కొత్త తెలుగు పదముల సృష్టికి ఇతర భాషా పదము లను వాడుట
729 views
Skip to first unread message
manyav
May 17, 2009, 3:17:12 AM5/17/09
to తెలుగుపదం
అందరికీ,
నమస్తే..
కొత్త తెలుగు పదముల సృష్టికి నేను ఇప్పటి వరకూ ౨ రకాల పద్దతులు చూసాను.
౧) BUS - బస్సు , Mathew - మత్తయి ( english పదాన్ని మన
pronounciation కి అనుగుణంగా మార్చటం)
౨) Train - ధూమ శకటం, hydrogen - ఉదజని (creating new word based on
existing vocabulary)
నమస్తే..
కొత్త తెలుగు పదముల సృష్టికి నేను ఇప్పటి వరకూ ౨ రకాల పద్దతులు చూసాను.
౧) BUS - బస్సు , Mathew - మత్తయి ( english పదాన్ని మన
pronounciation కి అనుగుణంగా మార్చటం)
౨) Train - ధూమ శకటం, hydrogen - ఉదజని (creating new word based on
existing vocabulary)
In my opinion neither are best solutions.
I feel the words created should be like: brinjal - వంకాయ, rain -
వర్షం.
The words should use simple words - 3-4 letters, should use words
that sound like telugu words, should limit the use of sanskrit sounds/
grammar
Somebody commented that is equivalent of creating words from nothing.
తెలుగు శబ్దాలని పోలిన పదాలు, malay, thai, మొదలైన భాషలలో ఉన్నాయి.
మనం ఆ పదాలను adopt చేసుకుంటే పని బాగా సులువు అవుతుంది.
మీ అభిప్రాయాలు తెలియజేయండి.
Kiran Na.Cha.
May 17, 2009, 5:58:07 AM5/17/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
<< I feel the words created should be like: brinjal - వంకాయ, rain - వర్షం.
The words should use simple words - 3-4 letters, should use words that sound
like telugu words >>
The words should use simple words - 3-4 letters, should use words that sound
like telugu words >>
కొత్త పదాలు "తయారు చేసే" వాళ్ళందరమూ చదవవలసిన ఒక కథ "A table is a table"
అన్నది... నాకు తొమ్మిదవ తరగతిలో అనుకుంటా ఆంగ్లంలో పాఠ్యాంశంగా ఉండింది (CBSE
syllabus లో, 1990లో). క్లుప్తంగా ఆ కథ ఏమిటంటే:
ఒక ముసలాయన ఒక చిన్న గదిలో ఒక్కడే బతుకుతూ ఉంటాడు. ఆయనకు అసలేమీ తోచనంత విసుగు
కలిగింది - రోజూ అదే కుర్చీ, అదే బల్ల, అదే గడియారం, అదే చిత్రపటం, ...ఇలా
అన్నీ అవే వస్తువులు. ఒక రోజు ఒక అద్భుతమైన కాలక్షేపం తడుతుంది ఆయన బుఱ్ఱకి.
"కొత్త భాష తయారు చేస్తే ఎలా ఉంటుంది?" అని. అనుకున్నదే తడవు ఒక పుస్తకం
తీసుకుని వస్తువుల పేర్లు తారుమారు చేసి వ్రాయటం మొదలుపెట్టాడు - కుర్చీని పటం
అనీ, బల్లని గడియారమనీ ఇలా. కొన్నాళ్ళకి "కొత్త భాష" పూర్తిగా నోటికి వచ్చింది
పుస్తకం అవసరం లేకుండా. అలా వీథిలోకి వెళ్ళి ఎవరినైనా పలకరించి వాళ్ళని తికమక
పెట్టి వినోదించేవాడు. కొన్నేళ్ళకి ముసలాయనకి సవ్యమైన భాష అర్థం చేసుకోవటానికి
పుస్తకం అవసరమయ్యేది, అదీ వినోదంగానే ఉండేది. మరి కొన్నాళ్ళకి ఆయన పుస్తకం
కనపడకుండా పోయింది. బయటి వాళ్ళు చెప్పే మాటలు ఈయనకి అర్థం కాక పిచ్చెక్కి
చనిపోయాడు.
...ఈ కథ నాకు చాలా నచ్చింది అప్పట్లోనే. భాష అన్నది జనం నిర్ణయించేదే అయి
ఉండాలి కానీ వినూత్నంగా ఉండటమో లేక మరొక దాన్ని పోలిన మాటల మూటలో కాకూడని
సున్నితంగా హెచ్చరిస్తుంది ఈ కథ.
గతంలో "BharatiyaBhashaSrujanalaya" అన్న పేరుతోననుకుంటా ఒక Yahoo! Group
ఉండేది. అందులో ఇలాగే ఒకాయన "కొత్తగా పదాలు కనిపెట్టాలి... తెలుగులా వినబడే
పదాలు ఉండాలి" అని "నేను car అన్న పదానికి 'టుంబి' అన్న పదం
ప్రతిపాదిస్తున్నాను." అన్నారు ఓ రోజు. దాని మీద అభిప్రాయం చెప్పమంటే ఏమని
చెప్పాలి? ఈయన "టుంబి" అన్నారు, మరొకరు "బింటు" అనవచ్చు, మరొకరు మరొకటి
అనవచ్చు. ఊహాజనితమైన పదాలకి అంతు ఉంటుందా? ఏదో ఒక ప్రమాణం లేకుండా పదాలు
నిష్పాదించటం మంచిది కాదని నా అభిప్రాయం. (మీరు చెప్పదలచినది అది కాకపోతే నన్ను
సరిదిద్దగలరు.)
<< should limit the use of sanskrit sounds/grammar
...
తెలుగు శబ్దాలని పోలిన పదాలు, malay, thai, మొదలైన భాషలలో ఉన్నాయి. మనం ఆ
పదాలను adopt చేసుకుంటే పని బాగా సులువు అవుతుంది. >>
మలయ్, థాయ్ భాషలైనా అరువు తీసుకోవచ్చు కానీ సంస్కృతం మాత్రం urgentగా
తగ్గించెయ్యాలంటారు, అంతేనా? ఎందుకని?
నచకి
--------------------------------------------------
From: "manyav" <many...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 02:17
To: "తెలుగుపదం" <telug...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [తెలుగుపదం] కొత్త తెలుగు పదముల సృష్టికి ఇతర భాషా పదము లను వాడుట
padma kala
May 17, 2009, 7:42:16 AM5/17/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
గుంపు మిత్రులకు ఒక విషయం చెప్పటం మరిచాను.విజయవాడలో ( మాఊళ్ళో) మొన్నా
మధ్య ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్ అధికార భాషా సంఘం ఆధ్వర్యంలో తెలుసుభాషా ప్రశస్తి అన్న
నృత్య రూఫక ప్రదర్శన జరిగింది.
