<problems@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1210416573.225581@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> As an european [unfortunate to be] living in Africa, I want to
complement
> radio netherlands on their openness which apparently comes from their
> national character.
>
> The re****ter [from Uganda/Kenya] took the trouble to explain that
> when 'the natives say "I am hungry" ', they are not suggesting that
> eating will solve their perceived complaint. Rather they are
> expressing a general dissatisfaction at their economic situation.
>
> Here in southern africa, they would all say "I'm suffering", no matter
> what tribe/language they originate from.
>
> We know that different 'cultures' recognise certain colours which
> other cutures don't. Similarly, I speculate that the africans don't
have
> distinct concepts for 'suffering', 'hungry', 'dissatisfied'.
>
> This would not be such a problem, if eg. the BBC re****ters, like the
> radio-netherland ones, would make the essential translation.
> Apparently the BBC thinks this would be politically incorrect.
>
> Related to PeeCee re****ting, when I read from the BBC's web-page:
> > Gerarda and her ten children live in searing poverty
> I don't know whether the re****ter:
> a) is tongue-in-cheek;
> b) is so damned stupid that S/HE too doesn't know that "searing
> poverty" follows inevitably from "her ten children";
> it's like re****ting that 'the cat was dead AND it wasn't breathing';
> c) is obeying some PeeCee code which I'm unaware of.
>
>
Yes. Good point. The code is underwritten by assuming victim status
of
everyone they interview. The BBC now represents 'victims' as a policy so
their language use will always have that nuance. To the BBC no-one is
responsible for themselves and the misery they get into.
|
