Linguistic Team International Forum

Quoted from "ralle4"

Quoted from "MarlysePi"

I already made a ToDo for this, but will repeat it here as it is kind of blocking the flow...
There is a string missing in the English text at http://pootle.linguisticteam.org/fr/tzm_…e/#unit=1184325
The French translation of this string can be found in the chronology.
Please reinstate the correct string in the English text, otherwise the next string does not make sense.

Marlyce, where is the string in reference, here, in the book?

Page 83
His work Capital: A Critique of Political Economy[...]

I found it, thanks, but do not know how to use Pootle, so cannot correct the error.

Quoted from "MarlysePi"

It is no longer there ! In Pootle at least. The string I linked contains the wrong English text (and translation). You can see this if you go to Show Timeline under the string, at about 22 weeks ago there is a French translation that doesn't correspond to the translation that is now in this string.

Yep, it is indeed now missing, although it's quite a mystery as to why it ran away.

As a rule, I'll sync the project and then pull a backup of the existing content before adding it back, just in case something goes wrong with the re-addition attempt.

@MarlysePi:, I've repaired the apparent corruption I found in the French version, but the current translation of the previously missing string is one that was intended for the string that took its place, and now follows it.

I'm not yet able to say what caused the corruption, but this string did not disappear within the few other languages that I've checked so far, so it may be limited to only the French section of Pootle. The investigation continues.

Thank you Ray. I will retranslate the recovered string into French, no problem.

Hello,
I was taking notes while I was reading, so now I have a list of possible errors in the pdf version. I couldn't see anything related to original text in pootle. My list is as follows :

page 24 footnote this reality AND can only [no AND?]
page 47 with each category broken into categorizes [?subcategories?] that represent
page 70 since the pre-industrial systems where still largely agrarian, [where --> were]
page 73 would inevitably reemerge no matter what reforms where attempted. [where --> were]
page 81 For instance, he believe that [believed?]
page 89 If cures for cancer where to actually emerge [where --> were]
page 128 While maintaining a needs meeting, quality standard of living is
important for physical and mental health, anything beyond that
balance in the context of social comparison has the capacity to create
severe neurosis and social distortion [? remove first ',' ?]
page 134 is the dehumanization of society as everyone and everything is reduce to a mere commodity for exploit [reduced?]
page 138 there is little to no
separation between the government and its corporations by default in the
Capitalist rooted socioeconomic model between the government and its
corporations [duplicate 'between the government and its corporations']
page 146 Terms such a [as]
page 148 Coupled with debt is the profit attribute associated [with?] the sale of money itself
page 151 the mechanism of this hidden tax in also [IS also]
page 162 basic knowledge of humanity['s ?] dependence
page 162 of ten people were[where] two
page 175 xyz is scare[scarce] and hence
page 175 The more an item is scare,[scarce]
page 187 there [are?] many other “footprint”
page 202 example of household solar array application to it possible [?]
page 202 and a lack [of?] social initiative
page 202 It [is] worth stating
page 203 as of 2013, an average home [BAD FORMAT]
page 203 USA but the in the [duplicate 'the']
page 205 order [to] maintain
page 217 Earthly, resources [no ',' ?]
page 252 tangible technical data price that embodies,[?that price embodies?]
page 260 outdated due [to?] a lack of
page 275 As for as [no 2nd as?] the “engine” of a city
page 282 and if far from a serious concern [no if?]
page 285 center with[which] has on demand media
page 286 your[you] remember your trip
page 309 towards a hypothetical break down [of?] the current system
page 314 the slow discovery of what are commonly termed the laws
of nature have provided not only a means to create and invent, but to
also understanding that we are actually not in control in many
profound ways. [provided not only a means... but also an understanding? ]
page 315 life inherent in the habit[habitat?]
page 317 the efficient [efficiency?] increase in production
page 319 such a[as] townhalls
page 320 , we[. We ?] are now able to

If you are using some tool for this, or if there is an up-to-date version of the original text, please direct me.

Thank you.

There are missing two paragraphs of English text under the title "Emergence" (in the essay "The scientific worldview"). We're translating that into Finnish, I'm not sure if it's only in our language version. Pootle doesn't show any text under "Emergence", but goes straight to the next title "Symbiosis". Can this be corrected?
- -
This was fixed, all's well!

From Christos:

"One's interest in the proposals of TZM, coupled with some type of action to promote such change, is the only defining feature of a “member” and the degree of participation comes down to the comfort zone and ingenuity of the individual and/or groups *they choose to be a part of.*: http://pootle.linguisticteam.org/el/tzm_…lter=all&page=4


Was it supposed to write "that choose to be a part of it [the movement]"? Otherwise it makes no sense to me."


