6 ms·

There is another aspect beyond raw vocabulary and grammar, and that's unspoken cultural assumptions :not abbreviations and slang, but real misunderstandings cau

There is another aspect beyond raw vocabulary and grammar, and that's unspoken cultural assumptions :not abbreviations and slang, but real misunderstandings caused by different understandings of what seems to be a set of perfectly obvious sentences to both sides . A branch of my company went through a merger with another branch in a different country, and with a different language. Needless to say, it was difficult, and people didn't all take it well. The interesting part was that both sides thought the other side was being actively hostile, and were brandishing emails as 'proof'. I was eventually asked to do something to reconcile both sides of the new merged team, since I am a native speaker of both languages and understand both cultures. I read the emails, and was flabbergasted. Side A could read email from B as hostile, but side B had genuinely sent something they thought was perfectly ok, and I could see why. The other way round was the same. To be more specific, some cultures are far more direct than others, and what seems offensive to one is perfectly acceptable to the other. The other way round would be saying something 'forcefully' but very indirectly, and the other side understanding it as 'no' when it meant 'yes'. I ended up solving the problem by organizing a very nice lunch, where everyone realized the 'others' were actually nice and friendly human beings, and that email was not always the best way to communicate.

jakub_g 5y ago
Meeting in person and regularly is extremely underrated. This can happen also within a single culture. When two companies do some business together but instead of meeting often and talking directly (or zoom), spend weeks to carefully craft emails and never talk face to face.
- ezoe 5y ago
  It is exploited. There are so many evil politicians who order to murder people or made the laws which restrict human rights. But if you meet them in person, you will definitely feel they are nice person.
  - behythoyg 5y ago
    This is a really interesting point. Malcolm Gladwell: "The people who got Hitler right were those who never met him, and the people who got him wrong were those who did spend time with him." Here's a clip from an interview with Gladwell on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvOilwY0yOQ&t=178s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvOilwY0yOQ&t=178s
cruano 5y ago
I think tribalism goes beyond language, I joined a company with two offices in different countries and while there was some rock-throwing and mistrust of each other, it all went away when we got acquired. Somehow belonging to the "old" company was a stronger bond that speaking the same language, so all this negative feelings got shifted towards the parent company Damn monkey brains
ksec 5y ago
>but real misunderstandings caused by different understandings of what seems to be a set of perfectly obvious sentences to both sides. Yes. Especially true when it happens between an American and a Brit. Also true between Germans and Brits, when the Germans are so good with their English, the precision with their wordings which tends to trigger some Brits.
- detaro 5y ago
  Do you have an example/anecdote for the last part? Not sure I know what you mean.
  - Tarsul 5y ago
    (not op) well, we Germans are very direct. So we would write something like "Can you give me the coordinates? Thanks in advance." whereas a Brit would like it if it was written as "I would very much like to get the coordinates from you. Can you direct them to me? Thank you very much. Much appreciated." (well, my impersonation of a Brit is not the best since I am too German in this respect)
    - tragomaskhalos 5y ago
      I'm not convinced by that example: I am British and would use exactly the same phrasing as your first example; the "thanks in advance" takes the edge off it perfectly well. The second example is like a bad impression of a subservient butler or something !
      - Tarsul 5y ago
        yeah, actually it took me a while to get to that point, with the "thanks in advance" :) I think generally my argument holds true (at least a little bit, but it probably also has a lot to do with not being familiar enough with the foreign language) but as with the example in the OP what's even truer is that emails can VERY easily be misunderstood as being unfriendly no matter the language. Which is why it's very important to use more social ways of communicating, e.g. telephone once in a while (and especially with delicate matters).
markdown 5y ago
A: "Should I launch the nukes?" B: "Fuck no" A: *Initiates launch*
- Iv 5y ago
  Laugh, but talking with Japanese, something that often happens is: A: "Shouldn't I launch the nukes?" B: "No." Can be understood as "yes, do it" because they are used to an opposite logic when answering negation. "Yes" means "I agree with the negation" and no the opposite. And they seem to have a hard time accepting that the logic is different in English.
  - jcrites 5y ago
    That's an ambiguous question in native English too and could only be fully, precisely understood from context. While I would interpret the sentence from only the context you provided in the way that you describe, I would characterize the question as unclear. A military chain of command would definitely phrase the question more like "Mr. President, can you confirm you are giving us the order to launch the nukes? Please present your confirmation code." But I understand what you mean about negations having opposite meanings in (spoken) English (where context is clearer). I consider that kind of negation and answer to be sloppy written grammar and something to avoid in written English.
    - jgwil2 5y ago
      French and German, at least, have handy words (si and doch respectively) that just serve to contradict a negative question.
      - developer93 5y ago
        I think doch and ihr (plural you) really need to be in English. I sometimes use yous for ihr, but unfortunately no equivalent for doch yet.
  - hardwaregeek 5y ago
