Would It Be Helpful to Non-Native English Speakers if.....
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Revert and reply are totally different words. Reply means to respond to someone, it refers to communications. Revert means to return a system to a previous state.
Well... http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/revert?q=revert
While it's stated to be Indian English, I remember the usage as being fairly common in the UK (not the norm, certainly, but not particularly uncommon either).
-
@Brett-at-ioSafe said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Revert and reply are totally different words. Reply means to respond to someone, it refers to communications. Revert means to return a system to a previous state.
Well... http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/revert?q=revert
While it's stated to be Indian English, I remember the usage as being fairly common in the UK (not the norm, certainly, but not particularly uncommon either).
huh - before this post, I would have asked them what they were smoking if someone asked me to revert to their inquiry.
-
@Brett-at-ioSafe said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Revert and reply are totally different words. Reply means to respond to someone, it refers to communications. Revert means to return a system to a previous state.
Well... http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/revert?q=revert
While it's stated to be Indian English, I remember the usage as being fairly common in the UK (not the norm, certainly, but not particularly uncommon either).
One of the problems with Oxford is that they document usage, even when it is very, very bad. Revert is, I believe, the worst misuse of the language ever specifically because 1) it makes you sound completely illiterate and 2) it causes the other party to have something documented specifically.
Here is what I have seen...
"Please install this package and revert."
This is an explicit as the language reasonably allows you to get to tell someone that you need to install a package and back it out again. A very common step done to test install / uninstall systems.
I've seen Indian workers attempting to "sound cool" as people generally assume the usage sprang from, use the term and cause system outages because it would be an Indian manager using the term to an English-native speaker system admin via email providing full written documentation of a request to do an install / uninstall when what they apparently wanted was just a response after the work was done. Using a "secret" misuse of the language that is VERY different from the standard language and overlaps with the traditional use is very, very bad and no matter how documented it becomes would be unprofessional to ever use.
In this particular example, many times I saw it cause much wasted time and effort and confusion as managers would demand reversion and IT kept reverting systems. I've even seen Wall St. banks take system outages from it. It's non-trivial in the IT world or any business context, as accuracy is far more important than "sounding interesting" or whatever its purpose is. Why would someone 1) use something other than reply and 2) need to state that a reply is needed?
-
@Dashrender said:
huh - before this post, I would have asked them what they were smoking if someone asked me to revert to their inquiry.
And you still should. Using the term, even if acceptable in some locations, should never be accepted to IT workers as it causes risk for no reason. It is inappropriate. Using as secret language, for fun, that clearly copies public words with specific meaning is not okay on the job.
-
The use of "revert" actually highlights a higher level language pattern problem. Regional speakers seem to find it necessary to demand responses, answers or help after a request. This is not a pattern generally used in native Western speakers. This is partly what makes the demand for reversion seem so odd and makes it that much more confusing - there is good reason to need to revert a request (testing purposes, using the term to actually mean revert is actually quite common) but no reason to demand a reply, in fact doing so is slightly rude to Western sensibilities, so it is not done.
But if you look at online postings, for example, speakers from several regions will either demand a response or add extra "Why?" or "Respond Please" or "Answer Me Now" at the end of questions, often even in post titles! Not only is it wasteful (the question mark handles all that is needed) but it is poor style (lots of extra words without purpose in titles) but it also comes across as rude - as if asking the question is not enough but an answer is "owed" and "demanded."
There is no need for that. Just ask the question simply and keep it clean.
-
@Dashrender said:
@Brett-at-ioSafe said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Revert and reply are totally different words. Reply means to respond to someone, it refers to communications. Revert means to return a system to a previous state.
Well... http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/revert?q=revert
While it's stated to be Indian English, I remember the usage as being fairly common in the UK (not the norm, certainly, but not particularly uncommon either).
huh - before this post, I would have asked them what they were smoking if someone asked me to revert to their inquiry.
I always considered it somewhat pretentious - it was often used by the same people who'd use ""Very truly yours" or similar as a valediction.
-
Something for non-native speakers to remember about revert.... no matter how much it is taught (and I am guessing that it is) in schools in certain regions nor how much it gets used, it will flag the speaker as being from specific regions, will flag you as not knowing the "real" meaning of the word because simply understanding what it potentially means is enough to make you know to never use it casually for something else and will make you look like you are struggling with English. Not that any of those things are not true, but the purpose of this thread was to see if people who cannot pass as native English speakers would like information on how to more easily pass for one.
It is difficult to simply "mimic" other speakers, sometimes things that are said seem reasonable but to a native speak a word like revert cannot be missed or ignored in the slightest.
-
I always wondered why they seemed so much in a hurry to get an answer, yet later in those threads you'd see where they weren't in a hurry after all.
-
@Brett-at-ioSafe said:
I always considered it somewhat pretentious - it was often used by the same people who'd use ""Very truly yours" or similar as a valediction.
Yes, very much pretentious. But worse than just formal, "putting on airs" style formal where words are just used without knowing what they mean. That Oxford lists it as "formal" for a very "technical" word is a tip off there.
It's management speak - like cloud. A word that people hear other people use and not understanding it they try to copy them by repeating the sounds without any idea that they are saying something specific and very different from their intention. Revert is a management buzzword, just one from a region rather than a technology group.
-
@Dashrender said:
I always wondered why they seemed so much in a hurry to get an answer, yet later in those threads you'd see where they weren't in a hurry after all.
Yes, I think it is a mistaken formality - just a guess. I would assume that in one or more of the primary languages there is a need for that kind of formality and it is expected. And when translated by word, rather than by intent, it comes through to English or other western languages as a very odd and unnecessary written pattern. It's so strong that even when reading languages I do not speak well it stands out as odd.
-
I don't think that we ever got any responses from anyone that wasn't a native English speaker, except for @joy, as to whether this would be helpful or not.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
.... we compiled a guide to things that are never said by Western English speakers that immediately tip people off that English is not your first language? There are many of these "tells" that make it very obvious where someone is from based on their written language. In most cases they do not cause communications problems, but they do "give away" more than I think most people want given away by their written communications.
I don't want to do this if people do not feel it would be valuable, I don't want the spirit of it to be taken the wrong way. But I just spoke with someone in Spanish and instantly knew that Spanish was not their first language and knew where they were from just from the phrases they were uses and how they wrote.
I feel that knowing some simple basics to avoid could be extremely helpful in allowing those from outside the big English native countries (UK, Canada, USA, Belize, Australia, New Zealand, etc.) to be less obvious. I am guessing that bad speech patterns are taught in some regions of the world and that people learning English there have no idea that they are being taught very identifiable and non-standard English. Generally it is not wrong but does not conform to western speech.
Thoughts?
Guys who had started learning English in former Soviet Union (35+ years old) were usually taught by people who had never in their lives actually talk to anybody talking native English speaking people. You can guess results
-
@KOOLER said:
Guys who had started learning English in former Soviet Union (35+ years old) were usually taught by people who had never in their lives actually talk to anybody talking native English speaking people. You can guess results
That is common almost everywhere. When I travel people are always excited to practice their English with me. There are English language schools everywhere here in Granada and I always wonder if they have English speakers running them or just people that can fool the locals into thinking that they can speak English.
I saw one last night: "Learn English, Secure Your Future." Meanwhile I met English speaking locals out on the street who are begging because, apparently, speaking English only, at best, makes you a top candidate for seasonal restaurant work.
