
Culture is the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular person or society. But how does culture affect international business?
In a business context, culture relates to what behaviour is common and accepted professionally in one location, compared to another. What may be acceptable business practice in one country, may be very different from the approach that is used by businesses overseas. Therefore, recognising how culture can affect international business is something that should be understood in order to avoid misunderstandings between colleagues and clients, and also to make sure that businesses are presenting themselves to their new market in the best way they can.
Communication plays an important role in international business
Communication plays an important role in international business, and sometimes effective communication can be the difference between succeeding or failing in a new market. Effective communication is particularly important for international businesses as there is a risk of your messages getting ‘lost in translation’. There are several things that need to be considered when looking at how effective your business’ communication is at an international level.
The first thing that should be considered when looking into communication is any language barriers that may hinder the communication between you and your new market. However, this goes deeper than just the language that is used to communicate, it’s how the messages are conveyed that’s important. Language barriers not only relate to people speaking different languages, but also to the tone used in those languages. For example, in countries like the US or Germany, it is common for people to speak loudly and be more assertive when sharing ideas amongst colleagues. However, in countries like Japan people typically speak more softly and have a more passive tone when making suggestions to colleagues.
Another thing to consider are the basic customs, mannerisms and gestures that are commonly accepted in that culture. Behaviour that might be commonplace in one culture could be unusual or potentially offensive to a client or colleague overseas. Professor Jean Vanhoegaerden gives the example of a business handshake being the norm in European and US cultures, but in some Middle Eastern cultures, handshakes are seen differently. For example in some cultures, handshakes must involve the right hand only as the left hand is seen to be less hygienic.
Businesses who are looking to operate internationally need to be aware of language barriers, tone and body language. Cross-cultural communication can be a challenge, but approaching cultural differences with sensitivity, openness, and curiosity can help businesses succeed internationally.
Different cultures have different attitudes to organisational structure
Businesses also need to be aware that different cultures have different attitudes towards business.
Scandinavian countries such as Sweden emphasise social equality and therefore they tend to have a relatively flat organisational hierarchy. This relates to their informal approach to communication and cooperation normally at the heart of their organisations. In Japan, their traditional values of relative status and respect for seniority are reflected in their organisations and there is a very clear organisational structure. This means that senior management command respect at all times and expect a level of formality from junior members of their teams.
These different cultural attitudes towards management can, therefore, make it difficult to define roles in multinational teams. Therefore, it is important for businesses to be aware of their target market’s cultural approach towards the organisational structure.
Businesses need to be aware of workplace etiquette when working internationally
Workplace etiquette is something else that businesses need to be aware of if they are working internationally.
The formality of address is another key thing to consider within international businesses when communicating with colleagues and clients from different cultures. Are they comfortable with being approached on a first-name basis or do they prefer titles and surnames? Asian countries such as China seem to prefer the latter, whereas Americans usually use first names. Things such as formality of address may not seem that important, but if you get off on the wrong foot with a potential foreign client then that could ruin your chances of ever working with them in the future. Therefore, it is important for businesses to know that their level of formality will differ depending on the culture of the person they’re communicating with.
Workplace etiquette in some cultures also means they have a different approach towards workplace confrontation, rules and regulations, and working hours. While some may consider working long hours a sign of commitment and achievement, others may consider these extra hours a demonstration of a lack of efficiency or the lack of prioritisation of family or personal time.
Don’t get lost in translation
Don’t let an international deal fall apart due to cultural misunderstandings: businesses should do plenty of research and be open to new cultural experiences and expectations when doing business across borders. Businesses aren’t alone in this process, Language Insight can help businesses communicate internationally with our translation and localisation services to make sure they have the best chance at succeeding in new markets. Contact us now for a free, no obligation quote.
HOW DOES OUR LANGUAGE SHAPE THE WAY WE THINK?
For a long time, the idea that language might shape thought was considered at best untestable and more often simply wrong. Research in my labs at Stanford University and at MIT has helped reopen this question. We have collected data around the world: from China, Greece, Chile, Indonesia, Russia, and Aboriginal Australia. What we have learned is that people who speak different languages do indeed think differently and that even flukes of grammar can profoundly affect how we see the world. Language is a uniquely human gift, central to our experience of being human. Appreciating its role in constructing our mental lives brings us one step closer to understanding the very nature of humanity.
HOW DOES OUR LANGUAGE SHAPE THE WAY WE THINK?
