I recently decided to get back into learning languages, and right now, I’m focusing on German as my main priority since it’s similar to my native language, Yiddish. My next languages to master are French, Spanish, and Portuguese. As I dive into these new languages, I’ve noticed that some words are almost universal, which made me reflect on how different cultures express ideas, emotions, and values through language.

One word that is mostly universal is “okay.” For English speakers, this is obvious—it’s typically written as “ok” in casual speech and “okay” in more formal writing. German also uses “okay,” as do French and Spanish speakers. However, in Spanish and Portuguese cultures, it’s almost always spelled “ok.”

In Mandarin Chinese, the word “okay” 可以  (kěyǐ) is commonly used, but the English loanword “OK” is also frequent in casual speech. In Korean, people use “오케이” (okei) (borrowed from English), but they also say “괜찮아” (gwaenchana), meaning “it’s fine” or “it’s okay.” Meanwhile, in Thai, “okay” is also borrowed, but native expressions like “ได้” (dai) or “โอเค” (oke) are preferred in casual conversations.

The Word “Baby” and Cultural Differences in Expressing Love

Another word that sparked my interest is “baby.” In most cultures, “baby” refers to both a literal infant and a romantic partner. This is common in German, French, Spanish, and Portuguese as well. However, in Hasidic Yiddish-speaking communities, "baby" is only used for an actual infant. Romantic expressions are typically more private, and terms of endearment like “מיין ליבלעך” (mayn libelekh – “my love”) are more common.

In Asian cultures, similar patterns exist. For example: In Korean, partners use “여보” (jagi) (meaning “honey” or “darling”), but it doesn’t mean “baby.” In Mandarin Chinese, romantic terms focus on beauty, admiration, or closeness. For example, “宝贝” (bǎobèi) means “precious treasure” and is used like “baby” in English. And In Japanese, people rarely call their partners “baby.” Instead, terms like “ダーリン” (dārin – “darling”) or “愛しい” (itoshii – “beloved”) are more common.

The difference lies in how cultures express love. Yiddish-speaking, Asian, and African cultures often value actions more than words. Love is expressed through respect and gestures—not necessarily pet names. In these cultures, calling someone “baby” doesn’t carry much meaning, but buying flowers or showing kindness through actions is deeply valued. By contrast, Western cultures still value actions like giving flowers or holding hands in public, but calling someone “baby” has a much deeper meaning—it’s an emotional connection as well as a term of affection.

“Sorry” and the Cultural Divide in Apologies

Similarly, the meaning of “sorry” differs between Western and non-Western cultures.
In Western cultures, saying “I’m sorry” is often seen as sufficient to express remorse. However, in Asian, African, and Yiddish-speaking cultures, an apology is expected to be accompanied by actions that repair the harm. As a child, when I did something wrong, simply saying “I’m sorry” wasn’t enough—I had to make it right through actions. In Jewish traditions, this idea is deeply embedded in prayers and rituals, especially during the High Holidays and Yom Kippur. Jewish prayers emphasize asking for forgiveness through specific actions and commitments to improve. Speeches by rabbis often focus on the tangible steps one must take to correct their mistakes. This made me wonder: Why do some cultures accept a simple "I'm sorry," while others require real actions to seek forgiveness?

One possible answer is that Western cultures have a long history of committing atrocities against other cultures—stealing land from Indigenous people, enslaving Black people, and viewing non-Western cultures as inferior. These injustices created lasting inequalities in wealth, healthcare, and social mobility. Over time, Western societies became tired of acknowledging and correcting their actions, so saying "I’m sorry" replaced actual reparations. Instead of making meaningful amends, Western societies justified their actions by upholding white supremacy and protecting the power of the privileged.

As time passed, "sorry" became overused, while real change remained stagnant. Many white people today struggle to understand why reparations for the descendants of enslaved people are necessary. They ask: "You weren’t a slave, so why do you deserve reparations?" or "Slavery happened a long time ago—why are we still talking about it?" At the same time, Black Americans, especially Black women, continue to be left out of important healthcare studies, economic opportunities, and social policies.

Political Apologies: The Illusion of Remorse Without Action

We see this pattern repeating today. Many Republican voters from the last election are now regretting their vote as they realize the policies they supported are actively harming them, too. But when they face backlash from the people who warned them about Project 2025, they ask, "I thought this was the party of love?" or "Why can’t we just move forward?" They expect a simple apology to be enough, while at the same time, Black Americans, trans people, and other marginalized groups continue to warn about the dangers of rising authoritarianism.

For trans people, this isn’t just a debate—it’s a matter of survival. The lies and fearmongering used against the trans community have resulted in: Delays in passport approvals (making it harder to leave the country). Legal barriers to being recognized as a person. An increase in transphobic laws and violence. While Western societies continue to rely on verbal apologies as a way to “move on,” marginalized communities are demanding real change.

Final Thoughts: Words vs. Actions in the Fight for Justice

As we see in politics today, the expectation that "I’m sorry" is enough continues to shape national debates, particularly in how Western societies confront historical injustices. In many cases, those who have benefited from oppressive systems—whether through colonization, slavery, or economic exploitation—believe that acknowledging past wrongs should be sufficient. But verbal recognition alone does not undo systemic harm, nor does it dismantle the structures that continue to disenfranchise marginalized communities. True justice demands action, yet too often, societies use language as a way to delay or entirely avoid meaningful change.

In Western cultures, this reliance on apologies without reparative action is deeply ingrained, stemming from generations of refusing to fully reckon with the consequences of their past. The discomfort of accountability has led to a pattern where words replace the need for restitution. Meanwhile, those who continue to suffer from the aftereffects of colonialism, racial discrimination, and economic inequality are expected to accept symbolic gestures while the core issues remain unresolved. This is why reparations for Black Americans are so fiercely debated—because for many, the very idea of economic and systemic redress contradicts the notion that an apology should be the final step in reconciliation.

We see this pattern repeating in modern politics, where many Republican voters who regret their previous choices now expect instant forgiveness for supporting policies that actively harm marginalized communities. The realization that their own well-being is also at risk has forced some to reconsider their stance, yet they remain frustrated by the backlash they receive. They ask, "I thought this was the party of love?" or "Why can’t we just move forward?" But moving forward without action is not justice. It is merely the continuation of the same pattern—where the privileged expect the oppressed to extend forgiveness without the necessary changes that would prevent further harm.

For trans people, this isn't just a political debate—it’s a matter of survival. The fearmongering and misinformation that have been weaponized against them are leading to real, tangible consequences. Trans people in the U.S. are now facing bureaucratic hurdles in securing passports, making it increasingly difficult for them to leave the country. Their very existence is being challenged through restrictive laws that strip them of basic rights, reinforcing the idea that certain identities can simply be erased through policy. And yet, when confronted with these realities, those in power offer little more than empty platitudes, expecting their words to suffice in the face of oppression.

Western societies have long mastered the art of using language as a shield—a tool to deflect responsibility while maintaining the status quo. But history shows that words alone have never been enough to create meaningful change. In cultures where apologies must be followed by action, there is an understanding that words without effort are hollow. Justice is not simply about recognition; it is about repair, about making amends in a way that ensures the harm is not perpetuated. The question now is whether Western societies will finally move beyond symbolic gestures and take the necessary steps toward real change—or if they will continue to rely on apologies as a substitute for progress. History doesn't make me to confident in the better but maybe I'm wrong.

📌 Disclaimer

This post explores linguistic and cultural differences across various communities, including Western, Jewish, African, and Asian cultures. While I have firsthand experience with Yiddish-speaking Hasidic communities, I acknowledge that I am not an expert on all the cultures discussed, particularly those of Asian and African traditions. My observations are based on personal research, language learning, and cultural exposure, but there may be nuances or perspectives I have missed. If I have misrepresented any cultural aspect, I welcome respectful corrections and insights, as my goal is to foster meaningful discussions about language, history, and justice."