అది అధికార భాషా సంఘం ఆధ్వర్యంలో జరిగింది.నేను కవరేజీ కి వెళ్ళీనప్పుడు అక్కడ కార్యక్రమంలో (రూపకంలో ) తెలుగు భాషా చరిత్ర .. .. నన్నయకు పూర్వ కాలం.. మొదలుకొని నేటి వరకు పరిణామాన్ని తెరపె వివరిస్తుండగా నృత్యరూపకం చక్కగా సాగింది.
ముఖ్యంగా నాకు సంతో షాన్ని కలిగించిన విషయం ఏమిటంటే... అధికార భాషా సంఘం అధ్యక్ష్యులు శ్రీ ఏ.బీకే. ప్రసాద్ గారు అధ్యక్ష్యత వహించిన కార్యక్రమంలో ఆయన రూఫకం అనంతరం ఒక మాట చెప్పారు. తెలుగు భాషాభివృద్ధికి వివిధ సంస్థలు వివిధ రకాలు గా తోడ్పాటు చేస్తున్నట్టు చెపుతూ ... గూగుల్ గుంపును ప్రస్తావించారు. ఈ తెలుగు గును కూడా ప్రస్తావించారు. కార్యక్రమానంతరం నేను ఆయనను కలిసి నా విజిటింగ్ కార్డును ఇచ్చి నేను గుంపు సభ్యురాలినని చెప్పి మన వాళ్ళు కొత్త పదాలు సృష్టించటంలో చూపుతున్న ఆసక్తి , చొరవలను గురించి చెప్పాను. హడావుడిలో ఎక్కువసేపు మాట్లాడటం కుదరలేదు.
ఆ ఫోటో ఇక్కడ ఉంది . ఓసారి చూడండి.వీడియో పెడదామంటె
అప్లోడ్ కావట్లేదు.
వీలైతే ఓసారి ఆ రూపకాన్ని చూడండి ఇప్పటి వరకు రాష్ట్ర వ్యాప్తంగా ఆ నాటికను ౬ ప్రదర్శనలిచ్చారట. మీ ప్రాంతంలో ప్రదర్శిస్తే చూడగలరు.
ధన్యవాదాలు
పద్మకళ
ఏమైందో తెలియట్లెదు
ఫోటో కూడా ఎక్కట్లేదు
మరొక్కసారి పెడతాను
అది అధికార భాషా సంఘం ఆధ్వర్యంలో జరిగింది.నేను కవరేజీ కి వెళ్ళీనప్పుడు అక్కడ కార్యక్రమంలో (రూపకంలో ) తెలుగు భాషా చరిత్ర .. .. నన్నయకు పూర్వ కాలం.. మొదలుకొని నేటి వరకు పరిణామాన్ని తెరపె వివరిస్తుండగా నృత్యరూపకం చక్కగా సాగింది.
ముఖ్యంగా నాకు సంతో షాన్ని కలిగించిన విషయం ఏమిటంటే... అధికార భాషా సంఘం అధ్యక్ష్యులు శ్రీ ఏ.బీకే. ప్రసాద్ గారు అధ్యక్ష్యత వహించిన కార్యక్రమంలో ఆయన రూఫకం అనంతరం ఒక మాట చెప్పారు. తెలుగు భాషాభివృద్ధికి వివిధ సంస్థలు వివిధ రకాలు గా తోడ్పాటు చేస్తున్నట్టు చెపుతూ ... గూగుల్ గుంపును ప్రస్తావించారు. ఈ తెలుగు గును కూడా ప్రస్తావించారు. కార్యక్రమానంతరం నేను ఆయనను కలిసి నా విజిటింగ్ కార్డును ఇచ్చి నేను గుంపు సభ్యురాలినని చెప్పి మన వాళ్ళు కొత్త పదాలు సృష్టించటంలో చూపుతున్న ఆసక్తి , చొరవలను గురించి చెప్పాను. హడావుడిలో ఎక్కువసేపు మాట్లాడటం కుదరలేదు.
ఆ ఫోటో ఇక్కడ ఉంది . ఓసారి చూడండి.వీడియో పెడదామంటె
అప్లోడ్ కావట్లేదు.
వీలైతే ఓసారి ఆ రూపకాన్ని చూడండి ఇప్పటి వరకు రాష్ట్ర వ్యాప్తంగా ఆ నాటికను ౬ ప్రదర్శనలిచ్చారట. మీ ప్రాంతంలో ప్రదర్శిస్తే చూడగలరు.
ధన్యవాదాలు
పద్మకళ
ఏమైందో తెలియట్లెదు
ఫోటో కూడా ఎక్కట్లేదు
మరొక్కసారి పెడతాను
17 మే 2009, 2:58 am న, Kiran Na.Cha. <email4...@gmail.com> ఇలా రాసారు :
Sirish Kumar Tummala
May 17, 2009, 11:08:29 AM5/17/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
మంచి కబురు చెప్పారు.
- తుమ్మల శిరీష్ కుమార్
-----------
నా బ్లాగు: http://chaduvari.blogspot.com
బ్లాగులన్నీ: http://koodali.org, http://jalleda.com
- తుమ్మల శిరీష్ కుమార్
-----------
నా బ్లాగు: http://chaduvari.blogspot.com
బ్లాగులన్నీ: http://koodali.org, http://jalleda.com
2009/5/17 padma kala <kala.p...@gmail.com>
Pedro Alvarez Espinoza
May 18, 2009, 2:13:31 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
The first method is a productive one. How many Telugu farmers use the word ధూమ శకటం in their day to day conversations? None, I bet. Then, why on earth people coin some idiotic translations for many english words, like the one for "fly over", when every day laborer uses "nativized" pronunciation of flyover. So, they end up on some books, which no one cares for. How these foreign words are pronounced by telugu folks tells more about the phonology of spoken telugu, etc.
Then comes translations like deva for God: these translations are questionable, because accepting these translations entails accepting the theories that these concepts part of.
Pedro.
Then comes translations like deva for God: these translations are questionable, because accepting these translations entails accepting the theories that these concepts part of.
Pedro.
2009/5/17 manyav <many...@gmail.com>
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 18, 2009, 4:16:57 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
manyav
May 18, 2009, 4:43:35 AM5/18/09
to తెలుగుపదం
>
> మలయ్, థాయ్ భాషలైనా అరువు తీసుకోవచ్చు కానీ సంస్కృతం మాత్రం urgentగా
> తగ్గించెయ్యాలంటారు, అంతేనా? ఎందుకని?
