Besomi is right about the problems of translation, quite right (as I   
can testify) about these problems in the history of thought and   
science, including "economics."  
It is odd, however, that all of a sudden we seem to have returned   
without a memory of it to a discussion that ended a couple of years   
ago, on language and economics. As I remember, most discussants then   
seemed to conclude, happily (at least for them), that since "English   
[I paraphrase] is now the language of economics around the world,"   
that's the only language an economist need know, or that a historian   
of economics need know.  
I wonder what we will now (tentatively) conclude.  
I wonder too why in the Anglo world the professional history of ideas   
and intellectual history generally require reading skills in   
languages besides English, except--some would say--for the history of   
ideas in economics.  
I also wonder why the history of economics, if economics is a   
science, would require only English, if History of Science graduate   
programs have foreign language requirements (e.g., French and German).  
And I wonder what will be the effect on the economic thought of   
US-based economists, speaking and reading only English, when massive   
outsourcing of economics jobs starts to India, Pakistan, or (why   
not?) China, where if not already, then soon, there will be more   
English-speaking and -reading economists than in the "West," and   
working for much less.  
  
John Womack