Final answer:
The principle violated by translation equivalents is the assumption of direct one-to-one translation between languages, which is challenged by the unique cultural and conceptual frameworks of each language, as suggested by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
Step-by-step explanation:
The word-learning principle violated by translation equivalents can be associated with the idea that not all concepts or experiences are directly translatable between languages. This relates to linguistic concepts such as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which posits that the language we speak can influence the way we think and perceive the world.
In practice, this means that sometimes, when translating from one language to another, some words may not have a direct equivalent, thereby challenging the assumption of direct one-to-one translation. This is because each language reflects a unique culture and thought process.
When learning a foreign language, it's essential to understand that languages have different rules and structures, just as the rules of language are implicitly known to native speakers. For instance, the words 'flort' or 'squeet' could potentially be English words based on phonetic rules of the language, whereas 'trlaqtoef' and 'aoipw' violate these unspoken rules.
These differences highlight that one must get to a point where they understand the conventions and usage of a foreign language well enough that they can function in it as naturally as when they perform multiple tasks simultaneously while riding a bicycle, without focusing on the individual actions.