>
చతుశ్చక్ర శకటము లాంటి భారీ శబ్దాల బారిన పడకుండా ఉండాలని నా> మలయ్, థాయ్ భాషలైనా అరువు తీసుకోవచ్చు కానీ సంస్కృతం మాత్రం urgentగా
> తగ్గించెయ్యాలంటారు, అంతేనా? ఎందుకని?
>
ఉద్దేశ్యం. :)
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 18, 2009, 4:47:31 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
ఏందో ప్రతి వాళ్లూ ఆ రెండు మూడు ఉదాహరణలు తప్ప ఇంకేమీ తెలుగులోకి తర్జుమా అవ్వనట్టు మాట్లాడతారే ?
2009/5/18 manyav <many...@gmail.com>
Sirish Kumar Tummala
May 18, 2009, 4:51:05 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
ఈ చతుశ్చక్ర శకటాలు, ధూమశకటాలూ ఊరికూరికే మన మధ్యకు ఇలా ఎందుకొచ్చేస్తున్నాయో నాకర్థం కాదు. అందరూ రైళ్ళు, బస్సులూ ఎక్కేవాళ్ళేగానీ పై శకటాలు ఎక్కేవాళ్ళెవరూ నాక్కనబడలేదు, కొత్త పదాల వ్యతిరేకులు తప్ప. అవసరం లేకపోయినా వాళ్ళు ఈ శకటాలను జనాల మధ్యకు దొర్లించుకొచ్చేస్తూ ఉంటారెంచేతో! :) ఇక్కడే కాదు, ఇంకా కొన్ని చోట్ల ఛూసానిది.
- తుమ్మల శిరీష్ కుమార్
-----------
నా బ్లాగు: http://chaduvari.blogspot.com
బ్లాగులన్నీ: http://koodali.org, http://jalleda.com
- తుమ్మల శిరీష్ కుమార్
-----------
నా బ్లాగు: http://chaduvari.blogspot.com
బ్లాగులన్నీ: http://koodali.org, http://jalleda.com
2009/5/18 manyav <many...@gmail.com>
manyav
May 18, 2009, 7:07:56 AM5/18/09
to తెలుగుపదం
> ఏందో ప్రతి వాళ్లూ ఆ రెండు మూడు ఉదాహరణలు తప్ప ఇంకేమీ తెలుగులోకి తర్జుమా
> అవ్వనట్టు మాట్లాడతారే ?
>
books వెతకాలి. ఇవంటే ఏదో బాగా నోటికి వచ్చినవి కాబట్టి ఇచ్చాను.
వెతకమంటే వెతుకుతా...
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 18, 2009, 7:41:06 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
వెతకండి.
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 18, 2009, 7:41:39 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
పుస్తకాలు
పాఠ్యపుస్తకాలు
Text books
RK
May 18, 2009, 9:01:55 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
Pedro Alvarez Espinoza,
You sound so familiar!!
నేననుకున్న వారే మీరయితే - మీకో సూచన. Don't bother :)
RK
You sound so familiar!!
నేననుకున్న వారే మీరయితే - మీకో సూచన. Don't bother :)
RK
2009/5/18 Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raind...@gmail.com>
The first method is a productive one. How many Telugu farmers use the word ధూమ శకటం in their day to day conversations? None, I bet. Then, why on earth people coin some idiotic translations for many english words, like the one for "fly over", when every day laborer uses "nativized" pronunciation of flyover. So, they end up on some books, which no one cares for. How these foreign words are pronounced by telugu folks tells more about the phonology of spoken telugu, etc.
narayana sarma
May 18, 2009, 9:10:45 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
పెడ్రోగారూ,
మీరు తెలుగువారు కానట్లుంది. బహుశ: తెలుగు నేర్చుకున్న అభిమానులై ఉంటారు...
స్వభాషాభిమానుల పట్ల మరికొంచెం మర్యాద...? మీకంతగా తెలియని అంశాల పట్ల
ఇంకొంచెం గౌరవం..?
ఏమీ అనుకోవద్దండి.
-నారాయణ
> 2009/5/18 Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raind...@gmail.com>
>>
>>...None, I bet. Then, why on earth
>> people coin some idiotic translations for many english words, like the one
>> for "fly over", when every day laborer uses "nativized" pronunciation of
>> flyover. So, they end up on some books, which no one cares for. How these
>> foreign words are pronounced by telugu folks tells more about the phonology
>> of spoken telugu, etc.
>>
>> Then comes translations like deva for God: these translations are
>> questionable, because accepting these translations entails accepting the
>> theories that these concepts part of.
>>
>> Pedro.
>>
>>
>>
--
అందరం సంతోషంగా ఉందాం.
RK
May 18, 2009, 9:59:26 AM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
నారాయణ గారు,
పెడ్రో అన్నదానిలో తప్పేమీ లేదు. తెలుగుల స్వాభిమానాన్ని భంగ పరిచే వ్యాఖ్యలేమీ లేవు ఆయన మెయిల్లో!
యోగి
పెడ్రో అన్నదానిలో తప్పేమీ లేదు. తెలుగుల స్వాభిమానాన్ని భంగ పరిచే వ్యాఖ్యలేమీ లేవు ఆయన మెయిల్లో!
యోగి
2009/5/18 narayana sarma <saman...@gmail.com>
Pedro Alvarez Espinoza
May 18, 2009, 6:07:29 PM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
Narayana,
Both "I love Telugu" or "I don't love Telugu" can be made consistent with what I have said; in which case, it is moot to discuss that matter. Lets come back to the matter on our hand.
Let's consider the english word "rail", and its telugu translation ధూమ శకటం. Both refer to the same object in the world. Which one should we pick: రైళ్ళు or ధూమశకటాలూ? One group claims that the latter is preferred because it is telugu-sounding. There is another side: the word రైళ్ళు does not sound english, assuming that we are referring to English spoken by natives, but not by Indians. For instance, in English, /r/ is a rounded consonant; in telugu, it is not. Second, the diphthong /ai" in rail is different from what we hear in రై; third, /l/ is dark in english; whereas it is not case in Telugu. This tells us the sequences of sounds we produce when we say " రైళ్ళు" is pretty much telugu. No one discuss these matters, because they think the phones/sounds of the world languages (in this case, english) can be transcribed using telugu sounds. That assumption is false, even though we try to learn the other using what we know.
Folks who devised translations like ఉదజని should be skewered alive!!
Both "I love Telugu" or "I don't love Telugu" can be made consistent with what I have said; in which case, it is moot to discuss that matter. Lets come back to the matter on our hand.