    There’s the classic “you can’t add too much water to the reactor” where “can’t” can mean you are physically incapable of adding too much water, and therefore should add a lot, or “can’t” can mean you must not add to much water.
bsder 5y ago
> I ended up solving the problem by organizing a very nice lunch, where everyone realized the 'others' were actually nice and friendly human beings, and that email was not always the best way to communicate. Email is terribly crappy. You completely lose language nuance. I always try to give people the biggest benefit of the doubt even when I'm certain that the person on the other side of the email is a raging asshole. I think its just "Seeing a face activates friendliness brain circuits." I really do have no other explanation how you can completely defuse situations just by having people sit down and talk at lunch, a bar, etc. However, my problem is that I have an extremely good command of the English language. This is very useful when I talk as I can make full use of humor, simile, metaphor, florid prose, idioms, etc. to keep things interesting for people. And I completely lose English as a second language people because they can't keep up with my language gymnastics at speed. If I have non-native listeners and I have to communicate, I have to deliver the talk once to myself, watch it, suppress all of my language weirdness, and deliver it again. It's really tough. Of course, people who speak English as a second language love listening to me one-on-one as they learn all manner of crazy ways to say things.
- novok 5y ago
  Its more than a face, it's also tone of voice, posture, and so on. With it gone, people tend to assume the worst, because humans are biased to interpreting things in the negative when something is ambiguous.
  - developer93 5y ago
    Being within punching range also has a calming effect on most people.
Iv 5y ago
As a French living in Japan one of the things I quickly learned is that if I complain about something while showing even a hint of anger or annoyingness, my interlocutor will take it personally, even if he/she is not involved about the thing as well.
- henearkr 5y ago
  Was you complaint about something related to Japan or the life there or the administration? Japanese people very easily feel compelled to defend their group, because if not they are often treated as "anti-japanese" by the most right-wing (which are the most vocal) of their relations/neighbors. This in turn leads to a lot of self-censorship.
  - astrange 5y ago
    Whenever I've met a French speaker in Japan (which happens surprisingly often) I have always been amazed at their ability to be just as direct in Japanese as they are in French. It turns my ears red and I'm American. I don't think it's about their opinions, it's just a language you have to be more polite in. Doesn't feel any different from the South or UK to me.
    - henearkr 5y ago
      I'd say it's more cultural than linguistic. Pure politeness is as well present in French, but in Japan it's an aversion to openly and directly confront others. You don't have it in Osaka as much as in Tokyo or Kyoto (that's why I'd think it's not the language), and in Tokyo people are overly stressed by their work, commuting, and overpopulation in general, so they need to compensate it by an impressive spectrum of skills for passive agessivity (which is not really better). Disclaimer of competing interests: I'm a French guy in Japan.
      - Iv 5y ago
        Yes, it is not about politeness, it is about conflict. In France, being frank is a quality, in Japan it is a mark of immaturity. Grown-ups are supposed to communicate their opinions implicitly. I stopped finding it "interesting and different" when I realized that it led to a LOT of miscommunications even among Japaneses and could end up ruin lives because of the unwillingness to point out even minor things. Happy to hear this is mostly a Tokyo thing (though it does extend to my coutryside in the Chiba peninsula)
skyde 5y ago
what do you mean by 'forcefully' but very indirectly.
- Agingcoder 5y ago
  Sorry I wasn't clear. They think they are making their point quite strongly with very explicit language, but are wrapping it in all kinds of polite conditionals and ifs and hidden meanings, making it, well, less explicit : they are being indirect. Your cat is on your kitchen table, looking at the chicken. Me: Indirect : is the cat supposed to be on the table ? Direct : your cat is about to eat the chicken! get away cat! Obviously, to one culture, the 'is the cat...' version is quite explicit and forceful. To the other, not at all. https://multiculturalyou.com/2020/06/22/direct-and-indirect-communication-styles/ https://multiculturalyou.com/2020/06/22/direct-and-indirect-... (I didn't read the whole thing, but the first two sections or so are pretty much what I meant)
bradknowles 5y ago
The related story my wife tells regarding when the Belgian company she was working for had just acquired their Dutch counterpart. The new owners sent high level executives to talk to all the new employees and reassure them of what was going to happen. The primary speaker was chosen because he was a native Flemish speaker and spoke multiple dialects as well as multiple other languages. When they arrived and got into the meeting hall, the speaker leaned heavily on the word for “worker”. He promised that everything they would do would be in tight coordination with the Workers Council, etc…. I think he probably used it in just about every other sentence he spoke. At the very end of his long presentation, he asked if anyone present had any questions. There was just one — an older man in the back held up his hand and said: “You do realize that the Flemish word for ‘worker’ is also the Dutch word for ‘slave’, right?” Oy. Language is hard. It’s easy to misinterpret, even if you think you’re an expert, and even if you’re communicating in person. But e-mail eliminates all the unspoken communication like body language and actual tone of voice, which is about 90% of all normal human communication. We need to keep these things in mind, every time we communicate with someone, even if it is in person, and we think we are an expert.

