Loomio
Tue 20 Aug 2013 8:51PM

'Need' and 'should'.

MM Mads Mastrup Public Seen by 81

Today I uploaded the following post to the webtranslateit.com forum (https://webtranslateit.com/en/projects/3020-Diaspora/discussions/28310). However Jonne Haß invited me to this forum, since it probably fits better in here:


Hi everybody!

I just learned about Diaspora today and joined the community as a Danish translator. I’m looking forward to great relations with all you other translators!

However I have encountered two words, during my translating the English into Danish, which I would like to address. The reason for this is that I feel the two words, ‘need’ and ‘should’, ought to be changed in the original English text, and thus in many many translations across the board.

Therefore I’d like us to discuss whether this should (pun intended =]) be done at all.

The thing is that Diaspora is a free software project, and thus strive for personal privacy and personal freedom. In this case I find the words ‘need’ and ‘should’ to be faulty expressions.

1.)

‘Should’ implies something a person has to do. In some cases the use of the word might be relevant, but I disagree with its usage in most of the Diaspora context. It is not a neutral word but rather a word that is based on subjective experience and desire. Thus it becomes a kind of imperative mood of ‘The Other’ (as Lacan would probably put it). I find this to be wrong.

Here is a list of all the lines that include ‘should’:

a.) “You should add some more contacts!”
b.) “You’ve asked to share with %{name}. They should see it next time they log in to Diaspora.”
c.) “Know their email address? You should invite them”
d.) “We want you to help us make Diaspora better, so you should help us out instead of leaving. If you do want to leave, we want you to know what happens next.”

Instead these lines could be replaced by:

a.) “You can add some more contacts!”
b.) [In this context I find the word to be used correctly and therefore is not in need of change.]
c.) “Know their email address? You could invite them”
d.) “We want you to help us make Diaspora better, so you could help us out instead of leaving. If you do want to leave, we want you to know what happens next.”

2.)

‘Need’ carries a sense of personal requirement to it. When used by a person speaking to/about you, it can often be perceived as an external judgment of what your needs are, and what you are required to do to improve upon these. How can a computer system (even a nice one like Diaspora) know what my needs are? I believe that it can not.

Here is a list with all the lines that include ‘need’:

a.) “Need Help?”
b.) “Looks like you need to add some contacts!”
c.) “Hey! You need to search for something.”
d.) “(we need your current password to confirm your changes)”
e.) “Email changed. Needs activation.”
f.) “Hey, you need to add the contact first!”
g.) “You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.”

Instead these lines could be replaced by:

a.) [No need (again, pun intended =]) for change.]
b.) “Looks like you could add some contacts!”
c.) “Hey! You could search for something.”
d.) [No need for change.]
e.) [No need for change.]
f.) “Hey, you have to add the contact first!”
g.) [No need for change.]

So there it is. Now before this need-and-should-debate goes beyond this forum, and might end up becoming official changes, what do you think of it all? Please let me and the others know.

Yours,
Mads


So what do you guys think about this?

Is there a need for change or should we keep it as it is?

PS: I hope you will not consider me finicky :-)

G

goob Tue 20 Aug 2013 9:19PM

Hi Mads, and welcome to the Diaspora community - and to Loomio - and thanks for helping out.

I agree that some of the expressions you cite are not particularly elegant. However, a lot of the text existing in Diaspora was written by the founders, and is in idiomatic youthful American English. Things such as 'Hey, you need to x' can be fine in that idiom, although the use of 'need' may seem wrong when taken out of that idiomatic context.

That's not to say that these phrases cannot be improved, and I think it's good to get away from idiomatic usage because it can lead to speakers of the same language but not the same idiom feeling a bit excluded.

It would be useful to know a bit more context, to help understand why some of the phrases are worded as they are.

