Perché il calcio viene chiamato in modo diverso da inglesi (football) e americani (soccer)?
I due termini, football e soccer, si usano per indicare lo stesso sport sebbene football sia presente in un maggior numero di lingue con un più alto numero di occorrenze.
Footballrisale a un decreto del 1424 in cui re Giacomo I di Scozia bandiva il gioco con la frase: "That na man play at the Fute-ball".
Nel 1863 viene fondata a Londra la Football Association (FA), la prima federazione calcistica nazionale che unificò definitivamente il regolamento. Queste regole furono adottate da tutti eccetto che dalla Scuola di Rugby, che preferiva un gioco più fisico in cui si potesse toccare il pallone anche con le mani. Si venne a creare cosi il termine soccer, entrato a far parte dello slang universitario comeabbreviazione colloquiale di Assoc., da Association football+ la formazione agentiva "-er" per distinguerlo dal Rugby Football.
With the World Cup underway in Brazil, a
lot of people are questioning if we should refer to the "global round-ball
game" as "soccer" or "football"? This is visible from
the queries of the readers that access my blog. The most visited post ever is indeed
tra football e soccer” and since we are in the World Cup craze I think this
topic is worth a post.
According to a paper published in May by
the University of Michigan and written by the sport economist Stefan Szymanski,
"soccer" is a not a semantically bizarre American invention but a
Soccer comes from "association football" and the term
was used in the UK to distinguish it from rugby football. In countries with
other forms of football (USA, Australia) soccer became more generic, basically
a synonym for 'football' in the international sense, to distinguish it from
their domestic game.
If the word "soccer" originated
in England, why did it f…
We all know the never-ending, love-hate relationship between translators and terminology… now, let’s explore some of the most common errors.
Generally speaking, when thinking of terminology, we imagine a glossary, made of two parallel columns full of terms, with the source language on one side and the target language on the other.
And what better than an Excel file for this type of structure? Seems easy and intuitive enough. Plus, you can also add an extra column to the right, to add comments or other notes.
Well, there’s something wrong here: Excel was never designed to store text, much less terminological data.
Yes, you guessed it… Excel was created to crunch numbers, not words!
Using Excel files is not an effective or efficient way to manage complex databases. If you use it to create glossaries as mentioned above, you will not be able to specify additional attributes for those terms. It is indeed possible to add extra columns but always limited to one field or category for ea…