Talk:Neacșu's letter/Archive 1

Translating to English

There are a lot of places here where I' follow individual words, but can't quite make full headway, maybe because this is very formal; e.g. I don't know what to do with "domnie tale" vs. "domniile voastre" (I take the latter as "your lordship".)

Anyway, we should produce an English translation. Consider the following a collaborative workspace for same. I'm starting off with some low-hanging fruit; I'll get back when I have time to work carefully through it if no one else beats me to it. - Jmabel | Talk 06:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a couple of people already did a good job on this at Commons. I'm just copying here from Image:Scrisoarea lui Neacsu.jpg. Does anyone see any problem with any of this? If not, let's get this all onto the article page. - Jmabel | Talk 01:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[start copied material]

Romanian text: (the parts in italic are in Slavonic)

Mudromu I plemenitomu, I cistitomu I bogom darovanomu jupan Hanăş Bengner ot Braşov mnogo zdravie ot Nécşu ot Dlăgopole.

I pak dau ştire domnie tale za lucrul turcilor, cum am auzit eu că împăratul au eşit den Sofiia, şi aimintrea nu e, şi se-au dus în sus pre Dunăre.

I pak să ştii domniia ta că au venit un om de la Nicopole de miie me-au spus că au văzut cu ochii lor că au trecut ciale corăbii ce ştii şi domniia ta pre Dunăre în sus.

I pak să ştii că bagă den toate oraşele câte 50 de omin să fie de ajutor în corăbii.

I pak să ştii cumu se-au prins neşte meşter' den Ţarigrad cum vor treace ceale corăbii la locul cela strimtul ce ştii şi domniia ta.

I pak spui domniie tale de lucrul lui Mahamet beg, cum am auzit de boiari ce sunt megiiaş' şi de generemiiu Negre, cum i-au dat împăratul sloboziie lui Mahamet beg, pe io-i va fi voia, pren Ţeara Rumânească, iară el să treacă.

I pak să ştii domniia ta că are frică mare şi Băsărab de acel lotru de Mahamet beg, mai vârtos de domniile voastre.

I pak spui domniietale ca mai marele miu, de ce am înţeles şi eu. Eu spui domniietale iară domniiata eşti înţelept şi aceste cuvinte să ţii domniiata la tine, să nu ştie umin mulţi, şi domniile vostre să vă păziţi cum ştiţi mai bine.

I bog te veselit. Amin.

---

Translation attempt:

To the most wise and honoured and by God gifted master Hans Benkner from Braşov, lots of health from Neacşu from Câmpulung (literally: The Long Field)

And so I let you know of the deeds of the Turks, as I have heard that the emperor has left Sofia, and that must be true, and went up the Danube.

And so You should know that a man from Nicopolis came to me and told me they saw with their own eyes that those ships which You know about have sailed up the Danube.

And so you should know that they are taking 50 men from each town to help on the ships.

And so you should know that some experts from Constantinople (Tsarigrad) realized how to make the ships to past that narrow place which You know too.

And so I tell You about the deed of Mahamet beg, as I heard from neighbouring boyars and from my son-in-law Negre, that the emperor gave Mahamet beg freedom to pass through Wallachia wherever he pleases.

And so You should know that our Basarab too is fearful of that thief Mahamet beg, even more so than You.

And so I'm telling You as my superior about what I have found out. I am telling You, and You are wise and You should keep these words for yourself, so that no many people know, and You should take proper guard.

And may God bring you happiness. Amen

[end copied material]

revisionism

...and the historical revisionism award goes to this quote from the article:

[...] a big and strong tradition of writing texts in Cyrillic alphabet in the Western Europe before XVII century. This tradition is known very little because very big amount of the books was annihilated during the next centuries

:-) bogdan 09:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Was this at the time when Romanians were still using the Dacian alphabet? (I'll live this link here so, just in case it does turn blue, I'd have an easier time CfDing it) :) Dahn 12:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Which alphabet? Old Hungarian script, Sinaia lead plates or Rohonczi Codex? :-) bogdan 17:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

<joke>The one that is used exclusively for automotive manuals.</joke> - Jmabel | Talk 00:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

translation

The article needs a translation, and an authoritative one, Linking the article to an online text in original language or having an 'attempted' translation in talk page is not a solution for an English reader--mrg3105mrg3105 09:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

this does not mean the article is unreferenced. there are users who know both languages and are able to veryfy the sources. otherwise, the sources would get deleted.Nergaal (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The point of Wikipedia is to make articles available to a wide range of people, not only those that know both English and Romanian, right? There needs to be an authoritative translation, or there is no point since an English speaker can't really appreciate the point of the article!--mrg3105mrg3105 11:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, THE ARTICLES! not necessarily the sources! the article is in English and pretty much translates from Romanian, one of the references.Nergaal (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Not quite, but I understand the confusion. Obviously the articles in en-Wiki must be in English. In addition the references must also be in English, or translated (if a quote, the quote needs translation). In addition the source citation needs to be translated because the libraries (if the reader whats to do own further research) store the information in English and not Romanian. Further, in this case the letter is actually the article and the source. In fact you are quoting the entire source because that is what the article is about. The problem with this is the translation needs to be authoritative. This means that it reacquires an expert, and I will tag it as such unless you care to include the credentials of the person who translated the letter. Usually the translation comes from a specialist publication where the translation is also analyzed.--mrg3105mrg3105 11:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Horrible

