Re: Colloquial language [Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao4677bis-15.txt> (The Tao of IETF: A Novice's Guide to the Internet Engineering Task Force) to Informational RFC]

[Klaas Wierenga <[e-mail]>]

On 5/31/12 10:58 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> I'm with Brian and Yoav on this. I don't see a need
> to change here. And I do think we might lose something
> if we become too PC. If a bunch of non-native speakers
> did say "yes, I found that made the document less
> useful" then I'd be more convinced that all these
> changes were worth it.

As a non-native speaker I agree. I think colloquial is fine. The one 
thing causes me some trouble is all the references that Americans make 
to sports that nobody in the civilized world cares about ;-) ("left 
field", "Hail Mary passes" etc.) But I think the Tao pretty much avoids 
those (perhaps "Home base" is the exception).

Klaas


>
> On 05/31/2012 08:47 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>
>> On 5/31/2012 9:24 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> I actually have no evidence either way; that's why I suggested asking
>>> some of them;-)
>>
>> 1.  Reliance on self-reporting for such things is methodologically
>> problematic.  It presumes a degree of self-awareness that is often
>> missing.  For example a native speaker of a language that uses noun
>> doubling -- saying the noun twice -- to indicate plurals was quite
>> insistent with me that that wasn't the rule.
>>
>> 2.  To claim a lack of evidence presumes some previous effort to acquire
>> it.  However a quick search discloses:
>>
>>
>> http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=054711CCAB4AFB348F7E70C9079E7305.journals?fromPage=online&aid=2546012
>
> Paywalled. Abstract says "comprehen-sibility of the non-native's
> interlanguage" so is a worse sinner IMO:-)
>
>> http://dc.library.okstate.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/theses/id/1031/rec/9
>
> Drives NoScript bonkers and needs some kind of FF plug in.
>
>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CF0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fscholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1255%26context%3Detd&ei=iyDHT4eBB874sgaa-rGQDw&usg=AFQjCNFnYm2MzlDnknB6AzfB0Oi4tUVyVg
>
> 289 pages, so only read abstract.
>
> That's about adolescents. My experience at IETF meetings is
> that more native English speakers seem to behave like
> adolescents, but maybe that's just me:-)
>
> It does make the point that there's a (presumably positive)
> correlation between understanding of idiom and academic
> achievement,
>
> I guess the argument could also be made that the Tao should
> be about as difficult to read as a typical IETF mailing list.
>
> S.
>
>>
>> among others.
>>
>> The mere existence of these ought to make clear that there is a
>> significant issue in the use of colloquialisms with non-native listeners.
>>
>> d/