[Date Prev][Date Next][Subject Prev][Subject Next][
Date Index][
Subject Index]
Re: Two real, honest-to-goodness Xy questions
- Subject: Re: Two real, honest-to-goodness Xy questions
- From: peregrine@xxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:28:29 -0400
Like any art, writing is of its own time. Why shouldn't a translation be of the same period to convey that?
I don't usually weigh in on such matters, but might the sense of "all is nothing but ..." be found in "naught but," as in "There is naught but order and beauty," or perhaps "There, naught exists but order and beauty"?
Jeff Seager
>From: Caballero mailto:Carlo.Caballero@xxxxxxxx
>Sent: Oct 16, 2007 2:33 PM
>To: xywrite@xxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Two real, honest-to-goodness Xy questions
>
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Philip Friedman wrote:
>
>> How about -
>> There, all is nothing but order and beauty
>
>Better: simply omit "nothing." --Carlo Caballero
>
Message-ID: mailto:47150A9B.7090501@xxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:01:47 -0400
From: "Patricia M. Godfrey" mailto:priscamg@xxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: xywrite@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Two real, honest-to-goodness Xy questions
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Caballero wrote:
>> How about -
>> There, all is nothing but order and beauty
>
> Better: simply omit "nothing." --Carlo Caballero
>
Ah, but Carlo, how many people under--what? 40? 50? 60?--would be
able to understand that construction? That was what I thought of
at first. But "all is but order..." will be unintelligible to
nine out of ten readers. Nobody reads anything written before he
or she was born. Its not just "big words" (I can't use
"exacerbate" in my council reports); it's any construction that
they haven't seen in People or their daily newspaper or heard on
the TV.
--
Patricia M. Godfrey
mailto:PriscaMG@xxxxxxxx