Transplant trasplante transplante

0
votes

Does anyone know a rule about the spanish translation for "translplant". I've seen it translated as "trasplante" and "transplante". I konw that la Real Academia Espanola doesn't recognize "translplante" as a word but is it acceptable to use in a translation since it is so widely used'

5386 views
updated DIC 26, 2008
posted by Javier-Loyo

19 Answers

0
votes

Actually, I am a medical interpreter, and even though it seems wrong two of my medical interpreting books even said that "transplante" is acceptable, as is the orginal "trasplante." So I guess in this case both are ok.

updated DIC 26, 2008
posted by LAtINaPunKROcKerAConFundidA
0
votes

CalvoViejo said:

I'm just trying to understand which is correct: setiembre or septiembre; oscuro or obscuro. Also, does "tan bien" sound like "también"?
And what about "libery" (where one borrows books) and Febuary'

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by samdie
0
votes

I'm just trying to understand which is correct: setiembre or septiembre; oscuro or obscuro.
Also, does "tan bien" sound like "también"'

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by CalvoViejo
0
votes

Sure I say transnochar everytime but not "transto" and "atransado".

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by pisacaballo
0
votes

Do you also say "transnochar", "transto" and "atransado"'

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by lazarus1907
0
votes

By the way, did you say "transtorno"? Hahahah! That's almost unpronounceable! Who on Earth talks like that'

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by lazarus1907
0
votes

I've asked my mother, who is also a Spanish grammar teacher, and she thinks that "transplante" is not acceptable.
Two of my uncles are doctors (one is a surgeon, the other an oncologist), and they agree with my mother.

I guess your family have also written their own Spanish dictionary, different from the one everyone else uses.

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by lazarus1907
0
votes

I've asked my mother, who is also a Spanish grammar teacher, and she thinks that "transplante" is not acceptable.
Two of my uncles are doctors (one is a surgeon, the other an oncologist), and they agree with my mother.

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by lazarus1907
0
votes

Transplante -- Trasplante
Transmisión -- Trasmisión
Transtorno -- Trastorno
Transnacional -- Trasnacional

There are various examples

My granfather is a surgeon, he wrote several books about surgery and I asked him about "transplante" and he answered me that it was ok.
If you dont belive me just check.
<http://www.smu.org.uy/socios/distinciones/2001/index.php'id=19>

Then I asked to my aunt and my mother (both literature teachers) and they agreed that the use of "transplante" is acceptable.

updated DIC 25, 2008
posted by pisacaballo
0
votes

James Santiago said:

it is not only the prevalence of usage
In the general theme of "going to hell in a hand-basket ..." and (given my, probably obvious, linguistically conservative outlook), I was taken aback (me chocó) your use of "prevalence" to mean "frequency". Howver, I found that, not only, some miscellaneous (American) dictionary that uses the name "Webster" in its title) but my, much beloved, OED, as well, is accepting of "prevalent" to mean, merely, "widespread" (although not prevailing). Ah well, another nice distinction bites the dust!

As for "trans-" vs "tras-", obviously, the Spanish should take a vote and decide just how difficult it is for most speakers to deal with the "ns" consonant cluster and fix their orthography accordingly. I don't think that their decision should be swayed by the "petty consistency" of conformance to Latin or English.

In a similar vein, I look forward (with some distaste) to the day when English speakers (all/predominantly) say
"diptong", "dipteria" and "naptaline".

updated DIC 23, 2008
posted by samdie
0
votes

I find it ridiculous that we now try to spell against convention and people's natural and spontaneous pronunciation, just because English uses that spelling, or because Latin used to. People tend not to pronounce the N, and books with careful spelling avoid the N. Why including it, then'

Now we're getting closer to agreement, because you are stating your opinion about the trend. However, it might not be so ridiculous in this case. I know you are not a chemistry expert, but let me ask you a question.

In English, we refer to certain types of isomers (molecules that contain the same atoms, but have different configurations) as cis-trans isomers. Do you know what these are called in Spanish? I ask because it is very likely that this concept of trans- is prevalent in Spanish, as well, and therefore it would be natural for scientists and doctors (as opposed to linguists at the RAE) to have a tendency to use the trans- spelling.

