elpais.com
Literal English Translations in Spanish Public Discourse
An analysis of Spanish language corpora reveals a growing tendency to use literal translations from English, such as "en el medio plazo," instead of established Spanish equivalents like "a medio plazo," particularly in political and journalistic writing.
- What is the main linguistic phenomenon analyzed in the article and what are its immediate consequences for Spanish?
- The article examines the prevalence of literal English-to-Spanish translations in public discourse, specifically focusing on phrases like "en el medio plazo" instead of the standard "a medio plazo." This trend is observed in political speeches, journalistic writing, and legal documents, highlighting a potential influence of English.
- What evidence supports the author's claim about the origins and spread of these literal translations, and what are the key sources of this phenomenon?
- The study uses data from the CREA and Corpes corpora to illustrate the significant disparity between the usage of "a medio plazo" and its literal translation. While "a medio plazo" has far more occurrences, the use of "en el medio plazo" is disproportionately concentrated in newspapers and political texts, suggesting a possible imitation of English phrasing.
- What are the potential long-term effects of this trend on the evolution and clarity of the Spanish language, considering factors such as prestige and the influence of English?
- The preference for literal translations, as exemplified by the example phrases, may reflect a perceived prestige associated with English or a lack of awareness of established Spanish equivalents. This trend could contribute to the erosion of linguistic precision and the adoption of less natural-sounding expressions in Spanish.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the use of 'en el medio plazo' as a negative phenomenon, highlighting its infrequent occurrence in literary works and emphasizing its prevalence in journalistic and political discourse. This framing implicitly suggests that political and journalistic language is somehow inferior to literary language.
Language Bias
The article uses evaluative language such as "anglicized", "incorrect", and "inferior" to describe the use of 'en el medio plazo'. This loaded language subtly influences the reader's perception of this phrasing. More neutral alternatives could include 'borrowed from English', 'alternative phrasing', or 'recent usage'.
Bias by Omission
The analysis focuses on the prevalence of anglicized phrases in Spanish, particularly within political and journalistic contexts. While the article provides data from language corpora, it omits discussion of potential sociolinguistic factors influencing this phenomenon. For example, it doesn't explore the role of globalization, prestige language, or the impact of English language media on Spanish speakers. This omission limits a comprehensive understanding of the underlying causes of this linguistic shift.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between 'correct' Spanish usage ('a medio plazo') and incorrect, anglicized usage ('en el medio plazo'). It doesn't fully explore the nuances of language evolution and borrowing, or consider the possibility that 'en el medio plazo' might eventually become accepted usage.