Translation challenge... for me

[zompist]

BTW, not a single lexicon lists a word for "process", not even Verdurian.

English has so many near-synonyms that you have to be a little flexible looking up words. žuydoni should work in most contexts.

[catberry]

"George [or other common name] was skeptical that the device would work as advertised."

I know it's lame, but it's the only one I could come up with.

[rotting bones]

Thanks. I saw "procedure", but I was looking for a word that denotes "process" as opposed to "state". There are ways around it, I suppose. Words exist for "dynamic" and "movement" for starters. In all honesty, I think it's a real credit to you that "process" occurs so many times in grammars and lexicons, and yet the languages they describe seem to be doing fine without such a concept.

[zompist]

When I look at people that I would like to feel have been a mentor or an inspiring kind of archetype of what I'd love to see my career eventually be mentioned as a footnote for in the same paragraph, it would be, like, Bowie.

Mêgle kath gzhêç bigo zhêthno at
that.time being mention.E I.inf someone one
kath gepughiw shêv bigo tsuth shono bigo
being perhaps authority.of I.inf guide.D he.resp I.inf
wamin kath lavne ôskwadhiw dzan dhnoradzu
or be.D type make-burn-act.part of model-big
kath demaf ghyith nikla,
being see.E want.E I.inf this.idea
gzhêge çir tlatsa khukwo dzam bigo bo izgeche lith tono chozhiw dzan zozh
mention.E-pl after sometimes job of I.inf in footnote for paragraph same-act.part of it
tsaw zhetsu Bowi.
there.is-D and-yes Bowie

Lordy, that's a sentence. It did make me think about a few new syntactic and pragmatic constructions!

[bulbaquil]

Thanks. I saw "procedure", but I was looking for a word that denotes "process" as opposed to "state". There are ways around it, I suppose. Words exist for "dynamic" and "movement" for starters. In all honesty, I think it's a real credit to you that "process" occurs so many times in grammars and lexicons, and yet the languages they describe seem to be doing fine without such a concept.

Mebharan has a word for "process" (bolt), but this word could also be translated as "method" or "procedure" (and, in fact, the verbal prototype for it is closer to "method" than it is "process").

So that this is not off topic, I offer the following sentence:

" 'I do not see the point of a Verdurian citizen, within the boundaries of Verduria, kowtowing to the whim of a Barakhinei barbarian,' the irascible Meleon Savley hissed."

[rotting bones]

This is on topic... sort of. Every language isn't great at conveying every nuance. Of course, I'd rather have zompist omit words, concepts and syntactic forms with full awareness than without, and I trust him not to give the Dekhnami any "vituperative" judges.

[zompist]

"One can work within any structure, but some structures are more appropriate than others, and there is no one structure which is universally appropriate."

Khukh çish tlôyno bo lithgemormo at, ôwmin shnejawa zhêdhe lilithgemormo tlôr tlim,
work.D can.D someone in structure any / however fit.E.-pl exceed.E-pl pl-structure some other,

zamin shnejaruw lithgemormo pwashi bo gagatwo she.
moreover fit.E.not structure no in pl-situation every

[zompist]

The vituperative judge arranged for the Bard to be burned to ash at the stake for vigorously raping his wife.

Genebam oshujyosh khyagashiw nikla, gwadôth sifno penath wêtla çir tsatwe denish shombebaç pekso dzan shono.
order.D.past judge berate-act.part this.idea burn.E.fut sing-man using pole to ash because rape.E.past he.inf wife of he.D

The ambiguity couldn't be preserved— it has to be pekso dzan shono 'the wife of him.D' referring to the judge, or pekso dzan zono 'the wife of him.E' referring to the bard. I chose the first but the second could certainly be used (though it would sound very odd to the Dhekhnami— sex with an inferior adult is not a crime).

It may amuse people to find Verdurian cognates... there's been a few, including one in this sentence.

[Delthayre]

Hey, neat, especially seeing how the ambiguity was treated. The interpretation that you chose is the one that I originally had in mind; the sentence at first referred to a King arranging for the bard's fiery execution, but I changed it soon afterward since I thought that the sentence with the judge would be slightly more interesting. I was also curious as to how you might treat vituperative.

I dread that I might be betraying ignorance or obtuseness in asking so, but: What exactly do D and E mean in the glosses?

Dhenknami has an interesting orthography. It succeeds, to my eyes, in not looking immediately like any natural language.

[zompist]

Struggle is an illusion. The tide rises, the tide falls, but the sea is changeless. There is nothing to struggle against. Victory is in the Qun.