Also, you say that the N is difficult to pronounce in Spanish in such spellings, but what about words such as transponer, transportar, and transparente? Are you saying that the N should be dropped from those words, too? If not, then why the reluctance to transplante?

Finally, my Spanish-English dictionary lists transplantar, although I see that the RAE does not recognize it. If the lexicographers are accepting it, that means it has moved beyond a mere misspelling, and is now a variety, just as theater and theatre are varieties in English.

updated DIC 23, 2008
posted by 00bacfba
0
votes

Eddy, as I tried to say in my second reply to Lazarus, it is a subjective call sometimes. Just because a certain spelling appears on a website (or on many websites), that doesn't automatically make it a good choice. Language is not like mathematics, where problems usually have only one correct answer, and there is much more gray area in language. In the case of this particular word, it is not only the prevalence of usage, but also the kind of sites where the alternate spelling is found (that is, sites apparently written by people who know what they are talking about) that should influence our decision.

Again, I'm not saying that trasplante is not "more correct" than transplante. I'm just saying that there seems to be an orthographic shift in progress here (one which may take decades to conclude, or which may just die out), and so we should take that into account.

updated DIC 23, 2008
posted by 00bacfba
0
votes

Surely languages need to evolve, but just listen to any native pronouncing "tra(n)splante" in a relaxed manner: most likely you will not hear the N. However, ask them to pronounce the word for you, and they'll think that you want to catch them mispronouncing it, and they'll go to any extremes over-pronouncing the N, just in case. The stress-based pronunciation of the English language makes combinations like "trans-" o "psi-" very fluent in many cases, but the syllabic-based pronunciation of the Spanish language makes it awkward and slow. Regardless of what the RAE and the doctors say, the trend in spoken Spanish in the last few hundred years has been to simplify "trans-" and "psi-" (among others) into "tras-" and "si-", despite the complaints of many prescriptive guys, such as some old-fashioned RAE members. I find it ridiculous that we now try to spell against convention and people's natural and spontaneous pronunciation, just because English uses that spelling, or because Latin used to. People tend not to pronounce the N, and books with careful spelling avoid the N. Why including it, then'

updated DIC 23, 2008
posted by lazarus1907
0
votes

James Santiago said:

We've had this argument before (several times!), but I think an unequivocal "wrong" may be too strong. The "trasplante" spelling is certainly the one accepted traditionally, but the other spelling seems to have so much currency that it seems overly prescriptive to dismiss it out of hand like this. I did a search for transplante, limiting the search to sites in Spain, and here is one of the many that use the N spelling. http://www.universia.es/portada/actualidad/noticia_actualidad.jsp'n...

It might be more precise to say that while both spellings are used, the trasplante spelling is probably better in formal contexts.

James. Far be it for me to argue the toss between you two guys, but in a previous discussion between us James, about the spelling of a certain word, when I found a site that corroborated my spelling of the word, your reply to me was simply, "that site is wrong". Perhaps the site that you have just found is incorrect.

updated DIC 23, 2008
posted by Eddy
0
votes

I'm just saying that it isn't always black and white.

The spelling "wierd" gets many millions of googits, but I would never say that that spelling is correct or acceptable, because 1) it is not spelled that way in edited text and 2) there is no linguistic reason for the spelling. Of course, it is possible that in 100 years that spelling will have become the accepted one, but it hasn't yet.

The prefix trans- comes directly from Latin, and is used in that meaning in countless Spanish words. Of course, there are also countless Spanish words where that spelling has evolved into tras-, which originally might have been considered an error by linguistic purists, but has now become standard Spanish.

Those who spell the word transplante may (or may not) have been influenced by English, because English is the international language of science and medicine, so most scientists and research doctors around the world are familiar enough with English to read journal articles. It is therefore not surprising if some spelling changes find their way into other languages, especially those having many cognates with English.

However, I'm not arguing against your basic point: you advised Javier to use the trasplante spelling. You are probably very correct in that. I was just saying that the way you phrased it seemed overly proscriptive to me. Languages do evolve, and while we should NOT tolerate anarchy in language, neither should we try to preserve our languages in a state of suspended animation.

updated DIC 23, 2008
posted by 00bacfba