[catillac]

I think it’s obvious to an everyday English speaking person, this is a take on a regular saying, like “costing an arm and a leg” or “sell my firstborn” or something. Though if I were this Twitter person, I would definitely avoid any metaphors involving things like this if they’ve been banned or whatever so many times.

Still, as an average person, it isn’t taken as anything but a riff on a saying.

[lavabiopsy]

Yes, the thing is that Twitter is also accessible to people who are not everyday English speakers.

[ameister14]

Interesting - so from the perspective of a non-english speaker, would you say that a phrase like 'that cost an arm and a leg!' is likely to offend you?

[estebarb]

Yes, because in other languages things costs less body parts. In Spanish, for example things just costs an eye or a kidney.

Spanish -> literal translation

Me costó un ojo -> it costs me an eye

Me costó un riñón -> it costs me a kidney

(Edited for format)

[lavabiopsy]

I can't answer that question because I am a native English speaker, but I can say, I would probably not use that phrase around non-native English speakers. It's confusing and could be misinterpreted. Generally one would want to avoid using idioms like that when trying to cross a language barrier.

[ameister14]

The problem with that is that the person's intent isn't to cross the language barrier.

Many languages have idioms involving body parts like this. In French it's couter les yeux de la tete, similar in Italian where it's costare un occhio della testa. One in Mandarin that means something different is 削足适履, about cutting your feet to fit your shoes.

I get that idioms don't always translate well (some actually do, especially literal ones that are less referential like cost an arm and a leg) but I'd be careful before invoking misunderstanding with theoretical groups of non-english speakers.

[lavabiopsy]

And yet, all of those could be misinterpreted by someone who is not familiar with that.

>I'd be careful before invoking misunderstanding with theoretical groups of non-english speakers.

If you're being cautious (as is common for a large website to do) then this is totally backwards -- you would actually need to be careful with invoking understanding when it comes to theoretical groups of non-english speakers. You can't start by assuming that everything that is said is going to be understood perfectly (Though I really wish that was possible, it would make it a lot easier to teach math, physics, history, etc).

[blondin]

let's stay on track here.

that expression is an idiom. other languages have idioms that native english speakers would find weird.

as far as the tweet that started all this, it sounded too serious in my opinion.

kanye west (not sure if it was him who said it first) was correct with this one: adding an emoji would have sent a clearer message. blink blink smiley face or something.

[dudul]

Do native English speakers need to renounce their idioms to accommodate people who barely speak English then?

[lavabiopsy]

Sure. Have you learned a new language recently? If you haven't, it's an illuminating experience -- usually you don't start with the idioms until you have a really strong grasp of the basics and of some other advanced forms.

[bombela]

I am not a native English speaker. In fact, I learned English very late in life. And I don't think you have to pretend you are talking to the whole world all the time and restrict yourself to simple English.

[lavabiopsy]

I don't understand, there's no pretending -- On Twitter, you are effectively talking to the whole world. Anyone in the world can click on your tweets and see what you're saying. If you want to have a broad reach, then minimizing the use of complicated words and language can absolutely help. That doesn't mean you can't discuss complex things, it just means being more deliberate in the way it's discussed.

[dudul]

So first, let's get the ad hominem out of the way. I speak 2 languages fluently in addition to my native language after living in 4 countries throughout my life, so don't patronize me.

Then, your argument is so silly that I wonder if you're just being contrarian for the sake of it. By your logic, anyone speaking language A should make sure to dumb it down as much as possible, make it extremely basic to make sure that anyone in the world who doesn't have a good grasp on language A can understand it unambiguously.

First of all, I don't owe you anything. If I decide to type a tweet in Italian, or Russian or whatever I don't have to accommodate you. If you don't understand the language, you're clearly not my target audience. Even though you can click on my tweet to read it doesn't mean that I need to make sure someone who doesn't understand the language can read it.

Second, this is a total disservice to people learning the language to not use idiom and common constructs. These are expressions people use in real life, if they are serious about wanting to learn a language they want to be exposed to them.

[estebarb]

The joke is completely understandable to anybody that speaks Spanish too. In fact, many languages have idioms about exchanging body parts for something.

[maccolgan]

I don't see the solution, should we self-censor all humor to the point of the lowest common denominator?