Re: Translation
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 12:29, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > Well, you're probably right, but then the suffixes are going to > lose all their meaning as a suffix. After a while there would be > no common sense between words ending with "ak"... (and yes, there > would be no suffix, some new words). Guest what? The suffixes have already lost their meanings. This same "-ak" is a good example. You want language control and mathematical semantics, which is more than impossible with a language like Persian, IMHO. > "-gaan" is not anything special, it's just "aan" for plural, > joined to a word ending with "hah-e naamalfooz". Just like > "saadegaan". So it means "datas". But again AFAIK "data" and > "daade" are both plurals. Don't know about "paadegaan". I am sorry, I am not talking about *that* "-gaan". I'm *only* talking about the "-gaan" in "paadegaan". > > That's an abbreviation: FTP = "gharaardaad-e enteghaal-e parvande": > > "gheyn", "alef", "pe". If you have problems with abbreviations, don't > > use them. > > And write "gharaardaad-e enteghaal-e parvande" everywhere? Write "FTP" if you like, or whatever you prefer. Go with "fetepe" if you like that. Or call it "chiz" ;-) You're definitely not bound by any of the requirements of the Academy. > > This is the translation of the "Redo" menu, not the action of > > "redo"-ing. I agree that it's not that good, but I've not seen many good > > ones. Your suggestion? > > "az no" reminds me of "reset" in forms. "dobaare" and "tekraar" > may have the same meaning as "az no", but do it better, again > IMHO. At last something I can pass. I'll ask the guys. > > > * scroll -> "navardidan"! > > > > The problem? Your suggestion? > > "navardidan" is completely another word, isn't? It do not hold > the feeling of rolling in a single direction, and it contains a > sense of a challenge, that cannot be ignored. My suggestion? > Good question. OK, from my Moaser Persian Dictionary: "[adabi] dar mohit, mantaghe, yaa masiri harekat kardan va az noghte-i be noghte-ye digar-e aan raftan". I can't see the sense of challenge there. I agree that it's not "scrolling" exactly, but what translation has the exact senses of its original word? Time will give all the senses to it. > > > * output (device) -> "khorooji" > > > (Isn't "khorooji" also a noun in Persian?) > > > > It's *only* a noun in Persian, as far as I can tell. I'm not getting > > what you mean. Would you explain? From what I get, is that they are > > translating the "output" of a program as "boroon-daad", but an "output" > > device as "dastgaah-e khorooji". > > Exactly. What is the problem then? > The problem is that, they are misusing their power to decide for > the language! They have been asked to do so. We need an authority for the language. American English has Merriam-Webster, British English has Oxford, German has Duden, and French has its Academie. They are trying their best to provide authority. As far as I can tell, they are coming to a point of good output. Well, I could never ever think about defending the Academy, but I'm doing that. Why? First, because they're having some good-enough output (which, well, you don't agree to, which I can understand). But second, because I've seen the anarchy out here, everyone considering himself/herself the authority, without even consulting the references. Haven't you? Aren't we on the same front exactly because of that? > You and I could have been decide on many > technicall matters, and spread it all around the world by coding > that here and there. But we have never done that so to decide > for others. We have never done that, since we know our work is not authoritative enough. Because it has not been the result of a consensus of experts. Academy's output is partially the result of such a consensus. > Better the propose words and wait some 5 or 10 > years, and decide if that can be settled. "rayane" is setteled > down. But the way they do it, they force many bodies to follow > their word. Well, these are not exactly *new* words. The words have been around and used for a long time by some translators. ISI's word list (masterminded by Dr Mashayekh) is the main source for these, as is Mohammadifar's Computer Dictionary (published by Moaser), and the entrepreneurial works of Dr Rohani-Rankoohi and Dr Badi', all of whom are members of the computer terms committee (with a few other people). I can't say they haven't seen all the references: they have. I've talked all of them (but Dr Rohani-Rankoohi) on different matters, and I know they don't move an inch in these waters without contacting every reference they can find on the matter. It's easy to start calling them "fossil"s, as we young people love to do, and close their dossier so easily, but we need to separate real work from just inventing random words (like some people we know have been doing). I really believe you should provide feedback to the Academy, and see what reasons they have. I'm m
