Jezičke adoumice™

[расејан]

šta je pravilno:- pojma nisam imao šta znači sve to ili - pojma nisam imao šta je značilo sve to(ili su možda oba načina podjednako pravilna?)

Да, али не онако како мислиш. Ово друго је, све ми се чини, превод са енглеског, а они у индиректном говору (ако сам погодио израз) иду једно време у прошлост у односу на нас. Наше "нисам знао шта му је" је нормално код нас; наша зависна реченица се догађа из гледишта субјекта у времену које главна реченица описује; енглеска из гледишта главне реченице - "I didn't know what was wrong with him". То ће, наравно, многи преводилац да заборави, и тако ће још једна туђа навика да нам се усели.

[bus]

Да, али не онако како мислиш. Ово друго је, све ми се чини, превод са енглеског, а они у индиректном говору (ако сам погодио израз) иду једно време у прошлост у односу на нас. Наше "нисам знао шта му је" је нормално код нас; наша зависна реченица се догађа из гледишта субјекта у времену које главна реченица описује; енглеска из гледишта главне реченице - "I didn't know what was wrong with him". То ће, наравно, многи преводилац да заборави, и тако ће још једна туђа навика да нам се усели.

Hm, jeste, ali i nije: "I didn't know what was wrong with him" ne govori ništa o tome da li mu je i sada nešto, ili mu je samo tada bilo.Tako, "She said she would come" znači da taj dolazak sada već može biti i prošlost, dakle, budućnost je iz prošle tačke gledišta. dok"She said she will come" znači da se dolazak definitivno još nije desio. ..."She said Niagara Falls is an ugly little town" implicira da je ovo stalnija istina, važila tada -- važi i sada, dok"She said Niagara Falls was an ugly little town" ostavlja mogućnost da se nešto od vremena kad je ona ovu rečenicu izgovorila i promenilo (npr. da je pala atomska bomba na Clifton Hill), dakle znamo sa sigurnošću jedino da je tada bilo istina.

[расејан]

U širokoj upotrebi po tamošnjim časopisima je izraz "poslužitelj", da ne reknem famulus :)

Мени једном западе посао да напишем модул за, пај' са', "server banking", ни мање ни више. Што сам дубље улазио у претходне покушаје да се то уради, све сам мање знао, и на крају сам питао шта је то - јел' то нешто као серверска фарма, оно, пуна полица оштрица или влати (blade), па се посао међу њима дели, или...Испало је да је то келнерска касица, колико је готовине имао у новчанику кад је почео, колико је готовинских бакшиша укњижио, колико је изручио у благајну, колико је имао на крају смене и како ће да подели са кујном. "Сервер" му дакле дође трпезарац .

[расејан]

"She said Niagara Falls is an ugly little town" implicira da je ovo stalnija istina, važila tada -- važi i sada, dok"She said Niagara Falls was an ugly little town" ostavlja mogućnost da se nešto od vremena kad je ona ovu rečenicu izgovorila i promenilo (npr. da je pala atomska bomba na Clifton Hill), dakle znamo sa sigurnošću jedino da je tada bilo istina.

Онда сам ја усавршио пролазност... јер кад год саставим нешто као оно прво, да траје, појави ми се другар из Брајтона и исправи ме - треба ово друго, може да је било ал' не мора данас да значи.

[расејан]

Онда сам ја усавршио пролазност... јер кад год саставим нешто као оно прво, да траје, појави ми се другар из Брајтона и исправи ме - треба ово друго, може да је било ал' не мора данас да значи.

Ево шта каже он на ово:

>OK, found it. Here's what the guy says: >>"She said she would come" - means that her arrival may be in the past already; it was in the future at the time. ""She said she will come" - means the arrival has definitely not occurred yetHmmm. But her intention at the time was that she would come. It's possible she's changed her mind and/or cannot anymore. Thus her intention at the time is not necessarily the reality of today.>>"She said Niagara Falls is an ugly little town" implies a permanent truth, was valid then, is valid now; But how could she predict that it would permanently remain ugly? She can only give her opinion of that time.>"She said Niagara Falls was an ugly little town" leaves a possibility that something has changed meanwhile (i.e. nuclear bomb fell on Clifton Hill), so we only know for sure that it was true at the time.That only works with American bad grammar. If that were the case it should read "She said Niagara Falls had been an ugly little town"

[bus]

Ево шта каже он на ово:> "She said she would come" - means that her arrival may be in the past already; it was in the future at the time. ""She said she will come" - means the arrival has definitely not occurred yetHmmm. But her intention at the time was that she would come. It's possible she's changed her mind and/or cannot anymore. Thus her intention at the time is not necessarily the reality of today.>>"She said Niagara Falls is an ugly little town" implies a permanent truth, was valid then, is valid now; But how could she predict that it would permanently remain ugly? She can only give her opinion of that time.>"She said Niagara Falls was an ugly little town" leaves a possibility that something has changed meanwhile (i.e. nuclear bomb fell on Clifton Hill), so we only know for sure that it was true at the time.That only works with American bad grammar. If that were the case it should read "She said Niagara Falls had been an ugly little town"

OK, just so you don't have to translate stuff again, I'll write in English right away:First of all, the remark about "bad American grammar" is utterly unscientific (i.e. your friend has obviously never read even an introductory text in linguistics; there are no "good" or "bad" grammars, there are just powerful and less powerful social groups; all mental grammars are of equal objective, i.e. scientific value). On top of that, the remark is incredibly snotty, but then, you can take the Brit out of a snotty place, but you can't take the snottiness out of a Brit. Finally, your friend might benefit from the insight that Canadians aren't Americans. You never know when knowing stuff like this may come in handy. Now on to our examples:"She said she would come" - Point taken. She may well not have come, but, then again, she might have. "She said she will come." - This certainly implies that the estimated time of her arrival is in the future of the speaker reporting her words. ..."She said Niagara Falls was an ugly little town" is not the same as "She said Niagara Falls had been an ugly little town". While the first sentence implies that the town was ugly at the time she uttered the sentence (and may or may not be ugly now), the second one clearly implies that the town had been ugly at a time prior to the time she uttered the sentence, while it may indeed have changed so as not to have been ugly anymore at the time when she was speaking. Note that both times are "past" with regard to the time of the reporting, but the time expressed by "had been" is "double past", whereas the one expressed by "said" is merely past with respect to now.

[Kelt]

Može li se na srpski jezik primeniti readability metrics za engleski?pošto se mehanizam ne razlikuje, trebalo bi da može, al šta znam...

Edited September 18, 2008 by Kelt

[bus]

Ja sam potpuni ignoramus za ovo, tako da pojma nemam. Mozda neko drugi zna?

[Luka]

Kako se uobicajeno prevodi hard boiled?

Tvrdo kuvano (jaje, npr). Ako se odnosi na lice, onda može da znači "okoreo"..

[расејан]

Kako se uobicajeno prevodi hard boiled?

Тврдо барен; безобзиран.

[mioba]

Тврдо барен; безобзиран.

tvrdokoran?

[mammy two shoes]

prekaljen?

[Willow]

Kako se uobicajeno prevodi hard boiled?

prefrigan?zaguljen?

[mammy two shoes]

prepreden, prevejan,stari lisac

[Waldorf]

prefrigan?

Не љути се на маторог џангризавца са балкона: овде је друго „р” вишка.