Re: O Zeyly Nibro Nizzemfon
|Date:||Saturday, May 15, 1999, 0:07|
Sally Caves <scaves@...> wrote:
> Ahhhh! You are the only one to attempt the
> despised O Zeyly Nibro Nizzemfon!
> I loved, by the way, your translation of "Verimak."
Thanks a lot. I loved it too. (The translation
*process*, not the *result* :) Well, the result too.
> Someone else did one, too, within the past twenty-
> four hours, and please forgive me if I can't remember
> who, but I'll go back and check. I'm so deeply
> grateful when somebody takes an interest in my
> little project. Yes, Pablo, I remember the "silk
> purse" from your translation of Boudewijn's poem,
> and I like your use of metaphors. "Verimak" was
> very accurate... this one shows the rough edges of
> the original a little more. Do you mind if I take
> out the "smooth" English version and examine it?
Be my guest!
> Completely nine yards downYour father lies.
> From his bones (how I love the word "smalk" for "skeleton"!)
I like it too. Sometimes things come out really nice
(why be modest? ;)
> Coral is forming. (Teonaht has a similar middle voice, which I should
> have used)
> Those pearls, which were his eyes (T. is zero-copula so that should be
> "Those are
> pearls which were his eyes."
I understood the zero-copula but I failed to see
where it was. :( Let me correct, then:
Qek onth lunmith
be.3p those pearls
qeq b=FCtth pon gef.
be.3pPST they.REL his eyes
_onth_ =3D "that one / those ones"
_gef_ is the plural of _gep_ "eye", formed by
fricativization (just FYI), as usual for nouns
ending in stops.
> [And here I'm stumbling...]
> Out from him to waste nothing
> Except enduring (lit. "crossing")
> A change of the sea (literally, in T. a "sea-ish change.")
> to be exalted (to?)
> Something extraordinary.
> Each hour strike
> [the mermaids--a part you've left out here.]
D'oh! I left the translation of "mermaids" for later.
And it turned out too late... All I can say is I'm half-
asleep after 7:00 PM these days.
To help you stop stumbling:
> Aus lif porr na vequit freth
> kram drast=E8n
> rroses dhenerrn s=E4n
> na r=E1tsaisentan
> ausnaffavdel rath.
In the same order, it reads (with pauses marked ,):
"Out from him, to waste, nothing, except by enduring
a sea change, goes, to an exalted extraordinary something".
Hey! I just realized I did a strange thing here. Not
wrong, but strange. The verb "goes" applies both to
the first part ("out from him nothing goes to waste")
and the second part ("by enduring a sea change [it]
goes to [=3Dbecomes] something exalted and extraordinary").
Usually the last part ("to something exalted...")
should be before the verb... It could be like this:
Aus lif porr na vequit freth "Out from him to waste nothing"
kram drast=E8n rroses dhenerrn "except enduring a sea change"
na r=E1tsaisentan ausnaffavdel rath "to something exalted and extraordi=
The weird thing here (which also happens in English
and Spanish translation) is that the subject of the
first part is "nothing", but the subject of the second
part, which is not stated, is not "nothing"!
> On fanth nuldas smokek
> pon briguann
Here I should insert "mermaids". Following the English
etimology, _rrosp=E4mth_ "sea-maids" seems appropriate,
but the word sounds awful to me. Let me think about it.
> Boy, I've probably made mincemeat of this!
> Forgive me!
No need to -- my mistakes were there before you
made mincemeat of my beautiful job. (Kidding :)
> Do you want to see the original? I'll post it with
> "spoiler headers."
> Thanks for doing this!
Thank *you* for posting the exercise. I read the
"spoilers"... and I still like "Verimak" better than