Re: Translation
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 00:28, Peyman wrote: > Persian has one of the most productive word formation systems. I would appreciate seeing some statistics to back that up, like you have done with the verbs. Do you have any? roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Peyman wrote: > The problem of new word coinage is not because of > language components (affixes) although Persian has one > of the most productive word formation systems. The > problem for making new words in our language is lack > of simple verbs (as quoted by Dr. Bateni). We have > roughly 340 simple verbs 110 of which is active only. > We normally make compound verbs. > Contrary to Persian, Arabic has the most nonproductive > new word formation systems (but enriched semantics). > e.g. the beautiful word "nAtarAvAyi" in Persian > (impenetrability) has its equivalent in Arabic as a > sentence "lA emkAna qAbeliyat attarashoh". The affixes > in Persian are the most powerful components in our > language. > If you are interested to know the problem you can read > the article "FArsi zabAni aqim?" by Dr. BAteni. > He is a genius who wrote about these problems 40 years > ago. I know that, and have read his book titled "Description of Grammatical Structure of the Persian Language"(?). What I'm sayin is that using affixes for meanings that has not be common, is going to ruin what you mentioned. > Peyman > --- Behdad Esfahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > > > > > > "vaaset" is so common. The problem should be > > kind of Arabic vs > > > > Ferdowsi. ;) > > > > > > I find this discussion very educational. Isn't > > this problem easier to > > > handle in Arabic than in Farsi? From my limited > > knowledge of Arabic, > > > it seem that, because Arabic's diction and > > vocabulary are in harmony > > > with its grammar, inventing new words are a matter > > of straight forward > > > application of existing rules; that is also > > exactly the reason why it is > > > hard in Farsi. > > > > Exactly, and that's why I don't like these using > > suffixes for any > > random meaning. > > ___ > > FarsiWeb mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search > http://shopping.yahoo.com > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb > > ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
The problem of new word coinage is not because of language components (affixes) although Persian has one of the most productive word formation systems. The problem for making new words in our language is lack of simple verbs (as quoted by Dr. Bateni). We have roughly 340 simple verbs 110 of which is active only. We normally make compound verbs. Contrary to Persian, Arabic has the most nonproductive new word formation systems (but enriched semantics). e.g. the beautiful word "nAtarAvAyi" in Persian (impenetrability) has its equivalent in Arabic as a sentence "lA emkAna qAbeliyat attarashoh". The affixes in Persian are the most powerful components in our language. If you are interested to know the problem you can read the article "FArsi zabAni aqim?" by Dr. BAteni. He is a genius who wrote about these problems 40 years ago. Peyman --- Behdad Esfahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > > > > "vaaset" is so common. The problem should be > kind of Arabic vs > > > Ferdowsi. ;) > > > > I find this discussion very educational. Isn't > this problem easier to > > handle in Arabic than in Farsi? From my limited > knowledge of Arabic, > > it seem that, because Arabic's diction and > vocabulary are in harmony > > with its grammar, inventing new words are a matter > of straight forward > > application of existing rules; that is also > exactly the reason why it is > > hard in Farsi. > > Exactly, and that's why I don't like these using > suffixes for any > random meaning. > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > > "vaaset" is so common. The problem should be kind of Arabic vs > > Ferdowsi. ;) > > I find this discussion very educational. Isn't this problem easier to > handle in Arabic than in Farsi? From my limited knowledge of Arabic, > it seem that, because Arabic's diction and vocabulary are in harmony > with its grammar, inventing new words are a matter of straight forward > application of existing rules; that is also exactly the reason why it is > hard in Farsi. Exactly, and that's why I don't like these using suffixes for any random meaning. ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