Gath zekwo bendemapwo.
be.E fighting illusion

Gwaydoth mwachwo zh pôshdoth mwachwo ôwmin zhdêrut tle.
above-go.E tide and below-go.E tide however change.E.not sea

Dzaruw tlôyla kath gath dzide zozh.
exist.E.not something being struggle.E you.inf it

Dzaw gwatwo bo Kun.
exist.E victory in Qun

[zompist]

I dread that I might be betraying ignorance or obtuseness in asking so, but: What exactly do D and E mean in the glosses?

They refer to two of the three ranks applied to verb. D is used for superiors, E for inferiors. (The third, B, is used for gods and ktuvoks or for very high human officials.) This isn't quite the same as Munkhâshi's five ranks, but they do descend from them— except for A and C which were lost.

Dhenknami has an interesting orthography. It succeeds, to my eyes, in not looking immediately like any natural language.

Thanks. I am not fond of the digraphs any more but they've been used for thirty years in Almeology. Without them the language would probably look more like Verdurian!

[rotting bones]

Awesome, I like it. The choice of words still looks distinctively European to me, though. This wouldn't be a big deal if the Dekhnami don't get into a habit of talking like that, but how much of a choice will they have if most of their vocabulary is inspired by Sal's reading list? I'm just saying, can't we please have looser translations?

[Salmoneus]

I don't understand your objection. There's nothing specifically "European" about these concepts, I don't think - most every language will have to have a word or phrase for "vituperative", after all.

What's more your egotistical children sentence is something that would never be said in English, except in academic circles, where a large percentage of the lines I offered ARE things that normal people would say.

[rotting bones]

What's more your egotistical children sentence is something that would never be said in English, except in academic circles, where a large percentage of the lines I offered ARE things that normal people would say.

I'm aware of that, and yet it uses concepts and forms of expression that are less strictly typical of English than some of the other sentences. I'm talking about maintaining untranslatability across speech patterns, which you'd know a lot more about than me. What I do know is that many of these sentences will sound unpolished or even ridiculous if translated directly into modern Indic languages. Not because such translations are syntactically impossible; rather, good wording and sentence structure in English is often bad style in other languages.

"I'm not a suspicious person" sounds fine to the Japanese, whereas an English speaker wouldn't even use "There's no reason to be suspicious of me" in similar contexts. "Then, climbing through, the rat came into her hole, biting her whelps, [she] made [them] squek, dragging the plank dish, [she] made a noise," and "Then, coming in, the frog took a knife for cutting out from behind a pillow, carrying [it], coming out, pricking up, killed [it]," aren't awkward sentences in Nivkh, but require substantial rearrangement and rewording for decent translations into English. Without revision, "vituperative judge" might just be sucky Dekhnami.

As for the structural effects of vocabulary, I think receiving a large lexical influence encourages analysis, hence phrasing, in patterns imitative of the source register. For example, a language that doesn't have a fitting word for "process" may force its speakers to describe the same phenomenon in terms of "impermanence of the object" instead. It's possible to elaborate a complete process-oriented metaphysics without utilizing the English concept of "process". This may not be the best example; still, don't you think revising the pool of available concepts can have a significant impact on speech pattern depending on the nature and extent of the revision? I'd love to see translations like that; sentences that reanalyze concepts from scratch, but carry more or less the same meaning.

This additional intellectual exercise is often what lazy bilingual speakers seek to avoid by means of code-switching. Just the other day, I said "Kon basis-e..." (on what basis) instead of, say, "Ki karon-e..." (for what reason). I can't think of a Bengali word for "basis" that can be used in the same manner. Anyway, this is my understanding of the matter. I have no formal training in linguistics, so it's likely that all this quackery is based on a fundamental misunderstanding on my part, especially since I thought this stuff was pretty basic. If so, please correct my misconceptions. That said, what style is acceptable to the Demoshi is up to zompist. I was just expressing a desire (repeatedly) to see alternate phrasing and looser translations more often, that's all.

Redundant or not, I guess I should have ended the "vituperative" line with a

[Jetboy]

Wouldn't it be a better idea to let Zomp adjust them to Dekhnami good style, rather than trying to second guess or dictate that style ourselves?

[rotting bones]

Definitely, but this is not always possible without making drastic changes. The kind that preserves the original meaning while bulldozing over rhythm, flow, metaphor and pretty much every element of style. I was a little worried that with sentences like "The youth, however, responded with quick flicks of his wrist, showing sharp-edged coins their way through the air to pierce the itinerant projectiles" up for translation, Dekhnami might develop too many one-to-one correspondences with English usage. It doesn't have to, and I'm not suggesting we do things differently. Carry on!

PS. Remember, the whole point of this exercise is to build a larger Dekhnami lexicon. The obvious solution is to translate the sentences loosely.

[zompist]

rotting, I think you're assuming too much about the Dhekhnami, or perhaps not reading the glosses. Both the syntax and vocabulary have to be approximated to the closest Dhekhnami equivalents. English is much more keen on subclauses and nouns than Dhekhnami is, for instance.

