訊息: 187
語言: English
T0dd (顯示個人資料) 2011年3月7日下午4:00:19
sudanglo:Kiel vesperto spertas la mondon.Interesting. I hadn't thought of it in terms of the bat's experience of the world, but why not?
Kiel spertiĝus la mondo, se vi estus vesperto.
Another possibility...
KIA ESTAS SPERTI KVAZAŬ VERSPERTO?
Is that comprehensible?
Miland (顯示個人資料) 2011年3月7日下午5:06:27
Here are my notes on the passage, assuming there are not likely to be any more attempts:
The word "Now" in my view is one of the hardest to translate. It draws attention, but not explicitly. Another hard question is whether to render "should" as something to be desired (and hence with an imperative), or as something likely (effectively, "would"). For now I have used the imperative where "should" is used, and I would follow the general preference of Esperanto for simpler tenses. Here's my suggestion for a translation:
Pripensu; ĉu vi vere dezirus ke tiuj kompatinduloj pekadu ĝis ili falis en inferon? Mi estas certa ke ne. Sed kiel alie eblis ke ili ekpreniĝu el la flamoj?
If "would" is preferred to "should" in terms of the meaning, we would have pekadus and ekpreniĝus respectively.
I've used flamoj because there are types of "fire" in the modern world used for heating which do not burn coal or wood, and "flames" might better convey to our minds that which "fire" would have to the 18th century author (he was John Wesley, by the way).
It is important to bear in mind that there is no unique best solution for problems like this. So to anyone who thinks "But I would done this or that better" - you may well be right!
The word "Now" in my view is one of the hardest to translate. It draws attention, but not explicitly. Another hard question is whether to render "should" as something to be desired (and hence with an imperative), or as something likely (effectively, "would"). For now I have used the imperative where "should" is used, and I would follow the general preference of Esperanto for simpler tenses. Here's my suggestion for a translation:
Pripensu; ĉu vi vere dezirus ke tiuj kompatinduloj pekadu ĝis ili falis en inferon? Mi estas certa ke ne. Sed kiel alie eblis ke ili ekpreniĝu el la flamoj?
If "would" is preferred to "should" in terms of the meaning, we would have pekadus and ekpreniĝus respectively.
I've used flamoj because there are types of "fire" in the modern world used for heating which do not burn coal or wood, and "flames" might better convey to our minds that which "fire" would have to the 18th century author (he was John Wesley, by the way).
It is important to bear in mind that there is no unique best solution for problems like this. So to anyone who thinks "But I would done this or that better" - you may well be right!
NothingHere (顯示個人資料) 2011年3月7日下午5:45:30
Nu, ĉu vi vere dezirus por tiuj ĉi geaĉuloj peki ĝis ili falus en Inferon? Vi ne dezirus, ja. Sed kiamaniere ili alie eskapus la fajron?
I honestly have no idea if this is even intelligible(I'm still something of a beginner), let alone correct, but this is what I got out of it. I think I might have over used the conditional tense, but I'm not sure how I could have done it.
I honestly have no idea if this is even intelligible(I'm still something of a beginner), let alone correct, but this is what I got out of it. I think I might have over used the conditional tense, but I'm not sure how I could have done it.