Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 9/3/2013 9:26 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
S Moonesamy <sm+ietf(_at_)elandsys(_dot_)com> wrote:
The new text is as follows: Participants, particularly those with
English as a first language, attempt to accommodate the needs of
other participants by communicating clearly. Participants try to
accommodate each other.
Except for the part between the commas it's great. As written, it
presumes that a mis-communication between a native speaker of English
and someone who isn't is the fault of the native speaker. I don't
think this is appropriate.
Hi, Scott,
Keeping in mind that we wouldn't be looking at this text in the first
place, if it was easy to communicate ... ;-)
What I thought the parenthetical presumed, was that a native English
speaker(*) might have more tools to use in helping repair
mis-communication - for example, a native English speaker might have a
larger vocabulary, if paraphrasing would help understanding, and might
be more likely to use obscure English idioms(**) that don't translate
easily into other languages and cultures. So, not that
mis-communication
is the native English speaker's fault, but that the native English
speaker might be better positioned to make the first move to improve
communication.
Spencer
(*) Obviously there are people, including people at the IETF, who
learned English as a second (or third, or ...) language and now have
better English communication skills than I do, so "native English
speaker/English as a first language" might benefit from rephrasing, if
the thought survives.
(**) My Chinese co-workers can conjure up 5000 years of rich idioms,
and
I enjoy hearing them, but they don't seem to translate them into
English
and insert them into conversations nearly as often as I insert idioms
into conversations ...
I think that is a given without having pre-emptive blame assignment in the text.
Scott K