StardustNyako said: Origianal sentence: No matter what circumstances you have, you can grab happiness.
Noboru, here was the German: Ungeachtet der Umstände, die Sie haben, werden Sie nicht in der Lage, das Glück zu greifen. The Meaning was already lost in Translation. What the Sentence describes is the Opposite of what you wanted to convey. The only thing missing is the Verb "sein" (to be):
"Ungeachtet der Umstände, die Sie haben, werden Sie nicht in der Lage sein, das Glück zu ergreifen."
More word-for-wordly, it would be "Regardless of the Circumstances that you have, you won't be able/in a Position to grab Happiness."
It's obvious that multiple Machine Translations, especially in exotic Languages, will eventually corrupt the Meaning. The original Sentence directly translated to German would be, according to Google Translate, "Egal welchen Umständen haben Sie, können Sie das Glück zu greifen."
First Fail is, that Dative Case (indirect Object) was used for "Umstände" instead of the Accusative Case (direct Object). Maybe the Translator is too stupid to interpret two Accusative Objects and assumes that if there's one of them, the other has to be in Dative Case.
Then it didn't pick up correctly that the Sentence starts with a subordinated Clause and thus the Pronoun "Sie" and the Verb "haben" should be swapped, because the Verb comes last in Sentences like that. Strangely, the Translator got the Position of the Verb in the Main Sentence right, because it takes the second Position of the whole Sentence since the Sentence started with a subordinated Clause.
The only Thing to criticize on the Main Sentence is that "zu" (to) should've been left out, so one grammatically correct Translation would be "Egal welche Umstände Sie haben, können Sie das Glück ergreifen." although one would rather separate the subordinated Clause with the Main Clause, because they don't make Sense like that, so it would be rather : "Egal welche Umstände Sie haben: Sie können das Glück ergreifen." which would sound less awkward.
edit: "ergreifen" sounds more fitting.
EminemVEVO said: V2 and VSO V2 means "Verb on second Position", so it doesn't matter whether you start with the Subject or Object (unless they are too similar that you can only distinguish the Subject from the Object based on its Position, since Subjects normally come before the Objects). It would be something like "A very fast, green Bike rode the annoying, lazy Paul" or "The annoying, lazy Paul rode a very fast, green Bike" (in English, only the latter one is acceptable). In both Cases, the second Idea or Position of the Sentence is highlighted.
VSO means Verb first, then Subject and Object(s) at last. For Example:
"Rode the annoying, lazy Paul a very fast, green Bike."
I don't see how the Example Sentence in VSO is anywhere similar in Structure from the ones with V2. If anything is similar or can be similar to V2, then it's SVO (Subject-Verb-Object) because the Condition that the Verb comes second is still fulfilled. |