News & Articles

Clever monkey!

Having recently written about some impacts of (unavoidable) language drift opens the way to look at the larger problem with AI translators. The relative explosion of automatic text gives cause for concern where proper nouns Wright, Marder and Garand become right, martyr and grand. Context would allow many of us to recognize “right brothers” as Wilbur and Orville. But with Marder written as “martyr tank” there’s a much bigger chance of error and confusion. 

For the heck of it I began to keep track. Weld became wild, forward was written as Ford, infantry transformed to inventory, an action, defense, turned into the noun fence. 

In the lands of language diversity miracles are commonplace where covert becomes COVID and floors are flaws.

Some linguistic redos are funny, and I’m not going to spend breath bemoaning what I can’t control. Why bother with useless expenditure of effort when we can look in wonder at the amazing ability we humans have to function reasonably well in the midst of permanent language quirks. 

Native speakers boom along over word bumps and sentence obstacles that leave the non-native boggled in frustration. Understanding language is an incredible and widely shared human ability. We’re able to do quite well handling word information. But despite a decent track record as clever monkeys (get ready for it) we are collective suckers for some traps. Take, in a current and past events sense, borders. Of late, Gaza and the Ukraine. 

Where to start? A border is about territory and people, often defining an ethnic population of or from a particular area. Would a primarily English speaking U.S. show different boundaries than a Hispanic one? Quite likely. 

But, why has the U.S. largely avoided having an official language and why was Canadian born S I Hayakawa an early champion of making English official? 

Whatever language represents goes beyond pure ethnicity and geography. My south Poland grandmother had next to no English proficiency. Her husband, on the other hand, especially in terms of cursing, was skilled. Was one, then, a Pole, Polish American or American? 

These sorts of issues crop up all over the globe otherwise there’d be no issue over Mandarin or Mongolian Chinese or any other language group we’d care to consider whether in the New World, Europe, Africa or Asia. Language gets mixed up in our consideration of borders.

But so does history. Look at the present European conflict. Ukrainian is not identical to Russian or Polish or Lithuanian or Czech. Different language groups. Groups move and resettle whereas rivers, plains and mountains tend to stay put. 

In my view this partly explains why territorial conflict sticks with us. Now what, tell me, could vastly more entertaining than trying to pin physical boundaries on the swings of social history? Tons of fun. Gets better if we add military history.

This gets good. September of 1939 National Socialism invaded Poland from the west. Little more than a week later Soviet Socialism followed through on its secret agreement to invade from the east. Months pass and the Nationals decide to get a jump on their socialist brothers with a sneak attack. The World War Battle of Socialist Ideologies ramped up (might say is still going). 

During this devoted idealogues on each side favored either Russian or German speaking people who were often clumped in specific areas or were relocated in groups to dilute a different language family. 

See, isn’t it fun? Now how ‘bout some diplomatic or world history to make an even gooder mud pie to play with?

I’ll guess most of us do not think Yalta when we look at the Ukraine-Russia war. But maybe we should because at that conference the West seemed to throw up its hands in agreeing Soviet Socialism could do what it wished. 

It did. Took over much of Poland into Russia and pushed a new Poland into what had been Germany. The Baltic states, too. Parts of Finland. Hungary. Czechoslovakia and Romania, the Ukraine and very nearly anything else in reach or sight. 

Go on. Count all the new borders and sometimes concocted (by diluting ethnic populations) nations that appeared as independent satellites (contradictory but useful term). Does anyone believe there is a way to understand and then correct sovereignty issues in all those places without complaint, opposition or war? Anyone? Plus there’s a good thousand years of Tatar, Viking and Mongol activity in the mix along with Roman and Orthodox Christianity with Islam joining the party, too. 

For a really-really good time have just one of all these players decide to exert the advantage of being the one-true-ordained voice of any-name god who must be obeyed. How many languages, religions and cultures can we handle. What are the odds of reconciling vegans with cannibals? 

Reeling the clock back to another time is not a solution because it simply can’t be done. Living memory covers much, and then too much if the box is opened into the way-back. Who gets Palestine? Hittites, dynastic Egyptians, Romans, Turkey, who? Those and more could make claims, and if we reasonably (I think foolishly) consider reparations for past acts are we then open to giving parts of Spain to Jews and Muslims because in 1492 (more than Columbus that year) the Reconquista booted them from Spain? There is so much crossover of ethnic, religious and language groups I doubt any force on Earth could straighten it out.

No matter how well intended, fixing the past is impossible. Might as well try creating Kosher or Halal bacon. 

Rather than helping, some efforts only perpetuate a problem that gets worse the further back in time our fixing reaches. Consider restoring something simple as a redistributing a sandwich. Once eaten, it’s over. Who wants a recently regurgitated sandwich? Takers anyone? It’s not long before what was a sandwich is long gone. Kaput. 

Sandwich restoration projects are delusional and worse so the further back we go to find the original correct sandwich to redo. Now and the ingredients at hand now are all we have. If someone says “Surely we can fix this.” The only thing I’d say is “My name’s not Shirley.”