번역 - I will not sign anything. (영어)

I think it means :

I don't write at night.

Am I so wrong?

If so, please excuse-me.

Hi lilian canale,
The source text is wrong somewhere, and I guess that the "natt" is suposed to be "någonting"

Correct source ought to be:
"jag skriver inte på någonting"


"I don't write at night." = "Jag skriver inte på natten"

Ok, should I edit this, pias, or do you want to.

Why edit?

Do you mean to lilian_canale's proposal?

Yes or do you want to leave it. Right now the vote is against your translation.

Ok, you better reject it dramati!

I still think that the proposal isn't right
all the votes against is from NOT native swedish people.

So, let's kick it up to an administrator to make the decision.

Aha...but feel free to reject it dramati.
It's ok

Pias:

Since "natten" can be reduced to "natt" (meaning: at night), I just think the original is correct. The only wrong thing I see is the pa instead of på.

Also, you translated as future tense : I will not, and there's no "skall" to indicate future.

I'm not a native speaker, but I'm trying to improve my Swedish as much as I've improved the other languages I deal with.

Again, sorry for disagreeing.
I just want to learn your language.

It's ok lilian_canale
Aha...you learn swedish too.

You are right, "natt" can also be "natten", but it doesn't sound like good swedish to say:
"jag skriver inte pa natt"
It sounds more correct to say
"jag skriver inte pa natten".

Do you understand what I mean..sorry, I'm not the best to explain in English

So...the source text is wrong anyway, and I guess that it can be:

"Jag skriver inte på natten"
or
"Jag skriver inte på nått"
(nått is similar to någonting, but a bit of slang..)

I think that we better ask the requester to edit the source. We can only guess here..

hm, you are right about something lilian..
It is not future. Thanks (my fault)

If my interpretation is right about the "natt" with (å) as a slang word for "någonting" it shall anyway be edit to:

"I don't sign anything"

right?

Hey, Pias:

You say that "it doesn't sound like good Swedish"

I'll tell you...unfortunately we receive texts which don't sound like a good English, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, etc, etc, etc, every single day.
So, don't be so surprised if the source text sounds like "terrible" Swedish.

Yeah...you are right about it!
And in this case..the meaning can be two..

I think that You better reject it dramati, cause I can't say if I'm right or wrong here...sorry.

Anyway, I still think that natt means natten, so I bet on:

I don't write at night

dramati,
I see that you still have not reject it..
Should I or you correct it to:

"I don't sign anything."

instead of:

"I will not sign anything."

"I don't sign anything." as opposed to I will not sign anything as opposed to I don't write at night.

Very confusing. I still think we need an administrator to look at this conversation and give us a bit of direction.

I would just like to say that I think Pias translation is perfectly right. I can also understand that somebody could hesitate, but... it is still correct as it is.
In Swedish present tense is sometimes "used as future tense" in the sense that I think every swede would in the first place interprete what is written above as future tense (it is an examlple of "present tense in the meaning of future" ).

I also think Pias guess that this means "I will not sign anything" (and not "I will not write at night" ) seems to bee the most obvious one, also probably seen from a native speakers point of view, if you read it that is just how at least I would first interprete it as it is written right now. Then IF the author has made a mistake and meant something else then that is not so easy to know. So if we want to make guesses (and not "translate mistakes" ) I think this is the best translation (as it is) and should not be rejected.

Sorry, I know it might be hard to "protest" against this long text of mine, but don't get frightened... However, as you noticed, this is how I look upon it...

I wrote this just because I noticed that some people had voted against (and that is great, that people vote) and this time I was very surprised, so that's why I had a look at your discussion...