English translation: Whereas in the past people .., today they...."
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
Romanian to English translations [PRO] General / Conversation / Greetings / Letters / grammatical constructions
Romanian term or phrase:Daca mai demult... astazi...
Buna ziua,
Am o problema cu acest tip de constructie, si nu stiu cum sa il rezolv.
|
ex: DACA mai demult oamenii erau cat de cat interesati de situatia societatii, astazi ei sunt aproape cu totul nepasatori.
|
Nu stiu cum sa construiesc fraza cu acest DACA. Sau sa impart fraza in 2 propozitii?
|
Va multumesc
Explanation: I would leave this as one phrase only. There is no need to split this into two phrases if you use the correct subordinate conjunction. This way you can stay closer to the original structure and it will still flow properly.
"A conjunction may be used to indicate the relationship between the ideas expressed in a clause and the ideas expressed in the rest of a sentence. .....
3. subordinate Conjunctions
...
Whereas
1. because: "WHEREAS this is a public building, it is open to everyone."
2. on the other hand: "He is short, WHEREAS you are tall."
." http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/durrus/153/gramch28.html
Yes, you did understand my quotes correctly, and I thank you for clarifying the issues. The dictionary I have been used is OALD, but it is sometimes "very classical English". I will use "whereas" as it should and I am happy to know that it is very used at the beginning of the sentence. Almost all the time I need someone to confirm the frequency of the use of words.
With regard to your dictionary definitions, I am not sure if I fully understand the Romanian explanations, but it looks like it says "whereas" cannot be used at the beginning of a sentence. If I have understood this correctly, then your dictionary is incorrect. I have been speaking English for 43 years and have always heardseen it used at the beginning - in fact just as much as in the middle of a sentence. Have I understood your quotes correctly?
Observ aici anumite mici neintelegeri, dar problema era doar despre "DACA", nu despre restul frazei.
Am retinut variantele: IF, WHEREAS, WHILE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT.
|
Problema cu IF ar fi ca nu ii gasesc sensul necesar acestei fraze. In OALD nu apare: http://www.oxfordadvancedlearnersdictionary.com/dictionary/i... Poate ca apare in dictionare care nu-s "prea English". Poate cineva care cunoaste intr-adevar problema sa arate ca IF are si sensul necesar frazei?
I hope I have not offended you with my corrections of your translation. I tried to correct the mistakes to benefit the Asker. There were some errors in your version which were not due to "linguistic register", but would have interfered with the flow and meaning of the language, should it be used by the Asker for English readers (i.e. I was trying to assist the Asker - NOT intended to demote your credibility or to promote my own suggestion). It was certainly not intended to promote the "Queens" English either - I am working class. As a native English speaker, and a qualified translator, it would have been wrong of me to have left your version as it was for the sake of the final translation chosen by the Asker. I am sure that were you to hear me, (or any other English person), speaking Romanian incorrectly , you would also look to correct this for the purpose of comprehension, irrelvant to how the Romanian royalty may speak. Although I also appreciate that you do not disagree with my own version, I did not correct your translation in defence of my own - merely due to my own love of languages.
As I mentioned, it depends on the linguistic register and I leave it to the translator to choose the right one since he/she has a full grasp of the bigger picture. The one I gave is not the "Queen's language" and I'm fully aware of it.
I also pointed out that the versions already given are perfectly correct.
"A" Long time (while ago = very conversational register) ..., "they are almost" = "almost" is a bit clumsy here and possibly unnecessary.
"they don't care almost at all" = grammatically incorrect and makes no sense in English. We say "we don't care at all" but do not qualify the phrase in this way and "almost" could never be used in this way here.
"Long time ago/a while ago, people were somewhat interested in societal issues but now/today, they are almost indifferent to them/they don't care almost at all"(disengaged). Depinde de registru lincvistic dar toate sugestiile date pana acum sunt foarte bune.
Explanation: I would leave this as one phrase only. There is no need to split this into two phrases if you use the correct subordinate conjunction. This way you can stay closer to the original structure and it will still flow properly.
"A conjunction may be used to indicate the relationship between the ideas expressed in a clause and the ideas expressed in the rest of a sentence. .....
3. subordinate Conjunctions
...
Whereas
1. because: "WHEREAS this is a public building, it is open to everyone."
2. on the other hand: "He is short, WHEREAS you are tall."
." http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/durrus/153/gramch28.html
I would say:
"in the past people were more or less interested in societal issues, today the point of not caring at all has been reached."
Example sentence(s):
"Whereas in the past we created obstacles to reduce the number of CS majors; today we must recruit students to have the workforce needed to meet the challenges and opportunities of information technology in this century."
LaraBarnett United Kingdom Local time: 16:00 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 20
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +7