Let's consider the english word "rail", and its telugu translation ధూమ శకటం. Both refer to the same object in the world. Which one should we pick: రైళ్ళు or ధూమశకటాలూ? One group claims that the latter is preferred because it is telugu-sounding. There is another side: the word రైళ్ళు does not sound english, assuming that we are referring to English spoken by natives, but not by Indians. For instance, in English, /r/ is a rounded consonant; in telugu, it is not. Second, the diphthong /ai" in rail is different from what we hear in రై; third, /l/ is dark in english; whereas it is not case in Telugu. This tells us the sequences of sounds we produce when we say " రైళ్ళు" is pretty much telugu. No one discuss these matters, because they think the phones/sounds of the world languages (in this case, english) can be transcribed using telugu sounds. That assumption is false, even though we try to learn the other using what we know.
Folks who devised translations like ఉదజని should be skewered alive!!
2009/5/18 narayana sarma <saman...@gmail.com>
narayana sarma
May 18, 2009, 11:24:13 PM5/18/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
hi, Pedro,
> Which one should we pick:
> రైళ్ళు or ధూమశకటాలూ? One group claims that the latter is preferred because
> it is telugu-sounding.
Personally I never use the word ధూమశకటాలు. I think one group prefers
it not because it is telugu sounding, but because it is not of English
Origin. :-)
Actually It does not sound telugu, it sounds Sanskrit!!!
And I dont have any doubt that the way రైళ్లు is pronounced in Telugu
is not English.
> This tells us the sequences of sounds we produce when we say "
> రైళ్ళు" is pretty much telugu.
So it is- with ఫైళ్లు, క్లిప్పులు, ప్లగ్గులు, షర్టులు.. and thousands
of such words.
>No one discuss these matters, because they
> think the phones/sounds of the world languages (in this case, english) can
> be transcribed using telugu sounds.
I doubt if anyone makes such assumptions.. we actually have a classic
story of Tenali Rama who out of desperation uses a picture to produce
a funny sound associated with a well known poem in Telugu-something
like.." త్బ్పృవ్వట బాబా తలపై పువ్వట...". We can not produce the
sounds of even Malayalam in Telugu script/sounds, why talk of world
languages?
> Folks who devised translations like ఉదజని should be skewered alive!!
Well ఉదకం is water and జని is born out of.. so ఉద-జని is a direct
offshoot of Hydro-Gen, meaningwise. If you consider the sound, they
sound similar, please consider! :)
So is the case with అంతర్జాలము: Internet !!
LOL.. Actually we are speaking the same thing. I have only one problem:
You talk of skewering ppl alive and you dont say why!!! he he he!
:)
-narayana
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 19, 2009, 12:35:34 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
>> Folks who devised translations like ఉదజని should be skewered alive!!
అవును. అలాగే వజ్రం అని డైమండ్ ను తర్జుమా చేసిన వాణ్ని కూడా.
అలాగే తెలగోళ్లందరినీ - అప్పుడు ఈ వాదనల, అనువాదాలు, తర్జుమాల అవసరం ఉండదు కదా. చక్కగా ప్రపంచంలో తెలుగోళ్లు కాకుండా మిగిల్న అంగ్రేజోళ్లంతా అంగ్రేజ్ లో మాట్లాడుకుంటారు.
2009/5/19 Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raind...@gmail.com>
Narayana,
Both "I love Telugu" or "I don't love Telugu" can be made consistent with what I have said; in which case, it is moot to discuss that matter. Lets come back to the matter on our hand.
Let's consider the english word "rail", and its telugu translation ధూమ శకటం. Both refer to the same object in the world. Which one should we pick: రైళ్ళు or ధూమశకటాలూ? One group claims that the latter is preferred because it is telugu-sounding. There is another side: the word రైళ్ళు does not sound english, assuming that we are referring to English spoken by natives, but not by Indians. For instance, in English, /r/ is a rounded consonant; in telugu, it is not. Second, the diphthong /ai" in rail is different from what we hear in రై; third, /l/ is dark in english; whereas it is not case in Telugu. This tells us the sequences of sounds we produce when we say " రైళ్ళు" is pretty much telugu. No one discuss these matters, because they think the phones/sounds of the world languages (in this case, english) can be transcribed using telugu sounds. That assumption is false, even though we try to learn the other using what we know.
Pedro Alvarez Espinoza
May 19, 2009, 1:32:04 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
Well, languages don't disappear because you borrow foreign words. Imagine a situation where all telugu nouns/verbs are of english origin, does telugu cease being telugu? Nope. However, if all functors in telugu get replaced by that of English, then we can start calling it English, even one uses telugu nouns/verbs. This is the insight one can glean from studying pidgins and creoles.
About వజ్రం, it is part of the natural language that telugu is. Telugu people used that word, before they encountered English. In this case, it is pragmatically productive to use వజ్రం as a translation for diamond. Same with neeru, varsham, etc. When some words are already part of a natural languages, one doesn't need to come up with new translations for foreign words.
About వజ్రం, it is part of the natural language that telugu is. Telugu people used that word, before they encountered English. In this case, it is pragmatically productive to use వజ్రం as a translation for diamond. Same with neeru, varsham, etc. When some words are already part of a natural languages, one doesn't need to come up with new translations for foreign words.
2009/5/18 Kiran Kumar Chava <chava...@gmail.com>
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 19, 2009, 1:44:25 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
ఆహా
Pedro Alvarez Espinoza
May 19, 2009, 1:42:00 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
Well ఉదకం is water and జని is born out of.. so ఉద-జని is a direct
offshoot of Hydro-Gen, meaningwise. If you consider the sound, they
sound similar, please consider! :)
What happens with this etymoligation is this: when there exist disputes about theories, they end up becoming disputes of etymologies. This problem would become acute when the transmission of theories is lost; instead, they end up becoming transmissions of etymologies: this is what the scholars of sankrit have become.
narayana sarma
May 19, 2009, 2:17:39 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
> What happens with this etymoligation is this: when there exist disputes
> about theories, they end up becoming disputes of etymologies. This problem
> would become acute when the transmission of theories is lost; instead, they
> end up becoming transmissions of etymologies: this is what the scholars of
> sankrit have become.
>
> about theories, they end up becoming disputes of etymologies. This problem
> would become acute when the transmission of theories is lost; instead, they
> end up becoming transmissions of etymologies: this is what the scholars of
> sankrit have become.
>
Well, Pedro,
"...About వజ్రం, it is part of the natural language that telugu is.
Telugu people used that word, before they encountered English.." is
not an instance of etimology?
I guess the whole thing is going in circles. I prefer not to continue
on this further.
thanks and bye.
RK
May 19, 2009, 6:53:55 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
Kiran Kumar Chava
ఆహా
I would like to see you putting up arguments(if you can) rather than merely playing the sarcastic sidekick role.It is unproductive.
