Käännös - "What a draaaag ..." (Englanti)

Based on the french translation I suggest bother, nuisance, mischief ???

Funny, Donna 22 voted both right and wrong here!
She must change her name: Donna 44.

Come si tradurrebbe, apple?

Ok, in some contexts, what a nuisance!, it can work...

AAAH, cela n'a pas le même sens que "la barbe". apple, est-ce bien la bonne traduction? Si c'est le cas, j'éditerai la traduction vers le français et taperai "Quelle connerie", car c'est bien ce que "what bullshit" signifie en français.
Merci de confirmer!

Bullshit is not right, although I found this translation on "The alternative dictionary", we never say Che palle! meaning that. We say it when we are bored, or fed up...

So "la barbe" is fine! good! (I won't have to edit!) Thanks.

"Quelle barbe" (che barba, aussi en italien) me paraît un peu trop "soft", en comparaisant "Che palle", qui est aussi un peu vulgaire....

ça oui! Mes parents jamais ne diraient ça! Mais parmi nous, jeunes gens (LOL!!!) c'est normale!

Ok, thanks apple, I edited the translation!

You're welcome.
But it's not only in some context, "bullshit" is definitely wrong.

Shouldn't we have to repeat some vowels to match the source text? And punctuation?

The language points ratio will be otherwise "staggered".
I know, this is a drop in the ocean...

What a draaaag... How booooring...

I'd better shorten the Italian version, or do what you said but putting the text in "meaning only mode", because this is writen language and not talken language. I already told apple about this point in a P.M , I know I may seem "straight", but for writen languages, I'm convinced that "un chat est un chat", and has to be writen only like it is writen in the dictionary, I mean wwhen it is a translation request in the regular mode. Using meaning only allows us to be more flexible with submited texts, and also with the translations relative to these texts. For the French version, I'll edit with "la baaaarbe!", and suggest "what a draaag" for the English one, but only if the Italian text, which is the original text, is in "meaning only" mode...

Are you OK with that? If you are, I'll do it not later than now... If you aren't, we may argue some more, as there's a third way to satisfy everybody, it is simply by using "...", or '...'
according to what's used in our respective countries... I'm saying that because I remember some books where I could read some "talken language" and it was displaid this way...

As Davide didn't request meaning only, I would balance the translation.

By the way, this strange situation is not ratio-friendly if seen by a completely theorical mathematical point of view...never mind...uhuh

OK, I'll do that (to be friendly)

Oh wow - I just stumbled on this whole discussion! That certainly helps with my evaluation of the English!

Francky, I was saying that this is not a ratio-friendly situation as well...

Let's "extremize" the situation:

IN! = DENTRO!

so ratio should be 3 : 7

but

IIIIIIIIIIN! = DENTROOOOOOOOOO!

have a ratio of 12 : 16 that is 3 : 4, very different from the right ratio.

So if you apply the Xini Theorem you will find that you should translate this way in order to keep the rate unchanged:

IIIIIIIIIIN! = DENTROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

that is 12 : 28 (3 : 7)

Ahah....I like maths Never mind...

Haha, You're right...
3/12=7/x
3x=7.12
3x=84
x=84/3
x=28
I did it only to check... hehe...

But I think you may consider to do that only with the letters, so:
IN! = DENTRO! 2:6
IIIIIIIIIIN! = DENTROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! 11:33
I went too far!!! Haha
What? I like Math too!!! It's trully the universal language...

Baci!