Wrong use of the abbreviation "i.e." Téma indítója: Jørgen Madsen
|
|---|
As a translator, you get used to all kinds of linguistic errors in the source text, but one error in particular bothers me: Often the abbreviation "i.e." ("id est" or "that is") is used when the writer quite obviously means "e.g." ("exempli gratia" or "for example"). Have others noticed this and does this mistake occur often?
| | | |
pcovs
Dánia
Local time: 10:53
angol - dán
| More recently | Oct 11, 2011 |
Yes, I had a couple of texts just the other week where this occurred.
It was very confusing at times and really annoying.
I don't know if there is a growing tendency to make this mistake, but I really hope not!
| | | |
Katia Perry 
Brazília
Local time: 05:53
Tag (2007 óta)
angol - portugál
+ ...
and I also observed in some texts the use of e.g. when, obviously, it should be used i.e.
| | | |
matt robinson
Spanyolország
Local time: 10:53
Tag (2010 óta)
spanyol - angol
| Illegitimum non carborundum | Oct 11, 2011 |
Aegroto dum anima est, spes est.
| | |
|
|
|
Tina Vonhof (X)
Kanada
Local time: 02:53
holland - angol
+ ...
| All the time | Oct 11, 2011 |
I see this mistake all the time, even made by educated people, but it doesn't particularly bother me. I suppose for people who never learned Latin, the abbreviations have no meaning and it's hard to remember which is which.
Latin is one of the most useful things I learned in High School, as a base for learning other languages, translating, and writing, and also in many other aspects of life.
[Edited at 2011-10-11 18:54 GMT]
| | | |
Erik Freitag
Németország
Local time: 10:53
Tag (2006 óta)
holland - német
+ ...
|
Rolf Kern
Svájc
Local time: 10:53
angol - német
+ ...
Az Ő emlékére:
It happens very often. We just have to be attentive.
| | | |
The text I am translating at the moment has that exact problem... I find it extremely annoying.
I have also corrected many translations where the original was correct, but the translators who did not know the difference. Perhaps even more annoying (I have very high expectations of the work of my colleagues...).
Paula
| | |
|
|
|
Rolf Kern
Svájc
Local time: 10:53
angol - német
+ ...
Az Ő emlékére:
Tina Vonhof wrote:
I see this mistake all the time, even made by educated people, but it doesn't particularly bother me. I suppose for people who never learned Latin, the abbreviations have no meaning and it's hard to remember which is which.
Latin is one of the most useful things I learned in High School, as a base for learning other languages, translating, and writing, and also in many other aspects of life.
[Edited at 2011-10-11 18:54 GMT]
I have no idea of latin, but know what "i.e." and "e.g." means, just from the letters.
| | | |
neilmac
Spanyolország
Local time: 10:53
spanyol - angol
+ ...
| True colours | Oct 12, 2011 |
By their lexicon shall ye know them.
| | | |
| Unnecessary... | Oct 12, 2011 |
Perhaps more irritating is the combination of eg and etc.
Ie, since eg refers to examples the etc is unnecessary.
| | | |
Daniel Bird
Egyesült Királyság
Local time: 09:53
német - angol
| Increasingly common I find | Oct 12, 2011 |
Jørgen Madsen wrote:
Have others noticed this and does this mistake occur often?
Why do I notice it? Not really sure, but perhaps there are more instances of e.g. in daily life than i.e., hence the incorrect usages are more numerous and noticeable. To make a massive generalisation, I think it's the kind of error that's brought on by pomposity, so it's more to be pitied than deplored.
| | |
|
|
|
| To avoid confusion, | Oct 12, 2011 |
when editing I generally write them out: "for example" ( or sometimes "such as") for e.g., and "that is" for i.e. And I agree with George: when you write "for example" and give an example (or 2), adding "etc." is unnecessary.
[Edited at 2011-10-12 12:50 GMT]
| | | |
Login to reply/comment 
