Translation - Turks-Engels - yalnizlik!dogustan her kimligine yazili...

written on each of his identities...> written on each of every identities,
a person....> a human
and I thing it will be better to use "human" instate of "he" .

I don't agree with any of your offers at all.

-- "written on each of every identities" means "her (bir) kimliğe yazılı". But in the orginal, it says "her kimliğine yazılı".

-- You really see a difference between "a person" and "a human"?

-- If we use "human" all the time, it will bother the reader. Instead of repetition, we can and should use "he".

Wow great translation handyy! I just don't fully agree with the translation of the first sentence Doğuştan her kimliğine yazılı tek uğraşıdır insanın bir yaşama sırasında.

I wonder about the word 'connaturally'? never heard of it.. shouldn't it just mean 'Since birth it is written on every identity that this (solitude) is the sole occupation of a person during their life.'. Only in the second sentence is the 'he' introduced (through dedi), but the first sentence is a general statement I guess?

'her insanin kimligine' ? Sorry I just read what merdogan wrote, but I feel that sometimes 'human' should be used and sometimes 'he'.. maybe you should have a look at reference here, is the 'he' the one who is referred to or 'human' in general? This is also related to my other post, I think in the first sentence 'humanity' is addressed, and not he.

Dear handyy,
it is a great translation.
But why don't you agree with our offers?
e g , why do you use "he,him" and not " she,her" ?
and don't you think if we use "he" all the time, will not bother the reader?

Hi Chantal

"connaturally" means "from birth". So I think it's not wrong to use it.

About your offer for the first sentence ('Since birth it is written on every identity that this (solitude) is the sole occupation of a person during their life.'), I think this translation won't give the correct meaning. Because, your translation means "Doğuştan itibaren herkesin kimliğinde hayatı boyunca/sırasında bir insanın tek uğraşının yalnızlık olduğu yazar."

I mean, according to your translation, the whole sentence "the solitude is the sole occupation of a person during their life." is written on the identity. Hope I could explain the difference. :/

In the first sentence, 'humanity' is addressed. (here I useed "a person".)

In the second sentence, it's not "humanity", but a specific person who is indicated. But, we don't know who he is. Here, we cannot say "somebody said..." or "a person said...", beacuse, as I already said, it must imply a specific person. That's why I used "he" in the second sentence.

The third sentence is again about "humanity", and I started it with "a person".

And for the rest of sentences, I again said "he said" for "dedi".

Merdogan, I already explained in my first message above why I don't agree with any of your offers. So I don't understand why you asked me this question now.

Please, read it again.

About your new questions...

If we don't know the gender, we generally use "he" as the pronoun. This is the rule, as far as I know.

And, I don't think using "he" all the time will bother the reader. Because, what makes a reader bother is reading the longer alternative of something all the time, while there is a shorter one.

Oh wait, now I get what the first sentence means! Anyway, I still don't think the first sentence is correct, how did you get to 'each of his' identities? Because this means that 1 person has more identities.. what about written on everyone's identity? so:

Solitude! Connaturally written on everyone's identity, it is the sole occupation of a person during a life.

Then I think there still is a little problem with the reference.. let me 'rewrite' your version the way I think it's better, maybe that will make clear what I mean! (Paste it in word, it works really well to compare! )

-------------------------------
Solitude! Connaturally written on everyone’s identity, it is the sole occupation of a person, during a life. He said it’s the only thing one (indefinite form to refer to individual human beings, because it’s about ‘insanin sahip oldugu right?, so not about ‘him’ but about ‘humans’) possesses, and one ought to know its value. A person (maybe human, makes it less ‘definite’) is alone all the time; that’s the reason of his(you can use ‘their’ here to refer to his/her) rush to get into the crowds. Crowded solitudes and lonesome crowds occur from city to city, from country to country. People don’t want death just as they don’t want solitude, which is even worse; but both will surely happen to them. (I’m not sure about the breakup here, I think ‘during a lonely life’ belongs to the next sentence as follows During a lonely life there is only one remedy, not for death but for solitude, he said. The only remedy to take a breath during a lonesome life is love. After all, love is the meeting of two lonesome people on a common solitude, he said. Do fall in love and show your solitudes to each other. In any case, separation is the yearning of a person for his own single solitude.
---------------------
Don't see this as negative criticism, I'm still surprised how well you translated it!

Oh, please! Of course you will criticize me. I'm not a native English speaker, so I will absolutely make mistakes. That's the nature.

But, I really have to quit now. Please, let me check your version later, will you?

P.S.: Thank you so much for your compliment. But, I think what is great is the original text itself not the translation.

Hi again, Chantal and Merdogan.

* Chantal, “on everyone’s identity” means “herkesin kimliğine”, but it says “her kimliğine” in the original. so it’s not accurate.

* I’m gonna chance the “he”s in the second sentence as you offered. It seems better.

* I prefer “a person” rather than “a human”, and “his” rather than “their” in the third sentence.

* I’m gonna use “ a person/one” again in the fourth sentence, not “people”, because this choice is made in the original itself. And, “ikisi de muhakkak gelir başına bir yalnız yaşama sırasında ölümün değil ama yalnızlığın bir tek çaresi var dedi.” here “bir yalnız yaşama sırasında” fits with the first sentence better, considering the meaning, believe me.

* I prefer “after all”. I seems like “in any case” changes the meaning more or less.


Here is the parts I’ll chance:

Solitude! Connaturally written on each of his identities, it is the sole occupation of a person, during a life. He said it’s the only thing one possesses, and one ought to know its value. A person is alone all the time; that’s the reason of his rush to get into the crowds. Crowded solitudes and lonesome crowds occur from city to city, from country to country. One doesn’t want the death just in the same way as he doesn’t want the solitude, which is worse; but both surely happen to him, during a lonely life. There is one and only remedy not for the death but for the solitude, he said. The mere remedy to breathe during a lonesome life is love. After all, love is the meeting of two lonesome people on a common solitude, he said. Do fall in love and show your solitudes to each other. After all, separation is the yearning of a person for his own single solitude.

What do you think now?

Ah, I just saw your question “how did you get to 'each of his' identities? Because this means that 1 person has more identities”.

I now understood the reason of your and Merdogan’s doubts about the first sentence. While talking about identity, we may refer to different kinds of identities. For instance, national identity, cultural identity, religious identity, etc.

To make you sure, let me explain one more thing. "Doğuştan her kimliğine yazılı tek uğraşıdır insanın bir yaşama sırasında." is already an inverted sentence, namely, components of the sentence is not in the normal word order. But, if it was "her insanın kimliğine", then, even if it's an inverted sentence and no matter where you put this phrase in the sentence, you have to take it as a whole; you cannot break the phrase order. Otherwise, it will be wrong grammatically.

Hope it’s clear now.

Thanks handyy, I think your translation is ok now .

Thank you for your help, Chantal and Merdogan.

______


Lily, I know you've already accepted it, but could you please replace the current translation with this one: (the things to be changed are written in bold )


Solitude! Connaturally written on each of his identities, it is the sole occupation of a person, during a life. He said it’s the only thing one possesses, and one ought to know its value. A person is alone all the time; that’s the reason of his rush to get into the crowds. Crowded solitudes and lonesome crowds occur from city to city, from country to country. One doesn’t want the death just in the same way as he doesn’t want the solitude, which is worse; but both surely happen to him, during a lonely life. There is one and only remedy not for the death but for the solitude, he said. The mere remedy to breathe during a lonesome life is love. After all, love is the meeting of two lonesome people on a common solitude, he said. Do fall in love and show your solitudes to each other. After all, separation is the yearning of a person for his own single solitude.

So sorry for the mess. :/


CC: lilian canale

Fixed!

Thanks, everyone