> "vaaset" is so common. The problem should be kind of Arabic vs > Ferdowsi. ;) I find this discussion very educational. Isn't this problem easier to handle in Arabic than in Farsi? From my limited knowledge of Arabic, it seem that, because Arabic's diction and vocabulary are in harmony with its grammar, inventing new words are a matter of straight forward application of existing rules; that is also exactly the reason why it is hard in Farsi. ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 11:05, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: [snip my .02] > > So you mean "ghaltak" means "abzaar-e ghalt-zadan"?? > > I'm sorry, but language is not that exact, neither I am an expert in > these. "ghaltak" means "abzaar-e ghalt-zan". "neshaanak" may mean > "abzaar-e neshaan-zan" (not exactly, yes). > > Also, these suffixes do not exactly bring a meaning with themselves, > contrary to what we've been learning in high school. The "-ak" in > "sorkhak" and "zardak" is just a suffix that creates a noun out of an > adjective. In "ghaltak" and probably "kaardak", it just makes a tool out > of something else. Just don't try to be productive in the old sense, > trying to assign exact meanings to each postfix and prefix. Well, you're probably right, but then the suffixes are going to lose all their meaning as a suffix. After a while there would be no common sense between words ending with "ak"... (and yes, there would be no suffix, some new words). [snip again] > > Unfortunately I'm loosing my last hopes on them. I can't fight > > for all these silly funny words (just a few of them are quoted): > > > > * database -> "daadegaan" > > The relationship of "base" and "-gaan" is existing, I guess "-gaan" > should have been a widely used postfix in Pahlavi. "paadegaan"? "-gaan" is not anything special, it's just "aan" for plural, joined to a word ending with "hah-e naamalfooz". Just like "saadegaan". So it means "datas". But again AFAIK "data" and "daade" are both plurals. Don't know about "paadegaan". > > * ftp -> "ghaap" > > That's an abbreviation: FTP = "gharaardaad-e enteghaal-e parvande": > "gheyn", "alef", "pe". If you have problems with abbreviations, don't > use them. And write "gharaardaad-e enteghaal-e parvande" everywhere? I like Omid Milani's transliteration for "HTML" as "echtemel", and "XML" as "iksemel" (I prefe "eksemel" myself though). > > * redo -> "az no" > > This is the translation of the "Redo" menu, not the action of > "redo"-ing. I agree that it's not that good, but I've not seen many good > ones. Your suggestion? "az no" reminds me of "reset" in forms. "dobaare" and "tekraar" may have the same meaning as "az no", but do it better, again IMHO. > > * scroll -> "navardidan"! > > The problem? Your suggestion? "navardidan" is completely another word, isn't? It do not hold the feeling of rolling in a single direction, and it contains a sense of a challenge, that cannot be ignored. My suggestion? Good question. > > And their inconsistencies: > > > > * interface -> "vaaset, miaanaa" > > * Graphical User Interface -> "miaanaa-ye ..." > > (miana is the second choice for interface) > > There is still a debate going on over that. "vaaset" was already > approved for a term in the Electricity Word-Choosing Group, but the > Computer group wanted "miaanaa". That is not finalized, so they are > listing both candidates for feedback. "vaaset" is so common. The problem should be kind of Arabic vs Ferdowsi. ;) > > * output (device) -> "khorooji" > > (Isn't "khorooji" also a noun in Persian?) > > It's *only* a noun in Persian, as far as I can tell. I'm not getting > what you mean. Would you explain? From what I get, is that they are > translating the "output" of a program as "boroon-daad", but an "output" > device as "dastgaah-e khorooji". Exactly. > > They never bothered themselves to identify nouns and verbs in > > their list. > > They do, in the final published list. They are assuming it's evident > from the translation. But in this certain case, I agree that they have > not translated "output" in the verb sense. The problem is that, they are misusing their power to decide for the language! You and I could have been decide on many technicall