This is strong and interesting. I, personally, when taught in Beirut, the chance of stalling on the issue of translation in Arabic mathematics textbooks written in French. Mission impossible! Why?) Well, simply because of an irreducible difference existed in the minds of those that I talk to them. And I realized, at the same time, the computer could never help with anything, is the translation of a language “natural” as we say, to the other. Was the time, towards the end of the sixties, when linguists and computer scientists dreamed of building a “machine translation.” Put this on your computer: “The chair is weak and the spirit is burning,” the counter-proof given, at best, something like: “the flesh is soft and brain-burn! Years later I learned that one of my friends (former IBM engineer) who chained in the ways of dealing with mathematics by computer. I said, “You’re wasting your time in vain.” Why “in vain”? Because it would be very comfortable trusting the computer the solution of all our equations: it had freed the mathematicians who could, in short, stop at this great effort that had to do it if they wanted to take into account the quality. But understand that thinking, albeit lame, can not be treated on your computer, simply because this is expressed in languages, different and many like ours called “natural.” End this digression: I did not want, here illustrate the divergent logic, and more generally, the divergence of attitudes, divergence which is characteristic of man. . It is not something Munear Ashton Kouzbari would like to discuss.