When I first arrived in Spain to live,
I soon encountered an unexpected phenomenon in
public offices and many shops: a disinterest
in customers or clients and a stubborn refusal to admit error, both of
which are clearly dysfunctional to the conduct of daily business. One
of my first sketches for a blog had the headline you see above. But
then I thought, let's cool it. We all have our quirks. And many
foreigners coming to Spain are quite overbearing. I laid that blog on
ice.
Still, these
impressions on my part assumed that those Spanish habits were only
directed at foreigners. Later I realized I was wrong. The
post-election circus of January-February surrounding the formation of
a new national government is revealing of just these tendencies. The
insistence on being right and holding their own line is not just a
way of facing foreigners; it is how Spaniards treat each other, at
least in public affairs.
Two words in Spanish
may illustrate. First, equivocarse, "being wrong". Spanish is a
language kind to people in the wrong. It assumes that a person who
acts contrary to rules or logic is not wrong, he or she only mistakes
one thing for another, or does something poorly, or misunderstands.
To be wrong in a more direct sense is not part of the picture. If a
Spaniard acts contrary to rules or logic, it is not because he fails
to grasp, to understand things, or because he intentionally breaks
the rules. Doing so would assume he is
either stupid or criminal. The prevalence of this
kind of attitude smooths relations at all social levels, at least for
those who understand what's going on. It may also serve to hide the
truth from others, who don't really get it.
Not surprisingly, therefore, there is
no direct translation. The Spanish word for
being wrong is «equivocarse», quite close
to the English word equivocate. You
know what that word means in English;
it signals ambiguity, to speak with double meaning. In French it
connotes uncertainty, dubiousness, misunderstanding. In
the Spanish language «equivocarse»
is the nearest one can come to saying someone is in error. In my
Spanish-Spanish Diccionario de Bolsillo the verb «errar» (Eng.: to
err) is defined as «equivocarse». But there
can be no doubt the etymology is about "two or more equal
calls", two voices, two meanings. Nothing about error.
What is the broader significance of
this? It shows a cultural reluctance to admit error,
to refuse to take the bull by the
horns (sic!), or to confront error with a correction. Errors are not
really errors, just mishaps. Corruption is not really corruption, it
is rather just something that oils the machinery of public affairs.
Nothing wrong with that, is there? In general the soft tone of
equivocarse
may be irritating, or sometimes even charming. Nevertheless, in
public administration and politics it can cause complications.
Next word:
«compromiso».
Unless you know the language you might think it means compromise, but
in a timely article in El Pais, John Carlin points out that the idea
of arriving at agreement by making mutual concessions is foreign to
Spanish political culture. The word compromise evidently has no
direct translation into Spanish.
(See "Una
palabra elemental que no existe en español", El Pais, January18, 2016.).
Now, clearly there
are other expressions in Spanish that convey that meaning, for
example "transigir"
(to make concessions). That goes as well for being wrong,
"equivocarse".
My point is, though, that compromise and equivocate are words
familiar in the political discourse of other European languages, but
their meaning in Spanish is shifted to something else. The underlying
tendency in their Spanish sense is to avoid losing face if you fail.
Barring that, stick to your guns and press others to concede.
This tendency of inflexibility is
reflected in the actions of the major party leaders in Spanish
politics after the elections of December 20. They stick to their "red
lines" (irrevocable positions) despite knowing well that nobody
else will accept them. With open eyes, and the deadline fast approaching for
deciding on new elections, they are heading for the precipice. New
elections. As if that will save them.
5 comments:
Taking a constructivist turn here Olav, are we? Interesting with language and culture…
This is not really a direct comment to your interesting observations from Spain, but I am just now reading a book that I may use for a masters course - EU environmental policy: Its journey to the centre stage by Nigel Haigh - which is quite interesting. In a reflection on how the term “sustainable development” has been translated into the different official EU languages, he finds, for example, that in four central documents (Rome Treaty Article 2 and 130, Maastricht Treaty Article B and the Agreement on European Area), sustainable development is translated into German language in four different ways. In Article 2, the word "beständig" (Eng. lasting, continuous) is used, which in this context, he argues, context, actually means economic growth, rather than sustainable development. Furthermore, in the Swedish translation (Agreement...) it says "principen om varaktig utveckling" which I, being native Swede, would translate into something like "continuous development”, which at least in my ears give different connotations compared with "sustainable development"...
