Discussion Group

Moderator: JackFrost

User avatar
Car
Forum Administrator
Posts: 10648
Joined: 2002-06-21, 19:24
Real Name: Silvia
Gender: female
Country: DE Germany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Re: Discussion Group

Postby Car » 2020-07-25, 2:13

linguoboy wrote:
Car wrote:
linguoboy wrote:Trying to translate a sentence from Catalan into English and I can't decide between two slightly different versions.

Original: La salsa pebrada devia ser una de les salses més emblemàtiques de la cuina medieval catalana.
Version 1: Pepper sauce must be one of the most emblematic sauces of mediaeval Catalan cuisine.
Version 2: Pepper sauce must be one of the sauces most emblematic of mediaeval Catalan cuisine.

I suppose "...one of mediaeval Catalan cuisine's most emblematic sauces" is in the running as well.

Definitely 1 or 3. Does 2 really sound natural to you?

Yup. It's not that unusual for English-speakers to displace heavy noun modifiers like this. (At least as common as it is for German-speakers to use heavy pre-noun inserts.) For instance, this always happens with the adjective likely when qualified by an adverb and governing an infinitive:

"It's reserved for the person least likely to try to kill me today."
"Tinder also edged out OKCupid as the app most likely to solicit online harassment from suitors."

Unqualified and governing a prepositional phrase, it precedes the noun while the phrase follows:

"Your volunteering might help us see you as a likely person for that role?

Emblematic is generally qualified with a prepositional phrase which follows the noun. The adjective can remain before the noun or it can follow as well, which is more likely when it's further qualified. (For instance, if the modifying adverb of degree were "extremely" instead of "most", there would be no question about displacing the adjective.)

Thanks, you two! For some reason your example sentences sound perfectly normal to me, but version 2 still sounds odd.
Please correct my mistakes!

User avatar
Gormur
Posts: 8068
Joined: 2005-05-17, 1:11
Real Name: Gormur
Gender: male
Country: CU Cuba (Cuba)
Contact:

Re: Discussion Group

Postby Gormur » 2020-08-05, 13:15

Talking about US English dialects, I wonder why in some areas britches refers to pants. Whereas I'd call these knee-highs or knickers for females

Is there a historical reason for this? I know breeches is the same word but I still think of knee-high pants or knickers and not something like silk pants or jeans

It seems like trousers was used by early settlers. Any idea why that fell out of use?

Cheers :)
Eigi gegnir þat at segja at bók nøkkur er hreinferðug eðr ønnur spelluð því at vandliga ok dáliga eru bœkr ritnar ok annat kunnum vér eigi um þœr at dœma

User avatar
languagepotato
Posts: 473
Joined: 2013-01-22, 7:17
Gender: male
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: Discussion Group

Postby languagepotato » 2020-08-08, 10:20

this is something I'm not even sure of in my native languages, but I'm also not sure in English.

Who exactly are my brothers-in-law/sisters-in-law?

My significant other's sibling?
My sibling's significant other?
My sibling's significant other's sibling?
native: (ar-MA) (nl)
very comfortable: (en-US)
somewhat comfortable: (de) (es) (af)
forgetting: (fr) (ar-arb)
touristy level: (ro) (sv)(ber)(pl)
someday hopefully: (ja) (sq) (cs) (tr) and many others


Return to “English”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest