in Acht...tun
UC
Two previous translations were:
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the more it is
condemned."
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the more thoroughly
it is proscribed."
I think both of these are wrong.
The second one cannot be right, for 'proscribing' does not admit of
degree.
The first one seems off too.
I have a hunch it goes something like this:
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the warier the herd
will be, and all the more vigorous in defence against it."
276=12:5[35]
NB Die ganze Moral E<uropa>s hat den Nutzen der Heerde auf dem Grunde:
die Trübsal aller höheren seltenen Menschen liegt darin, daß alles,
was sie auszeichnet, ihnen mit dem Gefühl der Verkleinerung und
Verunglimpfung zum Bewußtsein kommt. Die Stärken des jetzigen Menschen
sind die Ursachen der pessimistischen Verdüsterung: die Mittelmäßigen
sind, wie die Heerde ist, ohne viel Fragen und Gewissen, – heiter. Zur
Verdüsterung der Starken: Schopenhauer Pascal
NB. Je gefährlicher eine Eigenschaft der Heerde scheint, um so
gründlicher wird sie in Acht gethan. KGW VIII–1.200 KSA 12.196
N.B. The whole of European morality is based upon what is of use to
the herd; the misery of all higher and exceptional men is explained by
the fact that everything which distinguishes them from others reaches
their consciousness in the form of a sense of humiliation and calumny.
It is the strengths of modern men which are the causes of pessimistic
gloominess; the mediocre, like the herd, are not troubled much with
questions or with conscience – they are cheerful. Among the gloomy
strong men, Pascal and Schopenhauer are noted examples. The more
dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the warier the herd will be,
and all the more vigorous in defence against it.
UC
> UC quotes:
>
> >Je gefährlicher eine Eigenschaft der Heerde scheint, um so
> >gründlicher wird sie in Acht gethan.
>
> jemanden aus einer Gemeinschaft auszuschließen oder zu verdammen.
>
> Oben vermutlich im übertragenen Sinne gebraucht: Die
> Eigenschaft wird verdammt, also verurteilt und verworfen.
>
> Die Acht ist der Ausschluß einer Person vom Rechtsschutz,
> dadurch wird sie vogelfrei.
Could you try to explain in English, please? Is my proposed
translation adequate?
UC
> newsgroup.)
>
> One meaning of »jemanden in Acht (und Bann )tun« is »to
> exclude someone from a community or to condemn him«.
>
> In your quotation, this is probably used in a figurative
> sense: the property is condemned, denounced and discarded.
>
> The »Acht« is the exclusion of a person from legal
> protection, that is, the person becomes outlawed.
>
> >Is my proposed translation adequate?
>
Thank you very much!
UC
> newsgroup.)
>
> One meaning of »jemanden in Acht (und Bann )tun« is »to
> exclude someone from a community or to condemn him«.
>
> In your quotation, this is probably used in a figurative
> sense: the property is condemned, denounced and discarded.
>
> The »Acht« is the exclusion of a person from legal
> protection, that is, the person becomes outlawed.
>
>
How about:
"The more dangerous [or threatening] a quality seems to the herd, the
less tolerant of it the herd will be."
UC
> newsgroup.)
>
> One meaning of »jemanden in Acht (und Bann )tun« is »to
> exclude someone from a community or to condemn him«.
>
> In your quotation, this is probably used in a figurative
> sense: the property is condemned, denounced and discarded.
>
> The »Acht« is the exclusion of a person from legal
> protection, that is, the person becomes outlawed.
>
>
Herde is feminine...I'm just wondering....could sie possibly be
referring to Herde?
"The more dangerous the property, the more respect the herd earns?"
UC
> ©25 Oct 2010 15:31:33 GMT, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram), wrote:
>
> >UC quotes:
> >>Je gefährlicher eine Eigenschaft der Heerde scheint, um so
> >>gründlicher wird sie in Acht gethan.
>
> > jemanden aus einer Gemeinschaft auszuschließen oder zu verdammen.
>
> > Oben vermutlich im übertragenen Sinne gebraucht: Die
> > Eigenschaft wird verdammt, also verurteilt und verworfen.
>
> > Die Acht ist der Ausschluß einer Person vom Rechtsschutz,
> > dadurch wird sie vogelfrei.
>
> Beachtung resulting in:
> The more dangerous the masses appear to be the more thoroughly they will
> be watched.
>
> As always, one should read the whole original to see in what context the
> translation should be.
> --
> Arno
Here is the original, Arno:
UC
> ©25 Oct 2010 15:31:33 GMT, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram), wrote:
>
> >UC quotes:
> >>gründlicher wird sie in Acht gethan.
>
> > jemanden aus einer Gemeinschaft auszuschließen oder zu verdammen.
>
> > Oben vermutlich im übertragenen Sinne gebraucht: Die
> > Eigenschaft wird verdammt, also verurteilt und verworfen.
>
> > Die Acht ist der Ausschluß einer Person vom Rechtsschutz,
> > dadurch wird sie vogelfrei.
>
> Reading UC's sentence I interpreted Heerde as Masse and Acht as
> Beachtung resulting in:
> The more dangerous the masses appear to be the more thoroughly they will
> be watched.
>
> As always, one should read the whole original to see in what context the
> translation should be.
> --
> Arno
Arno, are you a native speaker?
Paul Schmitz-Josten
>Reading UC's sentence I interpreted Heerde as Masse and Acht as
>Beachtung resulting in:
>The more dangerous the masses appear to be the more thoroughly they will
>be watched.
I, too, thought of this as a possible meaning.
Ciao,
Paul, native speaker
UC
> Arno Martens in <ia6kdd$b...@news.datemas.de>:
Well, my Flügel 1892 has a 4-section entry for 'Acht'; it has the
"in..Acht thun" construction in section D of the entry; the meaning is
given as "ban, outlaw" etc.
This is 19th century German, by the way.
UC
> Arno Martens in <ia6kdd$b...@news.datemas.de>:
>
> >Beachtung resulting in:
> >The more dangerous the masses appear to be the more thoroughly they will
> >be watched.
>
> I, too, thought of this as a possible meaning.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Paul, native speaker
Here is the Flügel 1891 entry:
"Med., Law, outlawry, ban (of the law) attainder, proscription,; in
die Acht verfallen, become an outlaw; einem mit der Acht belegen, ihn
in die Acht erlkären, thun, sprechen, erkennen, to outlaw, to ban, to
proscribe..."
Examples follow from Schiller, et al.
UC
> --
> Arno
After reviewing all the reference material, we have concluded that the
Flügel sense D applies: outlaw, etc.
The translation:
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the less the
tolerance that will be shown for it."
This is intended to cover a number of possibilities: outlaw, wariness,
etc.
UC
> UC <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >tolerance that will be shown for it."
>
> since obviously any entity/being will be less tolerant to
> anything that seems to be dangerous to it. Thus, what
> matters in the original is not then contents of what is
> said, but rather the specific way used to express it.
>
> The two words with specific connotations are: »herd« and
> »outlaw«, only one of which has been retained.
I understand what you mean, but one could say the same for 'outlaw',
really, and it doesn't have the richness.
It's ***not*** tautological. There are several possible reactions:
fear, running away, etc.
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the more the
fear that will be shown for it."
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the more the herd
will try to avoid it."
"The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the more the
herd will condemn it."
You see?
"Less tolerance" covers a number of these possibilities.
UC
Well we have worked on it some more and this is the latest:
"The more dangerous the quality is to the herd, the more those that
possess it are shunned."
UC
> text might have not meant it in its original meaning.
>
> Have a look at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ge%C3%A4chteter
> --
> Cheers,
> Arno
Thanks, we have noted what you are saying. 'Shun' was chosen for a
number of reasons, and it has appropriate religious as well as social
connotations that make it suitable for a translation of Nietzsche...
Shunning is severe punishment in certain communities...
http://ezinearticles.com/?Amish-Traditions---Shunning&id=603322
UC
> text might have not meant it in its original meaning.
>
> Have a look at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ge%C3%A4chteter
> --
> Cheers,
> Arno
UC
herd shuns those that possess it."
That's what we ended up with.
mb
> I have a hunch it goes something like this:
>
> "The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd, the warier the herd
> will be, and all the more vigorous in defence against it."
> NB. Je gefährlicher eine Eigenschaft der Heerde scheint, um so
> gründlicher wird sie in Acht gethan.
What has that nonsense got to do with translation?
UC
???
This is final version:
mb
Again, wha't's that got to do with translation?
UC
I'm sorry, what are you asking? This is a ***translation*** into
'English', not 'Germlish'. One always translates ***into*** one's
native tongue. Therefore, native German speakers should never
translate into English.
When translating a text, native speakers are to be consulted on odd
points of grammar or syntax or usage, but generally speaking native
speakers hardly ever make good translators into another language. The
results are stiff, unnatural, and unidiomatic.
UC
There is a specific reference In Flügel's dictionary from 1891, to the
'Acht...thun" construction.
mb
> On Nov 8, 4:43 pm, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > NB. Je gefährlicher eine Eigenschaft der Heerde scheint, um so
> > > > > gründlicher wird sie in Acht gethan.
>
> > > > What has that nonsense got to do with translation?
> > > "The more dangerous the trait is to the herd, the more resolutely the
> > > herd shuns those that possess it."
...
> > Again, wha't's that got to do with translation?
>
> I'm sorry, what are you asking? This is a ***translation*** into
> 'English', not 'Germlish'. One always translates ***into*** one's
> native tongue. Therefore, native German speakers should never
> translate into English.
>
> When translating a text, native speakers are to be consulted on odd
> points of grammar or syntax or usage, but generally speaking native
> speakers hardly ever make good translators into another language. The
> results are stiff, unnatural, and unidiomatic.
Yours is not a translation. Invention and translation are two clearly
distinct things.
[As for your irrelevant and moronic observation about native speakers:
Native speakers do have an advantage --in their possession of a
clearly identifiable local/social vernacular only. Literary
translation, especially that of indigestible stuff such as Nietzsche
and Co., is in some variety of standard written English where the
native has no advantage over the furriner. As an example, while no one
doubts that English is your mother tongue, your amateurish production
is a textbook example of extremely stiff, unnatural and unidiomatic
invention.]
UC
I did not ask for your opinion. I am working with an American
Nietzsche scholar and what we are producing is vastly superior to
Walter Kaufmann's travesties. Under no circumstances should native
German speakers attempt literary translations into English. Native
German speakers are insufficiently acquainted with the various periods
(Victorian, etc.) of English and are unable to 'generate' Victorian
English. In case you don't recall, Nietzsche was a Victorian, and his
prose is sometimes awkward and elaborated far more than an English
style can accommodate. No English reader will put up with that. Part
of it is inherent in German, and part of it is the period in which he
wrote. But I have no intention of producing a mimesis of the German.
UC
Andy
<b687dee4-14b7-4f7d...@s5g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, UC
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote
[]
>Please keep out of my threads.
Welcome to Usenet :)
--
Andy Taylor [Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit <URL:http://www.austrianphilately.com>
UC
Maybe you should read some Dickens, Trollope, or George Eliot.
mb
So much irrelevant blah. Still doesn't make that passage a translation.
UC
Not interested in your opinions. Stay out of my threads!
Andy
<ce020c38-61c7-4a7d...@b19g2000prj.googlegroups.com>, UC
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote
[extremely large snip]
>Not interested in your opinions. Stay out of my threads!
This is Usenet, as I've already remarked. You cannot pick and choose who
is allowed to contribute to a thread; and while you may initiate a
thread you do not "own" it. You can of course ignore people - you may
even be able to automatically reject "all posts by xxx@yyy" or "all
posts from this country or that ISP". But their posts are still there
for others to read and reply to, and very probably archived for the
edification of posterity.
Also, don't forget that there can be pearls amongst pigmuck.
UC
> In message
> <ce020c38-61c7-4a7d-b634-f4196a93d...@b19g2000prj.googlegroups.com>, UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
But this is a specialist forum, not Talk.Origins, LOL. This particular
individual is not helpful. I have actually learned what I needed to
know on this topic, which I found in my trusty Flügel Allgemeines D-E
Wörterbuch of 1891. Many native German speakers are of little help
when the question is of older usage. Some German speakers also have
views on translation which I explicitly and vehemently reject. The
translation is for native ***English**** speakers. Native German
speakers almost always forget that. Some things simply cannot be
translated, and you have to live with that. If it's not absolutely
essential, I cut it. German speakers tend to pack more into a sentence
than English can tolerate, and often it is dross anyway. "The
expression of an instinct that reflects a drive to a tendency that is
at bottom an act of the will" is obviously redundant and can be
shortened, but that's the way a literal translation would read in some
cases. No English speaker would ever say such a thing. It's mere empty
words.
Andy
<0c0b1957-5d68-4e96...@42g2000prt.googlegroups.com>, UC
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote
[]
>But this is a specialist forum, not Talk.Origins, LOL. T
Maybe; if someone chooses to post adverts for mail-order brides,
detailed descriptions of animal husbandry, or lengthy political
rantings, you (and I) may resent it, we may reject it, but we cannot
prevent it.
>his particular
>individual is not helpful.
There's a lot of it about.
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
> []
>
> >But this is a specialist forum, not Talk.Origins, LOL. T
>
> Maybe; if someone chooses to post adverts for mail-order brides,
> detailed descriptions of animal husbandry, or lengthy political
> rantings, you (and I) may resent it, we may reject it, but we cannot
> prevent it.
>
> >his particular
> >individual is not helpful.
>
> There's a lot of it about.
> --
> Andy Taylor [Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society].
> Visit <URL:http://www.austrianphilately.com>
Besides, Nietzsche was influenced by or spoke or was taught Swiss
German, which means sometimes you have to guess what he means by the
context, because nobody knows the words! I have several friends and
acquaintances who are native speakers of German, and they are
sometimes completely stumped. Does anyone here know what 'Muckerluft'
is? I asked before an no-one did.
mb
> On Nov 11, 3:01 pm, Andy <a...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > >his particular
> > >individual is not helpful.
Doesn't intend to help a dimwit unable to understand even such a
simple concept as translating.
> Besides, Nietzsche was influenced by or spoke or was taught Swiss
> German,
Beside the highly doubtful nature of this statement, it has nothing to
do with the guy's written language. Anyone who knows at least one
dialect of Swiss German and the standard written German of Switzerland
would laugh at this kind of arrant nonsense (and, of course, you
obviously haven't the foggiest idea of either Swiss German or
Switzerland German.)
which means sometimes you have to guess what he means by the
> context, because nobody knows the words! I have several friends and
> acquaintances who are native speakers of German, and they are
> sometimes completely stumped.
Well, tough shit. Continue proving your cluelessness re translating.
Or change friends.
UC
I have published two papers on translating, and have read extensively
on the subject.
I have no interest whatsoever in your comments or ideas and will
ignore whatever you write here.
mb
Yarright. On how oral, vernacular competence miraculously extends to
writing, or on how to hang an innocent by misinterpreting?
> I have no interest whatsoever in your comments or ideas and will
> ignore whatever you write here.
But you, biggest laugh of the translation world after Babelfish,
should not be ignored!
UC
Get out of my threads and stay out.
UC
Nietzsche:
Die Anspannung eines Willens über lange Zeitfernen hin, die Auswahl
der Zustände und Werthungen, welche es machen, dass man über
Jahrhunderte der Zukunft verfügen kann-das gerade ist im höchsten
Maasse antimodern.
1906 translation (Anthony Ludovici): "The extension of one's will over
long periods of time, the selection of conditions and valuations which
make it possible to dispose of centuries in advance this, precisely,
is what is most utterly anti-modern."
1967 translation (Walter Kaufmann): "The tensing of a will over long
temporal distances, the selection of the states and valuations that
allow one to dispose of future centuries --precisely this is
antimodern in the highest degree."
CommentsL
"....verfügen über" means "to have control/mastery over, to have at
one's disposal", not "to dispose of".
Also, idiom requires one to say one "exerts" one's will... ("exerting"
for Anspannung) not "tensing", Walter! Not "extension", Tony! What the
devil is "tensing" one's will? Hilarious!
My version:
"The exerting of one’s will over long periods of time, the selection
of conditions and valuations which place centuries of future time at
one’s disposal: this, precisely, is what is most utterly anti-modern."
Andy
<28f601fa-165f-41f4...@i41g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>, UC
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote
>Why new translations are necessary:
>
>My version:
>
>"The exerting of one’s will over long periods of time, the selection
>of conditions and valuations which place centuries of future time at
>one’s disposal: this, precisely, is what is most utterly anti-modern."
I'm a scientist, not a philosopher; and I find myself unable to extract
any meaning from any of these translations.
And that gives me a logical problem. To me, translation is a process,
the output of which is (or should be) the best-possible and
most-accurate representation of the original meaning in the target
language. If the original is meaningless, all translations are equally
valid!
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
Well this needs some context (it's a long, convoluted story), but even
so one can see that the first two versions have seriously erred on the
basic terms. We have to have something to start with to make any sense
of this stuff; it's clear to me that "extending the will over long
temporal distances", and that "dispose of future centuries" are utter
nonsense. At least getting those right will help.
I am beginning to think 'criteria' is better for Werthung...
"The exerting of one’s will over long periods of time, the selection
of conditions and criteria which place centuries of future time at
mb
> On Nov 8, 4:43 pm, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Again, wha't's that got to do with translation?
>
> There is a specific reference In Flügel's dictionary from 1891, to the
> 'Acht...thun" construction.
Not that nonsense, the larger nonsense. You can't translate any more
than my pet hamster. Because you don't want to know what translation
is about. And that is because you are too stupid.
mb
...
> I'm a scientist, not a philosopher; and I find myself unable to extract
> any meaning from any of these translations.
>
> And that gives me a logical problem. To me, translation is a process,
> the output of which is (or should be) the best-possible and
> most-accurate representation of the original meaning in the target
> language.
Same here.
> If the original is meaningless, all translations are equally
> valid!
This does not follow from the above. If the original is meaningless
(like any Nietzsche nonsense), all translations are equally
meaningless but certainly not equally valid. Language does not have to
make sense, while it sure is required to have inner consistency,
conformity with general convention (=grammar and connotation) and with
the original (which eliminates stupid nonsense like that of Uranium
Committee. Who, by the way, should buy out Google if he wants to own
this thread.
UC
(............)
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
Do not presume that I am a 'devotee' of Nietzsche (though I may be);
I'm merely the translator. He says some very bizarre things, but my
job is to translate those things, bizarre or not, in such manner that
they can be correctly understood by a native English readership. And
yes you did make a good point above: it's the meaning, not the mere
words, that we're dealing with. My approach to translation is to
create a text that could have been written by an English speaker of
the period. Germans have a tendency to pack a lot of verbiage into a
relatively simple statement. If the original is wordier than typical
English of the period in question, then my job is to condense it to
the essentials. Will some subtleties be lost? Not really: the
'subtleties' are often nothing more than verbal entities. English has
them too. Words such as 'matter', 'instance', etc. are often nothing
but empty 'placeholder' nouns.
To wit:
-------------
Feststellen, was ist, wie es ist, scheint etwas unsäglich Höheres,
Ernsteres als jedes "so sollte es sein": weil Letzteres, als
menschliche Kritik und Anmaaßung, von vornherein zur Lächerlichkeit
verurtheilt erscheint. Es drückt sich darin ein Bedürfniß aus, welches
verlangt, daß unsrem menschlichen Wohlbefinden die Einrichtung der
Welt entspricht; auch der Wille, so viel als möglich auf diese Aufgabe
hin zu thun. Andrerseits hat nur dies <Verlan>gen "so sollte es sein"
jenes andere Verlangen nach dem, was ist, hervorgerufen: <das W>issen
nämlich darum, was ist, ist bereits eine Consequenz jenes Fragens:
"wie? ist <es> möglich? warum gerade so?" Die Verwunderung über die
Nicht–öbereinstimmung unsrer Wünsche und des Weltlaufs hat dahin
geführt, den Weltlauf kennen zu lernen. Vielleicht steht es noch
anders: vielleicht ist jenes "so sollte es sein", unser Welt–
Überwältigungs–Wunsch.
Translation:
To ascertain the nature and conditions of existence, seems an
inexpressibly higher and more serious matter than every “it should be
thus”, because the latter, as an instance of human criticism and
arrogance, appears to be condemned as ludicrous from the start. It
insists that the world be suited to our race’s well-being, and directs
the will as much as possible towards the fulfillment of that desire.
On the other hand, it is only this demand, “it ought to be thus”,
which has called forth that other question, “what exists?” The desire
for knowing what exists, is already a consequence of the question,
“how? is it possible?” Why precisely so?” Our wonder at the
disagreement between our desires and the workings of the world has led
to our learning the workings of the world; but it may be otherwise;
the expression,“it ought to be thus” could merely be our wish to
overcome the world.
-----------------
What some people don't seem to realize is that a native German speaker
can never do this, no matter how good his English skills are: his
linguistic 'allegiance' is to his native tongue, and he will warp and
twist English until he thinks it looks like the German with which he
is comfortable. I have read a lot of Victorian novels, which has
prepared me for this work particularly well.
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
Andy: Note the passage in the second sentence:
"Es drückt sich darin ein Bedürfniß aus, welches verlangt, daß unsrem
menschlichen Wohlbefinden die Einrichtung der Welt entspricht; auch
der Wille, so viel als möglich auf diese Aufgabe hin zu thun."
Literally, this is "It expresses a need, which demands..."
We don't talk that way in English. As proof thereof I can offer that a
google search of that phrase turned up no hits except an earlier
translation of the passage in question. 'Needs' don't 'demand'
anything: people do. Therefore the passage was translated as: "It
insists that..." This is idiomatic English.
A translation into a given language must use the idiomatic structure
of that language or else it is not a translation at all. Germans in
particular often seem not to understand this; some become enraged when
you tell them that they can't write that way in English.
Feststellen, was ist, wie es ist, scheint etwas unsäglich Höheres,
Ernsteres als jedes "so sollte es sein": weil Letzteres, als
menschliche Kritik und Anmaaßung, von vornherein zur Lächerlichkeit
verurtheilt erscheint. Es drückt sich darin ein Bedürfniß aus, welches
verlangt, daß unsrem menschlichen Wohlbefinden die Einrichtung der
Welt entspricht; auch der Wille, so viel als möglich auf diese Aufgabe
hin zu thun. Andrerseits hat nur dies Verlangen "so sollte es sein"
jenes andere Verlangen nach dem, was ist, hervorgerufen: das Wissen
nämlich darum, was ist, ist bereits eine Consequenz jenes Fragens:
"wie? ist es möglich? warum gerade so?" Die Verwunderung über die
Nicht–öbereinstimmung unsrer Wünsche und des Weltlaufs hat dahin
geführt, den Weltlauf kennen zu lernen. Vielleicht steht es noch
anders: vielleicht ist jenes "so sollte es sein", unser Welt–
Überwältigungs–Wunsch.
To ascertain the nature and conditions of existence, seems an
Paul Schmitz-Josten
>> This is Usenet, as I've already remarked. You cannot pick and choose who
>> is allowed to contribute to a thread; and while you may initiate a
>> thread you do not "own" it.
>But this is a specialist forum, not Talk.Origins, LOL.
More than 1 billion specialists? (taken from the number of computers
world-wide which may participate here)
OTOH, there are quite a few questions by learners of German, far away from
a specialist status, and every-day-level contributions which are discussed
among native speakers and others.
And, while some posters here have profound knowledge which astounds me
every day, there is me (and others, I suppose) who (think to) speak and
write good German and are willing to contribute.
Having said this, I sincerely object to "specialist forum" and double this
opinion because a.u.g isn't a forum t all. This is usenet!
Furtheron, I appreciate the "talk" which quite often reveils a background
to language usage and also to differences in language and culture.
