There are three things: language, speech and spoken language.
- Language: structured system of communication used by humans
- Speech: human vocal communication using language.
- Spoken language: a language produced by articulate sounds, as opposed to a written language (Well, like French, English…)
Basically, it is thanks to language that human beings communicate with others. Well, we all know the word is not enough. We also need the meaning, the context. It’s a set of things that makes it work and the other gets the “right” information (bye bye, robots, machines). Except that it is the society which tells us that “table” is a piece of wood with four legs. If we don’t know it, if we haven’t learned it, how can we know? Nothing innate, is it? Btw, I invite you guys to watch this incredible movie called: The Miracle Worker (1962, Arthur Penn). We see how a deaf, mute, blind person lives her life, until the day when she will understand that a specific sign means water to drink. And that day, she begins to communicate with the other. What a touching film. Well, where are my sheep? (Idiom, yes we have some things like that too: non-literal meaning)
In short, all this to say that the spoken language is just an expression mode to convey a message. Moreover, our spoken languages have evolved over the years, with history, culture… Latin is a good example. (Small nod to users of a dead language Ahah)
Well, the question is: French does not have the same words as the other languages (same for others like English…). Which sometimes limits our translations to something approximate. Here, we have two solutions. Either, we stay on something approximate. Either we use the original word and explain it. Besides, we do it with “oppa”, “Jie jie”…
Except that here, we don’t have the word that exists in French, it is untranslatable. Or, not necessarily entirely correct, but approximate: Noona becomes Madame. Which is correct in French, more than “sister”(sœur)
Except that in the case of Irmar, these are words that exist in Hindi. Well, I guess? For example, in French, we can say a “crush”, which comes from English. This word can exist in French in “sentiment”, “intérêt amoureux”, “béguin”…
Except that the English word has been used so much in France lately that this word has practically become a French word. Well, not yet in French academy dictionary, but…
I just saw that to crush comes from an initially French word, it’s funny, isn’t it? (cruising http://www.academie-francaise.fr/crush-pour-beguin). In addition, there has been a shift in meaning.
Conclusion: I believe that the main thing is to understand the information. Even if the word is not from the spoken language. On the other hand, if the word exists in the spoken language, I do not understand why we should not use them. Perhaps by doing this, in 100 years our spoken language will have evolved further. In 1000 years, we may all be speaking the same spoken language with evolution and borrowing from others. Well, I believe that there will always be a politician to remind us things, or a citizen who will scream for conservation of “heritage” (which anyway, to evolve and will continue to evolve, and which was created by humans beings).