This has got to be the worst article I have ever seen on Wikipedia. It's worse than a stub. Not even the title is right. And the way the article starts it's as if it talks about Neacsu, the person. I did a few fixes, by retranslating the English version, which is not present in a Wikisource article. I have also done a modern Romanian version of the text, which is located on the Romanian, Wikisource page (I didn't think it'd be of any great significance on the English one).
A good place to get ideas about what the article should say, is this. diego_pmc (talk) 20:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• I rewrote the page. diego_pmc (talk) 12:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Translating to English

There are a lot of places here where I' follow individual words, but can't quite make full headway, maybe because this is very formal; e.g. I don't know what to do with "domnie tale" vs. "domniile voastre" (I take the latter as "your lordship".)

Anyway, we should produce an English translation. Consider the following a collaborative workspace for same. I'm starting off with some low-hanging fruit; I'll get back when I have time to work carefully through it if no one else beats me to it. - Jmabel | Talk 06:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a couple of people already did a good job on this at Commons. I'm just copying here from Image:Scrisoarea lui Neacsu.jpg. Does anyone see any problem with any of this? If not, let's get this all onto the article page. - Jmabel | Talk 01:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[start copied material]

Romanian text: (the parts in italic are in Slavonic)

Mudromu I plemenitomu, I cistitomu I bogom darovanomu jupan Hanăş Bengner ot Braşov mnogo zdravie ot Nécşu ot Dlăgopole.

I pak dau ştire domnie tale za lucrul turcilor, cum am auzit eu că împăratul au eşit den Sofiia, şi aimintrea nu e, şi se-au dus în sus pre Dunăre.

I pak să ştii domniia ta că au venit un om de la Nicopole de miie me-au spus că au văzut cu ochii lor că au trecut ciale corăbii ce ştii şi domniia ta pre Dunăre în sus.

I pak să ştii că bagă den toate oraşele câte 50 de omin să fie de ajutor în corăbii.

I pak să ştii cumu se-au prins neşte meşter' den Ţarigrad cum vor treace ceale corăbii la locul cela strimtul ce ştii şi domniia ta.

I pak spui domniie tale de lucrul lui Mahamet beg, cum am auzit de boiari ce sunt megiiaş' şi de generemiiu Negre, cum i-au dat împăratul sloboziie lui Mahamet beg, pe io-i va fi voia, pren Ţeara Rumânească, iară el să treacă.

I pak să ştii domniia ta că are frică mare şi Băsărab de acel lotru de Mahamet beg, mai vârtos de domniile voastre.

I pak spui domniietale ca mai marele miu, de ce am înţeles şi eu. Eu spui domniietale iară domniiata eşti înţelept şi aceste cuvinte să ţii domniiata la tine, să nu ştie umin mulţi, şi domniile vostre să vă păziţi cum ştiţi mai bine.

I bog te veselit. Amin.

---

Translation attempt:

To the most wise and honoured and by God gifted master Hans Benkner from Braşov, lots of health from Neacşu from Câmpulung (literally: The Long Field)

And so I let you know of the deeds of the Turks, as I have heard that the emperor has left Sofia, and that must be true, and went up the Danube.

And so You should know that a man from Nicopolis came to me and told me they saw with their own eyes that those ships which You know about have sailed up the Danube.

And so you should know that they are taking 50 men from each town to help on the ships.

And so you should know that some experts from Constantinople (Tsarigrad) realized how to make the ships to past that narrow place which You know too.

And so I tell You about the deed of Mahamet beg, as I heard from neighbouring boyars and from my son-in-law Negre, that the emperor gave Mahamet beg freedom to pass through Wallachia wherever he pleases.

And so You should know that our Basarab too is fearful of that thief Mahamet beg, even more so than You.

And so I'm telling You as my superior about what I have found out. I am telling You, and You are wise and You should keep these words for yourself, so that no many people know, and You should take proper guard.

