Hi Chrysso
Sorry I took so long to get back to you, I already excused, promised and then got short of time.
I will first make some general comments about translating and then I will show you the different problems that arose in your translation.
A translation should never look like a translation. It should look and read like an original. This means that it should be fluid and natural.
In my (personal) opinion in anything other than a technical (medical, legal, instructions,...) text should be translated by the "feel" and not necessarily by translating one word for another. What may be a relevant allusion in one language may mean nothing at all once translated.
A good translation needs good tools, so use several dictionaries and thesaurus. Not only bilingual dictionaries, but also "ordinary" one language dictionaries. This helps for finding alternative words and often alternative meanings.
For this (your) specific translation the fluidity has completely disappeared. The removal of the article "the" is often a method for fluidifying English texts. Here you have made a kind of hybrid phrase since you use the article "the" and at the same time you used the preposition "to" rather than "into". In order to fluidify the phrase, since you used the article "the" you should have preferred using "into" instead of "to".
I will show you the different possibilities I have spoken of
Your version reads:
"Transform the sadness to kindness"
now without the article "the"
"Transform sadness to kindness"
and now with "the" and "into"
"Transform the sadness into kindness"
For the second phrase:
"your particularity in force"
If in the first phrase you use "to" you should repeat it here rather than using the "other half" of "into". Don't forget that it is something that is to be "transformed, and in English, something must be transformed *into* something else and not "in" something else. Here again you could choose between "to" and "into":
Firstly with "to":
"your particularity to force"
or with "into":
"your particularity into force"
About the word "particularity" - I didn't find it in either of my English dictionaries (though I did find it in my En/Fr dictionary). There is a very similar word in English "peculiarity" which would have been better, though I find it a bit pejorative.
The fluidity of the next part of the text seems to be the problem again. Your translation "sticks" to the original too much which give form "clumsy", overladen phrasing.
"It is not important if you lose your way"
Could have read:
"There is no importance if you lose your way"
To soften the phrase even more you could writhe "there's no..." instead of "there is no..."
The last phrase suffers from not being put in the genundive form "-ing" instead of the verb in its infiitive form.
infinitive form (your version)
"begin to walk, again and again"
and the gerundive form:
"begin walking, again and again".
You did good work and you understood the source text but you needed to spend more time on the fluency of your version.
You are even younger than my daughter, who will be 17 in november. You are all so clever at translating and writing in other languages. I am really proud to know you.
If you need any help again, don't hesitate to let me know.
Bises
Tantine
Yndis umsetingar
