 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2010re-writing practice
I was born in the Year 1632, in the City of York, of a good Family, tho' not of that Country, my Father being a Foreigner of Bremen, who settled first at Hull: He got a good Estate by Merchandise, and leaving off his Trade, lived afterward at York, (The Life and Adventures of Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe) The above sentences, I rewrote like below: I was born in the City of York in 1632. I grew up in a good family, and my father wasn't a local person there. He was originally from Bremen of Germany. Having gone away from that place, he started a new life in Hull of England and made fortune by doing business. Leaving the work, he came to the York of City to have another life of his own. I feel a litle unsure of how to deal with tense in what I wrote; a past tense, perfect tense > I was born in the Year 1632, in the City of York, of a good Family, > tho' not of that Country, my Father being a Foreigner of Bremen, who [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I feel a litle unsure of how to deal with tense in what I wrote; a > past tense, perfect tense I don't see any problems with your tenses, but looking at the grammar more closely > I was born in the City of York in 1632. I grew up in a good family, > and That "and" changes the force of the sentence. You really want an "although" or "though". > my father wasn't a local person there. He was originally from > Bremen of Germany. This was the first thing that struck me. First of all, it would be "from Bremen, in Germany". But more importantly, it wouldn't. I don't think that there was any single state that was referred to as "Germany" until the nineteenth century, and in the early seventeenth, Bremen was an independent state. Even so, the sentence seems abrupt. What you have is an explanation of how your father wasn't local, so it belongs in the same sentence". > Having gone away from that place, "Having left there" or "Leaving there". > he started a new life in Hull of England "Hull, in England". Or, since he was writing for an English audience, who would be assumed to know that, just "Hull". > and made fortune by doing business. Leaving the work, he came to the > York of City to have another life of his own. Was the prior life somebody else's? I think that the notion is that he made a fortune and retired. If I were to try to render it into modern English, I'd probably come up with something like I was born in York in 1632 into a well-to-do family. My father was a foreigner, from Bremen, who first lived in Hull and made his fortune as a merchant, moving to York when he retired.  SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If a bus station is where a bus 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |stops, and a train station is where Palo Alto, CA 94304 |a train stops, what does that say |about a workstation? kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > > I was born in the Year 1632, in the City of York, of a good Family, > > tho' not of that Country, my Father being a Foreigner of Bremen, who [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > a foreigner, from Bremen, who first lived in Hull and made his > fortune as a merchant, moving to York when he retired. And why not: I was born in York in 1632 into a good family, though not from this country, since my father was a foreigner from Bremen, who first lived at Hull. .... Does it still sound old-fashioned? Or is it just too long sentence? Do the sentences in contemporary English to be shorter? I'm not native Eng. speaker, so I don't really "feel" this. >> > I was born in the Year 1632, in the City of York, of a good Family, >> > tho' not of that Country, my Father being a Foreigner of Bremen, who [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > the sentences in contemporary English to be shorter? > I'm not native Eng. speaker, so I don't really "feel" this. It still seems a bit old-fashioned. "Good family" has a fairly different connotation these days from what I presume Defoe meant. And structurally, it would have to be "into a good family, though not *one* from this country", otherwise it makes it sound as though the speaker was born in York but was claiming to not be from that country. I agree that it would preserve the sense better to have something like that, but I couldn't figure out a good way to cast it. Perhaps "though not one that had long been in the country, my father being a foreigner, from Bremen, ..." SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |There are just two rules of 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |governance in a free society: Mind Palo Alto, CA 94304 |your own business. Keep your hands |to yourself. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | P.J. O'Rourke (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ Thanks, Evan Kirshenbaum I'm appreciative of detailed explanation I should have said beforehand: 1) I intended this rewriting for my country's readers 2) I have Ogden's BASIC ENGLISH on my mind. 3) My point here is whether it would be understanble at least or not. So, it does not matter how idiomatic it is, that is secondary with this rewriting. Therefore, I must say something about Bremen and Hull like where they are located curenntly, for the sake of readers here. I used the expression of "go away from" intead of "leave" according to Ogden's rules. This resulted in awakward compostion although I couldn't write in natural English originally. > I was born in the Year 1632, in the City of York, of a good Family, > tho' not of that Country, my Father being a Foreigner of Bremen, who > settled first at Hull: He got a good Estate by Merchandise, and > leaving off his Trade, lived afterward at York, (The Life and > Adventures of Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe) . . . > I should have said beforehand: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I used the expression of "go away from" intead of "leave" according > to Ogden's rules. We demur: some of your ideas seem misconceived. 1. In general, Defoe's plain prose style anticipated or approximated Ogden's Basic English, viz. was very different from the literary style of 1719. 2. Understandability is the main criterion of plain English. Idiom is a secondary but characteristic feature of understandability. E.g. "leave off" is both simple English and current idiom (equally in 1700 and 2010): "go away from" is not functionally equivalent, thus is not an acceptable substitution. 3. We do not see why you "must" locate Bremen and Hull on the map of 2010 in order to clarify this text of 1719. Defoe's wording implies unambiguously that in York any person not born in York was "a foreigner" (i.e. defines foreigner relatively, not absolutely, which we may assume was the way the word was then used.) It seems an error to choose Defoe for a rewriting exercise like this. A more baroque style seems a more functional choice. Defoe's simplicity needs no translation; (ironical writers like Swift should be avoided, since irony requires extra knowledge in the reader, presumably unavailable in the presumed type of reader.) SignatureDon Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.