<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
OK -here the path of the index is wider, including you and your friends<br><br>Ingvild
<br><br><div>> Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 20:10:36 +0530<br>> From: nik.azn@GMAIL.COM<br>> Subject: Re: Wahawafe - a multilingual translation project<br>> To: SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> <br>> Hi!<br>> Thank you very much for your translation! :-) but, could you please<br>> rewrite this using the inclusive form of we? Quite a few people have<br>> thought of aliens because of the line "from Earth". So, i have<br>> mentioned on my site that this project is only for humans and you<br>> should use the inclusive form. Sorry for the trouble!<br>> Thanks again! :)<br>> Nikhil.<br>> <br>> On 09/08/2011, Ingvild Roald <iroald@hotmail.com> wrote:<br>> ><br>> > As I suppose the sentence is something you could use if you were to meet<br>> > extraterrestrials, I have chosen to use the exclusive but extensive 'we',<br>> > and the Norwegian SL-sentence would translitterate something like 'humans we<br>> > yes, live Earth we yes', where the 'we' is 'all of us here, but not you'. I<br>> > am not a 'native' signer, and cannot guarantee that this would be the best<br>> > way of putting it in Norwegian SL, but I think it would do. The sign-text is<br>> > a screen dump. as I always have problems with the SignText in combination<br>> > with e-mail<br>> ><br>> > Ingvild<br>> > Roald, Norway<br>> ><br>> >> Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 22:28:57 +0530<br>> >> From: nik.azn@GMAIL.COM<br>> >> Subject: Re: Wahawafe - a multilingual translation project<br>> >> To: SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> >><br>> >> Hi! I don't claim that my sentence will not cause any problem in<br>> >> translation. I accept that languages are really different from one<br>> >> another to come up with an easily translatable and meaningful<br>> >> sentence. However, this sentence can be satisfactorily rendered in<br>> >> most languages, at least spoken ones. I don't have much idea of sign<br>> >> language grammars.<br>> >> You should use the version of "we", which includes the maximum number<br>> >> of people. If there is a difference between inclusive and exclusive<br>> >> "we", then use the inclusive one. Both the we's refer to the same<br>> >> group of people. If it's not possible to say the whole thing in one<br>> >> sentence, you can break this into two, by dropping the "and".<br>> >> Nikhil.<br>> >><br>> >> On 31/07/2011, Trevor Jenkins <bslwannabe@gmail.com> wrote:<br>> >> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Valerie Sutton<br>> >> > <sutton@signwriting.org>wrote:<br>> >> ><br>> >> > Nikhil needs the translations in written SIGN LANGUAGES, not spoken<br>> >> >> languages!<br>> >> ><br>> >> ><br>> >> >> I am not an ASL expert, or I would do the translation myself in ASL. I<br>> >> >> actually do not how to sign that phrase in ASL, so that is why I was<br>> >> >> waiting<br>> >> >> for someone who knows ASL to do the translation for NIkhil in<br>> >> >> ASL...written<br>> >> >> in SignWriting.<br>> >> >><br>> >> ><br>> >> > I'm in a similar situation with BSL. I'm increasing fluent in its use<br>> >> > but<br>> >> > not a native speaker. However, I am fluent in English yet I don't know<br>> >> > how<br>> >> > to understand the phrase:<br>> >> ><br>> >> ><br>> >> >> "We are humans and we are from Earth."<br>> >> >><br>> >> ><br>> >> > How many are the "we"s? English, plus I guess many (all?) of the spoken<br>> >> > languages given here as exemplars, the first person plural is<br>> >> > uncountable.<br>> >> > It would be possible to translate it into Swedish with "vi" and still<br>> >> > obscure the number of participants. In BSL, at least, the first person<br>> >> > plural is countable; up to four maybe five even 10. It is signed<br>> >> > differently<br>> >> > depending on the number of participants. For example, if "we" consists<br>> >> > of me<br>> >> > and my wife then I sign that slightly different from me, my wife, and<br>> >> > you<br>> >> > (Valerie), plus the physical proximity of the "we" one to another would<br>> >> > change the sign(s) needed. However these small groups are signed<br>> >> > entirely<br>> >> > differently from "we" as the subscribers to this list (if all of us<br>> >> > happened<br>> >> > to be assembled in one locale).<br>> >> ><br>> >> > The presence of the "and" indicates that the second "we" is a distinct<br>> >> > different group from the first but with the speaker (signer) a member<br>> >> > of<br>> >> > both groups. There is a famous phrase that exemplifies the same problem<br>> >> > "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path." In this case<br>> >> > the<br>> >> > AND is a transliteration from the source language but its inclusion<br>> >> > creates<br>> >> > an ambiguity that is not in the original. If that second "we" of the<br>> >> > sample<br>> >> > sentence were to refer to me, my wife and my dog then the "and" is<br>> >> > vital.<br>> >> ><br>> >> > There's also a BSL issue here. We have no sign for AND. There are ways<br>> >> > to<br>> >> > indicate that two things are connected but not immediately.<br>> >> ><br>> >> > The "from" affects the translational choices too. Where is this<br>> >> > discourse<br>> >> > dislocated sentence being transacted and how did the various "we"s<br>> >> > arrive<br>> >> > there, or were "we" there from the beginning. Similarly the actors to<br>> >> > whom<br>> >> > this phrase is being relayed are they from somewhere else coming to the<br>> >> > "here" or were they there from the beginning. This information will<br>> >> > change<br>> >> > how the sentence can be translated.<br>> >> ><br>> >> > It's not that the sentence is un-translatable *per se* but that rather<br>> >> > it is<br>> >> > not context free as Nikhil claimed somewhere (possibly on his web site).<br>> >> > At<br>> >> > least for BSL, context is required otherwise the processing costs in<br>> >> > the<br>> >> > sense of Relevance Theory is astronomically high. Without the enclosing<br>> >> > context it isn't really possible to provide a BSL translation.<br>> >> ><br>> >> > Regards, Trevor.<br>> >> ><br>> >> > <>< Re: deemed!<br>> >> ><br>> >><br>> >><br>> >> --<br>> >> निखिल सिन्हा | Nikhil Sinha<br>> >> nik.azn@gmail.com<br>> >> www.wahawafe.zxq.net - Wahawafe - a multilingual translation project.<br>> >> "We are humans and we are from Earth." in several languages.<br>> >><br>> > <br>> <br>> <br>> -- <br>> निखिल सिन्हा | Nikhil Sinha<br>> nik.azn@gmail.com<br>> www.wahawafe.zxq.net - Wahawafe - a multilingual translation project.<br>> "We are humans and we are from Earth." in several languages.<br>> <br></div> </div></body>
</html>