Sorry I can't type telugu on my mobile.
yogi
2009/5/19 Kiran Kumar Chava <chava...@gmail.com>
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 19, 2009, 6:59:57 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
భైరవభట్ల కామేశ్వర రావు
May 19, 2009, 10:10:35 AM5/19/09
to తెలుగుపదం
Thoug I am not sure if I completely understand what Mr. Pedro is
saying, I do see some point in it.
Another quick example like ధూమశకటం is కలన యంత్రం for Computer.
However there is a subtle difference between the two examples. We have
to undestand difference between three types of words:
1. Words for the objects/concepts which are native to telugu people
and so exist for a long time
2. Words that have come from other languages and have become part of
our language.
3. Words for the objects/concepts that are imported from other
cultures
a. The objects/concepts are of day to day use
b. The ojects/concepts are used in specific area of interest
I don't think we have to bother about category 1 and 2 at all for any
translation. The word "రవ్వ" for diamond belongs to category 1. The
word "వజ్రం" belongs to category 2.
What we need to bother about is category 3. Here, 3a are words used by
common man. The translation would be typically done by common man.
There are no specific rules that are followed in this. The ones that
become popular among the common man become standard. "రైలు" for train,
"బుంగ" or "బుడగ" for ballon are couple of examples I can readily think
of. There are several ways that these words get translated. It is an
interesting study for etymologists/linguists. If we have a new object/
concept like this (for example flyover), I think it would be good only
if it gets translated by a common man. As a group of people interested
in looking at telugu translations, we should get to know about them
and record them and try to spread the usage, instead of trying to
create a new word ourselves (I think we are doing it in some cases).
Then comes the category 3b. When we have words related to specific
area of interest to be translated, we need to have people from that
area and the linguists to sit together and think about it. There is no
other better way. The major problem here is maintaining some sort of
consistancy. The point of disagreement seems to be here. If I
understand correctly, Mr. Pedro is suggesting that we should
"telugize" the english words instead of trying to find a new telugu
word (for example "కంప్యూటరు" for computer rather than "కలనయంత్రం").
My opinion is that there is no problem either way, it is just a matter
of taste. I don't think the problem of dispute of etymologies would
arise if this translation is done in proper academic way and is
standardized. Linguistics itself is a good example for that. Though
there are few differences here and there about few terms, I think most
of the western linguistics concepts and words have been translated
into telugu and are widely used without much ambiguity.
Even if we want to "telugize" the words, it could lead to certain
confusion, if we do not set the rules clear. For example Computer can
be translated to "కంప్యూటరు". What about "Computerized" and
"Computerization"? What about some familier terms like "Search",
"Enter", "Close" etc.?
I would surely like to go with the second way of creating new words
(because of my personal taste), but on two conditions:
1. We should not following this for words of category 3a
2. There should be a very systematic approach for this rather than
adhoc tastes of the translators
regards,
Kameswara Rao.
On May 19, 10:42 am, Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raindoc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
saying, I do see some point in it.
Another quick example like ధూమశకటం is కలన యంత్రం for Computer.
However there is a subtle difference between the two examples. We have
to undestand difference between three types of words:
1. Words for the objects/concepts which are native to telugu people
and so exist for a long time
2. Words that have come from other languages and have become part of
our language.
3. Words for the objects/concepts that are imported from other
cultures
a. The objects/concepts are of day to day use
b. The ojects/concepts are used in specific area of interest
I don't think we have to bother about category 1 and 2 at all for any
translation. The word "రవ్వ" for diamond belongs to category 1. The
word "వజ్రం" belongs to category 2.
What we need to bother about is category 3. Here, 3a are words used by
common man. The translation would be typically done by common man.
There are no specific rules that are followed in this. The ones that
become popular among the common man become standard. "రైలు" for train,
"బుంగ" or "బుడగ" for ballon are couple of examples I can readily think
of. There are several ways that these words get translated. It is an
interesting study for etymologists/linguists. If we have a new object/
concept like this (for example flyover), I think it would be good only
if it gets translated by a common man. As a group of people interested
in looking at telugu translations, we should get to know about them
and record them and try to spread the usage, instead of trying to
create a new word ourselves (I think we are doing it in some cases).
Then comes the category 3b. When we have words related to specific
area of interest to be translated, we need to have people from that
area and the linguists to sit together and think about it. There is no
other better way. The major problem here is maintaining some sort of
consistancy. The point of disagreement seems to be here. If I
understand correctly, Mr. Pedro is suggesting that we should
"telugize" the english words instead of trying to find a new telugu
word (for example "కంప్యూటరు" for computer rather than "కలనయంత్రం").
My opinion is that there is no problem either way, it is just a matter
of taste. I don't think the problem of dispute of etymologies would
arise if this translation is done in proper academic way and is
standardized. Linguistics itself is a good example for that. Though
there are few differences here and there about few terms, I think most
of the western linguistics concepts and words have been translated
into telugu and are widely used without much ambiguity.
Even if we want to "telugize" the words, it could lead to certain
confusion, if we do not set the rules clear. For example Computer can
be translated to "కంప్యూటరు". What about "Computerized" and
"Computerization"? What about some familier terms like "Search",
"Enter", "Close" etc.?
I would surely like to go with the second way of creating new words
(because of my personal taste), but on two conditions:
1. We should not following this for words of category 3a
2. There should be a very systematic approach for this rather than
adhoc tastes of the translators
regards,
Kameswara Rao.
On May 19, 10:42 am, Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raindoc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
narayana sarma
May 19, 2009, 10:25:18 AM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
నా మనసులో మాటనే కనుక్కున్నట్లు చెప్పారు కామేశ్వరరావుగారూ. వందనాలు.
-నారాయణ
2009/5/19 భైరవభట్ల కామేశ్వర రావు <kame...@yahoo.com>:
--
Pedro Alvarez Espinoza
May 19, 2009, 6:36:35 PM5/19/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
A couple of points wrt 3b.
1. Sure, many concepts in linguistics are translated into Telugu. The meaning of these concepts are precise, not because they are translated to telugu according to some etymological standards, etc, but because the theories which these concepts embed in, exhaust their meaning. If there is any dispute, we will go back to the theory or a better theory and settle the case. If there are issues concerning Kirana Janya samyoga kriya, we don't go to a telugu pundit to solve issues; instead we try to understand the mechanism behind photo synthesis. Some one on this forum pointed about how paalgonuta is related to paalu (milk). This etymological connection is hardly of any use today. Another example, I have in mind, is: religion, and its etymology re+ligere. The latter etymology has no whatsoever relationship with when Christian theologians have described Christianity as a religion. In other words. the business of etymology at best can attest this: at one point in time, some concept was kinda tied to the underlying etymemes.
2. Any disputes about taste is sterile. Given this, have I voiced my concerns because my taste is different from others? Definitely not. There is an epistemic way to settle this. Use some productive heuristics we have learnt from studying spoken languages, considering that the orthography came later.
