Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

What's NESAT? was Re: documentation for A&S?

Expand Messages
  • rbrune@fusient.com
    Awesome!! Thanks a million. =-D Unfortunately I neither weave nor spin, knitting being my primary way of creating textiles, but I ve wanted to try spinning for
    Message 1 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Awesome!! Thanks a million. =-D
      Unfortunately I neither weave nor spin, knitting being my primary way
      of creating textiles, but I've wanted to try spinning for a while,
      this looks like a good place to start.

      -Teresa

      --- In Authentic_SCA@y..., loom@v... wrote:
      > Dear, sweet Teresa,
      >
      > Northern European Symposium on Archaeological Textiles (NESAT). I
      > hope you are a textile fanatic. There are plenty of pictures in
      > these articles. In fact for a weaver and spinner, these are great
      > primary sources. There is also some clothing info, but not as
      much.
      > One article served as my inspiration to weave an Irish Brat.
      >
      > Cassandra
      >
      > --- In Authentic_SCA@y..., rbrune@f... wrote:
      > > --- In Authentic_SCA@y..., loom@v... wrote:
      > >
      > > > Cassandra who really needs to learn German so she can read all
      > the
      > > > articles in NESAT
      > >
      > > I can do German! What's NESAT?? Does it have pictures?!
      > >
      > > -Teresa (excited about a new resource. . .)
    • Amy L. Hornburg Heilveil
      ... I do this, but I don t like to. I prefer to get a dictionary and do a translation of the materials myself. Smiles, Despina
      Message 2 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        At 12:30 PM 9/29/2001 +0000, you wrote:
        This question is for people who do research on cultures in whic they
        don't speak the language.  Is it normally acceptable to use published
        English translations of primary sources written in another langauge?

        I do this, but I don't like to.  I prefer to get a dictionary and do a translation of the materials myself.

        Smiles,
        Despina


      • Jeff Gedney
        On Saturday, September 29, 2001 8:31 AM, andrea@gideonfamily.org ... As long as you acknowlegde that it is no longer a primary source (unless you include the
        Message 3 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          On Saturday, September 29, 2001 8:31 AM, andrea@...
          [SMTP:andrea@...] wrote:
          > This question is for people who do research on cultures in whic they
          > don't speak the language. Is it normally acceptable to use published
          > English translations of primary sources written in another langauge?
          > Giovanna

          As long as you acknowlegde that it is no longer a primary source (unless
          you include the original).
          It is now secondary.
          Translation requires interpretation, and early languages in particular may
          have mutated such that translations may not convey the original intent of
          the author.


          Elias Gedney
          +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
          Studium doscendi volutate quae cogi non potest constat.
          +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        • William Harrington
          ... I admire you for doing this and I still want a Tibetan English dictionary so that I could do the same, but (very big but) wouldn t this just create a
          Message 4 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
             

            "Amy L. Hornburg Heilveil" wrote:

            At 12:30 PM 9/29/2001 +0000, you wrote:
            This question is for people who do research on cultures in whic they
            don't speak the language.  Is it normally acceptable to use published
            English translations of primary sources written in another langauge?


            I do this, but I don't like to.  I prefer to get a dictionary and do a translation of the materials myself.

            Smiles,
            Despina
             

            I admire you for doing this and I still want a Tibetan English dictionary so that
            I could do the same, but (very big but) wouldn't this just create a literal translation that likely lacks the subtlety of meaning that familiarity with the language brings?  I mean, if you had to translate English, you would prabably run into a lot of trouble trying to translate the meaning of idioms such as "hole in one" or "bad apple" or.... well, you get the idea.  I would think that a translation or two a long side the original language would be a necessity for doing this kind of primary research unless you are familiar enough with the language that you dont need a dictionary.

            Dorje

          • Ariane Helou
            ... I gotta agree with Dorje here :-) Idioms can certainly be difficult to translate, but keep in mind also that not all dictionaries give explanations of
            Message 5 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              At 06:33 PM 10/1/01 -0700, you wrote:
              > I do this, but I don't like to. I prefer to get a dictionary and do a
              > translation of the materials myself.
              >>
              >>Smiles,
              >>Despina
              >>
              >I admire you for doing this and I still want a Tibetan English dictionary
              >so that
              >I could do the same, but (very big but) wouldn't this just create a
              >literal translation that likely lacks the subtlety of meaning that
              >familiarity with the language brings?
              >Dorje

              I gotta agree with Dorje here :-)

              Idioms can certainly be difficult to translate, but keep in mind also that
              not all dictionaries give explanations of grammar and syntax. (Most good
              ones do, but many also presuppose some knowledge about noun declensions and
              verb conjugations; ie, they may simply give the forms for genitive and
              dative without explaining what they mean.)

              I'm a language geek, but I still don't always trust the dictionary by
              itself if I don't know the grammar of a language. German, for example; I
              know a few words, but I usually have to make a wild guess at
              syntax. Having the German original, a dictionary, AND an English
              translation means I can double-check on word definitions, and that I don't
              have to worry about figuring out the sentence structure. (This is a real
              example, btw; last year I was in a production of "The Magic Flute," all in
              German, but the only translation our director provided us was this silly
              rhyming business stuffed with "thees" and "thous"...it had *nothing* to do
              with what the characters were really saying!!)

              Producing your own translation is a great idea, but unless it's a language
              you know well, I would still recommend having a published translation (as
              modern a one as possible), or a translation by a friend fluent in the
              language in question, alongside the original just to double-check everything.

              And speaking of translations, my Latin homework is calling me...

              valete!

              Vittoria
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.