nonmaterial

Hey lads. It's me again. Now I am wondering how could you translate this subtitle into spanish

"the nonmaterial base of discourse"

The context is the studies held in critical discourse analysis and critical applied linguistics. I get the idea, but I am still without a hint of how to put it in a natural way in spanish.

Here there is more context

It is a fragment that has this subtitle, in the section Ideology, Discourse, Truth and Power, from chapter IV "The politics of text" of the book Critical Applied Linguistics, by Alaistair Pennycook.

It talks about the objections Foucault posted to the cannon notions of ideology.
He critiques the common association of power with cominant groups, so that he problematizes the essentialist given conception of power, regarding langauge.
He refuses the stance created by critical modernism that, according to him, has obscured the way forward a plentiful development of critical applied linguistics.

The matter of concern is that the word nonmaterial base is not pronounced anymore, though explained.

Thanx
And Old

"base inmaterial" is not correct?

I have also heard intangible as a translation for nonmaterial but I'm not sure if the context would be proper. Rgds,

If I understand correctly the author is using nonmaterial in the context of not being germain to the issue, i.e., immaterial or irrelevant.


P.S. Sandra

I think if you applied intangible in this case it would mean vague or elusive...perhaps hard to understand. Generally, something intangible is nonmaterial in the physical sense, i.e., you can't touch or feel it.

Saludos!

Good points you've reached over here, I sincerly appreciate your help. Vicente, I'm pretty sure it is not aimed to mean irrelevant, I understand the context, I don't know is what word to use...
What Pennycook (the author) aims is to show the base of discourse that is not drawn on a materialist view of power, language and social relations (e.g. Marx's stances regarding these all), so I think irrelevant ain't fits, but thanx for caring about this.

Andrés...Andrés...this kind of language

Quote:

---

so I think irrelevant ain't fits, but thanx

---

doesn't fit this forum and much less the academic topic you are dealing with.

In regard to nonmaterial, you may have to translate it as:

la base del discurso no materialista/antimaterialista
la base discursiva no conforme con la visión materialista

As you know in Spanish, we need longer sentences to convey in full the meaning of the much shorter sentences in English.

Suerte!

Morning everybody!
Truth is I did not read the context or the whole post! guilty of charges. sorry, not enough time yesterday and seems like today it will be like that too. I guess what I was translating at that moment influenced me too much (cultural world heritage) Hope the final verdict has been reached and I won't post anymore without reading the whole post first. I am a mess!!! hahaha
Have a nice weekend!

Sandra, don't feel bad!! Your answer was as good as any based on the question. To tell the truth, I'm still not sure what the context is. I am not familiar with Critical Applied Linguistics, by Alaistair Pennycook and I can barely make sense of Andres' explanations but it appears that Andres thinks nonmaterial base is being used in the sense of materialism, rather than in the sense of something not being pertinent or essential. If that is the case then it would seem to me it would have been written as "nonmaterialistic base". (in which case I think Cotty has given the best answer.)


Saludos! and you have a nice weekend as well!

Edit: To me nonmaterial means something that is irrelevant or immaterial like a nonmaterial response to a question; while nonmaterialistic means something not related to material things (money, property, possessions, etc.)

Look what a nice discusson qe have reached over here. Doubtless I made a good decision when signing in in this forum. I am going to make myself clear: I think that the best option so far I aim to use is Cotty's last recommendation, because it is quite clear for me (and it'd be for you if you read the text) it refers to what A. Pennycook is talking about in this pàrt of his text. Nonetheless, for me it is important what Vicente, as a native speaker, is explaining to us over here; that was exactly what logically (by cognates) one would think nonmaterial could mean. Now, my concern is that probably Pennycook aimed to mean nonmaterialistic but by some reason he made up his mind for nonmaterial. I thought not this term could have such an underlying translation dilemma. Once again, thanks so much, mates.

And Old
PS: Cotty, thanks for the corrections about my unpolite english; it's just I love street english as much as I do the academic and polite one; it might well be an equal source of linguistic knowledge and scope.

Quote:

---

so I think irrelevant ain't fits

---

Andres, it isn't that your English is impolite, it's just bad. "ain't fits" has no meaning. As you surely know, ain't is not formal English; however, I, myself, use it for emphasis once in awhile. Many people do. I often say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!". So in my opinion, if you want to use ain't it is acceptable but use it properly, although English teachers like Cotty might tell you there is no proper way to use it. Nonetheless, it is hard to deny it's existence in everyday English in uneducated circles. It is a form of "am not" or "are not" (I ain't; they ain't) or "is not" or "will not" (it ain't). Ain't is NOT a form of "to do" as you used it. You should have said "irrelevant doesn't fit" or, if you want to continue to use "street English", "it don't fit" or "it ain't gonna fit".

Frankly, and I mean no offense, I'd advise you to learn to use proper English before you get into street talk. It looks silly if you misuse it.

Saludos

Cool, mate, I didn't know that, I have thought it may virtually replace any negative form in English, it was what I was told probably by a not well prepared tecaher; I appreciate your teaching... Now, what do you think about the discussion we've reached here?

Quote:

---

Andres, it isn't that your English is impolite, it's just bad. "ain't fits" has no meaning.

---

I agree. It is mainly incorrect, even for slang or street talk. And although when I first read it, I noticed it right away, I didn't want to get into the details of it, mainly because I don't think Andrés really sees the importance of it. So, I decided to point out the fact that his way of writing was not appropriate to the occasion.

Quote:

---

...I often say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!".

---

This is an idiomatic expression used even by people who wouldn't normally use ain't.

Quote:

---

So in my opinion, if you want to use ain't it is acceptable but use it properly, although English teachers like Cotty might tell you there is no proper way to use it.

---

Of course there is aproper way to use it. The proper way is how it is intended to be used, i.e. in place of the verb to be. Although I mainly teach standard, proper, formal, scientific and academic English, I am well aware of slang and the informal and colloquial usage of language as part of normal conversation.

Quote:

---

...It is a form of "am not" or "are not" (I ain't; they ain't) or "is not" or "will not" (it ain't). Ain't is NOT a form of "to do" as you used it. You should have said "irrelevant doesn't fit" or, if you want to continue to use "street English", "it don't fit" or "it ain't gonna fit".

---

Absolutely. But even if he had used it correctly, and even if he likes that kind of street talk. It is undeniable that this is not the place to do it. Part of mastering a language is to know when and where to use certain kinds of forms. The thread that Andrés started is of a very academic nature and it calls for vocabulary of the same level.

Quote:

---

This is an idiomatic expression used even by people who wouldn't normally use ain't.

---

Certainly, it has become an expression used by many but there are numerous other expressions in which people use ain't for emphasis which are not necessarily idiomatic expressions. Several others could be considered as such, like. ain't it a shame; ain't no way; ain't what it used to be; but I wonder at what point they become "idiomatic" instead of simply the way people like to talk. Many people, depending a lot on where one was raised. will not use ain't in any situation. I have a lot of Canadian friends and I have never heard one of them say ain't...not once... and they are ordinary folk and not particularly well-educated. They just don't use the word. I consider myself fairly well educated but I am not afraid to use ain't when it serves the purpose of making a point. For instance, I might say "I ain't gonna do that" (instead of I will not or am not) because it adds flavor and emphasis in informal conversation and I know the people I'm talking to are not going to think I slept through English classes. I think it is mainly because I was raised in the South where the word is commonly used.

Quote:

---

Of course there is aproper way to use it. The proper way is how it is intended to be used, i.e. in place of the verb to be. Although I mainly teach standard, proper, formal, scientific and academic English, I am well aware of slang and the informal and colloquial usage of language as part of normal conversation.

---

Cotty, I did not mean to suggest that you didn't know there was an acceptable use of the word. However, I'm not sure I'd call it proper :). I meant that most English teachers don't care for the word. At least, not any of the ones I ever met. It has only become "semi-acceptable" in the last couple of decades. In my days in school the word ain't was simply not recognized and we were taught that it was bad English and any English teacher, and most mothers, would chastize you for its use and I suspect they would still do so in class today...at least I would hope so. It's slang, nothing more and I really wouldn't recommend its use by anybody, particularly those who are studying and learning to speak English. I'd tell them that if it is not already in their vocabulary, don't put it there.

My dearest Vicente, we can be here all day and we know how much Andrés enjoys our little exchanges which he considers nothing more than idle talk and completely irrelevant to the issue at hand :)

Quote:

---

...there are numerous other expressions in which people use ain't for emphasis which are not necessarily idiomatic expressions. Several others could be considered as such, like. ain't it a shame; ain't no way; ain't what it used to be; but I wonder at what point they become "idiomatic" instead of simply the way people like to talk.

---

Well, they become expressions or sayings when people start using them as a unit that has its own meaning further to the meaning of the individual components.

Quote:

---

Cotty, I did not mean to suggest that you didn't know there was an acceptable use of the word. However, I'm not sure I'd call it proper

---

I am not saying that using ain't is proper. I said proper not in the sense that is a correct word to use, but in the sense that if you are going to use it, use it correctly as a substitute of to be and not for instance, as a substitute of to do.

Quote:

---

...most English teachers don't care for the word. At least, not any of the ones I ever met....

---

I don't care for the word, never ever ever use it, and certainly never teach it or encourage its use, but that doesn't mean I am oblivious to the fact that it is used, whether I approve of it or not.

Quote:

---

My dearest Vicente, we can be here all day and we know how much Andrés enjoys our little exchanges which he considers nothing more than idle talk and completely irrelevant to the issue at hand :)

---

Mi querida Cotty, Andrés must know by now that, once started, these threads belong to the forum and they often provoke exchanges not related to the original post and do not require that he participate further if he chooses not to, and if he doesn't get it now, he will sooner or later. If he is an intelligent young man, as I suspect he is, he will realize that these exchanges could teach him things well beyond his original question.

Quote:

---

I don't care for the word, never ever ever use it, and certainly never teach it or encourage its use, but that doesn't mean I am oblivious to the fact that it is used, whether I approve of it or not.

---

Ves! You have the soul of an English teacher! :)

cool, you are no longer my thread-mates, you have become my masters, it is cool to have these discussions, now I see it; I just hope you to keep on sharing all that knowledge with us, the "beginners". Thanx a lot, specially by the point reached regarding the former issue of the thread; it'd be lovely if we continue talking about that, and if you keep on correcting me, so that I can learn much more.

And Old