Untranslatable?

That is not possible!

There is no such thing as an untranslatable word, anything that can be thought can be expressed. Anything that can be properly expressed can be translated into another language. Into any other sufficiently complex and rich language, as the principle of effability states. Only, I am afraid the situation is not that simple.

The hypothesis of Sapir-Whorf expresses the opposite point of view, stating that each language is different. This, so is claimed, has consequences for the way their (mono-linguistic) users think. This concept is also called principle of linguistic relativity. The semantics and grammar each language has determine in more or less subtle ways what can be imagined, thought and expressed in that language. The way I interpret this hypothesis, assuming it is right, untranslatable words would mark the limits of what can be thought in a given language. So, supposing we find untranslatable words, how would we define them? How could we know they are untranslatable? What could the reason for their untranslatability be? I guess the reasons will vary from case to case, as we shall probably see, but for the purposes of this blog I will argue that untranslatable words are those that sound and feel natural in one language, but artificial and unnatural in another. (Spoiler: The hypothesis of Sapir-Whorf is wrong, especially in its strong form. Language does not limit what you can think about and does not set a limit to what you can not think about. What language can do, however, is to make it easier to speak about things you have words for. It also makes it easier to express sexist or racist ideas: just use one word instead of another and everybody will know what kind of -ist you are.) More.

See: A Word In Your Ear

Subscribe to the translation news daily digest here. See more translation news.