Last but not least, the signal / noise ratio concerning on-topic
contributions is very good here, better by dimensions than in the
"neighbouring" soc.culture.german.
Let's keep this group alive and sane as long as possible!
OTOH, you want
- specialists,
- non-Germans,
- no talk
and you want to expel certain users from your topics.
I should consider to feel addressed because I feel unwanted in three ways
and in order to avoid to become a subject of the latter demand.
Remember: Usenet is not a right!
Ciao,
Paul
Andy
<a44dcc6f-a63d-4222...@h21g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>, UC
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote
[]
>To ascertain the nature and conditions of existence, seems an
>inexpressibly higher and more serious matter than every “it should be
>The desire
>for knowing what exists, is already a consequence of the question
>the expression,“it ought to be thus” could merely be our wish to
>overcome the world.
[My email reader renders the character before 'it' in the first excerpt
and those surrounding 'it ought to be thus' as a solid square; I'll
assume they are quotation marks.]
There's something non-English about these commas. I would be recasting
the word order to remove them. Indeed, to me the whole paragraph has a
flavour of Germlish. Leaving aside the question of "does the original
mean anything", I'd probably write:
The ascertaining of the nature and conditions of existence seems
an inexpressibly...
or maybe
To ascertain the nature and conditions of existence seems an
inexpressibly...
and The desire to know what exists is already a consequence...
and The expression "it ought to be thus" could merely be...
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
This German was written in the 1880s. As I said above, it is intended
to be Victorian English. It may seem a bit odd to 2010 readers. I do
think the first sentence could be improved even more, though. This was
the original that I revised:
1906 original:
"To ascertain what exists, how it exists seems an ever so much higher
and more serious matter than every "thus should it be," because the
latter, as a piece of human criticism and arrogance, appears to be
condemned as ludicrous from the start."
How about this further revision:
"Determining the nature and conditions of existence, seems an
inexpressibly higher and more serious matter than any “it should be
thus”, because the latter, as an instance of human criticism and
arrogance, appears to be condemned as ludicrous from the start."
The original:
Andy
<b4922e82-308c-4aaa...@h21g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>, UC
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote
[]
>This German was written in the 1880s. As I said above, it is intended
>to be Victorian English. It may seem a bit odd to 2010 readers.
>How about this further revision:
>"Determining the nature and conditions of existence, seems an
>inexpressibly higher and more serious matter than any “it should be
>thus”, because the latter, as an instance of human criticism and
>arrogance, appears to be condemned as ludicrous from the start."
>
utility of publishing in 2010 a new translation into Victorian English,
as there will be very few prospective buyers whose mother tongue it is.
To those whose speech was formed in the 1950s onwards, it will seem
'wrong', and the effort of understanding it plus the impenetrability of
the original will soon lead them to an easier area of study.
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
> []>This German was written in the 1880s. As I said above, it is intended
> >to be Victorian English. It may seem a bit odd to 2010 readers.
> []
> >How about this further revision:
> >"Determining the nature and conditions of existence, seems an
> >inexpressibly higher and more serious matter than any “it should be
> >thus”, because the latter, as an instance of human criticism and
> >arrogance, appears to be condemned as ludicrous from the start."
>
> I have no expertise in Victorian English! However, I'm not clear on the
> utility of publishing in 2010 a new translation into Victorian English,
> as there will be very few prospective buyers whose mother tongue it is.
> To those whose speech was formed in the 1950s onwards, it will seem
> 'wrong', and the effort of understanding it plus the impenetrability of
> the original will soon lead them to an easier area of study.
No more so than to native German-speaking readers of the German
original. I have striven to clarify and smooth out some of the most
awkward parts, but, it is impossible to separate completely the style
from the content.The 'style' is part of the 'content'.
He is writing in the 1880s. It should sound like it.
UC
> <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote
One thing I have done is generally to omit translating 'Grunde'
phrases ('basically', 'at bottom', 'fundamentally') because they're
simply annoying, repetitive, and meaningless. So, there are no 'at
bottoms' in my translation. It's just throat-clearing, basically.
mb
> He is writing in the 1880s. It should sound like it.
And this guy wants to translate...