By Lera Boroditsky
LERA BORODITSKY is an assistant professor of psychology, neuroscience, and symbolic systems at Stanford University, who looks at how the languages we speak shape the way we think.
From WHAT'S NEXT?
Dispatches on the Future of Science
Edited By Max Brockman
Humans communicate with one another using a dazzling array of languages, each differing from the next in innumerable ways. Do the languages we speak shape the way we see the world, the way we think, and the way we live our lives? Do people who speak different languages think differently simply because they speak different languages? Does learning new languages change the way you think? Do polyglots think differently when speaking different languages?
These questions touch on nearly all of the major controversies in the study of mind. They have engaged scores of philosophers, anthropologists, linguists, and psychologists, and they have important implications for politics, law, and religion. Yet despite nearly constant attention and debate, very little empirical work was done on these questions until recently. For a long time, the idea that language might shape thought was considered at best untestable and more often simply wrong. Research in my labs at Stanford University and at MIT has helped reopen this question. We have collected data around the world: from China, Greece, Chile, Indonesia, Russia, and Aboriginal Australia. What we have learned is that people who speak different languages do indeed think differently and that even flukes of grammar can profoundly affect how we see the world. Language is a uniquely human gift, central to our experience of being human. Appreciating its role in constructing our mental lives brings us one step closer to understanding the very nature of humanity.
I often start my undergraduate lectures by asking students the following question: which cognitive faculty would you most hate to lose? Most of them pick the sense of sight a few pick hearing. Once in a while, a wisecracking student might pick her sense of humor or her fashion sense. Almost never do any of them spontaneously say that the faculty they'd most hate to lose is language. Yet if you lose (or are born without) your sight or hearing, you can still have a wonderfully rich social existence. You can have friends, you can get an education, you can hold a job, you can start a family. But what would your life be like if you had never learned a language? Could you still have friends, get an education, hold a job, start a family? Language is so fundamental to our experience, so deeply a part of being human, that it's hard to imagine life without it. But are languages merely tools for expressing our thoughts, or do they actually shape our thoughts?
Most questions of whether and how language shapes thought start with the simple observation that languages differ from one another. And a lot! Let's take a (very) hypothetical example. Suppose you want to say, "Bush read Chomsky's latest book." Let's focus on just the verb, "read." To say this sentence in English, we have to mark the verb for tense in this case, we have to pronounce it like "red" and not like "reed." In Indonesian you need not (in fact, you can't) alter the verb to mark tense. In Russian you would have to alter the verb to indicate tense and gender. So if it was Laura Bush who did the reading, you'd use a different form of the verb than if it was George. In Russian you'd also have to include in the verb information about completion. If George read only part of the book, you'd use a different form of the verb than if he'd diligently plowed through the whole thing. In Turkish you'd have to include in the verb how you acquired this information: if you had witnessed this unlikely event with your own two eyes, you'd use one verb form, but if you had simply read or heard about it, or inferred it from something Bush said, you'd use a different verb form.
Clearly, languages require different things of their speakers. Does this mean that the speakers think differently about the world? Do English, Indonesian, Russian, and Turkish speakers end up attending to, partitioning, and remembering their experiences differently just because they speak different languages? For some scholars, the answer to these questions has been an obvious yes. Just look at the way people talk, they might say. Certainly, speakers of different languages must attend to and encode strikingly different aspects of the world just so they can use their language properly.
Scholars on the other side of the debate don't find the differences in how people talk convincing. All our linguistic utterances are sparse, encoding only a small part of the information we have available. Just because English speakers don't include the same information in their verbs that Russian and Turkish speakers do doesn't mean that English speakers aren't paying attention to the same things all it means is that they're not talking about them. It's possible that everyone thinks the same way, notices the same things, but just talks differently.
Believers in cross-linguistic differences counter that everyone does not pay attention to the same things: if everyone did, one might think it would be easy to learn to speak other languages. Unfortunately, learning a new language (especially one not closely related to those you know) is never easy it seems to require paying attention to a new set of distinctions. Whether it's distinguishing modes of being in Spanish, evidentiality in Turkish, or aspect in Russian, learning to speak these languages requires something more than just learning vocabulary: it requires paying attention to the right things in the world so that you have the correct information to include in what you say.
