8000 WIP: add Esperanto translation of the Code of Conduct by das-g · Pull Request #8 · Xe/creators-code · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

WIP: add Esperanto translation of the Code of Conduct #8

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

WIP: add Esperanto translation of the Code of Conduct #8

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
25 changes: 25 additions & 0 deletions KONDUTKODEKSO.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Kondutkodekso
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The article in the Esperanto Wikipedia uses "Kondutkodo", but "kodekso" is somewhat more precise than just "kodo".


Ni estas kognaj.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Although this is a translation of v2 (cec3e77), I've here taken into account that the wording in v1 (4f562ff) was "sapient" instead of "sentient". I've chosen to use the suggestion "kogna" (meaning ~ "cognitive") from Joop's answer to my question "How to translate “sapient” (as a level of sentience)?" on Esperanto Stack Exchange.

(If I was to translate v1, i.e. with the wording still using "sapient", I might have gone for his other suggestion: Introduce "sapiensa" as a new word into Esperanto.)

I'm not sure, though, whether "kogna" can be used in the meaning able of cognition instead of just that of related to cognition. If not, it should maybe be "kognikapabla" or "kognipova" instead.

Esti kogna estas esti limhava.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When translated that way, it occurs to me that it's actually kinda semantically wrong already in the English original, although maybe not on a practical, but on a categorical level: Being sentient doesn't necessarily imply being limited. While only limited sentient beings might exist (or, for what it's worth, be known to us), it's quite possible to imagine beings (maybe deities?) that are both sentient and non-limited, or at least not limited in the way that's meant here: Being fallible. There could be (hypothetical / imaginary, but nonetheless consistent) beings that are sentient and infallible.

From the history of this sentence in this CoC (in v0 it was "human"), we can recognize this as a simile to "To be human is to err." or "To err is human.", so we can conclude that this isn't actually about being sentient (or sapient) in the sense of having that property, but about being a sentient (or sapient) real being, i.e., being in that category of living things.

I'm thus thinking about whether it should (again, as suggested by Joop on Esperanto Stack Exchange) be something like "kognulo" instead of just "kogna" (or "kognikapablulo", "kognipovulo", in case "kogna" is the false adjective to begin with). "racia besto" as seen in some examples on https://glosbe.com/en/eo/sentient would work in other contexts, but probably not here, because the term "besto" (just like the English "animal") usually excludes humans unless maybe in a very scientific/biologic and purely taxonomic setting.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As the limitation in question apparently is that of our decision-making and of our ability to do the right thing(s), I wonder whether "erarema" would be better than the somewhat too general "limhava".

En nia limigo ni faras elektojn, kiuj estas malsaĝaj aŭ estas misaj.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The more succinct

Suggested change
En nia limigo ni faras elektojn, kiuj estas malsaĝaj aŭ estas misaj.
En nia limigo ni faras elektojn malsaĝajn aŭ misajn.

would probably mean mostly the same and be somewhat more elegant, but I've decided to keep the sentence structure of the English original with the relative subordinate clause.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not quite sure, whether it should be "En", "Dum" or "Pro" here, or whether it would have to be phrased completely different in Esperanto. I'm also not sure whether any of them are actually compatible with "limigo" and whether "limigo" is the right kind of "limitation" here, or whether it should be "limiĝo" (though, is it ourselves who's limiting us?), "limo", "limoj", "limaro" or "limeco" / "limigeco".

I'm thinking maybe "limeco" or "limigeco", as this is really about our "limitedness" ...


Se ni faras malsaĝajn elektojn pro nia limigeco,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(Here, I did choose "limigeco", so maybe I should use the same above, too.)

ni ne rajtas juĝi aliaj pro la sama kialo.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've interpreted "cannot" in the English original's

we cannot judge others

as "aren't allowed to" / "have no right to" / "must not", rather than "aren't able to" or "don't have opportunity to", as the latter two don't seem to make sense.

I wonder whether "shall not" / "let's not" would be yet better:

Suggested change
ni ne rajtas juĝi aliaj pro la sama kialo.
ni ne juĝu aliaj pro la sama kialo.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the English original, it's unclear what "for the same reason" applies to and what reason it refers to. There's two possible interpretations:

  1. If we make unwise decisions, we cannot condemn others for also making unwise decisions.
  2. If our limitations cause us to make unwise decisions, the same limitations make us unsuitable to judge others.

I think my Esperanto translation carries more or less the same ambiguity, as for "pro la sama kialo" it's similarly unclear what it applies to and what it refers to.


Do, ni ne povas juĝi,
tial ni pardonas.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the English original, this is phrased as a statement, but in Esperanto, an imperative / volative is more easily formed for the first person plural than in English, where it'd require a "Let's ...", so I wonder whether it should be

Suggested change
tial ni pardonas.
tial ni pardonu.


Tiu ĉi projekte kaj ĝiaj rezultaĵoj estas intencata kiel:
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The passive voice feels kinda awkward for this sentence in Esperanto. Maybe another case were imperative / volative could be appropriate?

Suggested change
Tiu ĉi projekte kaj ĝiaj rezultaĵoj estas intencata kiel:
Tiu ĉi projekte kaj ĝiaj rezultaĵoj estu:

loko de lernado,
loko de kompreno,
loko de instruado,
loko de komunigo,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've used -ad- for lern- (learn) and instru- (teach), because those need a place for the process taking place.

For kompren- and komun·ig-, I've however used the plain nouns corresponding to the respective verbs, without focus on the process or on the time the process takes.

loko, kie kreantoj kreas la ilojn por helpi al aliaj kreantoj krei komplikajn aĵojn elegante.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here, I've decided to use a relative subclause where the English original didn't have one. Imitating the sentence structure of the original would have become too unwieldy here, I believe.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've translated

the tools for other creators to create [...]

as if it were

the tools for helping other creators to create [...]

as Esperanto offers AFAIK no structure directly corresponding to the

<tool> for <subject> <doing something>

of English.


Fartu bone, kreanto. Fartu bone kaj kreu.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the English original "Creator" is capitalized here. As I assume that "creator" here is a mere categorization of the reader, not a name, nor a title or god/deity term, I've not capitalized "kreanto" here.


---

Surbaze de la [Kodekso de Kreanto v2](https://github.com/Xe/creators-code).
Bonvolu legi la ligitan retpaĝon por pli da informoj.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The English original asks to "read the link", but thereby implies reading the content that's being linked to, not the link itself, so I've translated this as "la ligitan retpaĝon" (the linked webpage).

0