| Stran v tématu: < [1 2 3 4] > | Would a native English speaker have written the following sentences? Autor vlákna: cinziag
|
|---|
Ashwin Goud 
Španělsko
Local time: 13:37
španělština -> angličtina
+ ...
| The queens language with a poetic license | Apr 21, 2009 |
The sentances are perfectly fine. Though the choice of words in some sentances sound a bit bizarre but thats OK becuase the author reserves the poetic license to play with his narrative style.
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosna a Hercegovina
Local time: 13:37
Člen (2009)
angličtina -> chorvatština
+ ...
Margreet Logmans wrote: As a non-native, I was a little puzzled by the third sentence. 3- In the distance can be seen a long, glittering, gray line – the sea. If I had to write this, I would probably write: In the distance, a long, glittering, gray line can be seen: the sea. Because I think I was taught that in English the subject should be before the verb. Maybe this is part of the reason why cinziag (topic starter) had doubts?
" the sea" is an object here, not the subject ( Passive Voice). Although English is classified an SVO language, these constituents can be moved around for different reasons, mostly to emphasize something, for example by moving a constituent toward the beginning of the sentence.
| | | | Stephen Gobin
Velká Británie
Local time: 12:37
němčina -> angličtina
+ ...
Sentence 3 - it's a good literary device: placing the verb phrase in second place (and before the subject) adds to the overall literary effect. Were it the usual SVO, the result would be more pedestrian.
Some nice long sentences here too. Long sentences are beautifully intimate, unlike clipped, telegraphese ones. But that'c coming from someone's who's read Proust twice
| | | | Rachel Fell
Velká Británie
Local time: 12:37
francouzština -> angličtina
+ ...
As a native UK English speaker, I found several things in these sentences that did not sound natural to me.
I would rephrase them as follows (with alternative possibilities shown in the first sentence):
1- I could not imagine that there might/could ever have been a time when the sky had not been called 'le ciel', or that there might/could/should ever be a time when it would no longer be called 'le ciel'.
2- I approached the English language as you might approach... See more As a native UK English speaker, I found several things in these sentences that did not sound natural to me.
I would rephrase them as follows (with alternative possibilities shown in the first sentence):
1- I could not imagine that there might/could ever have been a time when the sky had not been called 'le ciel', or that there might/could/should ever be a time when it would no longer be called 'le ciel'.
2- I approached the English language as you might approach a person you know quite well but who, nevertheless, intimidates you a little. (or possibly: “you, a little.” But I’m not convinced that the comma's placing in the original was so deliberate as ViktoriaG implies)
3- In the distance a long, glittering gray line can be seen – the sea. (I'd normally spell it "grey", though both sps. are acceptable in UK)
4- It is a curious fact that we sometimes think of the places we love as people, with souls, bodies and features, and to many of us Paris is a person: a great and generous person, a bold, proud and impatient person, with a kind heart and a quick temper.
5- There is nothing a novelist can imagine that has not already happened somewhere in the world, at some time.
In 3, I think "In the distance could be seen a long, glittering gray line – the sea" sounds OK, but I don't think it sounds so right in the present tense somehow.
[Edited at 2009-04-21 16:36 GMT]
In 1, I don't think "should" works in the first part of the sentence because it doesn't make sense there (for reasons I haven't got time to go into!) but it's OK in the second part because it expresses a possible future in the past.
In 2, I think "but" has to be used rather than "and", as there is a somewhat negative sense to the clause.
In 4, the way the original sentence was constructed sounded unnatural and was not well punctuated - "Curious fact though it is/may be, we sometimes..." or "It is a curious fact, but sometimes..." sounds more natural to me.
[Edited at 2009-04-21 18:43 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-04-21 18:46 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-04-22 00:02 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
EHI (X)
Local time: 13:37
| bit formal but fine | Apr 21, 2009 |
..
| | | | Kathryn Sanderson
Spojené státy americké
Local time: 07:37
francouzština -> angličtina
| Sounds native to me | Apr 21, 2009 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
Gray suggests US English to me.
The use of "should" in the first sentence likewise. "Should" has a fairly specific meaning in formal UK English (and formal this English certainly is, whichever flavour it is), which, although you could crowbar it into that sentence and force some sense out of it, makes me inclined to think that we are probably looking at US handling of tense and mood.
This is interesting....I read the usage of "should" as UK English, or *possibly* old-fashioned literary US English. I remember being confused when I read "A Little Princess" at the age of ten. Jessie, one of Sarah Crewe's enemies at Miss Minchim's school says, "I should like to slap you." I thought Jessie must mean "I *would* like to slap you."
I could not imagine that there should ever have been a time when the sky had not been called 'le ciel', or that there should ever be a time when it would no longer be called 'le ciel'.
This sentence sounds native to me, but I would (ahem!) have written: "....that there would have ever been a time...."
That's why I'm not going to be rivaling Henry James or Edith Wharton anytime soon. And I don't think Mark Twain would have written sentences in this style, although he was probably capable of them.
Kathryn
| | | | Margreet Logmans (X)
Nizozemsko
Local time: 13:37
angličtina -> nizozemština
+ ...
| Thanks Stephen and Lingua5B | Apr 22, 2009 |
You've made it clear to me once more that language is flexible and lively - and that's the beauty of it, of course.
Thank you!
| | | | | Translator profiles and native English | Apr 22, 2009 |
Glancing at the title, I thought that this thread might have been about translator profiles. I've seen some translators on this site claiming to be native speakers of English whose use of English in their own profiles would seem to disprove that claim.
| | |
|
|
|
To be fair to me (!), the age of the text was unknown at the time. Hence I assumed the question meant nowadays. Ah, the foolishness of assumptions...
Kathryn Sanderson wrote:
This is interesting....I read the usage of "should" as UK English, or *possibly* old-fashioned literary US English. I remember being confused when I read "A Little Princess" at the age of ten. Jessie, one of Sarah Crewe's enemies at Miss Minchim's school says, "I should like to slap you." I thought Jessie must mean "I *would* like to slap you."
Excellent example of what I meant. To me (UK), "should" in such contexts these days is a word that initially brings to mind a moral obligation. "You should write a thank you note"... you might not, but you should.
(I know there are additional meanings e.g.: a sense of missed benefit or pleasure in the past tense particularly. "You should have seen his face...." or "you should have listened more in school" or e.g.2: basically "if" - "should you find yourself unemployed...".).
But the typical straightforward meaning I ascribe to "should" sits uneasily with...:
I could not imagine that there should ever have been a time when the sky had not been called 'le ciel', or that there should ever be a time when it would no longer be called 'le ciel'.
....but as you have said above, I know that US English can use "should" where I would use "would" (this is getting complicated!) these days.
This sentence sounds native to me, but I would (ahem!) have written: "....that there would have ever been a time...."
Whereas I think my natural inclination would be to use "could", on the assumption that the meaning is intended to be along the lines of "I was unable to imagine the possible existence of a time when..."
I suspect that in the UK at least, should/would and the related shall/will are in a state of transition. I never use "shall", in translations or elsewhere. I tend to avoid "should" in translations, and when I use it in everyday life, it is never with the meaning "would".
[Edit for clarity - I hope ]
[Edited at 2009-04-23 08:51 GMT]
| | | | Giles Watson
Itálie
Local time: 13:37
italština -> angličtina
In memoriam | Subjects, objects and adverbials | Apr 23, 2009 |
In the distance, a long, glittering, gray line can be seen: the sea.
Because I think I was taught that in English the subject should be before the verb. Maybe this is part of the reason why cinziag (topic starter) had doubts?
Could be, but of course it's actually quite common to find an adverbial phrase in a sentence-initial position and in any case here the place adverbial is separated from the subject of the sentence by a comma.
" the sea" is an object here, not the subject ( Passive Voice). Although English is classified an SVO language, these constituents can be moved around for different reasons, mostly to emphasize something, for example by moving a constituent toward the beginning of the sentence.
It would perhaps be more accurate to say that "a long, glittering gray line" is the complex object of the hypothetical active sentence from which this passive version is reformulated. In the passive sentence, it's probably more helpful to understand "the sea" as a noun phrase in apposition to the grammatical subject ("a long, glittering gray line").
HTH
Giles
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosna a Hercegovina
Local time: 13:37
Člen (2009)
angličtina -> chorvatština
+ ...
| SVO, active/passive | Apr 23, 2009 |
Giles Watson wrote:
" the sea" is an object here, not the subject ( Passive Voice). Although English is classified an SVO language, these constituents can be moved around for different reasons, mostly to emphasize something, for example by moving a constituent toward the beginning of the sentence.
It would perhaps be more accurate to say that "a long, glittering gray line" is the complex object of the hypothetical active sentence from which this passive version is reformulated. In the passive sentence, it's probably more helpful to understand "the sea" as a noun phrase in apposition to the grammatical subject ("a long, glittering gray line"). Giles
Yes, you are right.. the object of the active sentence become the subject of the passive sentence, however, the SVO structure is " measured or tested" on active sentences, not the passive..( hence my commentary) Illustration>
We can see (a long, glittering, gray line: the sea). SVO
(A long, glittering, gray line: the sea) can be seen (by us). SV+ by-agent ( not technically an object, which fractures the SVO structure). Plus it sounds very odd with " by us", in this context.
The passivization in English generally works better with bi-transitive verbs, e.g.
I was given a book by John. ( SVO by-agent)
[Edited at 2009-04-23 19:19 GMT]
| | | | liz askew
Velká Británie
Local time: 12:37
Člen (2007)
francouzština -> angličtina
+ ...
| Complex sentences in English | Apr 23, 2009 |
Well, for what it's worth I do think a native English person has written this, or at least somebody with an excellent command of sophisticated English.
Sure, the style is literary....haven't you ever noticed though that there are writers who have more than one idea in a sentence and you have to read the sentence more than once, but once you get used to the style and vocabulary you can catch on and actually begin to enjoy the language? There is some poetry in the sentences you have ... See more Well, for what it's worth I do think a native English person has written this, or at least somebody with an excellent command of sophisticated English.
Sure, the style is literary....haven't you ever noticed though that there are writers who have more than one idea in a sentence and you have to read the sentence more than once, but once you get used to the style and vocabulary you can catch on and actually begin to enjoy the language? There is some poetry in the sentences you have quoted.
It is no mean feat to write a sentence with more than one idea or thought in it.
Great stuff!
Liz Askew ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Kathryn Sanderson
Spojené státy americké
Local time: 07:37
francouzština -> angličtina
| I would (or should) like to say more! | Apr 23, 2009 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: To me (UK), "should" in such contexts these days is a word that initially brings to mind a moral obligation. "You should write a thank you note"... you might not, but you should.
Actually, as far as I know, as a native US English speaker, typical US usage of "should" is identical to what you describe.
This sentence sounds native to me, but I would (ahem!) have written: "....that there would have ever been a time...." Whereas I think my natural inclination would be to use "could", on the assumption that the meaning is intended to be along the lines of "I was unable to imagine the possible existence of a time when..."
"Could" sounds OK to me, too, though repetitious: "I could not imagine that there ever could have been..." But my first inclination would be to use "would," as in, I was unable to imagine, under any conditions, a time when..."
I suspect that in the UK at least, should/would and the related shall/will are in a state of transition. I never use "shall", in translations or elsewhere. I tend to avoid "should" in translations, and when I use it in everyday life, it is never with the meaning "would". [Edit for clarity - I hope ] [Edited at 2009-04-23 08:51 GMT]
They're in transition in the US, too. In fact, I think the transition is nearly complete. I never use "should" to mean "would." I don't use "shall," either, and I've never known anyone who did, except for effect.
Those modal auxiliaries will get you every time!
[Edited at 2009-04-24 12:33 GMT]
| | | | Javier Wasserzug
Spojené státy americké
Local time: 04:37
angličtina -> španělština
+ ...
| The Canterville Ghost | Apr 23, 2009 |
Juliana Starkman wrote: What's more, my father speaks and writes this way . Appropriate for a man who believed that "The Canterville Ghost" was a good bedtime story for his small daughters. I find sentence 3 a bit awkward, but not incorrect.
My mum used to tell this story to us... We always thought it was really funny!!
| | | | | I agree entirely with Liz on this one | Apr 23, 2009 |
I was surprised that anyone should be surprised that this was the work of a native speaker.
Just shows how far the dumbing down process has gone.
And our language is all the poorer for it.
Shame.
| | | | | Stran v tématu: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Would a native English speaker have written the following sentences? | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
