I think the geosynchronous basic idea of translation is that: Human languages consists of words that describe an action(verb) or a thing(noun) forced to be arra

I think the geosynchronous basic idea of translation is that: Human languages consists of words that describe an action(verb) or a thing(noun) forced to be arranged according to a known ruleset(grammar). Words are all orthogonal to each others and are all clearly defined, except there are redundant definitions(synonyms) that serves no purposes. Noam Chomsky is ever correct and as he argues the language must be hardcoded in brain so every languages must be the same logic and apparent differences must be merely superficial that's officially hard science. Right? ... And I find it hilarious how thoroughly wrong above is, as the real version(that I believe) is; there are always some conceptual overlaps between two arbitrary cultures(as we all live on Earth so far), so a lot of concepts in one also sometimes work in the other if reasonable mappings can be made up and fabricated. Where there isn't an overlap or the mapping cannot be mutually agreed(i.e. things that don't translate) it just mottainai-ingly falls apart. This version lines up with the below too: > (...) so translating things from Japanese to English is essentially a game of trying to figure out what the original text is trying to say. This cannot be required if words, sentences, or possibly even logic had real correspondences between English and Japanese even if there were some words that had no direct counterparts. Word to word transpositions, sentence capture and replace, some additional surrounding texts, together should make up perfect translations without use of human creativity yet that doesn't happen, it always goes down to speculating on broader intent and translators ghostwriting on behalf of the original author - at least when it comes to between English and Japanese. If only everybody could just take that.