Such a priori arguments about whether or not language shapes thought have gone in circles for centuries, with some arguing that it's impossible for language to shape thought and others arguing that it's impossible for language not to shape thought. Recently my group and others have figured out ways to empirically test some of the key questions in this ancient debate, with fascinating results. So instead of arguing about what must be true or what can't be true, let's find out what is true.
Follow me to Pormpuraaw, a small Aboriginal community on the western edge of Cape York, in northern Australia. I came here because of the way the locals, the Kuuk Thaayorre, talk about space. Instead of words like "right," "left," "forward," and "back," which, as commonly used in English, define space relative to an observer, the Kuuk Thaayorre, like many other Aboriginal groups, use cardinal-direction terms — north, south, east, and west — to define space.1 This is done at all scales, which means you have to say things like "There's an ant on your southeast leg" or "Move the cup to the north northwest a little bit." One obvious consequence of speaking such a language is that you have to stay oriented at all times, or else you cannot speak properly. The normal greeting in Kuuk Thaayorre is "Where are you going?" and the answer should be something like " Southsoutheast, in the middle distance." If you don't know which way you're facing, you can't even get past "Hello."
The result is a profound difference in navigational ability and spatial knowledge between speakers of languages that rely primarily on absolute reference frames (like Kuuk Thaayorre) and languages that rely on relative reference frames (like English).2 Simply put, speakers of languages like Kuuk Thaayorre are much better than English speakers at staying oriented and keeping track of where they are, even in unfamiliar landscapes or inside unfamiliar buildings. What enables them — in fact, forces them — to do this is their language. Having their attention trained in this way equips them to perform navigational feats once thought beyond human capabilities. Because space is such a fundamental domain of thought, differences in how people think about space don't end there. People rely on their spatial knowledge to build other, more complex, more abstract representations. Representations of such things as time, number, musical pitch, kinship relations, morality, and emotions have been shown to depend on how we think about space. So if the Kuuk Thaayorre think differently about space, do they also think differently about other things, like time? This is what my collaborator Alice Gaby and I came to Pormpuraaw to find out.
To test this idea, we gave people sets of pictures that showed some kind of temporal progression (e.g., pictures of a man aging, or a crocodile growing, or a banana being eaten). Their job was to arrange the shuffled photos on the ground to show the correct temporal order. We tested each person in two separate sittings, each time facing in a different cardinal direction. If you ask English speakers to do this, they'll arrange the cards so that time proceeds from left to right. Hebrew speakers will tend to lay out the cards from right to left, showing that writing direction in a language plays a role.3 So what about folks like the Kuuk Thaayorre, who don't use words like "left" and "right"? What will they do?
The Kuuk Thaayorre did not arrange the cards more often from left to right than from right to left, nor more toward or away from the body. But their arrangements were not random: there was a pattern, just a different one from that of English speakers. Instead of arranging time from left to right, they arranged it from east to west. That is, when they were seated facing south, the cards went left to right. When they faced north, the cards went from right to left. When they faced east, the cards came toward the body and so on. This was true even though we never told any of our subjects which direction they faced. The Kuuk Thaayorre not only knew that already (usually much better than I did), but they also spontaneously used this spatial orientation to construct their representations of time.
People's ideas of time differ across languages in other ways. For example, English speakers tend to talk about time using horizontal spatial metaphors (e.g., "The best is ahead of us," "The worst is behind us"), whereas Mandarin speakers have a vertical metaphor for time (e.g., the next month is the "down month" and the last month is the "up month"). Mandarin speakers talk about time vertically more often than English speakers do, so do Mandarin speakers think about time vertically more often than English speakers do? Imagine this simple experiment. I stand next to you, point to a spot in space directly in front of you, and tell you, "This spot, here, is today. Where would you put yesterday? And where would you put tomorrow?" When English speakers are asked to do this, they nearly always point horizontally. But Mandarin speakers often point vertically, about seven or eight times more often than do English speakers.4
Even basic aspects of time perception can be affected by language. For example, English speakers prefer to talk about duration in terms of length (e.g., "That was a short talk," "The meeting didn't take long"), while Spanish and Greek speakers prefer to talk about time in terms of amount, relying more on words like "much" "big", and "little" rather than "short" and "long" Our research into such basic cognitive abilities as estimating duration shows that speakers of different languages differ in ways predicted by the patterns of metaphors in their language. (For example, when asked to estimate duration, English speakers are more likely to be confused by distance information, estimating that a line of greater length remains on the test screen for a longer period of time, whereas Greek speakers are more likely to be confused by amount, estimating that a container that is fuller remains longer on the screen.)5
An important question at this point is: Are these differences caused by language per se or by some other aspect of culture? Of course, the lives of English, Mandarin, Greek, Spanish, and Kuuk Thaayorre speakers differ in a myriad of ways. How do we know that it is language itself that creates these differences in thought and not some other aspect of their respective cultures?
One way to answer this question is to teach people new ways of talking and see if that changes the way they think. In our lab, we've taught English speakers different ways of talking about time. In one such study, English speakers were taught to use size metaphors (as in Greek) to describe duration (e.g., a movie is larger than a sneeze), or vertical metaphors (as in Mandarin) to describe event order. Once the English speakers had learned to talk about time in these new ways, their cognitive performance began to resemble that of Greek or Mandarin speakers. This suggests that patterns in a language can indeed play a causal role in constructing how we think.6 In practical terms, it means that when you're learning a new language, you're not simply learning a new way of talking, you are also inadvertently learning a new way of thinking. Beyond abstract or complex domains of thought like space and time, languages also meddle in basic aspects of visual perception — our ability to distinguish colors, for example. Different languages divide up the color continuum differently: some make many more distinctions between colors than others, and the boundaries often don't line up across languages.
To test whether differences in color language lead to differences in color perception, we compared Russian and English speakers' ability to discriminate shades of blue. In Russian there is no single word that covers all the colors that English speakers call "blue." Russian makes an obligatory distinction between light blue (goluboy) and dark blue (siniy). Does this distinction mean that siniy blues look more different from goluboy blues to Russian speakers? Indeed, the data say yes. Russian speakers are quicker to distinguish two shades of blue that are called by the different names in Russian (i.e., one being siniy and the other being goluboy) than if the two fall into the same category.
For English speakers, all these shades are still designated by the same word, "blue," and there are no comparable differences in reaction time.
Further, the Russian advantage disappears when subjects are asked to perform a verbal interference task (reciting a string of digits) while making color judgments but not when they're asked to perform an equally difficult spatial interference task (keeping a novel visual pattern in memory). The disappearance of the advantage when performing a verbal task shows that language is normally involved in even surprisingly basic perceptual judgments — and that it is language per se that creates this difference in perception between Russian and English speakers.
When Russian speakers are blocked from their normal access to language by a verbal interference task, the differences between Russian and English speakers disappear.
Even what might be deemed frivolous aspects of language can have far-reaching subconscious effects on how we see the world. Take grammatical gender. In Spanish and other Romance languages, nouns are either masculine or feminine. In many other languages, nouns are divided into many more genders ("gender" in this context meaning class or kind). For example, some Australian Aboriginal languages have up to sixteen genders, including classes of hunting weapons, canines, things that are shiny, or, in the phrase made famous by cognitive linguist George Lakoff, "women, fire, and dangerous things."
What it means for a language to have grammatical gender is that words belonging to different genders get treated differently grammatically and words belonging to the same grammatical gender get treated the same grammatically. Languages can require speakers to change pronouns, adjective and verb endings, possessives, numerals, and so on, depending on the noun's gender. For example, to say something like "my chair was old" in Russian (moy stul bil' stariy), you'd need to make every word in the sentence agree in gender with "chair" (stul), which is masculine in Russian. So you'd use the masculine form of "my," "was," and "old." These are the same forms you'd use in speaking of a biological male, as in "my grandfather was old." If, instead of speaking of a chair, you were speaking of a bed (krovat'), which is feminine in Russian, or about your grandmother, you would use the feminine form of "my," "was," and "old."
