| |
|
Translation - French-Latin - À vivre sans risques, on ne vit rien.Current status Translation
This text is available in the following languages:
This translation request is "Meaning only". | À vivre sans risques, on ne vit rien. | | Source language: French
À vivre sans risques, on ne vit rien. |
|
| Sine periculis vivens, vere non vivis. | | Target language: Latin
Sine periculis vivens, vere non vivis. |
|
Last validated or edited by Aneta B. - 5 September 2010 23:58
Latest messages | | | | | 5 September 2010 22:09 | | | | | | 5 September 2010 22:43 | | gamineNumber of messages: 4611 | Hello dear. Word by word it's: "To live without risks, you live nothing" but I'd say:
"Living without risks you don't live". | | | 5 September 2010 22:48 | | | Thank you, dear!
----
Alex, I think you didn't understand the source text precisely. Could you correct your translation, please? | | | 5 September 2010 22:59 | | | I translated into Latin thinking
"If you live without risks, you don't live really".
French text doesn't show any 2nd singular person.
It shows only a general subject "on", which finds its equivalent in the 3rd singular person passive ending "-tur".
Maybe instead of "si vivitur" I could have written "vivendo".
Is "vere" totally wrong in this context? | | | 5 September 2010 23:24 | | | I see. So, you can leave this passive impersonal form I guess.
But "Vivendo" is typical "Italian solution"
In Latin it should be "vivens" (participium praesentis activi).
You added "vere" (truly) to the text, because you interpreted it in this just way. I don't think it is very bad. I'd say this is rather a matter of your "licentia poetica" (even if it is not a poem at all). And becuase this is a request "meaning only" you can let yourself use the "licence"
| | | 5 September 2010 23:27 | | | But using "vivens" in the first clause, you have to use 2nd person in the second one... | | | 5 September 2010 23:40 | | | Then is this OK?
"Sine periculis vivens, vere non vivis." | | | 5 September 2010 23:46 | | | Exactly! |
|
| |
|