Of course I didn't create a root for 'vituperative'; it's a lexical intensive of the word for 'complain', so it largely means 'berate, rail against'.

You could always supply a couple Bengalis sentences to translate (but I'd need glosses).

[rotting bones]

rotting, I think you're assuming too much about the Dhekhnami, or perhaps not reading the glosses.

I can't imagine why people always say that about me.

Both the syntax and vocabulary have to be approximated to the closest Dhekhnami equivalents. English is much more keen on subclauses and nouns than Dhekhnami is, for instance.

Of course I didn't create a root for 'vituperative'; it's a lexical intensive of the word for 'complain', so it largely means 'berate, rail against'.

lol I didn't say that's what was going on. I'm questioning whether the Demoshi would use this kind of phrasing to express the idea at all. Eg. If you had translated "I'm not a suspicious person," Dekhnami might now have a word, compound or phrase, whatever its etymology, meaning "suspicious person" in this context that wouldn't have existed otherwise. Am I the only one who thinks this would result in contamination by Japanese semantics if carried too far?

You could always supply a couple Bengalis sentences to translate (but I'd need glosses).

Count on it, but it will take a while to dig up sentences overwrought enough to counteract the process of Anglicization that has taken place already.

[Legion]

You could always supply a couple Bengalis sentences to translate (but I'd need glosses).

Count on it, but it will take a while to dig up sentences overwrought enough to counteract the process of Anglicization that has taken place already.

I did provide a French sentence. Maybe I should provide some more?

[rotting bones]

Sure, but that was a joke, kinda.

Mind you, this only matters if zompist is too literal in his translations.

[zompist]

Of course I didn't create a root for 'vituperative'; it's a lexical intensive of the word for 'complain', so it largely means 'berate, rail against'.

lol I didn't say that's what was going on. I'm questioning whether the Demoshi would use this kind of phrasing to express the idea at all. Eg. If you had translated "I'm not a suspicious person," Dekhnami might now have a word, compound or phrase, whatever its etymology, meaning "suspicious person" in this context that wouldn't have existed otherwise. Am I the only one who thinks this would result in contamination by Japanese semantics if carried too far?

Well, you keep noting that it's a danger without showing that it's happened. Granted you don't have the grammar yet, you have the glosses, and you can see that the words and syntax used are not identical to the English.

(Again, look at "vituperative"; in English this is an adjective, but there are very few adjectives in the English sense in Dhekhnami; mostly verbs are used instead. The Dhekhnami translation was an active participle, and based on a Munkhashi morphological process, the intensive, using a root (complain) that perfectly fits Munkhashi society. And in general, look, I've been creating languages for thirty years and know several non-Western terrestrial languages-- I'm very aware of making things too English-like.)

[rotting bones]

Well, you keep noting that it's a danger without showing that it's happened. Granted you don't have the grammar yet, you have the glosses, and you can see that the words and syntax used are not identical to the English.

Huh? This isn't something that can happen in a single step. It could happen if a significant portion of Dekhnami vocabulary is created by back-translating English sentences. I'm not saying anything did happen, I'm saying something might.

Again, look at "vituperative"; in English this is an adjective, but there are very few adjectives in the English sense in Dhekhnami; mostly verbs are used instead. The Dhekhnami translation was an active participle, and based on a Munkhashi morphological process, the intensive, using a root (complain) that perfectly fits Munkhashi society.

Thanks. I figured it would be something like that, but I'm talking about choice of words as opposed to etymology, morphology, syntax, etc.

Maybe I'm missing something here. To use my previous example, suppose I tell you to translate "Sense-perception is an unceasing process". If you create a Demoshi word meaning "process" and add it to the lexicon, then I'd say the language will become too English-like once most of its vocabulary consists of such back-translated words. I'd rather have you translate this as "The perceived world is impermanent," or even better, something that sounds downright bizarre in English. My example is too abstract to illustrate this easily, but thinking of "process" as a concept that lends itself to metaphor (I'm mainly concerned with these) instead of a theoretical abstraction, I might suggest something like: "Chips flake off [could be one word] from that which is before us." This done, I'd have you refrain from creating a commonly used word "process" on purpose so that learners are forced to use native speech patterns.

And in general, look, I've been creating languages for thirty years and know several non-Western terrestrial languages-- I'm very aware of making things too English-like.

Sorry, appeal to authority.

Look, I've already admitted that I could be wrong about all this. You don't have to keep arguing about it. This is a low-key issue as far as I'm concerned and I promise to quit spamming.

[Salmoneus]

As usual, you haven't explained what you're worried about in real terms, only ideological ones.

How is translating "I am not a suspicious person" into Dekhnami going to make it "too Japanese"? Is English "too Japanese", in that case?

You seem to confusing language with physics. Turning "sense-perception is an unceasing process" into "the perceived world is impermanent" isn't "translating" (note, both are valid phrases in English!), but imposing a totally different theory of physics/metaphysics. That's like saying that to translate "the mass of an object does not change its velocity when falling" into ancient Greek, we need a sentence that actually means "heavier objects fall faster than light ones!".

On the one hand, you're stressing the (more or less) stupidity of non-English speakers, how they can't translate what we say but only some "equivalent" physical theory; yet at the same time you hypocritically demonstrate that all their theories can be expressed in English.

More concretely: you can't say that "sense-perception is an unceasing process" is the English way of saying something and "the perceived world is impermanent" is another language's way of saying it - because, firstly, the two say totally different things, and, secondly, because BOTH sentences are English! They are BOTH the English way of saying something! Now, one may be more representative of the academic metaphysics of English-speaking philosophers in the twentieth century, but that doesn't mean one is less "English" than the other.

Your other suggestion, ""Chips flake off [probably one word] from that which is before us" calls to mind what a Chinese philosopher might say. Because it is true that old Chinese philosophical works tended to employ a different literary style from those of Europe. But that's not something about the LANGUAGE. They didn't say things like that just because they couldn't translate Heraclitus more closely - they just chose to use a different style. But if a philosopher had decided to be less metaphorical and more direct, they wouldn't have stopped being true Chinese speakers - anymore than Nietzsche spoke a different language from Kant!

Finally, I want to stress that translating "sense-perception is an unceasing process" with a calque of "the perceived world is impermanent" is very poor translation indeed - because the two claims mean totally different things! A person could accept the one without qualm but reject the other, or accept the other happily but not permit the one. They don't mean the same thing! And any language ought to be able to express BOTH of them.

Otherwise, philosophy and physics could never have been translated from one language to another...

[zompist]

Dans un pareil univers d'animaux sensibles et raisonneurs il n'y a plus rien pour le saint, ou il faut le convaincre de folie.

Bo namshekash dzan lavne mim, zhidhiw titliçna tôshiw zh krawkharo, dzaruw pwashila lith benôghashno, wamin ôzbôsh shêfdoth nikla, dzits zono.
in world-great of kind this, with pl-animal perceive-act.part and reason-act.part / exist.E.not nothing for zeal-man / or prove.E must.E this.idea / crazy.E he.inf

The most difficult word here was ‘saint’. Benôghashno is literally one who follows intensively— a zealot or fundamentalist of Gelalhát. There's a slight connotation of excess; such a person makes life more difficult for everyone else. There’s a word gew ‘be holy, numinous’, but humans in general aren’t holy, only gods and ktuvoks are— gewno ‘holy person’ would sound very odd indeed. In the context of discussing another religion, such as Cadhinorian paganism or Jippirasti, foreign words could be borrowed, e.g. khokoy, a Sarnáean prophet or hermit.

[rotting bones]

zompist: Last post, I promise.

As usual, you haven't explained what you're worried about in real terms, only ideological ones.

As usual, you're an ornery bastard.

How is translating "I am not a suspicious person" into Dekhnami going to make it "too Japanese"? Is English "too Japanese", in that case?

Like I said, English speakers don't use "suspicious person" in the context that Japanese does. You'd know what I'm talking about if you were into anime.

You seem to confusing language with physics. Turning "sense-perception is an unceasing process" into "the perceived world is impermanent" isn't "translating" (note, both are valid phrases in English!), but imposing a totally different theory of physics/metaphysics.

Yes, thanks for explaining that more clearly. Languages often do not share assumed metaphysics, and consequently, the concepts used to express them.

That's like saying that to translate "the mass of an object does not change its velocity when falling" into ancient Greek, we need a sentence that actually means "heavier objects fall faster than light ones!".

You might have to, if the target language didn't have a word for "speed" or "velocity". When a language lacks a word for a concept, the usual practice is to borrow a word, coin one or use semantic twists to express the meaning via native speech patterns. The first two options don't make sense for Dekhnami. Why would the Demoshi come up with just that set of concepts which an English speaker would use? Note that this is only a problem if it's pervasive enough in the vocabulary of the language.

On the one hand, you're stressing the (more or less) stupidity of non-English speakers, how they can't translate what we say but only some "equivalent" physical theory; yet at the same time you hypocritically demonstrate that all their theories can be expressed in English.

Stupidity has nothing to do with it. English doesn't have a word for every concept imaginable, and yet theoretically, it can be used to discuss them all, depending on how you define "English".

This technicality gives rise to serious problems only in a very unusual situation, when crafting a believable conlang that's hermetically sealed from the languages used by the people creating it.