I was in the process of researching another post which I may or may not finish, and spotted an ad saying:
Find your dream editor
Is that an editor of the kind you dream about (if you actually dream about editors!), or someone who edits dreams? Given the disjointed dreams I’ve been having lately, I need the latter. You’d think that dream editors wouldn’t write ambiguous ad headings.
Note that “the editor of your dreams” is also ambiguous, but compare “the wo/man of your dreams” (and a “dream catcher”).
Never Pure and Rarely Simple 
Even assuming the first interpretation, “the editor of your dreams,” would that be an ideal boss at a magazine publishing job, or the perfect program to create and modify files on your computer? As a retired former user of many of the latter, I might have had some candidates in mind (invoking the vi vs. emacs wars of the Unix world, or Microsoft Word vs. Word Perfect in the Windows world).
LikeLiked by 1 person
in one legal publishing job I used a program called ‘[something] editor’, but that was a while ago, so I don’t immediately think of the program-type editors.
There is a story of one publishing company where a man walked through at random times and hit people on the head. When someone asked him why, he said “I’m the ‘ed ‘itter”. (It probably works better spoken than written.)
LikeLike
That reminds me of the classic Monty Python “The Argument” sketch, where Terry Jones is giving “being hit on the head” lessons.
LikeLiked by 1 person
> That reminds me of the classic Monty Python “The Argument” sketch
No it doesn’t …
I often used that sketch (the argument part, at least) to illustrate various ways in which people use language (discuss, argue, contradict etc) and also the interplay of V, N and (have/take/make/do) a N eg argue, argument, have an argument. (Is there a term for those little verbs used in that way?) (See also look v take a look: https://neverpureandrarelysimple.wordpress.com/2020/08/31/take-a-look-v-look/)
Very soon after I moved to Korea the first time, a colleague with some knowledge of Western culture asked me if I could explain Monty Python to her. I said “(long pause) … No …” (Perhaps I should have said Ni, which now that I think about it, sounds very close to Korean 네.
LikeLike
And of course 네 would be the exact opposite of what you meant. Actually, I remember reading about Korean orthography recently on one of these blogs, or perhaps Wikipedia, regarding the origin of the 이 surname, usually written in English as Lee; it said the original form was closer to 리, and initial ㄹusually transformed pronunciation-wise to ㄴbut then disappeared in proximity to ㅣ. So it was very near to being pronounced “Ni”, but that’s evidently not a pronounceable combination in modern Korean, so there’s no way those knights could have been Korean.
The most salient part of “The Argument” is the point where the definition of “argument” is brought up in order to assert that what the two participants are engaging in is not, in fact, a true argument at all (and of course the two disagree about that).
I would think that Monty Python would largely survive being translated into different languages, since it is largely not pun-based, but whether it can be translated into different cultures is another question. Americans seem to have no problem with it at all, but there is some degree of familiarity with the unique aspects of British culture that must be required, probably made easier by the arrival of The Beatles in 1964.
There are, of course, many references to literature and philosophy, but an in-depth knowledge of those is not needed to enjoy the humor. That’s a point I used to make about what makes Woody Allen different from Monty Python; to appreciate Allen’s take on The Death of Mary Queen of Scots you must have some knowledge of the original, whereas no knowledge of the original is needed to appreciate Python’s sketch on the same subject.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the Argument Clinic sketch would translate into most languages. I assume most languages have words for ‘abuse’, ‘argument’ and ‘contradiction’. Possibly non-written languages have more words for oral interaction than written languages do.
For the Cheese Shop sketch, it might be possible to transfer all the names of the cheeses into French, but not many other languages. But Michael Palin’s responses could easily be translated.
In fact I’ve just remembered that Monty Python did some shows in German (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Fliegender_Zirkus).
The Four Yorkshiremen also comes to mind as a sketch which would easily translate into many languages.
How much of the background to a sketch do we have to know to find the sketch funny: eg knowledge of the Spanish Inquisition, or philosophers?
LikeLike
Funny, I just learned of the existence of Monty Python’s Fliegender Zirkus yesterday because one of its producers just died and had an obituary on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Biolek
Similarly, it was odd that Jon Hassell died a few days after I referenced him on this blog to illustrate the use of the word “musics.”
Do the names of cheeses really require translation?
Some basic awareness of what the Spanish Inquisition was should certainly be required. It is regrettable that the phrase is probably responded to by many (younger?) people these days as merely a laugh-getter. The actual Inquisition was no laughing matter.
Oh, and here’s a question that generated itself in my mind recently. If you borrow the lyrics to a song, translate them into another language and sing them to a different tune, can you still get sued for copyright infringement? (No, I am not aware of any instances of such.)
LikeLike
Per this somewhat aged thread, if you’re still wondering if Monty Python can survive translation, check out this clip, which you should find especially interesting:
LikeLike