From pycyn@aol.com Tue Apr 03 12:31:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_1); 3 Apr 2001 19:31:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 18343 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2001 19:31:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Apr 2001 19:31:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r20.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.162) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Apr 2001 20:32:18 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r20.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.14.) id r.dd.127adcde (16937) for ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 15:30:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 15:30:57 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] translation of "Mark" To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_dd.127adcde.27fb7ef1_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_dd.127adcde.27fb7ef1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/3/2001 2:08:01 PM Central Daylight Time, ninar@techpointer.com writes: > of geographic and proper names? Words like Jordan, Jerusalem, > Jesus, and so on (not necessarily beginning with "J") - in > Lojbanistan are these words transliterated from English > or from local names? Is this a decision for the individual > writer/translator/speaker? > The official line is that proper names are to be represented as close as possible to their home version, so, for Mark, either Aramaic or Koine, with Aramaic winning out. I recall "Jesus" coming out as {iecu,ys} (but my recollections are not reliable). In mamy cases (Chinese having had the most discussion recently) the translator's idea of what fits these requirements has been allowed to stand after a lot of carping by experts. > > Can I submit what I've done here, or point to my website > and ask for corrections to be sent to me privately?> > I think we can be convinced to do it privately, unless some point of general interest comes up. But I think you might get a broader range of comments (not all helpful, alas) if you let the discussion go public. BTW, I congatulate you for your relatively sensible choice (16 chapters is no short piece, but the text is very clear, not like the old standards Tao Teh Ching 1 or something from Alice) and I admire your courage. --part1_dd.127adcde.27fb7ef1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/3/2001 2:08:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
ninar@techpointer.com writes:


<But I have to ask - is there any convention for internationalization
of geographic and proper names?  Words like Jordan, Jerusalem,
Jesus, and so on (not necessarily beginning with "J") - in
Lojbanistan are these words transliterated from English
or from local names?  Is this a decision for the individual
writer/translator/speaker? >


The official line is that proper names are to be represented as close as
possible to their home version, so, for Mark, either Aramaic or Koine, with
Aramaic winning out.  I recall "Jesus" coming out as {iecu,ys} (but my
recollections are not reliable).  In mamy cases (Chinese having had the most
discussion recently) the translator's idea of what fits these requirements
has been allowed to stand after a lot of carping by experts.  


<Also, is there any convention for review of translations?
Can I submit what I've done here, or point to my website
and ask for corrections to be sent to me privately?>

I think we can be convinced to do it privately, unless some point of general
interest comes up.  But I think you might get a broader range of comments
(not all helpful, alas) if you let the discussion go public.
BTW, I congatulate you for your relatively sensible choice (16 chapters is no
short piece, but the text is very clear, not like the old standards Tao Teh
Ching 1 or something from Alice) and I admire your courage.
--part1_dd.127adcde.27fb7ef1_boundary--