Hi
This discussion reminds me of the similar exchanges that have taken
place elsewhere about how scientists should write when formally
reporting their work. My experience when dealing with papers in
european languages was that it was much easier to understand a paper in
another language when it used the conventional format, which in my
working days meant using the passive voice and a relatively limited
vocabulary. Also, when considering reports by native English
speakers, any examples which I have seen in which non-scientists
(usually language specialists) attempted to convert papers into more
conventional language with a wider vocabulary actually lost some of the
significant details.
Thus I do not think there is any absolute 'right' or 'wrong', but
the writer should consider the expected reader. Abbreviations or
special phrases can easily cause problems and misunderstandings for a
reader with a different native tongue. In a related context, I
remember the confusion many years ago when, in Denmark, an Englishman
said he would go and 'knock-up' a maid who had overslept and not
produced breakfast in our hostel: americans present were extremely
surprised. Certainly, there was no reason why 'UK english' should have
taken precedence over 'american english' in that establishment, but it
was a warning to all present of potential problems of using idioms (eg.
'knock up' instead of 'wake up').
In the case of photographic discussions on this list, I suggest
that we should give most weight to the views of those contributors for
whom english of any form is not their native language.
Brian
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|