Re: Cheap, shallow and super: French deficiencies

Philippe Caquant wrote:

> It's also striking that French hasn't a word for
> *shallow*. This is even worse than *cheap*, because if
> I want to find the English, German or Spanish word for
> *bon marche'* in a lexicon, I can look at *marche*, or
> sometimes at *bon* ; but if I want to translate *peu
> profond* (the equivalent for *shallow*, lit. = little
> deep), I might often NOT find anything, neither at
> *profond*, nor at *peu*. So it will be impossible for
> me to know that there is such a word like *shallow*,
> or *flach* - in Spanish, I think that it is *bajo*,
> but I'm not sure.
If you mean a body of water (i.e. a lake or a swimming pool) that is not
deep, the word is *pando*.  For something that lies near the surface:
*superficial*.

-- Carlos Th