"राज के हाथों में पाँच उँगलियाँ हैं।"
Translation:There are five fingers in Raj's hands.
52 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
This sounds like Raj is holding five disembodied fingers in his hands. Or, that Raj has five fingers embedded inside his hands (which don't include fingers to begin with? I think that a हाथ consists of a हथेली−more or the less the palm—and उँगलियाँ, the fingers). So really what you're saying is that Raj's hands (we can assume two...?) each have five fingers, which we are very happy to hear! In that case, I would phrase the Hindi as: राज के [दो] हाथों की पाँच उँगलियाँ हैं।
Yes, this is funny. I assumed the proper translation had to be "five fingers on his hand" because "There are five fingers in Raj's hands" makes no sense, unless Raj is severely lacking the average number of fingers on both hands, which would normally average to ten fingers. But does your correction clear that discrepancy?
There once was a man named "Angulimala" who turned bad after a sequence of events and collected other people's fingers to make a necklace (hence: anguli-finger + mala-necklace). He was aiming for 1000 fingers. After collecting 999 fingers he met the Buddha and became a monk. Perhaps this sentence refers to him at an early stage, haha!^)
I would not mark incorrect for answering with "on Raj's hands" instead of "in Raj's hands" as this use of "in" is nonstandard in American English. The word for word translation is correct with "in" but the meaning is better preserved with "on". There is another instance of a similar translation issue with "taking water" vs "drinking water" -- "taking" is fairly nonstandard except for medications in American English.
The Hindi course is the one I have most trouble with not being able to get into the Duo English mindset. As a native English speaker, it is really hard to know how much violence I have to do to the English language to have an acceptable translation. This one is particularly bad and the translation doesn’t even convey the actual sense. Raj’s hand has five fingers is what an anglophone would say.
Ok this is funny but this is the fifth time I am discussing the order of the words. the flow and translation if off. "There" is not "Raj". Its better if its "Raj's hands have five fingers" also "Raj's hand has five fingers" I'm guessing it is the second one because if it's the first one, this means out of Raj's two hands has only five fingers. and five are missing. either on one hand or a mix of the two. As much as this amuses me, it still needs corrected