Off-topic
Because “distanciation” doesn’t have that meaning in French. It’s not about ‘bad associations’, but rather about commonly accepted meanings of the word, at least up to that point in time. I asked my French room mate, who’s younger than me (he’s 19 or 20) and thus should be less attached to old definitions, about it during the confinement, because I quite frankly was surprised to hear the criticisms levelled against the term “distanciation sociale”. I thought it was fine, though I frankly had never used the verb “distancier”, which is what gives us “distanciation”. After some thought, he told me that it was true that “distanciation” didn’t have a physical, concrete meaning in French, but rather an abstract one, though the amount of time he took suggested that he had never considered the question before. We can call it the evolution of a language. I’ll grant you that.
More off-topic
I think we should just agree to disagree at this point. I’ve already conceded that it has probably entered common usage, which means I can and probably should use this word in order to be understood. I’m not willing to back up any further. I believe our priorities and the things we ‘care about as language learners’ are also different, because I prioritise correctness over just being understood. I am by no means accusing you of not bothering with correctness, and I’m pretty sure your Japanese is better than mine, but I think we can agree that we attribute different levels of priority to correctness and comprehensibility, and that we use different yardsticks to measure correctness. My yardstick for correctness is what’s in widely respected dictionaries and what’s considered correct by grammarians, official rules and similar sources. I still twinge on the inside whenever I knowingly violate a French grammar rule in order to avoid standing out because it’s ignored by almost everyone in informal speech. I also wince when I hear native speakers make mistakes with respect to formal grammar, even though I know that their usage is acceptable in certain circles. To me, it’s important to know what’s officially or formally correct, and what is just common usage, so that I can adapt my language use to the context I’m in. It might be because I’m from a country in which non-standard English is spoken on a daily basis, so ‘code-switching’ is a very important thing for me since I wouldn’t be able to keep the two grammars and lexicons from spilling into each other otherwise. That’s why I’m so attached to figuring this out, even if it looks like I’m just splitting hairs.
画面 is actually the picture that is seen by both users, which I think you could qualify as being ‘co-owned’ or at least ‘jointly had’. I personally see no conflict with the kanji here.
Interesting, though we don’t know who was responsible for the translation. Perhaps the focus is on the end result, seeing as an intermediate step (e.g. sending a link) is possible. I can imagine someone saying 「共有しましょう」to suggest sharing something, which wouldn’t require the common ownership or experience to be presently realised, though I obviously don’t have any experience with usage to back this feeling up. I guess everyone’s examples are gradually convincing me…
Kinda on-topic, but skippable aside from the sentence related to 共有
Maybe I should explain just one more thing about myself: because of my tendency to code-switch and put up walls between the languages I know, and a certain level of perfectionism, I tend to be a purist when I pick up new languages. The reason I try to abandon translations as quickly as I can is because I want to avoid unnecessary foreign influence in my use of the target language. When I see similarities between how a word is used in the target language and how it is used in my language, I don’t go, ‘Goody, another easy word!’ My question is ‘where do the similarities stop?’ I don’t like having to accept foreign influence on usage in my target language unless I can see that it’s well-established and accepted as correct. That’s why I’m so reluctant to accept this use of 共有: I want to see it in a Japanese product, because for now, it still feels mostly like a bad translation for products coming from the Anglosphere, even though I’m slowly warming to the idea in certain cases. Similarly, I still refuse to say “j’ai réalisé” in French for ‘I (have) realised’, forcing myself instead to stick to the relatively long “je me suis rendu compte”, even though many of my friends use the former, because none of the other meanings of the verb “réaliser” in French match or come close to this idea. This self-imposed discipline (or hair-splitting, if you prefer) may make me look like a stickler, but it helps me minimise unnatural-but-understandable expressions in my speech, avoiding confusion for native speakers and making my usage acceptable to as many native speakers as possible. I also see it as a way of preserving the authenticity of the target language, instead of contributing to the propagation of some sort of English-based ‘globish’ that encourages everyone to express themselves based on the norms and thought processes found in the world’s dominant language.
In conclusion, yes, my priorities are likely very different from those of a typical language learner. Perhaps I also chose a bad example, since it seems that 共有する being used to mean ‘transmit in order to share’ is fairly widespread, at least in products coming from the Anglosphere that are used in Japan. @Ddjross and everyone else are free to ignore my concerns. I simply wished to raise awareness of the fact that some default translations are poorly done, and that it might be worthwhile, if only for expanding one’s vocabulary and for one’s own reference, to look up other possibilities instead of absorbing interface translations as correct or natural in all circumstances, since English words and their translations do not necessarily correspond perfectly.