And may God bring you happiness. Amen

[end copied material]

revisionism

...and the historical revisionism award goes to this quote from the article:

[...] a big and strong tradition of writing texts in Cyrillic alphabet in the Western Europe before XVII century. This tradition is known very little because very big amount of the books was annihilated during the next centuries

:-) bogdan 09:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Was this at the time when Romanians were still using the Dacian alphabet? (I'll live this link here so, just in case it does turn blue, I'd have an easier time CfDing it) :) Dahn 12:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Which alphabet? Old Hungarian script, Sinaia lead plates or Rohonczi Codex? :-) bogdan 17:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

<joke>The one that is used exclusively for automotive manuals.</joke> - Jmabel | Talk 00:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

translation

The article needs a translation, and an authoritative one, Linking the article to an online text in original language or having an 'attempted' translation in talk page is not a solution for an English reader--mrg3105mrg3105 09:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

this does not mean the article is unreferenced. there are users who know both languages and are able to veryfy the sources. otherwise, the sources would get deleted.Nergaal (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The point of Wikipedia is to make articles available to a wide range of people, not only those that know both English and Romanian, right? There needs to be an authoritative translation, or there is no point since an English speaker can't really appreciate the point of the article!--mrg3105mrg3105 11:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, THE ARTICLES! not necessarily the sources! the article is in English and pretty much translates from Romanian, one of the references.Nergaal (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Not quite, but I understand the confusion. Obviously the articles in en-Wiki must be in English. In addition the references must also be in English, or translated (if a quote, the quote needs translation). In addition the source citation needs to be translated because the libraries (if the reader whats to do own further research) store the information in English and not Romanian. Further, in this case the letter is actually the article and the source. In fact you are quoting the entire source because that is what the article is about. The problem with this is the translation needs to be authoritative. This means that it reacquires an expert, and I will tag it as such unless you care to include the credentials of the person who translated the letter. Usually the translation comes from a specialist publication where the translation is also analyzed.--mrg3105mrg3105 11:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Horrible

This has got to be the worst article I have ever seen on Wikipedia. It's worse than a stub. Not even the title is right. And the way the article starts it's as if it talks about Neacsu, the person. I did a few fixes, by retranslating the English version, which is not present in a Wikisource article. I have also done a modern Romanian version of the text, which is located on the Romanian, Wikisource page (I didn't think it'd be of any great significance on the English one).
A good place to get ideas about what the article should say, is this. diego_pmc (talk) 20:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• I rewrote the page. diego_pmc (talk) 12:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

1st transliteration: mistakes

Mistakes galore in the 1st transliteration!

• ъ (e.g. dunŭre, kŭte ► dunăre, căte) always has to be rendered as ă [ə] (never u!). Unfortunately, this character ъ is too often mixed up with b in the first transliteration text.

• And this one, b, has no phonetical value (in contrast with the other one, the serifed ъ). This is why its rendering with an ĭ - as in amĭ and sŭntĭ - generates another serious mistake! A correct transliteration of these two words would (should!) be ► am and sănt (or [sənt]). (The latter - which again contains the wrong transliteration due to a similarity of ъ and b -, was for centuries spelled sănt and not sînt, as it has been since 1860.)
• ѣ [ea] stands for a diphtong, pronounced as such or as [ya] . Hence, instead of the character ę, either ea or ia would be the appropriate renderings (as it has always been done in transliterations by scholars who know Romanian paleography). (In some cases, ę would fit, but only in words where it is justified by dialectal circumstances. The insertion thereof should however be avoided because only competent native speakers of the relevant subdialects would be able to do it accurately, i.e., alternate the insertions of both ea/ia and this e with cedilla in the same text.)
• ѩ stands for [i-ya] (actually 2 syllables: i + ya)
• The character looking like a combination of I and lambda (or as an inverted V with an I) stands for în (either as the preposition meaning in or the prefix meaning in- or en- in English), as it is shown in the Romanian cyrillic alphabet shown here. Hence, the word ĩpŭratu(l) should be spelled ► înpăratul.
• Those brackets. It doesn’t matter that some letters are written in the original script as if though they were diacritical signs. They are genuine letters (characters); they are miniaturized and put in the line above the main line for titla & al. diacriticals above, but they are clearly outlined, written down, so that those lots of brackets are superfluous. In general, in linguistics, in such texts letters or fragments put in brackets tell the reader that in the original they are OMITTED. But this is not the case in the original shown in the article, namely this one!).

(BTW, today’s spelling of the word is ► împăratul, due to a rule introduced more than three centuries later, according to which în- & al. prefixes/words ending with an n have to turn m whenever preceding a p or a b.)

• mulci is wrong: either ► mulţi or (phonetically so that everybody gets it) ► multsi/multzi. The same is valid for pŭzici and štici: ► păziţi, štiţi.

Further explanations re. the Romanian cyrillic alphabet.

The second transliteration of the text is way much better (I mean the 2nd part of "3.1 Romanian original"), and is contained in many and various scholar publications (so that it won't stir up any WP:OR discussion). -- Ralsog Iref (talk) 13:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)