You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to l10n@openoffice.apache.org by Tal Daniel <ta...@gmail.com> on 2014/06/07 08:27:08 UTC
[HE] [VOTE] to Anchor, or to Attach?
I'm not fond of the Anchor verb, used to attach objects to a character,
paragraph, or a page. Currently, we translate it literally as עגן, e.g. עגן
לפיסקה, עיגון, ...
How about translating it to הצמד (attach to ...)?
This way, I think it would new users would find it easier to understand;
admit it, Anchoring sounds too far from the office, and related to the sea
world.
Re: [HE] [VOTE] to Anchor, or to Attach?
Posted by Tal Daniel <ta...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 07/06/14 08:41, jan i wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 June 2014 08:27, Tal Daniel wrote:
>>>
>>>> How about translating it to הצמד (attach to ...)? ...
>>>>
>>>> admit it, Anchoring sounds too far from the office, and related to the
>>>> sea
>>>> world.
>>>>
>>> I cannot tell you what the correct translation is, but "anchor" has been
>>> used for many years in word processor software. ...
>>>
>> we should not change terms that are used for years and common on other
>> word processors as well
>>
>
> I think the issue here is how to translate the word (note [HE] tag in
> subject). So "anchor" in English is not under discussion here.
>
> In this case, a guideline we normally follow in the Italian translation is
> that if a concept already has a name in Italian in Microsoft Office we
> reuse the same translation (which in some cases is literal from English, as
> it happens for "Anchoring"/"Ancoraggio", in others is not, in others does
> not exist) even when we have better wording available. This is to avoid to
> confuse users. But there are a few cases where we changed the translation.
>
> For sure, 1:1 mapping to the English terms (like, translating "Anchoring"
> with the same word you would use in "Anchoring a boat") is not mandatory:
> use whatever sounds good in Hebrew, provided that you are consistent and,
> when possible, that you don't change the Microsoft Office terminology too
> much if you expect many users to be familiar with that one.
Sorry for the confusion I caused; as Andrea noted, I meant changing the
translation for Hebrew only.
Since there's no response from the community, I may leave it as-is for now.
Not critical.
Tal
Re: [HE] [VOTE] to Anchor, or to Attach?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 07/06/14 08:41, jan i wrote:
>> On 7 June 2014 08:27, Tal Daniel wrote:
>>> How about translating it to הצמד (attach to ...)? ...
>>> admit it, Anchoring sounds too far from the office, and related to the sea
>>> world.
>> I cannot tell you what the correct translation is, but "anchor" has been
>> used for many years in word processor software. ...
> we should not change terms that are used for years and common on other
> word processors as well
I think the issue here is how to translate the word (note [HE] tag in
subject). So "anchor" in English is not under discussion here.
In this case, a guideline we normally follow in the Italian translation
is that if a concept already has a name in Italian in Microsoft Office
we reuse the same translation (which in some cases is literal from
English, as it happens for "Anchoring"/"Ancoraggio", in others is not,
in others does not exist) even when we have better wording available.
This is to avoid to confuse users. But there are a few cases where we
changed the translation.
For sure, 1:1 mapping to the English terms (like, translating
"Anchoring" with the same word you would use in "Anchoring a boat") is
not mandatory: use whatever sounds good in Hebrew, provided that you are
consistent and, when possible, that you don't change the Microsoft
Office terminology too much if you expect many users to be familiar with
that one.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [HE] [VOTE] to Anchor, or to Attach?
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 07/06/14 08:41, jan i wrote:
> On 7 June 2014 08:27, Tal Daniel <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not fond of the Anchor verb, used to attach objects to a character,
>> paragraph, or a page. Currently, we translate it literally as עגן, e.g. עגן
>> לפיסקה, עיגון, ...
>>
>> How about translating it to הצמד (attach to ...)?
>>
>> This way, I think it would new users would find it easier to understand;
>> admit it, Anchoring sounds too far from the office, and related to the sea
>> world.
>>
>
> I cannot tell you what the correct translation is, but "anchor" has been
> used for many years in word processor software.
>
> If you e.g. look at microsoft office, you will find they also use "anchor".
we should not change terms that are used for years and common on other
word processors as well
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [HE] [VOTE] to Anchor, or to Attach?
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 7 June 2014 08:27, Tal Daniel <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not fond of the Anchor verb, used to attach objects to a character,
> paragraph, or a page. Currently, we translate it literally as עגן, e.g. עגן
> לפיסקה, עיגון, ...
>
> How about translating it to הצמד (attach to ...)?
>
> This way, I think it would new users would find it easier to understand;
> admit it, Anchoring sounds too far from the office, and related to the sea
> world.
>
I cannot tell you what the correct translation is, but "anchor" has been
used for many years in word processor software.
If you e.g. look at microsoft office, you will find they also use "anchor".
Just a consideration.
rgds
jan I.