19985: (Chamberlain) re 19974: Higbie: Re: 19941: Aristide resignation letter (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Greg Chamberlain <GregChamberlain@compuserve.com>

>  From: Janet Higbie <jhigbie@nytimes.com>


> I'm wondering what people think of the English translation
> of the Aristide letter on the CNN site.  "I accept to leave"
> is not proper English

(...)

> wouldn't "M aksepte ale" be better translated in English
>  as, "I agree to go"?


__________

Yes.
"Accepter à" in French/Creole means "agree to" while "agréer à" means "to
accept."  What's called a "faux-ami" ("false friend" = deceptive word).


Also, "nan fè respekte Konstitisyon" isn't "in the face of"  (CNN) or "in
the fact of" (AP) respecting the Constitution but rather "by respecting" or
even "in accordance with" or "under" the Constitution.

This means the preceding line "in respect for the Constitution" is
virtually the same, but that's the poetic way he speaks.

The argument about the "if" clause (did he _really_ resign? etc) is
misguided.  The "si" preceding-clause construction in French/Creole is not
(or very rarely) to be translated by "if".  It's a statement of fact,
nothing conditional.  So the US embassy (and CNN's) translation:

"For that reason, tonight I am resigning in order to avoid a bloodbath. I
accept to leave..."

is more accurate than than the AP/Valdman one:

"For that reason, if tonight it is my resignation that will avoid a
bloodbath, I accept to leave..."


Notta "corporate media" plot in sight!


        Greg Chamberlain