matters, and spread it all around the world by coding that here and there. But we have never done that so to decide for others. Better the propose words and wait some 5 or 10 years, and decide if that can be settled. "rayane" is setteled down. But the way they do it, they force many bodies to follow their word. > roozbeh behdad ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 11:05, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > As far as I know "kaaf-e tahghir" does not mean something poor, > but something small, like your "chizak". The other kind of > "kaaf" I know is "kaaf-e ezzat", as your examples "azizak", > "kanizak", and sometimes both of them are meant, like in > "morghak". What about the others senses? > > > Do so please then. > > > > I guess they're using the "-ak" postfix in the tool sense (like > > "ghaltak"). So it comes to mean "abzaar-e neshaane-gozaari". Still not > > convinced? > > So you mean "ghaltak" means "abzaar-e ghalt-zadan"?? I'm sorry, but language is not that exact, neither I am an expert in these. "ghaltak" means "abzaar-e ghalt-zan". "neshaanak" may mean "abzaar-e neshaan-zan" (not exactly, yes). Also, these suffixes do not exactly bring a meaning with themselves, contrary to what we've been learning in high school. The "-ak" in "sorkhak" and "zardak" is just a suffix that creates a noun out of an adjective. In "ghaltak" and probably "kaardak", it just makes a tool out of something else. Just don't try to be productive in the old sense, trying to assign exact meanings to each postfix and prefix. > You didn't > got my argument about assigning a wider phrase to the narrow > "computer-related" word. The physical bookmark, and virtual > browser-related bookmark are both "abzaar-e neshaane-gozaari", > and as for "abzaar", the physical one is much more a tool. Got > it? I got that the first time, and I simply accepted it. But I guess we can't change that. Creating new words to make them more *generative* is a well-known general policy of the Academy. I guess "choob-alef" has a tendency not to be able to create new parts of speech, while "neshaanak" does. > Unfortunately I'm loosing my last hopes on them. I can't fight > for all these silly funny words (just a few of them are quoted): > > * database -> "daadegaan" The relationship of "base" and "-gaan" is existing, I guess "-gaan" should have been a widely used postfix in Pahlavi. "paadegaan"? > * ftp -> "ghaap" That's an abbreviation: FTP = "gharaardaad-e enteghaal-e parvande": "gheyn", "alef", "pe". If you have problems with abbreviations, don't use them. > * redo -> "az no" This is the translation of the "Redo" menu, not the action of "redo"-ing. I agree that it's not that good, but I've not seen many good ones. Your suggestion? > * scroll -> "navardidan"! The problem? Your suggestion? > And their inconsistencies: > > * interface -> "vaaset, miaanaa" > * Graphical User Interface -> "miaanaa-ye ..." > (miana is the second choice for interface) There is still a debate going on over that. "vaaset" was already approved for a term in the Electricity Word-Choosing Group, but the Computer group wanted "miaanaa". That is not finalized, so they are listing both candidates for feedback. > * output (device) -> "khorooji" > (Isn't "khorooji" also a noun in Persian?) It's *only* a noun in Persian, as far as I can tell. I'm not getting what you mean. Would you explain? From what I get, is that they are translating the "output" of a program as "boroon-daad", but an "output" device as "dastgaah-e khorooji". > They never bothered themselves to identify nouns and verbs in > their list. They do, in the final published list. They are assuming it's evident from the translation. But in this certain case, I agree that they have not translated "output" in the verb sense. roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 11:02, Peyman wrote: > It doesn't mean that the academy shouldn't do anything > but in its correct way i.e. coining words firstly for > the very new words like "Tokomak" which has not yet > been publicly used and after gaining the control over > stuff like this reviewing old borrowed words. Well, the Academy is trying hard to help mass production of new terms. They have guidelines on how to translate an foreign term, and want their words be considered as an example of what has reached consensus, and now can be stabilized. These will be used in public media and public education, then. But they can't translate new terms, since one can hardly reach consensus on them, when one hasn't seen them in Persian context. Translating new terms, is what translators and tutors should do (possibly using the help the Academy guidelines provide). > Any way, there is a lot of argument on these issues > and it needs professional discussions. I agree very much. roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 10:31, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > > I wish they had invented a new word for that. Think about that: > > "neshaanak": "kaaf-e tahghir" attached to a common word. They > > are bounding a wider phrase to a narrow meaning, but with > > "raayaane" it's the other way. > > I don't agree with naming that postfix "kaaf-e tahghir". It has wider > usage: "morghak" (a "little" bird, not a petty or poor one), "chizak" (a > "small amount" of a thing), "azizak" (a "dear" dear), "ghaltak" (a > "tool" that rolls), "poshtak" (a back-related "action"), "zardak" (a > yellow fruit), "sorkhak" (a reddening disease), ... As far as I know "kaaf-e tahghir" does not mean something poor, but something small, like your "chizak". The other kind of "kaaf" I know is "kaaf-e ezzat", as your examples "azizak", "kanizak", and sometimes both of them are meant, like in "morghak". > > Do so please then. > > I guess they're using the "-ak" postfix in the tool sense (like > "ghaltak"). So it comes to mean "abzaar-e neshaane-gozaari". Still not > convinced? So you mean "ghaltak" means "abzaar-e ghalt-zadan"?? You didn't got my argument about assigning a wider phrase to the narrow "computer-related" word. The physical bookmark, and virtual browser-related bookmark are both "abzaar-e neshaane-gozaari", and as for "abzaar", the physical one is much more a tool. Got it? > BTW, a latest list of everything official or semi-official > (computer-related) is here: > > http://www.isi.org.ir/farhangestan/fh-gn.htm Unfortunately I'm loosing my last hopes on them. I can't fight for all these silly funny words (just a few of them are quoted): * database -> "daadegaan" * ftp -> "ghaap" * redo -> "az no" * scroll -> "navardidan"! And their inconsistencies: * interface -> "vaaset, miaanaa" * Graphical User Interface -> "miaanaa-ye ..." (miana is the second choice for interface) and: * output -> "boroondaad" * output (device) -> "khorooji" (Isn't "khorooji" also a noun in Persian?) They never bothered themselves to identify nouns and verbs in their list. > roozbeh behdad ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
Linguistically speaking, any coined word by the academies will be used after a while IFF it is accepted by the majority of the native speakers (mainly avAm). This period can be one day to 50 years. The 2nd Persian academy (Rezakhan era) coined "dAneshgAh" for the word "yuniversite" and it was accepted years after its coinage. However, there was a lot of coined words were never accepted like "yakh sori" for "ice-skating". I still doubt if everybody (mainly avAm) is comfortable with "rAyAneh" and time will prove it. It doesn't mean that the academy shouldn't do anything but in its correct way i.e. coining words firstly for the very new words like "Tokomak" which has not yet been publicly used and after gaining the control over stuff like this reviewing old borrowed words. Any way, there is a lot of argument on these issues and it needs professional discussions. Peyman --- Behdad Esfahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > > On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 10:20, Behdad Esfahbod > wrote: > > > Just to say they couldn't choose anything worse > than "neshaanak" > > > > Not that I don't agree, but they have "raayaane", > don't they? ;-) > > I wish they had invented a new word for that. Think > about that: > "neshaanak": "kaaf-e tahghir" attached to a common > word. They > are bounding a wider phrase to a narrow meaning, but > with > "raayaane" it's the other way. > > > Anyway, there are official channels for nagging, > since this is still not > > final. I see a few of the members on a regular > basis, and I can pass any > > specific comments one may have. > > Do so please then. > > > Roozbeh > > behdad > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 10:31, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > I wish they had invented a new word for that. Think about that: > "neshaanak": "kaaf-e tahghir" attached to a common word. They > are bounding a wider phrase to a narrow meaning, but with > "raayaane" it's the other way. I don't agree with naming that postfix "kaaf-e tahghir". It has wider usage: "morghak" (a "little" bird, not a petty or poor one), "chizak" (a "small amount" of