For example, under SHOULD:

a. Here an onus of desirability is implied, because it would help the user to add more contacts. This message, I know, is displayed when a new user looks at their stream and it is empty, because they have no contacts and therefore there is nothing to display. So it's saying 'In order to get interesting content in your stream, you should add more contacts.' So 'should' conveys the right sort of force, although there might be a better way of phrasing it. 'You can add some more contacts' doesn't hit quite the right note, because it's telling them what is possible, not what is best for them to do.
b. Agree, it is fine.
c. Here I agree it is the wrong sense. Here there is no onus on a user to invite people just because they happen to know their email address, so 'should' is inappropriate. I'd suggest' Know their email address? Then why not invite them?'
d. Here I don't know the context. It sounds wrong, as no one has a duty to help Diaspora, but I'd love to know in which context someone would see this message. - Ah, I've found it - on the splash screen displayed when someone clicks the 'Close Account' button. You're right, this really chimes wrong. I think this needs completely rephrasing. Something like 'We'd love your help to improve diaspora*, so please stick around and tell us what made you want to leave. With your help, we can make diaspora* a place that everyone enjoys being. However, if you do decide to close your account, this is what will happen:'

Under NEED:

a. Agree. Fine.
b. Here, I think 'need' is right, if I've got the context right. I believe it's an error message displayed when someone tries to do something that would require some contacts to exist in a particular scenario, and a null/blank result is returned. In effect it's saying 'You can only do that if you have some contacts', or '[In order to do that] You need to add some contacts.' 'You can add some contacts' has quite a different meaning, which could make sense in another context, but not this one. Of course, if I've got the context wrong, that's a different matter.
c. Ditto b.
d. Fine.
e. This is fine but a bit terse. I'd change it to 'Your email address has been changed, but needs confirmation before it is activated. Please check your inbox and click the link in the email you will have received from us.'
f. The original and your version are equivalent in meaning and force. I'd say 'need to' in there is very slightly more American idiom, and 'have to' very slightly more British idiom, but there isn't much in it. Either is fine and pretty much globally understood.
g. Fine.

So that's my view, as a native speaker and ex-editor. Of course English is one of those languages in which there are really no hard-and-fast rules, only guidelines; and one of those is simply what 'feels right', or what is most elegant. This is subjective, and differs from person to person. You clearly have an excellent grasp of the nuances of English, although I disagree with some of your interpretations.

I hope that's a useful contribution. Now, I have some complaints about the Danish translations... only joking, I don't get much further than 'rød grød med fløde'...

MM

Mads Mastrup Tue 20 Aug 2013 10:28PM

@goob

Thanks for the warm welcome and the swift, yet in-depth, reply!

Hahaha, yeah 'rød grød med fløde' can be a pretty tough nut to crack :-D The same goes for your “How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?”

”I agree that some of the expressions you cite are not [etc...]”

A youthful ”non-clinical” language is definitely also something I prefer and I'm quire sure it wont scare off too many potential users. So hopefully the language of diaspora* will stay young, energetic and inviting :-)

“For example, under SHOULD: [etc...]”

I'm quite happy that you clarified a few things for me with regards to the word 'should.' The thing is that the Danish equivalent ('bør') carries a kind of negative feeling with it. Most of the time it sounds really harsh and is usually only used when parents tell their kids what to do or when the media is chasing/harassing some poor (but deserving) politician :-) I now understand the English word on a deeper level and agree with the things you and pointed out.

“Under NEED: [etc...]”

Again I agree with all of what you write.

I think that the places where you have rewritten whole sentences needs to be changed to your version instead of the current one, or to a third for that matter. But aside from that I'm quite happy with the feedback on the places where it seems I've gotten it a bit wrong, and I agree that some of the things I have pointed out aren't in any need of change.

So to sum it up for new readers:

SHOULD:

a.) Keep as it is.
b.) Keep as it is.
c.) Possibly needs change.
Suggestions so far: 'Know their email address? Then why not invite them?'
d.) Possibly needs change.
Suggestions so far: 'We'd love your help to improve diaspora*, so please stick around and tell us what made you want to leave. With your help, we can make diaspora* a place that everyone enjoys being. However, if you do decide to close your account, this is what will happen:'

NEED:

a.) Keep as it is.
b.) Keep as it is.
c.) Keep as it is.
d.) Keep as it is.
e.) Possibly needs change.
Suggestions so far: 'Your email address has been changed, but needs confirmation before it is activated. Please check your inbox and click the link in the email you will have received from us.'
f.) Keep as it is.
g.) Keep as it is.