European phrase?

February 16, 2006 10:18 AM

I've noticed when reading European books translated into English, the turn of phrase "Do sex" or "sex each other" etc. Is this an accurate translation, or is it a watered down translation for the tradionial f-word in American English? British books sometimes feature it as well. Are both phrases used in Europe? Is there a difference in meaning?
posted by rainbaby to Writing & Language (19 answers total)

The "traditional f- word in American English" is our language's most powerful and offensive obscenity, and is therefore not a great option for a book's translation, unless the work being translated uses an equally powerful and offensive obscenity in its own language. If a translator has done her job right, she will not translate a reference to sex by using the f- word unless the reference warrants the use of that term.

(and the fact that some Americans throw the f- word around like it was nothing special has little effect on that -- if a European book contains dialogue where the speaker is the type of person who throws around obscenities like it was nothing, then in that case the similarly strong english obscenities would be warranted)
posted by JekPorkins at 10:52 AM on February 16, 2006

Anecdotally, I've always assumed this was because of the presence of the verb faire (in French) or a face (in Romanian, another language from the same general family) which means to do or to make. This doesn't translate literally into English well, so while we say "have sex" their literal phrasing is "make sex"

So, a literal translation of the French "go fuck yourself" is "va te faire foutre" or "go do yourself a fuck". Similarly in Romanian when you go for a walk, you "fac o plimbare" or "make/do a walk". More than you want to know about Romanian verbs over at Wikipedia.
posted by jessamyn at 10:53 AM on February 16, 2006

The phrase "do sex" sounds like a child's eye view to me.

JekPorkins, offensiveness or obscenity is of course dependent on context. You might be surprised that the same "type of person" who would recoil in shock if someone boorishly used the verb "fuck" in its literal context at, say, work is the very same person who would use it mundanely, innoffensively, and unobscenely when talking to his wife about their lovelife while dutifully scrubbing her back in the shower.

Also, "fuck" is not the most offensive word in English. It is much less offensive than "cunt".
posted by dydecker at 11:22 AM on February 16, 2006

dydecker, a good translator is well aware of the subtleties of the usage of obscenities in both the original language of the text and the language into which the text is being translated. I appreciate the tutorial (though I'm not surprised, as you imagined I might be). The contexts you describe are present in literary accounts, since they generally try to describe situations and people, and varied translations are, therefore, appropriate. If a book uses language A's obscenty, then the translation to language B might appropriately include an equivalent obscenity (if there is one).
posted by JekPorkins at 11:31 AM on February 16, 2006

You see my point.
posted by dydecker at 11:47 AM on February 16, 2006

some languages use the same word for do/make (like french), they could mean "making love" and not "doing sex"....
posted by blue_beetle at 11:49 AM on February 16, 2006

The "traditional f- word in American English" is our language's most powerful and offensive obscenity, and is therefore not a great option for a book's translation, unless the work being translated uses an equally powerful and offensive obscenity in its own language.

"Cunt" and "nigger" are still vastly more offensive to the American ear than "fuck," which is hardly "our language's most powerful and offensive obscenity."

Also, people don't "throw around" the word "fuck." They use it. In different parts of America, at different levels of class and education, across races and religions, the word "fuck" has long since been devalued of any purely offensive force and has acquired many unambiguous forms and uses. This is common knowledge that any good translator will know.

Many Europeans use "fuck" too—it is widely understood from Moscow to Madrid and I have seen it appear untranslated and unglossed in French, Spanish, Swedish, and German texts.
posted by Mo Nickels at 11:52 AM on February 16, 2006

PS: Görlach's Dictionary of European Anglicism shows that "fuck" as a verb and interjection, as well as "fucked up" adj. and "fuck-up" n., have been adopted to a noteworthy degree in German, Dutch, Norwegian, Icelandic, Romanian, Russian, Polish, Bulgarian, and Greek.
posted by Mo Nickels at 11:56 AM on February 16, 2006

That should be Dictionary of European Anglicisms...
posted by Mo Nickels at 11:57 AM on February 16, 2006

I've never seen that phrase. Can you give an example of a book where you read it? At first glance, it just looks like a bad translation.

No matter how the verb works in their language, we say "have sex" not "do" or "make". So the translator should have translated it that way.
posted by AmbroseChapel at 11:59 AM on February 16, 2006

I like the phrase "do sex." I think I am going to incorporate it into my daily speech, along with "sex each other."
posted by Astro Zombie at 12:01 PM on February 16, 2006

Response by poster: Upon further review, it appears the child-like view dydecker suggested may be it. I just read "The Ninth Life of Louis Drax" by Liz Jensen, which was written in English, although she has lived in France, where the novel was set. It was also used in "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime" - also a child narrator, also British writer. I was also thinking of Houellebecq, but his translated books also used fuck and all manner of expressions.

So - childlike, British, French?

I may join the movement to adopt these phrases into general US usage, Astro Zombie. Thanks everyone.
posted by rainbaby at 12:15 PM on February 16, 2006

"Sex" is listed in the OED as a slangy synonym for "to have sexual intercourse." However, it is listed there as an intransitive verb. Therefore, phrases like "sex each other", in which the verb takes an object, are incorrect. The transitive verb form of "sex" means "to determine the sex of, by anatomical examination."

Since sex-as-transitive-verb has a specific meaning in English and there are plenty of other ways in which English casually refers to intercourse, I'd say this is overly literal and bad translation.
posted by amber_dale at 12:18 PM on February 16, 2006

I've heard people whose first language is a Romance language use the expression "make sex," but it's basically an incorrect translation (same with "do sex"), unless the translator is deliberately using it to indicate an unfamiliarity with the language or, as some have suggested, a childlike lexicon.
posted by anjamu at 1:03 PM on February 16, 2006

My love for you is like a truck, Berserker.
posted by Pollomacho at 1:25 PM on February 16, 2006

May I refer my learned colleagues to the use of the word in the phrase "I Wanna Sex You Up"? I submit that this is a colloquial compound transitive form of the word "sex" used as a verb.
posted by AmbroseChapel at 2:11 PM on February 16, 2006

Not to mention R. Kelly's Sex Me. And "sex each other" is easily googled as current idiom, though I would class it as a particular slang phrase not yet within standard English.

I suspect it's just a translator with a tin ear.
posted by dhartung at 11:59 PM on February 16, 2006

Then there's the southern Louisiana idiom, "making groceries" to go shopping.
posted by commander_cool at 6:34 AM on February 17, 2006

this is either a terrible translation (no, we don't routinely say 'do sex' or 'sex each other' in British English), or the context is such that it's a childish usage - the latter sounds quite plausible to me. I'd be interested to hear where exactly you saw it. I don't imagine it's that widespread (though I remember the one in Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime).
posted by altolinguistic at 9:24 AM on February 17, 2006