> On Oct 4, 10:43 pm, "Dmitri Fedortchenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For example, you changed the occurrences of "bytes," where the English
> > text does indeed say "bytes," in plural and all, to the Swedish
> > singular equivalent, "byte." I'd love to know why.
>
> In Swedish there is no plural versions of the words byte, megabyte, gram,
> kilogram etc.
> It's all singular. You don't usually say "kilogrammer" or "megabytes"?
> I also double-checked in several respectable enough places, among them
> wikipedia
> where no plural form of the word byte is ever
> used.http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte_%28enhet%29
Okay, I can live with that, though I'm rather used to saying "två
bytes" etc, but I've heard people just say byte there too.
> > Also, you changed "lade" to "la," which is just incorrect.
>
> I would not say it is "just incorrect". Plenty of searching around has not
> convinced me.
> So I am not sure anymore. As I understand it, lade till is more old
> fashioned/rural, but I could be wrong.
>
> Anyway I will yield to the original here since I am unsure.
Lade is more formal indeed, but I don't feel that we should use
colloquial language in a translation, as you note further down, it
should feel as if it was written in Swedish from the start, not
translated. I for one suggest we use formal language, because it's the
most neutral, and Svenska Akademiens ordbok lists lade as the proper
version, and la as the more colloquial one:
läg³ɑ², v.
-er, lade la³de², vard. äv. la la⁴
> > Another one I'm really wondering is the change of "ett" to "en" on a
> > noun that is unknown, how could you possibly motivate that?
>
> Well, thinking about it now I guess I am unsure.
> I thought some more about it in context and I think the original is better.
> Although I think that it just doesn't sound right either way. There should
> be a better way to formulate that...
>
> I will yield to the original here.
Yeah, there's no proper way to do it except for "en/ett," which is
shady in its own way. I find "ett" more proper since you say "ett
ting" and "ett objekt," but that might get thoroughly wrong in other
places.
The problem is that we can't adjust Django itself to work with the
language enough for it to feel completely natural, the only solution
here would be to let programmers flag a model's genus, which I don't
think will happen nor do I want to see it happen, so in conclusion
either one would do, but you having changed it stumped me a bit. :-)
> > Additionally, on several places you've changed the translation to one
> > that doesn't exactly match the English version, for example "We're
> > sorry, but the requested page could not be found." doesn't comtain the
> > "We're sorry" part, and there are a lot of that type of retranslation.
>
> I felt that it's important that rather then being an exact copy of the
> English
> wording, the Swedish translation should sound professional and true to the
> language.
>
> Generally the politeness level in Swedish is lower then that of English and
> I felt that that should be reflected in the translation. If we are to
> translate every phrase exactly, we might as well just use Google's
> translator-bot.
> I could be wrong, but I think this translation sounds more Swedish.
I understand, and agree. The question is where the border goes from
translating to rewriting, a few rewordings are fine, but yeah, depends
on how deep you want to go in translating. There are many more of
these issues, the comment score system is one, at least in my mind,
the whole thing feels awkward, and almost impossible to properly
translate.
> > You changed "This account is inactive." to "This account is
> > inactivated." which isn't the same either, when the previous
> > translation matched exactly, again, why?
>
> Thinking about it more clearly, the English version is a little ambiguous.
> Since it can mean that the account is disabled, in which case "Inaktiverat"
> is more correct.
> It can also mean that the account has not seen much activity, and in this
> case I guess the original translation is more correct.
>
> So I changed it back to the original.
I can't say I agree. If I see "Det här kontot är inaktivt," I'd
interpret that as my account having been inactivated by an
administrator, not that I haven't logged in for a while. Swedish
"inaktivt" has the same ambiguity that English has, so I don't get why
not just stick with it?
> > I think I was the one who wrote "zipkod" instead of "postnummer,"
> > because "postnummer" sounds localized to Sweden, when, as far as I can
> > see, this is actually German, Italian, Japanese, ... zip codes.
>
> In Swedish the word "postnummer" does indeed mean post code and zip code,
> so I feel it is only natural to use it.
> http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postnummer
> http://lexin.nada.kth.se/cgi-bin/sve-eng
Yes, it does mean that. However, when a form asks for a 'postnummer,'
my guess would be my Swedish zip code, i.e. something bound to Sweden,
not a general one.
Further, Lexin does actually agree with me:
Svenskt uppslagsord
post|nummer -numret -nummer -numren (el. -nummerna) subst.
ett femsiffrigt nummer före ortnamnet i en postadress
Note how it explicitly says five-digit number, and
Engelsk översättning
post code, (zip code US)
So "postnummer" isn't a proper translation, at least I don't think it
is, I've seen sites using "zipkod" as the translation, to avoid this
confusion and I thought that'd make most sense.
> > Again with "static" vs. "flat," while indeed it should be "flatsida"
> > and "flatsidor," I don't think "statisk sida" and "statiska sidor" is
> > correct. It's not "static pages," it's "flat pages."
>
> Well the fact is that "flatsida" sounds more like "a lesbian's page" (flata
> is these days one way to refer to a lesbian).
> I felt that for the sake of avoiding ridicule and jokes about this newest
> addition to django,
> we should rather use translations which make sense rather then
> half-translating.
>
> According to the documentation of the flatpages application, it is used to
> store HTML content in a database. This in my book constitutes static pages.
>
> However, in my quest to find a better translation I did remember the word
> "platt" which in fact also means "flat".
>
> I still think static sounds better, but I changed it to "Platt sida" to be
> more true to the original.
Yeah, I don't think flatsida is a smashingly good translation,
however, I don't think flatsida would get the lesbian connotations you
speak of, the English flat, when referring to the adjective, is only
properly translated into flat in Swedish, for example "handflata,"
"flat tallrikar," and so on.
Static also bears meaning of constant, unchanging, as Lexin suggests:
Svenskt uppslagsord
statisk statiskt statiska adj.
stillastående, oföränderlig
I'd say "platt" is the best suggestion so far, though, shouldn't it be
a compound? I mean, both compound and non-compound versions make sense
in this case, but since even the English version -- and English
doesn't do compounds very often -- uses a compound there, so it's more
of a name than a description, and hence, using a compound in Swedish
would both be at least as accurate and gain a little on staying true
to the original text.
> I uploaded the new patch, feel free to check it.
As soon as I get the time, though I'd bet some other Swedish
translator will come by any time soon.
It'd also be nice if we could get a list of Swedish translators, I
think we're about 3-4 now, those I know are me, mr. Fedortchenko and
mr. Lindborg.
--
Ludvig Ericson
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django I18N" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Django-I18N?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
