| |
|
Oversættelse - Portugisisk brasiliansk-Latin - Já deverÃamos saber, em boca fechada não entra...Aktuel status Oversættelse
Denne tekst er tilgængelig på følgende sprog:
Kategori Sætning For denne oversættelse bedes om "kun betydning". | Já deverÃamos saber, em boca fechada não entra... | | Sprog, der skal oversættes fra: Portugisisk brasiliansk
Já deverÃamos saber, em boca fechada não entra mosca. |
|
| | | Sproget, der skal oversættes til: Latin
Nobis iam sciendum est, musca os clausum non init. |
|
Senest valideret eller redigeret af Aneta B. - 28 Januar 2011 21:36
Sidste indlæg | | | | | 25 Januar 2011 00:46 | | | in clausum os --> in os clausum
Hello Lilly!
Can I ask you a bridge for evaluation, pls? CC: lilian canale | | | 25 Januar 2011 13:12 | | | "We should already know: loose lips sink ships."
Idiom meaning that unguarded talk may give useful information to the enemy (from WWII)
| | | 25 Januar 2011 22:36 | | | Thank you, Lilly!
It is not a literal translation, is it? I understand that it is an English equivalent (a source, in fact, because it is originally English) of the Portuguese idiom. Unfortunately I can't remind myself of any Latin proverb that would convey a meaning of the sentence. The closest probably would be: "Loquentia est stultitia loquax" (Verbosity is talkative foolishness?), but it is not exactly the same. So, I think we should translate the idiom literally from Portuguese, just like Alex has done.
Is it: "No flies fly into a closed mouth" or "Fly doesn't come into a closed mouth"?
CC: lilian canale | | | 26 Januar 2011 10:30 | | | It's an idiom in both English and Portuguese. From the original, literally:
"Flies don't enter a closed mouth." | | | 28 Januar 2011 19:43 | | | Thank you, Lilly.
--------
Hi Alex!
Why did you put the verb "debere" in the conjunctive mode? Is it any reason for that?
debeamus --> debemus?
" in os clausum non init"
this"in" is already included in a verb "inire", so shouldn't be repeated.
And do you think that "quod" is needed here?
| | | 28 Januar 2011 20:27 | | | Dear Aneta!
1) I wrote "scire debe amus" because "we should know". I think that "scire debemus" means "we must/have to know". Is it wrong?
2) Prefixes! Ok, I will remove the preposition, but why then Cicero used to say " conferre sermonem cum aliquo"?
3) No, "quod" is not needed, I guess.
| | | 28 Januar 2011 20:48 | | |
1) You're right that the verb "debere" is ambiguous one. It may have different meanings: to have to, ought to, should, must... But the mood doesn't change anything.
If you really want to have "should" in Latin it'd be better if you use "Coniugatio Periphrastica Passiva":
"Nobis iam sciendum est" = We should already know
And we don't need to put this "id" either.
2) Haha! Some prefixes have larger functions as "con" does. This is why they don't simply replace prepositions. "Conferre" means "to gather together", "to talk over"... So we have to add the preposition "cum" if we want to say "to talk over with"
3) | | | 28 Januar 2011 21:34 | | | | | | 28 Januar 2011 21:38 | | | Nie ma za co, Alex! Cała przyjemność po mojej stronie. Właśnie zaakceptowałam Twoje tłumaczenie. |
|
| |
|