Do You Monitor the Monitor?
In case you’re interested, an article originally posted here has been picked up and published in the Christian Science Monitor. The piece, which I titled The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and How Language Affects our Understanding of Soccer, is in today’s Monitor on the commentary page under the headline Win or Lose, It’s How You Say the Game. It has been edited from the original essay, but contains the same basic ideas.
September 24th, 2007 09:15
RE: “Win or Lose, It’s How You Say The Game”
By David Keyes, 9/24/2007
David Keyes, in “Win or Lose, It’s How You Say The Game” (9/24/2007) has noticed an interesting cultural artifact; that Latino soccer players have named an especially dangerous type of tackle. Why did this happen in Latin America but not in other cultures?
The motivation, and perceived necessity, is usually obvious when listening to the political spin doctors in Washington, D.C., who have turned Sapir-Whorf into a sophisticated art. But why was la plancha given a name? Two possible explanations come from opposite directions: Do Latino players tend to be more vicious, requiring that dangerous play be named and sanctioned in order to maintain a civilized sport? -or- In contrast with the English “Grin and Bear It”, are Latino soccer moms more horrified and incensed when a player is willing to cripple another just to gain a sporting advantage?
Bruce Hickman
Hartfield, Virginia
September 24th, 2007 09:24
Congratulations! Nice to see your work getting picked up by the press.
September 24th, 2007 09:48
That was a great article. Congrats!
September 24th, 2007 09:58
Great article. The anthropology of football is a great subject to study.
September 24th, 2007 17:58
Sorry, but the Japanese stuff is just wrong. The JI in jibun means self or auto, not part. It’s used in other words like automatic JIDOUTEKI. I’ve the source your cite for this meaning, and though it’s full of odd notions, nowhere does it equate JI with part.
BUN has a variety of uses and meanings, but chiefly it means separate/divide, not group. You really should double check stuff like this. Now that it’s been in the CS Monitor, this factoid is probably going to take on a life of its own like the Chinese crisis = danger + opportunity story. Sigh…
September 24th, 2007 18:16
Brett - I’m sorry you disagree with my interpretation of jibun. I came across this definition in my time in Japan as well as in my study of Japanese language and culture. I would cite specifically Takeo Doi’s work The Anatomy of Dependence for my use of the word jibun.
Even if our interpretations of jibun vary slightly, I don’t think the differences take away from my main point, which was that language affects the way people perceive things. I hope that is the take-away message of my piece, rather than any specific linguistic details.
Thanks for taking the time to read my piece in the Monitor and to comment on my blog.
September 25th, 2007 04:52
On the contrary, I think it does take away from your main point. Such a dismissal suggests that the Sapir-Worf Hypothesis is true a priori and that these examples are mere illustrations and decorations that help your readers understand and enjoy this “fact”. Yet is precisely this kind of mistranslation / exoticisation of foreign vocabulary that has been used to prop up the SWH in the first place.
Again, Doi doesn’t explain JI as part, nor BUN as group. The translation that you link to does discuss ‘jibun’ in contrast to the group, but this is entirely unremarkable and would have been much more clearly so had the translator not tried to exoticise the term by leaving it untranslated. Ideas like “if the individual is completely submersed in a group, he has no self” can be found in philosophical discussions the world over.
The flaws aren’t limited to the Japanese. You claim not have had the concept of trequartista because English didn’t have a word for it. Yet you supply a word: playmaker. My knowledge of soccer is not deep, but I find that there are other existing words for this concept: deep-lying forward, second striker.
Even if English had no word for it, it’s very clear that people can conceive of things for which they have no word. This is the source of neologisms. What you were missing was the concept, not the word. Nor is it the word that would lead people to expect somebody to play a libero position (which I assume simply means something like ‘free’, ‘undesignated’, or ‘roamer’.) It is the knowledge that a certain style of play is associated with success.
So, no, I don’t think this seemingly minor linguistic quibble leaves your main point intact. I think it shows that your main point is built on untenable premises.
September 25th, 2007 07:53
Brett - You clearly feel very strongly about this. All I can say is that we’re going to have to agree to disagree.
September 25th, 2007 10:21
Congrats on the great article.
September 25th, 2007 14:14
Despite your disagreement I find the topic fascinating partly because I have just moved to Germany (from England) and am experiencing a whole new football culture when attending games.
Should I find any language or cultural differences worth mentioning I will let you know.
September 29th, 2007 02:18
Congrats on having the original picked up by the CSM. I was checking out some soccer videos online and saw a compilation of the worst fouls in Argentina and it seems there is a flip side to having the term la plancha in wide use. If you WANT to do something thuggish and violent the first thing that comes to mind is la plancha. I never saw so many vicious cleats up tackles in my life. Check out the few where a player is kicking the ball and then does a long spikes up follow through that impales the opposition in the chest or head. I’m not sure dirty players in Europe think to do something so violent, again because it’s not in their vocabulary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIanAD9M-3c