a thing), "azizak" (a "dear" dear), "ghaltak" (a "tool" that rolls), "poshtak" (a back-related "action"), "zardak" (a yellow fruit), "sorkhak" (a reddening disease), ... > Do so please then. I guess they're using the "-ak" postfix in the tool sense (like "ghaltak"). So it comes to mean "abzaar-e neshaane-gozaari". Still not convinced? BTW, a latest list of everything official or semi-official (computer-related) is here: http://www.isi.org.ir/farhangestan/fh-gn.htm roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 10:20, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > > Just to say they couldn't choose anything worse than "neshaanak" > > Not that I don't agree, but they have "raayaane", don't they? ;-) I wish they had invented a new word for that. Think about that: "neshaanak": "kaaf-e tahghir" attached to a common word. They are bounding a wider phrase to a narrow meaning, but with "raayaane" it's the other way. > Anyway, there are official channels for nagging, since this is still not > final. I see a few of the members on a regular basis, and I can pass any > specific comments one may have. Do so please then. > Roozbeh behdad ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 10:20, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > Just to say they couldn't choose anything worse than "neshaanak" Not that I don't agree, but they have "raayaane", don't they? ;-) Anyway, there are official channels for nagging, since this is still not final. I see a few of the members on a regular basis, and I can pass any specific comments one may have. Roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 13:05, My Mazgoon wrote: > > Does any one knows a translation for "BOOKMARK" or "BOOKMARK THIS > > PAGE" in Persian? > > The latest translations from the Persian Academy (Farhangestan) for the > computer term "bookmark", are "neshaanak" and "neshaanak-gozaari" (not > final yet, since it's not signed by the president). The common > translation for the physical thing that is used with real books, is of > course "choob-alef", as Behdad said. Just to say they couldn't choose anything worse than "neshaanak" > Roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 13:05, My Mazgoon wrote: > Does any one knows a translation for "BOOKMARK" or "BOOKMARK THIS > PAGE" in Persian? The latest translations from the Persian Academy (Farhangestan) for the computer term "bookmark", are "neshaanak" and "neshaanak-gozaari" (not final yet, since it's not signed by the president). The common translation for the physical thing that is used with real books, is of course "choob-alef", as Behdad said. Roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Saturday 04 October 2003 03:59, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > Hi, > > You know that the 'book' in 'bookmark' is refering to the > book/n/, not book/v/. The original word bookmark/v/ is kind of > tricky, as it's not listed in dictionaries, and is a invented to > be used in browsers. BTW, the standard Persian translation for > bookmark/n/ is "choob-alef". It may seem weird, but better we > stick with it and spread it around, instead of replacing with a > new word. I remember the word was there back in early 90s in > Persian MS Windows 3.1s. And perhaps bookmark/v/ can be > translated as "choob-alef gozaashtan" or literally "choob-alef > gozaardan". > > > behdad > This is exactly how we have translated "bookmark" for FarsiKDE. Greetings, Arash > On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Ali A Khanban wrote: > > It seems to me something like "sabt-e neshaani" for "bookmark" is more > > relevant, if we look at the meaning and also think of "book" as > > "register". So for "bookmark this page" we may say "neshaani-ye in > > safhe raa sabt konid". > > > > -ali- > > > > Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > > >>Does any one knows a translation for"BOOKMARK" or"BOOKMARK THIS > > >> PAGE" in Persian? > > > > > >neshaane safheh or neshaane ketab? > > > > > >I don't know if such a phrase is actually in common use. Reminds me > > > of my highschool physics teacher trying to explain where the word > > > "shaar" (a replacement for "flux") came from. After thinking about > > > it, he said, it comes from "Farsie be pedar o madar". > > > > > >___ > > >FarsiWeb mailing list > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb > > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb -- The FarsiKDE Project www.farsikde.org ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
