20013Re: [Czechlist] What does "should" actually mean??????
- Mar 2, 2004Jo jo jo jo jo :)
To uz prece davno vime, ze existuji "areas" kde nejde prelozit ABC jako DEF
tak, aby to melo absolutne stejny vyznam a jeste aby to znelo jako original
veta v cilovem jazyce... nerikam, ze je to jasne nebo jednoduche, ale od
toho tu jsme, abychom posoudili a prelozili jak nejlip umime...
Vim, ze se mnou v tomhle nesouhlasis, Helgo, a tohle je jeden z prikladu,
kde bychom mohli diskutovat do zblbnuti...
Cestina je tady IMHO asi tak stejne striktni jako Nemcina - i nase povahy -
pokud jde o prikazy a zakazy - jsou rekl bych blize nes ty za
oceanem/Anglickych mluvcich..., ale presto mi to nepripada jako takovy
ve vetsine pripadu proste zhodnotim, co tim autor myslel (see Jamie's
comments) a pak to nejak pojednam... pokud by na tom jedinem sluvku zavisel
zivot, (neco us oudu, nebo ten priklad co uvadel Simon) - prelozim to stejne
tak (aby to bylo co nejblize zamyslenemu vyznamu - pokud jej znam), plus
dodam poznamku podobnou jako uvadi Simon (ze jako v A neni nekdy jasne,
jestli should je muset nebo moci, nebo melo by.., takze at si daji
pozor...)... ale jak rikam, troufam si tvrdit, ze tak v 90% mych prekladu
(smlouvy delam bezne, ale na soud ani podobne veci se nespecializuji) tenhle
problem nenestava - tedy alespon pokud si zachovam chladnou hlavu a nezacnu
ve tri rano zmatkovat a vymyslet 99 verzi jedne vety zavisejicich na
drobnych nuancich kazdeho slova v ni (coz se nekdy stava)..
A vim, ze se mnou nebudes souhlasit :), ber to jako muj nazor, zivot neni
skoro nikdy nalinkovany a cernobily, tak proc by takove mely byt i vsechny
popsane papiry (i kdyz nektere by takove SHOULD byt :)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Helga Humlova" <prekladatelka@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 2:41 PM
Subject: RE: [Czechlist] What does "should" actually mean??????
> No, no, no, no, no. Imagine you translate a "must-should" as
> "should-should" and something happens, because the user saw it as
> "recommendation only" and for various reasons did not do what he was
> "recommended" to do because you translated it as "should-should" which
> showed it as not being imperative.
> On the other hand, if you translate a "should-should" as "must-should"
> and it is actually only a "should-should" you might get in trouble with
> someone for excluding him/her from something because he/she does not
> fulfill this "must-should" requirement, even though it is only a
> "should-should" requirement and this person, had he/she known that it is
> only a "should-should" requirement would not have had to refrain from
> doing/using because of the non-fulfillment of a requirement, which
> actually was not meant to be an imperative requirement.
> It seems that something I never saw as being a problem is actually more
> than a problem.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terminus Technicus [mailto:czechlist@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 2:22 PM
> To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Czechlist] What does "should" actually mean??????
> Ahoj Helgo,
> Don't think we're that desperate... in contracts, if the author wants to
> "someone must do something", they usually say "someone shall do
> something"... haven't seen many contracts with "should" in them. In
> and instructions, you'll probably be able to judge what they meant by
> meaning/context of the sentence...
> In the bus driver example you gave, I think it's safe to assume it means
> MUST, or at least it SHOULD mean must :), otherwise the sentence would
> have to be written in the first place... common sense, context and
> should be enough to carry you trhough most problems... but I've got a
> feeling that your question/discussion comes from a German-speaking group
> the frustration comes from the German (and Austrian) looooove for
> "ordnung" - n'est ce pas?
> > So, how in the world a non native speaker of E knows, when "should" is
> > actually "must" and in which cases it is "recommend". I am so
> > about that because we all know that - especially - Americans "love"
> > suits and I would think that companies are extremely careful about
> > they say things. So, if I were a US company I would avoid the word
> > "should" when I mean "must" because any US lawyer would interpret
> > "should" as just being a recommendation and as we all know,
> > recommendations are not binding. So if I only "recommend" something,
> > this is not binding for my client and therefore he can sue me that I
> > have not told him that this and that is absolutely imperative.
> > From what I have said so far I come to the point, that for the purpose
> > of _correct_ translation it is extremely important for us to exactly
> > understand what a certain word stands for, or the translation may be
> > totally wrong. I think you would agree with me, that it is definitely
> > wrong to say "musite udelat/mit/...." when the author actually meant
> > "byloby dobre, kdybsyste...." and vice versa it would be even worse.
> > So, what am I supposed to do, think, believe??????
> > Helga
> > > The basic concern is: does this "should" express a "must" or a "is
> > > recommended"
> > >
> > As when my ESL students ask an "either/or question", my answer is
> > > Examples:
> > >
> > > Before riding with a passenger, the driver should become highly
> > familiar
> > > with the operation of the vehicle.
> > >
> > Translation: "You can run the vehicle without being highly familiar
> > with
> > its operation, but you could get yourself into big trouble if you
> > orient
> > yourself first. So you had better get familiar with it."
> > > Protective clothing that should be worn by the operator:
> > >
> > In this case, it means "must".
> > > No one under the age of 16 should operate this vehicle.
> > >
> > In this case it means "had better".
> > In general speech, "should" usually means "ought to" or "it is
> > recommended".
> > However, it can sometimes mean "you had better, if you don't want
> > trouble,
> > but it's still your choice". Occasionally, someone uses the word to
> > sound
> > friendly when they really mean "must", or at least where a German or a
> > Czech
> > would want to say "must".
> > Remember that in English we don't say "must" as much as the Germans or
> > Czechs, possibly because we have a longer history of egalitarianism.
> > German
> > managers coming to the US often have to be trained to stop saying
> > unless they
> > are being extremely forceful. It is to be replaced with "should" or
> > "have
> > to", so that, as in one case I know, the German does not end up with
> > office
> > nickname of "The Gestapo".
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Czechlist Users' Guide:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>