The choice of language used in the second paragraph indicates the author’s certainty both about the existence of a large quantity of tongues spoken by humans and about the number of such languages.

In the first paragraph the author emphasizes the biological similarities presented by human beings and claims that people are the same but for the different languages they speak.

For the author, the act of translation is connected with philosophical issues which have a straightforward and easy explanation: “men speak different languages” (L.1-2).

In the text, the expression “to put forward” (R.22) can be correctly replaced by define or establish.

If the phrase “grapple with” (L.18-19) were to be replaced by deal with, come to grips with, or tackle, the general idea conveyed in the text would remain the same.

All texts can be analysed from a semiotic perspective.

The relationships between the different signs of a specific language are unique. However, such relationships can be identically reproduced during the translation process depending on the skills of the translator.

The sentence “The catching and eating of other animals is by no means the sole diet of a wild carnivore” is inaccurate and has defects which might easily be carried over into a translation.

The following sentence presents a problem of “meaning”: “Emotion is running high at the moment, but that emotion must not be allowed to temper sensible judgement”.

There is an ambiguity in the following excerpt: “The British Government makes little effort to tap European Community Funds for training women because they discriminate against men, according to the Department of Employment”.