For you, Olav, I'll give the Norwegian translation in the same document; “prinsippet om en baerekraftig utvikling", where I guess "baerekraftig” has a different ring to it than "varaktig" (continuous), or what would you say, Olav, speaking Norwegian as well as Swedish? Wonder if it is “only” a question of translation dilemmas/sloppiness, or if we actually are referring to somewhat different things in different cultures/languages when we discuss what sustainable development really implies…
Best, Björn H
Olav, I enjoyed very much reading this blog. You are completely right in your analysis. Admitting of being wrong or accepting other people's views is almost impossible for a Spanish. But, it has to do with the fact that the Spanish are extremely proud people. Although they are aware of the shortcomings of their political, economic and social system, they will never admit it in public and certainly not when a foreigner dare to express some criticism. If you really want to make a Spanish angry, start criticize Spanish habits or matters. Going native is the only way to live in this country. Abandon all your previous way of life, and adapt to the Spanish way of life. When I once made a remark about the many fiestas, they answered with a smile that nosotros trabajar para vivir y no vivir para trabajar. Or when I still had no telefoon and Internet connection in my first year here and made a remark to a Telefonica employee that in the Netherlands they say that the client is always the Rey, the young girl laughed at me and said: aquí yo soy la reina. Every country has its characteristics, and from time to time you have to wake up and realize that you chose to live in Spain and not in Sweden Norway or the Netherlands. Like you, I am astonished to see how the political leaders handle the negotiations for the forming of a new government. Although they know that the only way out is a coalition government, they all stick to their red lines and refuse to compromise. Unbelievable in our eyes, but probably very understandable for Spanish people.
Constructivist, Bjorn? Not very, I don't think. I have always been fascinated by the links between culture and language, without being a constructivist. The case of sustainable development being translated wrong into numerous languages is not a parallel as I see it. These are plain mistakes. In this case the Norwegian version comes closest to the original, which was coined by Dennis Pirages. He told me once he was upset by the failure of Mrs. Brundtland and her advisers to credit him in the so-called "Brundtland Report", issued by the UN, and entitled just Sustainable Development. The Spanish words I believe to be adaptations of foreign words to the nearest, culturally suitable Spanish meaning.
Dear Olav, you touch upon a interesting subject in your column: the tendency to not acknowledge being wrong or mistaken, especially in Spaniards. My direct communication with Spaniards is too limited to agree or disagree with you. Although I remember a irritating discussion with a Spanish friend about “el mar” (the sea); he asserted I was wrong, for it had to be “la mar”. He didn’t want to accept that the same word “mar” had a different meaning when starting with “el” or “la”, He didn’t even take the effort to consult my dictionary. How could a foreigner be right about his knowledge of Spanish?!
In this case “mar” is the same word with two meanings, depending on the article “el” or “la”. We are dealing here with an “aequivocatio” = Latin, for: the same word with a different meaning, a phenomenon occurring quite a bit in the Spanish language. Rather problematic for foreigners and for Spaniards at the same time. Una equivocación es humana o un error es humano.
“equivocar” is indeed making a mistake, but used in reflexive sense it will say: getting mixed up, being mistaken or wrong. Few humans are wilfully wrong – usually we make a mistake or misunderstand each other. People in an official function are prone to not acknowledge being wrong or mistaken, a simple question of professional pride. Especially politicians of ANY country or nation are incapable of conceding in public they are wrong or mistaken. On the whole it might be more obvious in Spain, because of the long history of bureaucracy. As foreigners we feel extra helpless and resentful, when exposed to it.
As to the word “compromiso”, it expresses the obligation or commitment to act in accordance with a promise. The Latin origin of the word means just the same: an obligation, without the explicit connotation of give and take. But of course an obligation or commitment presupposes a kind of concession or ‘transaction’ in advance. In a normal relationship you have to give and take, but in Latin and in Spanish that’s not explicit requested tn the meaning of the word. Therefore you cannot truly say that in Spanish the meaning has shifted – rather the opposite has happened: Spanish kept the original meaning of the Latin word - in the European languages the meaning shifted, probably under the dominant influence of English, For better or for worse? That’s debatable..
For curiosity sake: in Dutch “right or wrong” is “gelijk of ongelijk”, literally translated “equal or inequal”. Sounds a bit like Spanish?
Charles Rodijk
Good comment, Charles. Your point about Spanish often being closer to Latin than other European (at least West European) languages is something I have noticed at times. Now, since the development of language reflects the development of society, you can see how “compromiso” mirrors the slow birth of democracy in Spain. It also makes the incredible standstill in the current negotiations for a new government easier to understand.
Post a Comment