Languages don't work how most people think AKA how I learned how to say farm in Chinese. [Chinese]

Most people seem to think in a way that is confined to the natural mode of thought that corresponds to their own language. That's understanding. People tend to work within the paradigm, or framework, of their own experience. They expect languages to work like their own does. Most people, after all, don't learn a foreign language. The following is a pertinent example of the reality of language learning.

Every single time that I have tried to say farm in Chinese, I felt like it was off. I was always saying 田地 tian2di4. Now, the thing is, farmer is 農民 nong2min2 or 農人 nong2ren2, which is related to agriculture 農業 nong2 ye4. Additionally, 農地, has the same final character 地 di4 - land - as in the way that I was saying farm, means farmland. The character that farmer, farmland and agriculture have in common is the first one 農 nong2, which means agriculture or farming. Characters aren't typically used by themselves in modern Chinese by the way. So, that's a bunch of words related together.

Finally though, I did the smart thing - I asked. 田地 tian2di4 does mean farm, but in the western sense, because in the west, our farms can have animals. In China, they separate the two. The Chinese farm is called 農場 nong2chang3, the same first character as agriculture/farming/farmer/farmland and the place that you put animals is called a 牧場 mu4chang3 - pasture/pastureland.

So, even though it turns out I was right, I was only right by accident.

The point of all this is that different languages can have different ways to approach things. The more specific a language is in meaning, the more analytical is said to be in the field of linguistics. That means that while there is one way to say farm in English, you could say that there are at least 3 ways to do so in Chinese because they distinguish in different ways. This point about the analytic quality of languages is an interesting one, but it isn't actually what I am trying to get at here. Rather, the point is that things do not necessarily translate one to one. You can't just say how do you say X in Y language. There may be different ways to express that one word in the other language. This is could be representative of a different way of looking at things, the analytic quality of a language or both.

To clear up the confusion that I have now created, I give you another example: You can galvanize a crowd and you can galvanize metal. In Chinese, these are two different verbs - 刺激 ci4ji1 and 鍍鋅 du4xin1. They mean, respectively and literally, to stimulate to excitement and to plate (w/) zinc. Another example, this time from Spanish, would be 'galvanizar' for to galvanize a crowd and the metal and 'mover' for to galvanize someone to action.

As you can see, languages can be complicated. So, when learning languages, I recommend that you really think hard about what I have said here. Learn from this so that you can learn better when you are learning whatever language it is that you are currently working on. Try not to get disheartened, I guarantee you that this is actually something that makes languages amazing and it will open up your eyes to new perspectives...if you pay enough attention.

Until next time, stay vigilant and diligent.

Evren