|
A learner's error of translation:
Is this an error of morphology; or is it, as I think, a neologism, in that the learner substitutes a term he already knows for the correct word in the vocabulary. Am I correct or totally wrong? |
|||||||||
|
This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, see the FAQ.
|
The mistake here is neither morphological nor neologistic; it is lexical. Morphology denotes the changes of form of which a word is grammar required to undergo in order to make it agree with a specific context. Me for I when the word is used as indirect object is a morphological change; if the translator had written Hand I the pincers the error would be morphological. Neologism is, literally, the process of building or inventing new words, but it is more often used to designate a word so invented. Sometimes the term is used in a neutral sense to describe the historic origin of a word: “Oxygen is a neologism created in 1777 by the French chemist Lavoisier from Greek oxys and French gène, itself derived from a Greek word." More often the term is used in a deprecating sense: “This term [electrocution], descriptive of the method of Inflicting the death penalty on convicted criminals in some of the states, is a vulgar neologism of hybrid origin, which should be discountenanced.” The translator has not invented a new word — both pincers and pliers have been around for a long time. What the translator has done, you tell us, is simply chosen the wrong word from the English vocabulary or lexicon. |
||||
|
|
|
It's nothing so complex as that. Pincers are a different tool than pliers. Either you are mistaken in your assessment of what the tool is, or the speaker is unaware of the difference. |
|||||||
|
