[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

I have a dream - belated

Colin Fine `(>) and John Cowan (>>) discussed Martin Luther King's "I
have a dream" as translated by Bob McIvor on loglanist list, back in
June.  McIvor used the TLI equivalent of "ponse" and "senva".

>>Of course, the whole notion that what MLK had was a {senva} is plain silly.
>>He had a {pacna}, or maybe even a {terzukte}.  A reasonable, if essentialist,
>>translation might be:
>>       mi ckaji le nu pacna
>You mean 'pacna' . I partly agree with you.  I think that revri/senva is
>not adequate as a translation, but I think that it is an important part
>of it.  In fact I would translate the rhetoric something like
>        seke pacna senva mi
>(The conversion serves partly rhetorically to front the selbri, and
>partly to allow the pseudo anaphoric 'lego'i' in following sentences.).

I agree with John that "pacna" is better than "senva".  I agree also
that "ponse" is wrong, in that there is no sense of ownership with
regard to dreams that one wants to share.  I think the underused word
"steci" helps solve the problem.  It conveys an especially, even
extremely, close association, but has no implications of exclusiveness
or ownership in either direction.  Using wording to keep the English
translation word order, I like:

mi se steci pa se pacna
To me is special/specific one hoped-for (thing)
I  have     a  dream.

Reversing the word order eliminates the first "se", but makes the result
less recognizable to those familiar with the original.

pa se pacna steci mi
One hoped-for thing is special/specific to me.

But since the two places of steci are symmetric, this isn't really
necessary - you just need avoid too literal an English translation.

mi steci pa se pacna
I am special/specific to one hoped-for (thing)
which is identical in meaning to
One hoped-for thing is special to me.