Cucumis - Ücretsiz online çeviri hizmeti
. .



Tercüme - Brezilya Portekizcesi-Latince - Já deveríamos saber, em boca fechada não entra...

Şu anki durumTercüme
Bu yazının aşağıdaki dillerde karşılığı vardır: Brezilya PortekizcesiLatince

Kategori Cumle

Bu çeviri talebi yalnizca anlamla ilgilidir.
Başlık
Já deveríamos saber, em boca fechada não entra...
Metin
Öneri beto1106070
Kaynak dil: Brezilya Portekizcesi

Já deveríamos saber, em boca fechada não entra mosca.

Başlık
Nobis iam sciendum est
Tercüme
Latince

Çeviri alexfatt
Hedef dil: Latince

Nobis iam sciendum est, musca os clausum non init.
En son Aneta B. tarafından onaylandı - 28 Ocak 2011 21:36





Son Gönderilen

Yazar
Mesaj

25 Ocak 2011 00:46

Aneta B.
Mesaj Sayısı: 4487
in clausum os --> in os clausum

Hello Lilly!
Can I ask you a bridge for evaluation, pls?

CC: lilian canale

25 Ocak 2011 13:12

lilian canale
Mesaj Sayısı: 14972
"We should already know: loose lips sink ships."

Idiom meaning that unguarded talk may give useful information to the enemy (from WWII)

25 Ocak 2011 22:36

Aneta B.
Mesaj Sayısı: 4487
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 Ocak 2011 10:30

lilian canale
Mesaj Sayısı: 14972
It's an idiom in both English and Portuguese. From the original, literally:
"Flies don't enter a closed mouth."

28 Ocak 2011 19:43

Aneta B.
Mesaj Sayısı: 4487
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 Ocak 2011 20:27

alexfatt
Mesaj Sayısı: 1538
Dear Aneta!

1) I wrote "scire debeamus" 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 Ocak 2011 20:48

Aneta B.
Mesaj Sayısı: 4487


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 Ocak 2011 21:34

alexfatt
Mesaj Sayısı: 1538
I like "Nobis iam sciendum est"

Dzięki!!

28 Ocak 2011 21:38

Aneta B.
Mesaj Sayısı: 4487
Nie ma za co, Alex! Cała przyjemność po mojej stronie. Właśnie zaakceptowałam Twoje tłumaczenie.