[discuss] Possible approaches to solving "problem no. 1"

[Michel Gauthier]

Brian,

the orthogonal meaning difference is between the American language 
and the French language. We translate American "global" as "mondial", 
and "globalization" as "mondialization". This is why we are 
interested by the way your newspapers translate the US globalization? 
How do you understand the Unicode "globalization" and the normative 
internationalization.

We are friednly to the US but we are not interested in an US globalization.

M G

At 23:48 20/02/2014, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

>On 21/02/2014 10:56, Ian Peter wrote:
> > the word globalisation has different meanings to different people 
> and I refer you to the anti-globalisation  movement, which sees 
> globalisation as a word for transnational corporate control without 
> government regulation (and you can see the ramifications of that in 
> an internet setting in terms of economic dominance). Probably not 
> the most sensitive word for ICANN to use given its connotations to 
> many people, but I'm not sure what the best substitute is.
>
>It's certainly true that the word has been contaminated by the
>"anti-globalization" lobby, but I looked in my Shorter Oxford
>and it says that "global" means "pertaining to or embracing the
>totality of a group of items, categories or the like."
>As far as I can tell that's the same as the French meaning,
>which is "considered in its entirety" (my translation of the
>definition in Le Petit Larousse). Neither of them defines "global"
>to have anything to do with the globe of the Earth.
>
>For the francophones here, my Robert is very strange since it
>is asymmetric:
>
>global (En) = universel, mondial, planétaire (Fr)
>global (Fr) = global, total, overall, aggregate, comprehensive (En)
>
>The English to French translation is simply wrong, according
>to the Oxford definition. Certainly in the Internet standards
>world, when we say "global" we are not thinking about the
>globe of the Earth.
>
>      Brian
>
> > From: Michel Gauthier
> > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 8:18 AM
> > To: John Curran ; Louis Pouzin (well)
> > Cc: 1Net List
> > Subject: Re: [discuss] Possible approaches to solving "problem no. 1"
> >
> > At 20:43 20/02/2014, John Curran wrote:
> >
> >   On Feb 20, 2014, at 2:24 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
> >
> >     Global(ization) mentioned 25 times, i.e. USG/NSA control.
> >
> >   Louis -
> >       For those us not quite as astute, could you unpack the 
> above a little bit,
> >      (In particular, I'm trying to figure the how use of global 
> implies USG control)
> >
> > Please, not again!
> > :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list
> > discuss at 1net.org
> > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list
> > discuss at 1net.org
> > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss