[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[jbovlaste] Re: Emperor



I think the main question is whether you are trying to come up with a gloss of an English (or other naljbo) word or whether you are describing something in your own words. A translation is probably a bit of both, since you normally want the wording of the xe fanva to be reminiscent of the original text, but you also want the result to understandable and accurate in the target language. In the case of the Emperor of Japan, it may be worth noting that we are not dealing with a word that is originally English anyway, and while the emperors of Austria, China, and Japan may have the same title in English, these are two or three different words in Japanese and Chinese.

Regarding "sorgugnai", I've never been very clear on exactly what a gugde or a natmi is, but the gismu glosses natmi as "nation/ethnic group" and in brackets as [people sharing a history/culture], while gugde is a "country" and parenthetically (people/territory relationship). So, it seems like natmi means nation in the more specific sense of a largish imagined community, as opposed to the more colloquial sense of a political regime as found in the name of the United Nations. An empire is arguable a type of gugde, but the whole point of it is that it rules various natmi. So, perhaps an empire would be a sornai gugje'a, while a union like the EU would be a sorgu'e jecta?

Note also that being sornai is probably always a matter of degree, i.e. there's probably a certain amount of ethnic diversity in any political territory. Even the Emperor of Japan is ruler not only of Japan proper, but also of the Ryukyu Islands and Ainuistan.

mu'e mi'o sen

--- On Fri, 12/31/10, A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:

From: A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com>
Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Emperor
To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Date: Friday, December 31, 2010, 1:58 PM


>I agree that such a distinction between "empires" and "unions" should be made.
>*Maybe* {sorgugnai} (a nation extending several countires) could fit for
>"empire".
>
>Furthermore, I think that if the ruler of japan chooses to call himself an
>Emperor, that doesnt mean that he has to be an emporer in the lojban sense of
>the word (ruler of an empire).
>Is "King of th Hill" a king? Is "Dr. Evil" a doctor? No. But they can still
>choose to use those titles, devoid of their meaning. We shouldn't have to "bend"
>
>the lojban word for emperor to fit Japan.

I have struggled with this.  But I don't think, in general, particularly if we
are

translating, that it's our role as lojbanists to decide if the 'Emperor' is
really  
an Emperor.  On the other hand, if we are writing specifically about his/her
role or

responsibilty, then we may chose to call the Emperor of Japan a 'king', and
Queen Victoria an 'empress.


>
>And BTW, isn't {noltrunau} and {noltruni'u} the preveiling words for king/queen?
>
>(as used in Alice in Wonderland)

{noltru} could be the governor of a province - hence the need for the rafsi
{-rai} as

used in jbovlaste..

Often it doesn't really matter if the monarch is male or female.  As for Alice
in

Wonderland, I guess the level of rulership wasn't important for the translator,
but maybe the gender was.

totus