Does treating chairs as masculine and beds as feminine in the grammar make Russian speakers think of chairs as being more like men and beds as more like women in some way? It turns out that it does. In one study, we asked German and Spanish speakers to describe objects having opposite gender assignment in those two languages. The descriptions they gave differed in a way predicted by grammatical gender. For example, when asked to describe a "key" — a word that is masculine in German and feminine in Spanish — the German speakers were more likely to use words like "hard," "heavy," "jagged," "metal," "serrated," and "useful," whereas Spanish speakers were more likely to say "golden," "intricate," "little," "lovely," "shiny," and "tiny." To describe a "bridge," which is feminine in German and masculine in Spanish, the German speakers said "beautiful," "elegant," "fragile," "peaceful," "pretty," and "slender," and the Spanish speakers said "big," "dangerous," "long," "strong," "sturdy," and "towering." This was true even though all testing was done in English, a language without grammatical gender. The same pattern of results also emerged in entirely nonlinguistic tasks (e.g., rating similarity between pictures). And we can also show that it is aspects of language per se that shape how people think: teaching English speakers new grammatical gender systems influences mental representations of objects in the same way it does with German and Spanish speakers. Apparently even small flukes of grammar, like the seemingly arbitrary assignment of gender to a noun, can have an effect on people's ideas of concrete objects in the world.7
In fact, you don't even need to go into the lab to see these effects of language you can see them with your own eyes in an art gallery. Look at some famous examples of personification in art — the ways in which abstract entities such as death, sin, victory, or time are given human form. How does an artist decide whether death, say, or time should be painted as a man or a woman? It turns out that in 85 percent of such personifications, whether a male or female figure is chosen is predicted by the grammatical gender of the word in the artist's native language. So, for example, German painters are more likely to paint death as a man, whereas Russian painters are more likely to paint death as a woman.
The fact that even quirks of grammar, such as grammatical gender, can affect our thinking is profound. Such quirks are pervasive in language gender, for example, applies to all nouns, which means that it is affecting how people think about anything that can be designated by a noun. That's a lot of stuff!
I have described how languages shape the way we think about space, time, colors, and objects. Other studies have found effects of language on how people construe events, reason about causality, keep track of number, understand material substance, perceive and experience emotion, reason about other people's minds, choose to take risks, and even in the way they choose professions and spouses.8 Taken together, these results show that linguistic processes are pervasive in most fundamental domains of thought, unconsciously shaping us from the nuts and bolts of cognition and perception to our loftiest abstract notions and major life decisions. Language is central to our experience of being human, and the languages we speak profoundly shape the way we think, the way we see the world, the way we live our lives.
1 S. C. Levinson and D. P. Wilkins, eds., Grammars of Space: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006).
2 Levinson, Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
3 B. Tversky et al., “ Cross-Cultural and Developmental Trends in Graphic Productions,” Cognitive Psychology 23(1991): 515–7 O. Fuhrman and L. Boroditsky, “Mental Time-Lines Follow Writing Direction: Comparing English and Hebrew Speakers.” Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (2007): 1007–10.
4 L. Boroditsky, "Do English and Mandarin Speakers Think Differently About Time?" Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society (2007): 34.
5 D. Casasanto et al., "How Deep Are Effects of Language on Thought? Time Estimation in Speakers of English, Indonesian Greek, and Spanish," Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (2004): 575–80.
6 Ibid., "How Deep Are Effects of Language on Thought? Time Estimation in Speakers of English and Greek" (in review) L. Boroditsky, "Does Language Shape Thought? English and Mandarin Speakers' Conceptions of Time." Cognitive Psychology 43, no. 1(2001): 1–22.
7 L. Boroditsky et al. "Sex, Syntax, and Semantics," in D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow, eds., Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Cognition (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), 61–79.
8 L. Boroditsky, "Linguistic Relativity," in L. Nadel ed., Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science (London: MacMillan, 2003), 917–21 B. W. Pelham et al., "Why Susie Sells Seashells by the Seashore: Implicit Egotism and Major Life Decisions." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82, no. 4(2002): 469–86 A. Tversky & D. Kahneman, "The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice." Science 211(1981): 453–58 P. Pica et al., "Exact and Approximate Arithmetic in an Amazonian Indigene Group." Science 306(2004): 499–503 J. G. de Villiers and P. A. de Villiers, "Linguistic Determinism and False Belief," in P. Mitchell and K. Riggs, eds., Children's Reasoning and the Mind (Hove, UK: Psychology Press, in press) J. A. Lucy and S. Gaskins, "Interaction of Language Type and Referent Type in the Development of Nonverbal Classification Preferences," in Gentner and Goldin-Meadow, 465–92 L. F. Barrett et al., "Language as a Context for Emotion Perception," Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11(2007): 327–32.
Claiming FMAP For Translation/Interpreter Services
Interpreters are not Medicaid qualified providers however their services may be reimbursed when billed by a qualified provider rendering a Medicaid covered service. Interpreters may not be paid separately. As of February 2009, oral interpreter services can be claimed using billing code T-1013 code along with the CPT Code used for the regular medical encounter. States can also raise rates to recognize additional service costs, including interpreter costs, but must do so for services rendered by all providers in the class.