2.1 Don't use some long words: this is what manyav suggested. I have been to this village whose name is written as sanjeeva rao peta; however, people live there call it "sanji rao peta". Same with the name "san francisco: people live in that city and nearby areas call it with a three-syllable word which sounds similar to "san cisco". You can find many such examples; one can easily brush em off being a phonetic result of some fast speech phonological processes: agreed; what happens when a group of telugus migrate to other parts of the world, continue to use telugu? In that case, what they speak would become the standard of what they gonna end up writing on paper: telugu folks in mauritius can attest that. They don't transcribe "lakshmudu", instead they say lachmudu. This tells us to focus on the telugu phonology when choosing some words.
2.2 don't pick some obscure words, if there exist others which are frequently used. For instance, many illiterate folks in some parts of Kurnool district call surgery as operation: they say like "maa vaadiki chinna(pedda) operation(opration) ayyindi" Even though operation is an english word, native speakers of english don't use operatoin in that context; so, the use is the clinching factor. That's why you hardly see "surgery theatres"; instead, one sees "operation theatre"
3. Why we need to use words? Of course, to describe our experience: these words refer to the aspects of our experiential world. How we experience the world depends upon the knowledge about the world. If you are a physicist, you can experience neutrino, postitron, meson, etc, because you have knwoledge of the underlying theories, and you have the experimetal apparatus to see it--either directly and indirectly. Any person, with sufficient mental capabilities, irrespective of what one's mother tongue is, can experience it: no etymology involved. Next time, when you wanna translate a book on economics, go to an etymoligist!!
2009/5/19 భైరవభట్ల కామేశ్వర రావు <kame...@yahoo.com>
Kiran Kumar Chava
May 20, 2009, 12:16:09 AM5/20/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
పదాలు వర్గీకరించారు.
అలానే ఈ గుంపు సభ్యులను కూడా వర్గీకరించాలి అనుకుంటాను.
1. పరిశీలకులు
2. హాబీ-నిష్పాదకులు
3. ప్రొఫెషనల్ నిష్పాదకులు
పరిశీలకులు
వీరు ఇక్కడ నిష్పాదించిన పదాలు చూస్తూ ఉంటారు, నచ్చితే వాడతారు. అడపా దడపా ఒకటీ రెండు పదాలు నిష్పాదించిన విష్పాదించవచ్చు.
హాబీ-నిష్పాదకులు
వీరు ఇక్కడ పదాలు నిష్పాదిస్తుంటారు. కాకుంటే దానిలో పెద్ద లాజిక్ ఉండదు, మనసుకు నచ్చినట్టు నిష్పాదిస్తూ ఉంటారు. ప్రొఫెషనల్ నిష్పాదకులనుండి కొన్ని టిప్స్ నచ్చితే తీసుకుంటారు.
ప్రొఫెషనల్ నిష్పాదకులు
వీరు పదశాస్త్రంలో పండితుకు, ఏదన్నా పదాన్ని నిష్పాదించాలంటే నియమాలు అన్నీ తెలిసి ఆ రీతిగా నిష్పాదిస్తుంటారు.
Kiran
2009/5/20 Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raind...@gmail.com>
Praveen
May 20, 2009, 5:11:44 AM5/20/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
2009/5/20 Pedro Alvarez Espinoza <raind...@gmail.com>:
? Obviously no one cares about the etymology (or need to, really)
*after* the word is already popular, and a strong semantic association
has been established. Are you saying: See how the word is popular
though the current usage of the word does not exactly correspond to
original intention of the word? Change is in the nature of the
language. Meanings change, contexts change... such is evolution.
> 2. Any disputes about taste is sterile. Given this, have I voiced my
> concerns because my taste is different from others? Definitely not. There is
> an epistemic way to settle this. Use some productive heuristics we have
> learnt from studying spoken languages, considering that the orthography came
> later.
True enough. But civilization progressed rapidly only after the
introduction of written languages. Most languages have a spoken and
written flavors.
> 2.1 Don't use some long words: this is what manyav suggested. I have been to
> this village whose name is written as sanjeeva rao peta; however, people
> live there call it "sanji rao peta". Same with the name "san francisco:
> people live in that city and nearby areas call it with a three-syllable word
> which sounds similar to "san cisco". You can find many such examples; one
> can easily brush em off being a phonetic result of some fast speech
> phonological processes: agreed; what happens when a group of telugus migrate
> to other parts of the world, continue to use telugu? In that case, what they
> speak would become the standard of what they gonna end up writing on paper:
> telugu folks in mauritius can attest that. They don't transcribe
> "lakshmudu", instead they say lachmudu. This tells us to focus on the telugu
> phonology when choosing some words.
> 2.2 don't pick some obscure words, if there exist others which are
> frequently used. For instance, many illiterate folks in some parts of
> Kurnool district call surgery as operation: they say like "maa vaadiki
> chinna(pedda) operation(opration) ayyindi" Even though operation is an
> english word, native speakers of english don't use operatoin in that
> context; so, the use is the clinching factor. That's why you hardly see
> "surgery theatres"; instead, one sees "operation theatre"
Firstly, I agree that some words are better left untranslated for any
given practical purpose.
There is value to your point of view when we are talking about the
contemporary language, as perceived by the common man - 'railu'
'opration' etc. However, my interpretation of the point 3b is not just
about translating English words into Telugu, but a more general idea
of coming up with words for new concepts. This application is true
even of English, in scientific fields, for example.
I see the following advantages to using etymology:
a) Conveys the meaning, at least in a broad sense, to some one who
missed out the memos on coining of the new word. I remember how we
used to remember unknown words by trying to break it up into parts,
and relating to the concepts we already know.
b) Gives the power of association to the concept in context. Explain
the origin of 'paalgonu' to someone, and see if they forget the word
again.
c) Evolving words out of roots and suffixes gives more flexibility in
terms of describing related concepts/entities.
Also, 2.1 and 2.2 above considers only the use case of what is
considered acceptable for a spoken language by a common man. That is
not the *only* purpose of a language. For example, education in Telugu
medium, or even the current context of localization. Especially in the
context of Localization, a majority of the audience might be looking
at a word for the first time - they should understand what it means.
I'm going into the unending debates of what it actually means, and
does the word very accurately represents what it is for etc. (see
point b above).
Making up words out of thin air is all fine and dandy, until we start
running into the NIH (Not Invented Here) Syndrome like re-translating
'udajani'. Personal tastes aside, 'udajani' already won the popularity
contest generations ago.