Christos, so, this not a typo, it is correct (not sure if someone already helped you w/ this, 'cause I don't see it in the thread). However, you need a comma in the text after "member". I would punctuate it like this: "One's interest in the proposals of TZM, coupled with some type of action to promote such change, is the only defining feature of a “member”, and the degree of participation comes down to the comfort zone and ingenuity of the individual and/or groups *they choose to be a part of.* " As far as explaining the reason why this is correct in English, but would not be correct in some other languages (I understand clearly why you would be confused, because we don't re-reference our subjects/pronouns, as they do in some other languages) perhaps @Di Anna: can explain that much better than I. I only can tell you it is correct.


Regarding this: ... Of course, many hear such a proposal, coupled with the understanding that this is an open access project and anyone on the planet can contribute, might conclude that the vastness of subjective human opinion on such a matter would make settling on such a design impossible.

I think an "and" is what is missing. "Of course, many hear such a proposal ... , and might conclude..." .

The text continues: "This is actually not the case when the scientific method is brought into play. While the <em>localized</em> technology ... will always change over time, ... the basic topographical reasoning will change far less. ..."

Although either could work ("who" closer to the beginning or the "and" before "might"), I think the "and" makes more sense in context.

"..., coupled with the understanding that this is an open access project and anyone on the planet can contribute, ..."

That part is an interjection, which is always surrounded by commas and, if removed along with its surrounding commas, will not in any way adversely affect the grammatical correctness of what remains.


So, if we remove the interjection, it will become much more clear what, if anything, is wrong with the foundational part of the statement.

"Of course, many hear such a proposal might conclude that the vastness of subjective human opinion on such a matter would make settling on such a design impossible."


Given the above, I see three relatively simple approaches for 'righting' it. Both of the suggestions that you two are proposing (adding 'who' after the word 'many' near the start, or adding 'and' in place of the comma after proposal) could work, but it would be even simpler (and cleaner, i.e. not adding any words) to extend the word 'hear' out to 'hearing'? The result would then become:

"Of course, many hearing such a proposal might conclude that the vastness of subjective human opinion on such a matter would make settling on such a design impossible."


And with the interjection returned:

"Of course, many hearing such a proposal, coupled with the understanding that this is an open access project and anyone on the planet can contribute, might conclude that the vastness of subjective human opinion on such a matter would make settling on such a design impossible."

Hi Everyone,
Ramona tagged me to give an explanation to a question here. I have survived reading through this thread, and I just wanted to say, I'm not sure what was asked when or where or even 'why', at this point. But here is the quote from Christos that involves her question to me about correctness in red:

"One's interest in the proposals of TZM, coupled with some type of action to promote such change, is the only defining feature of a “member” and the degree of participation comes down to the comfort zone and ingenuity of the individual and/or groups *they choose to be a part of.*: http://pootle.linguisticteam.org/el/tzm_…lter=all&page=4


Was it supposed to write "that choose to be a part of it [the movement]"? Otherwise it makes no sense to me."

My response to that: A relative pronoun has been omitted (we often do that in English), so "participation comes down to the comfort zone and ingenuity of the individual and/or groups THAT they choose to be a part of. (Explanation: The individual could be a chapter coordinator of TZM and the groups could be the chapters in TZM-- that they choose to be a part of, or not).

I agree with Ramona that there doesn't seem to be an error here.

And it seems appropriate for me to comment on the following post because it involves the same 'omitted' relative pronoun (who and that can be used as relative pronouns, introducting relative clauses. But... sometimes we omit them in English, as being 'understood'.)

Quoted from "Christos Pap."

String 1242975
"Of course, many hear such a proposal, coupled with the understanding that this is an open access project and anyone on the planet can contribute, might conclude that..."

There's probably a "who" missing between "many" and "hear"

Hi, again, CP In English, we often omit the "who" (relative pronouns) in clauses like this one, but if you want to insert a "who" in your translation of the text, it doesn't change the meaning at all.

I guess what this all comes down to is the imperfection of our languages to communicate ideas, and that we just have to do the best we can to translate those ideas in our native tongues.

Famous Buddha quotation: "The finger that points to the moon is 'not' the moon." Our words are just pointers. It's the ideas that are important, and we just do the best we can, each of us pointing in our own way.

Love you all ,
Di

Quoted from "Christos Pap."

String 1242990

"Other events, such a <em>townhalls</em>, which can be monthly or bi-monthly, are also common. "


There's probably and "s" missing after "a".

Yes there is.