On 12/27/06, Till Rettig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, I see, I was quite unclear. First about this mentioned passive forms: Direkt imperative as in English sounds in German somehow unpolite, maybe indeed the "active" style that Han-Wen mentioned. Actually it is some kind of passive form ("so you can see what is going on" would be translated "damit man sehen kann, was passiert"). So I mean here this German "man" form speaking about passive.
Ah, you mean "impersonal" rather than "passive". "Passive" is one of three grammatical *voices* available in European languages (active, middle, passive) whereas the German "man"-construction is an example of the impersonal *pronoun*, just like French "on". The German "... damit man sehen kann, was passiert" is in the active voice and, as such, doesn't arouse the type of ire that grammarians reserve for the passive. (Note that the passive does exist in German, but requires some form of "werden", as in "Der Brief wird von mir geschrieben".) AFAICS, German "man" and French "on" still sound perfectly natural and are the unmarked impersonal constructions. Note that English has an equivalent construction with the impersonal pronoun "one", as in "this way, one can see what's going on". But the acceptability of impersonal "one" in English varies greatly by both dialect and register. British English -- especially written British English -- seems to still manage the construction unselfconsciously, but it sounds horribly stilted to my American ears. So, as it turns out, you're really advocating for impersonal pronouns (instead of second-person pronouns) in the German translations, and not the passive voice. Impersonal German "man" should be fine; it's the passive that might be troublesome ... -- Trevor Bača [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user