- This topic has 23 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 11 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Of course, it’s always a good idea to keep an open mind about things and not to be too categorical. But I would still tend to agree with Aonghus that you can’t translate one language word for word into another, if you want an authentic result. I can only think of one language where you could use the verb “to work” or “to function” to mean “to be suitable”, and that’s French (“marcher” = “to work”, “to function”, but also “to be suitable”). There is no such analogy in Spanish or German, I think. Nor in my own mother tongue, Estonian.
As for the examples quoted in Potafocal, I have the impression that none of them conveys exactly the meaning we’re after. So, the hunt is still on… 🙂
Go raibh míle maith agaibh, gach duine! I have a wealth of new words to “chew on” (that would be a fun idiom to find a comparable meaning for! ;-P ) and new ways to express the meaning I had originally asked about. This community is so much richer than any one dictionary or other static resource could ever be. Thank you all for your thoughtful, creative contributions.
Is iad ár dteangacha álainn, nach iad?
My suggestion would be the same as ones already given:
“Does that work for you?”“An bhfuil sé sin oiriúnach duit?” <- is it suitable to you?
or
“An bhfuil tú sásta leis?” <- are you happy/satisfied with it?
or even more generally, since it’s really the sentiment, not the syntax we’re looking to emulate here, something like:
“Ceart go leor?”I find it’s important to be able to think even on another level than just word choice. Sometimes the appropriate idea is better represented with a wholly different construct than the one you’re trying to translate from. It’s also important to remember there is hardly ever a single right answer, since translation is inherently problematic. There are usually at least several wrong answers though 🙂
“chew on” (that would be a fun idiom to find a comparable meaning for! ;-P )
Chew on – ag cogaint ar – found at http://www.potafocal.com/Search.aspx?Text=chew as in “ag cogaint ar choincheap an ama, chewing on the concept of time. But wait a minute – how could that possibly be right since it’s a direct translation? Looks like we’ll have to come up with a different one to follow this forum’s newly established Indirect/Non-Word-For-Word Rule when translating idioms. 🙂
“chew on” (that would be a fun idiom to find a comparable meaning for! ;-P )
Chew on – ag cogaint ar – found at http://www.potafocal.com/Search.aspx?Text=chew as in “ag cogaint ar choincheap an ama, chewing on the concept of time. But wait a minute – how could that possibly be right since it’s a direct translation? Looks like we’ll have to come up with a different one to follow this forum’s newly established Indirect/Non-Word-For-Word Rule when translating idioms. 🙂
I think you misunderstand here…
No one is saying that idioms are never possible as word-for-word translation. Second, there are no “rules” being established here – I don’t know where you picked that up. I believe the original question was about existing ways that speakers express the idea of “to work for”, as in to suit or fit a task or need. I don’t think there’s any question that using the words “obair” or “saothar” to describe that would be a flat out mistake, within the context of what Irish people actually say. Is there some police force preventing you from doing so? No. But it isn’t the way people say that (as far as I know).
I believe the original question was about existing ways that speakers express the idea of “to work for”, as in to suit or fit a task or need. I don’t think there’s any question that using the words “obair” or “saothar” to describe that would be a flat out mistake, within the context of what Irish people actually say.
Here’s an article in Beo from 2006 by Máire Ní Chuagáin, where she uses oibrigh, the verb for obair, in the context of fitting a particular need: http://www.beo.ie/alt-cosa-siulacha.aspx (end of 5th paragraph) Could it be possible that Máire Ní Chuagáin or another Irish speaker actually originated the use of “obrigh” to mean fitting a task or need, and now we Americans are shoe-horning it for our own use with sayings like ”it works for me?”
I believe the original question was about existing ways that speakers express the idea of “to work for”, as in to suit or fit a task or need. I don’t think there’s any question that using the words “obair” or “saothar” to describe that would be a flat out mistake, within the context of what Irish people actually say.
Here’s an article in Beo from 2006 by Máire Ní Chuagáin, where she uses oibrigh, the verb for obair, in the context of fitting a particular need: http://www.beo.ie/alt-cosa-siulacha.aspx (end of 5th paragraph) Could it be possible that Máire Ní Chuagáin or another Irish speaker actually originated the use of “obrigh” to mean fitting a task or need, and now we Americans are shoe-horning it for our own use with sayings like ”it works for me?”
…. Except that’s not the way she’s using the word in that article.
She’s talking about whether the vaccine worked or not.
The original poster was asking about instances like this:
“Hey, should I pick you up at 8?” “Sure, that works”.
“Will you take $50 for that TV?” “That’ll work”.Rather different in terms of the actual sentiment.
The original poster was asking about instances like this:
“Hey, should I pick you up at 8?” “Sure, that works”.
“Will you take $50 for that TV?” “That’ll work”.Rather different in terms of the actual sentiment.
“Sure, that works” / “That’ll work” are English idioms. Using “obair” to translate them would be Béarlachas.
But with “The vaccine worked” “The television works” using “obair” is appropriate.
D’oibrigh an vacsaín / Tá an teilifíseán ag obair
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
