訊息: 4
語言: English
utopio_projekto (顯示個人資料) 2017年3月2日下午10:00:32
When "water" refers to the ocean or sea:
> Do you see the sparkles on the water?
sparkles = sparkles of light.
Is Google's translation sparkles -> "brilantaj" correct?
Does it make sense to use the direct translation water -> akvo when referring to the surface of the ocean?
> Do you see the sparkles on the water?
sparkles = sparkles of light.
Is Google's translation sparkles -> "brilantaj" correct?
Does it make sense to use the direct translation water -> akvo when referring to the surface of the ocean?
Vestitor (顯示個人資料) 2017年3月4日上午2:00:13
If the water in question is a distinct body of water, then you refer to it by its name: the sea, a river, a lake. If you're talking about the water contained in one of those bodies, then it's just 'water'.
Sparkles is, to me, not usual English. To sparkle, with reference to liquids, really means to effervesce rather than reflections of light or a 'glint' or 'shimmer' or 'glisten'.
Poetically I would ask: Ĉu la lumo dancas sur la akvo?
Sparkles is, to me, not usual English. To sparkle, with reference to liquids, really means to effervesce rather than reflections of light or a 'glint' or 'shimmer' or 'glisten'.
Poetically I would ask: Ĉu la lumo dancas sur la akvo?
tommjames (顯示個人資料) 2017年3月10日上午11:50:42
Is Google's translation sparkles -> "brilantaj" correct?"Brilantaj" is a plural adjective meaning "shining". I would use the verb "trembrili" here, so:
La akvo trembrilas
Ĉu vi vidas la trembrilojn sur la akvo
But there are other ways of putting it - Vestitor's "lumo dancas" is quite nice.
