"I doubt if it is hot everywhere."
Translation:Wątpię, czy wszędzie jest gorąco.
35 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Checking the national corpus produces almost only negated examples: "nie wątpię, że...".
A professor of linguistics told me that this comes in pairs as follows:
wiem, że to prawda / nie wiem, czy to prawda
wątpię, czy to prawda / nie wątpię, że to prawda
They would be if the verb were the same, but doubt expresses more or less the opposite of know.
Try to translate this to German while using 'dass' for 'że' and 'ob' for 'czy' and you'll probably see what we mean.
1089
There's a report button after you get the answer checked, and it should be used for reporting problems with questions and answers. The creators don't keep track of comments, they may pop in here, but that's not guaranteed.
- 1089
No, it's only possible just after answering the question and before following to the next one. But maybe someone else notices this comment chain and reports it.
"I doubt that it is hot everywhere" is more likely to be said than "I doubt if it is hot everywhere" in my opinion
- 842
I agree. The only option I think I would utter myself was “I doubt whether it is hot everywhere”, although I am not even sure about this variant. I would simply go with that as it is not an evocative sentence, just a thesis statement.
Well, it works, but it would suggest that the Polish translation should be "że", and it's not.
- 842
But shouldn't translation into a target languages comply with the common usage of words in the target language, regardless of the words chosen in the sentence's original language? What had been practised is a rather literal translation, which is consequently scrutinised for its comparably unnatural sound. I can wonder if it's hot everywhere, coming up with the idea by myself, all alone; but I would doubt that it is, in response to someone who just uttered this thought. It's a difference between spontaneity and a presumed context.
Or at least that's how I would explain it.
I'd sacrifice the naturalness of English (as long as it's not wrong), if it means that people won't try to translate it into a wrong Polish sentence.
- 842
Shouldn't mutual naturalness be favoured over picking which language should be favoured in terms of naturalness? (In which Polish enjoyed the upper hand in this course, apparently) I mean, as long as the vocabulary planned to be taught in the lesson is not changed in the course of translating a sentence naturally, it can be picked. This would be my opinion.
I once was told by a Conference Interpreter that it is best to translate the message of a sentence rather than to translate a language word for word. Translating a language word for word will confuse the recipient of the translated language, and of course, will cause issues for the recipient and the other party.
- 842
@Kane136241 Given so many languages' non-linear syntax, such as in Czech and occasionally in Polish, this makes sense, especially during conferences where interpreters have to interpret utterances simultaneous to their expression, it would be impossible to catch up without disfiguring the sentences into an incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo. But I was always sceptic about such “Raffungen”, as we call them in German: Radical shortening of utterances to break them down into their bare meaning. In journalism, such methods are viewed as even distorting statements and the very contents thereof. But of course, conferences are not journalistic pieces.
Hence, thanks, but don't bother to answer me as I will mute this thread. I don't have time to skim through all of the notifications by Duo anymore, unfortunately. The times, they are a-changin', and so, I have to make arrangements.
But thanks a lot for taking your time to tell us. :-)
A perfectly good sentence, however, "tak" is something the English doesn't express.
It's not the "tak" there's a problem with. That was absolutely fine, so no idea why you mention it. It's the "że" that should be accepted as that's how most polish would say this sentence. I'm a native.
Checking the national corpus produces almost only negated examples: "nie wątpię, że...".
A professor of linguistics told me, that this comes in pairs as follows:
wiem, że to prawda / nie wiem, czy to prawda
wątpię, czy to prawda / nie wątpię, że to prawda
Natives don't alwaya know best and can make mistakes. Look how many native English speakers say "Should of" instead of "should have"
Let's agree that this sentence may indeed want to focus on 'everything'. Added.
From my comment above:
Checking the national corpus produces almost only negated examples: "nie wątpię, że...".
A professor of linguistics told me, that this comes in pairs as follows:
wiem, że to prawda / nie wiem, czy to prawda
wątpię, czy to prawda / nie wątpię, że to prawda
-
"wśendzie" is not a word, you meant 'wszędzie'.
-
"jeśli" doesn't suit this sentence. "jeśli" can be used for example in "If something happens, then something else will happen".