Presupposition, perceptional relativity and translation theory

The intertwining of assertions and presuppositions in utterances affects the way a text is perceived in the source language (SL) and the target language (TL). Presuppositions can be thought of as shared assumptions that form the background of the asserted meaning. To translate presuppositions as assertions, or vice versa, can distort the thematic meaning of the SL text and produce a text with a different information structure. Since a good translation is not simply concerned with transferring the propositional content of the SL text, but also its other semantic and pragmatic components, including thematic meaning, a special attention should be accorded to the translation of presupposition. This article examines the intrinsic relation between presupposition and thematic meaning, why the concept is relevant to translation theory, and how presupposition can affect the structure and understanding of discourse. Unshared presuppositions are major obstacles in translation, as cultural concepts may be conveyed through expressions that yield presuppositions. To attain an optimal proximity to the SL text, presupposition needs to be singled out as a distinct aspect of meaning, and distinctions need to be made between definite and indefinite meaning, topic and comment, topic and focus, presupposition and entailment, and presupposition and implicature

Can Machines Think in Radio Language?

People can think in auditory, visual and tactile forms of language, so can machines principally. But is it possible for them to think in radio language? According to a first principle presented for general intelligence, i.e. the principle of language's relativity, the answer may give an exceptional solution for robot astronauts to talk with each other in space exploration.Comment: 4 pages, 1 figur

Wittgenstein, Modern Physics and Zeilinger‘s Pronouncement, or How Naive Was Wittgenstein? (Revised and Updated)

This paper examines the almost ineradicable misconception of Wittgenstein's alleged antagonism to science as evidenced through some characteristic disparaging comments by world-renowned scientists, notably by Anton Zeilinger. Above all, he criticizes Wittgenstein on the basis of the opening sentence of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, "The world is all that is the case", which he regards as expressing *"the naive world-view"*1 of a *"typical philosopher of classical physics"*. He proposes an extension in agreement with the findings of quantum theory, namely by the clause *"… and all that can be the case"* (Zeilinger 2003, 231). It will become apparent, however, that this amplification is redundant, that Wittgenstein was in tune with modern physics, that a surprising number of his philosophical concepts are in agreement with it, and that various quantum pundits consider them to be relevant

On What Counts as a Translation

In this article, instead of taking a particular method as translation, we ask: what does one expect to do with a translation? The answer to this question will reveal, though, that none of the first order methods are capable of fully represent the required transference of ontological commitments. Lastly, we will show that this view on translation enlarge considerably the scope of translatable, and, therefore, ontologically comparable theories