jakub_g 5y ago

Meeting in person and regularly is extremely underrated. This can happen also within a single culture. When two companies do some business together but instead of meeting often and talking directly (or zoom), spend weeks to carefully craft emails and never talk face to face.

ezoe 5y ago
It is exploited. There are so many evil politicians who order to murder people or made the laws which restrict human rights. But if you meet them in person, you will definitely feel they are nice person.
- behythoyg 5y ago
  This is a really interesting point. Malcolm Gladwell: "The people who got Hitler right were those who never met him, and the people who got him wrong were those who did spend time with him." Here's a clip from an interview with Gladwell on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvOilwY0yOQ&t=178s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvOilwY0yOQ&t=178s

cruano 5y ago

I think tribalism goes beyond language, I joined a company with two offices in different countries and while there was some rock-throwing and mistrust of each other, it all went away when we got acquired. Somehow belonging to the "old" company was a stronger bond that speaking the same language, so all this negative feelings got shifted towards the parent company Damn monkey brains

ksec 5y ago

>but real misunderstandings caused by different understandings of what seems to be a set of perfectly obvious sentences to both sides. Yes. Especially true when it happens between an American and a Brit. Also true between Germans and Brits, when the Germans are so good with their English, the precision with their wordings which tends to trigger some Brits.

detaro 5y ago
Do you have an example/anecdote for the last part? Not sure I know what you mean.
- Tarsul 5y ago
  (not op) well, we Germans are very direct. So we would write something like "Can you give me the coordinates? Thanks in advance." whereas a Brit would like it if it was written as "I would very much like to get the coordinates from you. Can you direct them to me? Thank you very much. Much appreciated." (well, my impersonation of a Brit is not the best since I am too German in this respect)
  - tragomaskhalos 5y ago
    I'm not convinced by that example: I am British and would use exactly the same phrasing as your first example; the "thanks in advance" takes the edge off it perfectly well. The second example is like a bad impression of a subservient butler or something !
    - Tarsul 5y ago
      yeah, actually it took me a while to get to that point, with the "thanks in advance" :) I think generally my argument holds true (at least a little bit, but it probably also has a lot to do with not being familiar enough with the foreign language) but as with the example in the OP what's even truer is that emails can VERY easily be misunderstood as being unfriendly no matter the language. Which is why it's very important to use more social ways of communicating, e.g. telephone once in a while (and especially with delicate matters).

markdown 5y ago

A: "Should I launch the nukes?" B: "Fuck no" A: *Initiates launch*

Iv 5y ago
Laugh, but talking with Japanese, something that often happens is: A: "Shouldn't I launch the nukes?" B: "No." Can be understood as "yes, do it" because they are used to an opposite logic when answering negation. "Yes" means "I agree with the negation" and no the opposite. And they seem to have a hard time accepting that the logic is different in English.
- jcrites 5y ago
  That's an ambiguous question in native English too and could only be fully, precisely understood from context. While I would interpret the sentence from only the context you provided in the way that you describe, I would characterize the question as unclear. A military chain of command would definitely phrase the question more like "Mr. President, can you confirm you are giving us the order to launch the nukes? Please present your confirmation code." But I understand what you mean about negations having opposite meanings in (spoken) English (where context is clearer). I consider that kind of negation and answer to be sloppy written grammar and something to avoid in written English.
  - jgwil2 5y ago
    French and German, at least, have handy words (si and doch respectively) that just serve to contradict a negative question.
    - developer93 5y ago
      I think doch and ihr (plural you) really need to be in English. I sometimes use yous for ihr, but unfortunately no equivalent for doch yet.
- hardwaregeek 5y ago
  There’s the classic “you can’t add too much water to the reactor” where “can’t” can mean you are physically incapable of adding too much water, and therefore should add a lot, or “can’t” can mean you must not add to much water.

bsder 5y ago

> I ended up solving the problem by organizing a very nice lunch, where everyone realized the 'others' were actually nice and friendly human beings, and that email was not always the best way to communicate. Email is terribly crappy. You completely lose language nuance. I always try to give people the biggest benefit of the doubt even when I'm certain that the person on the other side of the email is a raging asshole. I think its just "Seeing a face activates friendliness brain circuits." I really do have no other explanation how you can completely defuse situations just by having people sit down and talk at lunch, a bar, etc. However, my problem is that I have an extremely good command of the English language. This is very useful when I talk as I can make full use of humor, simile, metaphor, florid prose, idioms, etc. to keep things interesting for people. And I completely lose English as a second language people because they can't keep up with my language gymnastics at speed. If I have non-native listeners and I have to communicate, I have to deliver the talk once to myself, watch it, suppress all of my language weirdness, and deliver it again. It's really tough. Of course, people who speak English as a second language love listening to me one-on-one as they learn all manner of crazy ways to say things.

novok 5y ago
Its more than a face, it's also tone of voice, posture, and so on. With it gone, people tend to assume the worst, because humans are biased to interpreting things in the negative when something is ambiguous.
- developer93 5y ago
  Being within punching range also has a calming effect on most people.

Iv 5y ago

As a French living in Japan one of the things I quickly learned is that if I complain about something while showing even a hint of anger or annoyingness, my interlocutor will take it personally, even if he/she is not involved about the thing as well.

henearkr 5y ago
Was you complaint about something related to Japan or the life there or the administration? Japanese people very easily feel compelled to defend their group, because if not they are often treated as "anti-japanese" by the most right-wing (which are the most vocal) of their relations/neighbors. This in turn leads to a lot of self-censorship.
- astrange 5y ago
  Whenever I've met a French speaker in Japan (which happens surprisingly often) I have always been amazed at their ability to be just as direct in Japanese as they are in French. It turns my ears red and I'm American. I don't think it's about their opinions, it's just a language you have to be more polite in. Doesn't feel any different from the South or UK to me.
  - henearkr 5y ago
    I'd say it's more cultural than linguistic. Pure politeness is as well present in French, but in Japan it's an aversion to openly and directly confront others. You don't have it in Osaka as much as in Tokyo or Kyoto (that's why I'd think it's not the language), and in Tokyo people are overly stressed by their work, commuting, and overpopulation in general, so they need to compensate it by an impressive spectrum of skills for passive agessivity (which is not really better). Disclaimer of competing interests: I'm a French guy in Japan.
    - Iv 5y ago
      Yes, it is not about politeness, it is about conflict. In France, being frank is a quality, in Japan it is a mark of immaturity. Grown-ups are supposed to communicate their opinions implicitly. I stopped finding it "interesting and different" when I realized that it led to a LOT of miscommunications even among Japaneses and could end up ruin lives because of the unwillingness to point out even minor things. Happy to hear this is mostly a Tokyo thing (though it does extend to my coutryside in the Chiba peninsula)

skyde 5y ago

what do you mean by 'forcefully' but very indirectly.

Agingcoder 5y ago
Sorry I wasn't clear. They think they are making their point quite strongly with very explicit language, but are wrapping it in all kinds of polite conditionals and ifs and hidden meanings, making it, well, less explicit : they are being indirect. Your cat is on your kitchen table, looking at the chicken. Me: Indirect : is the cat supposed to be on the table ? Direct : your cat is about to eat the chicken! get away cat! Obviously, to one culture, the 'is the cat...' version is quite explicit and forceful. To the other, not at all. https://multiculturalyou.com/2020/06/22/direct-and-indirect-communication-styles/ https://multiculturalyou.com/2020/06/22/direct-and-indirect-... (I didn't read the whole thing, but the first two sections or so are pretty much what I meant)

bradknowles 5y ago

The related story my wife tells regarding when the Belgian company she was working for had just acquired their Dutch counterpart. The new owners sent high level executives to talk to all the new employees and reassure them of what was going to happen. The primary speaker was chosen because he was a native Flemish speaker and spoke multiple dialects as well as multiple other languages. When they arrived and got into the meeting hall, the speaker leaned heavily on the word for “worker”. He promised that everything they would do would be in tight coordination with the Workers Council, etc…. I think he probably used it in just about every other sentence he spoke. At the very end of his long presentation, he asked if anyone present had any questions. There was just one — an older man in the back held up his hand and said: “You do realize that the Flemish word for ‘worker’ is also the Dutch word for ‘slave’, right?” Oy. Language is hard. It’s easy to misinterpret, even if you think you’re an expert, and even if you’re communicating in person. But e-mail eliminates all the unspoken communication like body language and actual tone of voice, which is about 90% of all normal human communication. We need to keep these things in mind, every time we communicate with someone, even if it is in person, and we think we are an expert.