> 3. Why we need to use words? Of course, to describe our experience: these
> words refer to the aspects of our experiential world. How we experience the
> world depends upon the knowledge about the world. If you are a physicist,
> you can experience neutrino, postitron, meson, etc, because you have
> knwoledge of the underlying theories, and you have the experimetal apparatus
> to see it--either directly and indirectly. Any person, with sufficient
> mental capabilities, irrespective of what one's mother tongue is, can
> experience it: no etymology involved. Next time, when you wanna translate a
> book on economics, go to an etymoligist!!
>
Or make up random words and make sure no one else can understand what
is written, or is it use the same words as English when in doubt? Why
is the 'common-man-appeal' or some other subjective attribute ("I like
it") more desirable than precision, or clarity of thought? I'm all for
simple words, but if there is a trade off between Simplicity and
Comprehensibility, I know what I will choose. One might argue that
comprehensibility is subjective as well - I submit that when we are
talking about specialized domains like Economics, you expect people to
understand the concepts and have some basic background knowledge. If
the argument here is that even if you make such a translation and no
one understands it because of all the difficult words, may be there
was no point or real need to translating it in the first place.
My 2c.
Praveen
>
> >
>
> A couple of points wrt 3b.
> 1. Sure, many concepts in linguistics are translated into Telugu. The
> meaning of these concepts are precise, not because they are translated to
> telugu according to some etymological standards, etc, but because the
> theories which these concepts embed in, exhaust their meaning. If there is
> any dispute, we will go back to the theory or a better theory and settle the
> case. If there are issues concerning Kirana Janya samyoga kriya, we don't go
> to a telugu pundit to solve issues; instead we try to understand the
> mechanism behind photo synthesis. Some one on this forum pointed about how
> paalgonuta is related to paalu (milk). This etymological connection is
> hardly of any use today. Another example, I have in mind, is: religion, and
> its etymology re+ligere. The latter etymology has no whatsoever relationship
> with when Christian theologians have described Christianity as a religion.
> In other words. the business of etymology at best can attest this: at one
> point in time, some concept was kinda tied to the underlying etymemes.
I fail to understand the argument here. What is wrong with "paalgonu''
> 1. Sure, many concepts in linguistics are translated into Telugu. The
> meaning of these concepts are precise, not because they are translated to
> telugu according to some etymological standards, etc, but because the
> theories which these concepts embed in, exhaust their meaning. If there is
> any dispute, we will go back to the theory or a better theory and settle the
> case. If there are issues concerning Kirana Janya samyoga kriya, we don't go
> to a telugu pundit to solve issues; instead we try to understand the
> mechanism behind photo synthesis. Some one on this forum pointed about how
> paalgonuta is related to paalu (milk). This etymological connection is
> hardly of any use today. Another example, I have in mind, is: religion, and
> its etymology re+ligere. The latter etymology has no whatsoever relationship
> with when Christian theologians have described Christianity as a religion.
> In other words. the business of etymology at best can attest this: at one
> point in time, some concept was kinda tied to the underlying etymemes.
? Obviously no one cares about the etymology (or need to, really)
*after* the word is already popular, and a strong semantic association
has been established. Are you saying: See how the word is popular
though the current usage of the word does not exactly correspond to
original intention of the word? Change is in the nature of the
language. Meanings change, contexts change... such is evolution.
> 2. Any disputes about taste is sterile. Given this, have I voiced my
> concerns because my taste is different from others? Definitely not. There is
> an epistemic way to settle this. Use some productive heuristics we have
> learnt from studying spoken languages, considering that the orthography came
> later.
introduction of written languages. Most languages have a spoken and
written flavors.
> 2.1 Don't use some long words: this is what manyav suggested. I have been to
> this village whose name is written as sanjeeva rao peta; however, people
> live there call it "sanji rao peta". Same with the name "san francisco:
> people live in that city and nearby areas call it with a three-syllable word
> which sounds similar to "san cisco". You can find many such examples; one
> can easily brush em off being a phonetic result of some fast speech
> phonological processes: agreed; what happens when a group of telugus migrate
> to other parts of the world, continue to use telugu? In that case, what they
> speak would become the standard of what they gonna end up writing on paper:
> telugu folks in mauritius can attest that. They don't transcribe
> "lakshmudu", instead they say lachmudu. This tells us to focus on the telugu
> phonology when choosing some words.
> 2.2 don't pick some obscure words, if there exist others which are
> frequently used. For instance, many illiterate folks in some parts of
> Kurnool district call surgery as operation: they say like "maa vaadiki
> chinna(pedda) operation(opration) ayyindi" Even though operation is an
> english word, native speakers of english don't use operatoin in that
> context; so, the use is the clinching factor. That's why you hardly see
> "surgery theatres"; instead, one sees "operation theatre"
given practical purpose.
There is value to your point of view when we are talking about the
contemporary language, as perceived by the common man - 'railu'
'opration' etc. However, my interpretation of the point 3b is not just
about translating English words into Telugu, but a more general idea
of coming up with words for new concepts. This application is true
even of English, in scientific fields, for example.
I see the following advantages to using etymology:
a) Conveys the meaning, at least in a broad sense, to some one who
missed out the memos on coining of the new word. I remember how we
used to remember unknown words by trying to break it up into parts,
and relating to the concepts we already know.
b) Gives the power of association to the concept in context. Explain
the origin of 'paalgonu' to someone, and see if they forget the word
again.
c) Evolving words out of roots and suffixes gives more flexibility in
terms of describing related concepts/entities.
Also, 2.1 and 2.2 above considers only the use case of what is
considered acceptable for a spoken language by a common man. That is
not the *only* purpose of a language. For example, education in Telugu
medium, or even the current context of localization. Especially in the
context of Localization, a majority of the audience might be looking
at a word for the first time - they should understand what it means.
I'm going into the unending debates of what it actually means, and
does the word very accurately represents what it is for etc. (see
point b above).
Making up words out of thin air is all fine and dandy, until we start
running into the NIH (Not Invented Here) Syndrome like re-translating
'udajani'. Personal tastes aside, 'udajani' already won the popularity
contest generations ago.
> 3. Why we need to use words? Of course, to describe our experience: these
> words refer to the aspects of our experiential world. How we experience the
> world depends upon the knowledge about the world. If you are a physicist,
> you can experience neutrino, postitron, meson, etc, because you have
> knwoledge of the underlying theories, and you have the experimetal apparatus
> to see it--either directly and indirectly. Any person, with sufficient
> mental capabilities, irrespective of what one's mother tongue is, can
> experience it: no etymology involved. Next time, when you wanna translate a
> book on economics, go to an etymoligist!!