Hi, You know that the 'book' in 'bookmark' is refering to the book/n/, not book/v/. The original word bookmark/v/ is kind of tricky, as it's not listed in dictionaries, and is a invented to be used in browsers. BTW, the standard Persian translation for bookmark/n/ is "choob-alef". It may seem weird, but better we stick with it and spread it around, instead of replacing with a new word. I remember the word was there back in early 90s in Persian MS Windows 3.1s. And perhaps bookmark/v/ can be translated as "choob-alef gozaashtan" or literally "choob-alef gozaardan". behdad On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Ali A Khanban wrote: > It seems to me something like "sabt-e neshaani" for "bookmark" is more > relevant, if we look at the meaning and also think of "book" as > "register". So for "bookmark this page" we may say "neshaani-ye in safhe > raa sabt konid". > > -ali- > > Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > > >>Does any one knows a translation for"BOOKMARK" or"BOOKMARK THIS PAGE" > >>in Persian? > >> > >> > > > >neshaane safheh or neshaane ketab? > > > >I don't know if such a phrase is actually in common use. Reminds me of > >my highschool physics teacher trying to explain where the word "shaar" > >(a replacement for "flux") came from. After thinking about it, he said, it > >comes from "Farsie be pedar o madar". > > > >___ > >FarsiWeb mailing list > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb > > > > > > ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Peyman wrote: > Hi, > > Contrary to your teacher's comment "shAresh" (flux) is > "bA pedar o mAdar" because it comes from the Persian > simple verb "shAridan" means "jAri budan". The proof can be the common word "aabshaar", means waterfall. > Cheers, > > Peyman ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
> Contrary to your teacher's comment "shAresh" (flux) is > "bA pedar o mAdar" because it comes from the Persian > simple verb "shAridan" means "jAri budan". I remember it being spelled sheen, alef, re. This is around '77, '78 when a new set of books came out. ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
Hi, Contrary to your teacher's comment "shAresh" (flux) is "bA pedar o mAdar" because it comes from the Persian simple verb "shAridan" means "jAri budan". Cheers, Peyman --- Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does any one knows a translation for"BOOKMARK" > or"BOOKMARK THIS PAGE" > > in Persian? > > neshaane safheh or neshaane ketab? > > I don't know if such a phrase is actually in common > use. Reminds me of > my highschool physics teacher trying to explain > where the word "shaar" > (a replacement for "flux") came from. After > thinking about it, he said, it > comes from "Farsie be pedar o madar". > > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
Hi, "in safhe ra neshandar kon" Other translations are also good. Peyman --- My Mazgoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - Hi all, Does any one knows a translation for "BOOKMARK" or "BOOKMARK THIS PAGE" in Persian? Thanks Siamak - Help protect your PC. Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb > __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
It seems to me something like "sabt-e neshaani" for "bookmark" is more relevant, if we look at the meaning and also think of "book" as "register". So for "bookmark this page" we may say "neshaani-ye in safhe raa sabt konid". -ali- Skip Tavakkolian wrote: Does any one knows a translation for"BOOKMARK" or"BOOKMARK THIS PAGE" in Persian? neshaane safheh or neshaane ketab? I don't know if such a phrase is actually in common use. Reminds me of my highschool physics teacher trying to explain where the word "shaar" (a replacement for "flux") came from. After thinking about it, he said, it comes from "Farsie be pedar o madar". ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb -- || Ali Asghar Khanban || ||Research Associate in Department of Computing ||| Imperial College London, London SW7 2BZ, U.K. || Tel: +44 (020) 7594 8241 Fax: +1 (509) 694 0599 ||| [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~khanban ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: Translation
> Does any one knows a translation for"BOOKMARK" or"BOOKMARK THIS PAGE" > in Persian? neshaane safheh or neshaane ketab? I don't know if such a phrase is actually in common use. Reminds me of my highschool physics teacher trying to explain where the word "shaar" (a replacement for "flux") came from. After thinking about it, he said, it comes from "Farsie be pedar o madar". ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
