If language were simply a nomenclature for a set of universal concepts, it would be easy to translate from one language to another. One would simply replace the Portuguese name for a concept with the English name. If language were like this the task of learning a new language would also be much easier than it is. Anyone who has attempted either of these tasks has acquired, alas , a vast amount of direct proof that languages are not nomenclatures, that the concepts… of one language may differ radically from those of another….. Each language articulates or organizes the world differently. Languages do not simply name existing categories, they articulate their own. For example Portuguese doesn’t have equivalence for the words “bully” or “impeach”, and some Portuguese words without English equivalents such as “jarrete” (the back of the knee), and “tez” (complexion or skin colour). So problems can arise from lack of equivalence at word level during translation; what does a translator do when there is no word in the target language which expresses the same meaning as the source language word? Is word the main unit of meaning in language? What kind of meaning it can convey, and how languages differ in the way they choose to express certain meanings but not others?