>
is written, or is it use the same words as English when in doubt? Why
is the 'common-man-appeal' or some other subjective attribute ("I like
it") more desirable than precision, or clarity of thought? I'm all for
simple words, but if there is a trade off between Simplicity and
Comprehensibility, I know what I will choose. One might argue that
comprehensibility is subjective as well - I submit that when we are
talking about specialized domains like Economics, you expect people to
understand the concepts and have some basic background knowledge. If
the argument here is that even if you make such a translation and no
one understands it because of all the difficult words, may be there
was no point or real need to translating it in the first place.
My 2c.
Praveen
>
> >
>
Sirish Kumar Tummala
May 20, 2009, 5:24:15 AM5/20/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
తెలుగు పదం గురించి ఇంగ్లీషులో చర్చ. భళా!
- తుమ్మల శిరీష్ కుమార్
-----------
నా బ్లాగు: http://chaduvari.blogspot.com
బ్లాగులన్నీ: http://koodali.org, http://jalleda.com
- తుమ్మల శిరీష్ కుమార్
-----------
నా బ్లాగు: http://chaduvari.blogspot.com
బ్లాగులన్నీ: http://koodali.org, http://jalleda.com
2009/5/20 Praveen <mirch...@gmail.com>
Kiran Na.Cha.
May 20, 2009, 6:32:21 AM5/20/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
<< తెలుగు పదం గురించి ఇంగ్లీషులో చర్చ. భళా! >>
I think it's necessary at least because we are not sure if Pedro's is just a
fancy name or an actual non-native Telugu enthusiast (and then we don't know
what level, though we can make some guesses there).
@Praveen:
I am with you on the argument about etymology, simplicity, and
comprehensibility, bro! :-) (I've been following all the long e-mails flying
around on this issue, and I hope this discussion will give one big,
comprehensive, final answer that we can simply refer to someone when someone
else comes up with similar issues in future.)
* I am of the opinion that the group's intention is not to touch already
popular translations, even if they're etymologically wrong or long or tough
to remember. When Telugus can learn and remember long English words such as
"photosynthesis" (which derives its name from Greek and Latin combined), I
think they should already learn to not complain about "kiraNa janya
samyOgaka kriya". (We could always have fancy acronyms or "poTTi pErlu" when
things go haywire really.)
* There's another part of argument for direct translations from English,
which I picked up in another e-group long ago: Sometimes, the English names
are themselves wrongly given, such as "chromosome" which has nothing to do
with "chromos" ("color") but was only mistaken at the time of discovery to
be colored (?). When we translate such things into Telugu, we could either
correct the "age-old mistake" or make the same so that people can understand
(like ghaTOtkacha says "asamadeeyulu" to let lambu and jambu understand the
word "asmadeeyulu" in their own way in the classic film "maayaabazaar").
Either case, we are not committing a crime or sin towards the language or
the people - we're only bridging a gap in communication. Contextual
decisions can be made in such situations. (For now, a "chromosome" is just a
"krOmOjOmu" in Telugu. No complaints. Or, a "computer" is a "kalana yantram"
or "gaNini" - borrowing the "mistake" of undermining its current use as in
English - or call it "kampyUTaru" if that makes someone understand better.
Sometimes, you actually need to call a "pilli" a "maarjaalamu" - you need
to, of course, sometimes clarify to someone who thinks it's some of
"network" seeing the suffix "-jaalamu" :-D)
* Whether "hydrogen" is really "hydro-gen" (uda-jani) is not the case in
point, IMHO. But, what I once used to mock at but later liked was how the
translation (probably) inspired "natrajani" for nitrogen. The suffix "-gen"
was already translated as "jani" - very good really - and who can tell what
"nitro-" is to a non-technical telugu - "natra-" sounds very simple as a
prefix, whether meaningful or not. Why, we could simply use "nitro-boost" as
"natra-chOditam", for instance, and extend it further as may be possible! So
much for "udajani".
* I personally think we could give Telugu some more space - why should we
constantly argue for a short "Telugu sounding" (whatever that means) word
and discard all suggestions in the process, when the English word itself is
possibly derived from one or more foreign languages and is foreign to us, of
course, and we still learnt it without complaining? Can't we simply Telugu
words with equal "respect" towards the complexity of the language? And, like
my brother (Praveen) said, domain-specific jargon is not necessarily for
everyone to understand! ("Terms" and "definitions" are different. We don't
need to combine them sometimes, but sometimes we could. Either way is
complain-able or compromise-able. It depends on how one looks at it.)
As a conclusion (interim), I want to make a bold suggestion to anyone who
wants to discard word suggestions made: Please, for the sake of the language
and development, and since we all share the same intentions more or less,
come up with an alternate word suggestion without simply saying "I don't
like it". Of course, we are not surely doing it for one's personal choices.
If the concept of language offers so much of customization and preference,
someone's dictionary in any language could only be a couple of pages while
some may want thousands of pages! Words are used without everyone's
approval, of course, and let's live with it and move on accepting (a) a word
proposed by someone else, (b) an alternative proposed (by yours truly or
someone else), or (c) the "telugization" of English/foreign words (to
Telugu), at least as an ad hoc placeholder until (a) or (b) can happen.
...Surely, (c) cannot be (a) for everything, or we don't need this group!
My two cents (or two pages, rather) :-)
Kiran/NaChaKi
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Praveen" <mirch...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 04:11
To: <telug...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [తెలుగుపదం] Re: కొత్త తెలుగు పదముల సృష్టికి ఇతర భాషా పదము లను వాడుట
Praveen
May 20, 2009, 7:00:45 AM5/20/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
2009/5/20 Sirish Kumar Tummala <sirish...@gmail.com>:
సులువుగా చెయ్యగలిగే వీలుంటే ఈ గుంపే అవసరం ఉండేది కాదేమో :)
- ప్రవీణ్
> తెలుగు పదం గురించి ఇంగ్లీషులో చర్చ. భళా!
అదేదో సామెత చెప్పినట్టు... ఇటువంటి చర్చలని సామాన్య ప్రజలు తెలుగులో
సులువుగా చెయ్యగలిగే వీలుంటే ఈ గుంపే అవసరం ఉండేది కాదేమో :)
- ప్రవీణ్
Sirish Kumar Tummala
May 20, 2009, 7:48:32 AM5/20/09
to telug...@googlegroups.com
ప్రవీణ్ గారూ,
మీరన్నది నాకర్థం కాలేదు. తెలుగు పదాల గురించి ఇంగ్లీషులో తప్ప తెలుగులో చర్చించలేమనా లేక ఇంగ్లీషులో చర్చించేందుకే ఈ గుంపు పెట్టారనా?
మీరన్నది నాకర్థం కాలేదు. తెలుగు పదాల గురించి ఇంగ్లీషులో తప్ప తెలుగులో చర్చించలేమనా లేక ఇంగ్లీషులో చర్చించేందుకే ఈ గుంపు పెట్టారనా?
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages