Talk:Nemzeti dal

Translation comments

I just got around to thinking we needed this page! Kudos to the translator but I feel like the version here misses out on a lot due to the lack of rhyming and emphasis... I do have a version that does not have copyrite issues on it that takes care of this, would anyone have a particular preference? (Quick example, the refrain in this version is "to the God of the Magyar we swear to thee, we swear to thee, that slaves we shall no longer be.") Just a thought. Andromeda321 00:28, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm really opposed to rhyming or lyrical translations of poetry. A translation is a translation, and a poem is a poem. If you translate something and force it into a rhyming scheme, then you not only are adding your own ingenuity and creativity to the piece, making it not entirely the author's, and also you almost always have to change words and sentences in order to force them to fit. A good example of this is the (in my opinion) absolutely atrocious translation to be found of the Himnusz: "With Thine aid his just cause press / Where his foes to fight appear." I dunno; I'm certainly not the voice of consensus on this one, but if we do add another translation, I would suggest leaving this one in as well.
Korossyl 20:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with need of having "translation of meaning" for poem like this - it still does not mean it needs a word-by-word translation. It needs translation that transfers meaning as precisely as possible.

I would be even more happy (and I believe it is valid for any non-Magyar readers of this translation) if there are additional explaining comments to specific phrases selected in poems - it could seem to be a bit speculative, on the other hand it is a common practice when translating e.g. ancient works where many comments about context possibly unknown to readers are usually added (and often they take more space than the translated text itself ;) The reason is, it is wise to expect reader is not knowing the context - an I believe in an encyclopedia it makes even more sense. For example I do not understand meaning of "magyarok istenere" translated as "Hungarian God" - I have a vague notion of why God is attributed to Hungarians here, what god does author mention here (Christian or a hungariang mythological god?) and why the first letter was capitalized. Also I do not understand, why "magyarok" is translated to "Hungarian" here, if in first verse word "Magyar" is translated to "Magyar"?

"Rhyming and emphasis" can be found in the original version that is available for readed. If a rhyming translation will be added, then please put it there only as an additional information and do not remove the exact meaning translation. (Eltwarg (talk) 08:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC))

Rhyming Translation

There is at least one good rhyming translation of the first verse: "Magyars rise! Your country calls you! Meet this hour, what'er befalls you. Shall we free men be, or slaves? Choose the lot your spirit craves!" I do not know whom to credit with this translation, but this is a fair use excerpt.

Retitle to Nemzeti dal

I'm quite sure the real title of the poem is "Nemzeti dal", so the current title "Nemzeti Dal" is wrong. However, the title is also mentioned a few times in the article, which is making me uncertain. Could anyone please either confirm which title is correct? If there's no answer in some time, I'll fix the title in the text and move the article. – b_jonas 21:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

No no; you're absolutely right. I just got carried away with American naming conventions, and having written the article, repeated the mistake throughout. Thanks for noticing! Korossyl 14:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I think I'll edit it and then move. – b_jonas 17:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Where the poem "Nemzeti dal" was first read to the public

The author of the article says : "Petőfi read the poem aloud on March 15 in Vörösmarty Square in Budapest to a gathering crowd, which by the end was chanting the refrain as they began to march around the city, seizing the presses, liberating political prisoners, and declaring the end of Austrian rule." There are two problems with this sentence.

The first is, that Vörösmarty tér was not existing in 1848 at all. There was a square more and less at the same location called Színház tér (Theater Platz), but it was definitely not the same as the present one. The present sqare had gradually been built during the second half of the 19th century and it became the same as we know it today only by 1870 (with the completion of the so-called Haas-building, which was demolished during WW2). The square was then named "Gizella tér" (named after the elder daughter of Emperor Franz Josef the 1st). In 1908 the statue of the Hungarian poet Vörösmarty Mihály was erected in the middle of the square and in 1925 the whole square was renamed after him.

The second problem is, that according to all Hungarian history books, stories, etc. and also common knowledge the poem was first read by Petőfi on the stairs of the National Museum to the crowd gathering in the garden of the building. This legend, however, has never been proven by reliable historical sources, but as kind of a canonized legend it is known even by children and the act is repeated every year at the same place during the official celebrations on March 15 (the coreography of the event changes year by year, but a common point is, that Nemzeti dal is read from the stairs). Historians sometimes doubt whether the poem was read to the public at all, some for example sais that it was only performed by Cafe Pilvax, where Petőfi and friends (the so-called "Márciusi ifjak", meaning March Youth) were gathering during the morning of March 15, 1848. But in case it had been read at all, this should probably have been occured somewhere else than at the then Tehater Platz as the crowd gathered at the National Museum and if they later crossed Theater Platz (going to the Buda Castle to meet the Resident Council or "Helytartótanács" in Hungarian, and to free another poet and national hero, Táncsics Mihály) at all, they probably did not stop there at all, as there was no point to do so.

All in all I suggest to change the sentence in the article as follows (certainly, my English may be brushed without any prior consent:-) : "According to the legend Petőfi read the poem aloud on March 15, 1848 from the stairs of the National Museum to a gathering crowd...." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Selmeczig (talk • contribs) 20:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Translation Errors

You cannot swear "on" God, you can only swear "to" God in English. I've changed the translation with a reference to the original source. This preserves the quote, but corrects the translation. It is a common method used in scholarly works to preserve the original quote, but correct the translation. (Taivo (talk) 03:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC))
I just double checked Országh's big two-volume Magyar-Angol Szótár (pg. 534) for backup and esküzik valamire is "swear on/by", but in the examples he also lists "swear to" in the sense of swear to the truth of something. In the examples, "swear on" is only used of things, but "swear by" is only used of people. So according to the standard magyar-angol dictionary, the translation should be "swear by", not "swear on". In English, this is also the case, you do not swear on people, but only on nonhuman objects. (Taivo (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC))
The Magay/Országh magyar angol kéziszótár is even more explicit: esküszik vmre "swear on", vkre "swear by". (Taivo (talk) 04:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC))

Is there a special reason for translating Magyar to Magyar?

Why there is word "Magyar" in the first verse translated as "Magyar", while "magyarok" is translated to "Hungarian"?

Can anybody make clear for non-Magyar (or non-Hungarian) if there is a distinction between meaning of these two words for Magyars (Hungarians?) themselves? (Eltwarg (talk) 07:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC))

I changed "Magyar" to "Hungarian". There is no distinction between Magyar and Magyarok other than singular and plural. All changes in the translation should be discussed here on the Talk Page first, as this one was. --Taivo (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Changing Translation

Hello all,

I've already addressed this issue in the past with Taivo, and another analogous discussion can be found at Talk:Himnusz. Yes, translations are changed in academia; no, wikipedia is not academia. I wish the issue at hand was just something petty like my pride, so I could get over it and we'd all be happy. However, that particular translation is found online -- here -- and is therefore "set in stone," as it were. It reflects the specific stylistic choices and linguistic opinions of the translator. That happens to be me in this case, but the consequence would be the same with anyone: it cannot be changed and remain attributable to the translator, and it cannot be un-attributed without being WP:OR. And I've seen plenty of good translations, even of single sentences, yanked for just that reason. So, here it is: the translation remains as it is, or it gets removed entirely. Attributed quotes do not fall into the public domain, like the rest of Wikipedia does, and can be removed at the author's discretion. To get another translation online, it NEEDS to be attributed to someone else, and then again, it can't be changed. There's a crappy rhyming one floating about someplace, use that if you wish. Good luck, everyone.

Korossyl (talk) 20:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Copyright?

Isn't it:

Translated by: KŐRÖSSY LÁSZLÓ 

a WP:COPYVIO copyright violation ;)? Is this gentleman a Wikipedian who agreed to it? Zezen (talk) 00:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

This article was originally written by the translator. The last time anyone looked at it was several years ago and the translator's website no longer exists as far as I can tell (at least the link no longer works). But this isn't really any different than hundreds of different translations found throughout Wikipedia as long as it is properly attributed (which this one is). --Taivo (talk) 00:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Then :

1. His name should be removed. We do not edit WP under our RL personas and we give our copyright to Wikipedia and the world, in short.

2. The outdated non-RS link should be removed, to prevent further copyvio questions.

I am not nit-picking here, but speaking from experience - my edits and drafts got removed for one copy-pasted sentence, with right attribution, by ANI admins. Zezen (talk) 00:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I think I got it fixed. Thanks for the input--it's been four years since I last visited this page. --Taivo (talk) 03:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The site's around, it just got moved to http://laszlokorossy.com/magyar/nemzetidal.html . This particular translation was also recently used in a published work of fiction, Under Budapest, by Ailsa Kay. I still don't see how changing the translation is acceptable -- the reason I still have that site online is precisely so that the translation wouls not seem to be OR, which is not acceptable -- the attribution must remain to be compliant with Wiki policies, as far as I can tell. See the comments above, for the first time we addressed this in 2010 (also at Himnusz, I believe). It's fine that you think that the translation should be different or better (and you may be correct) -- but either the translation remain in its published form, or it needs to be removed entirely. I don't see how a middle ground can be acceptable under Wiki policies. Korossyl (talk) 16:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Furthermore, it is true that most edits to Wikipedia pages fall under Wiki's public domain policies -- anything contributed forgoes copyright. This does not, however, include cited quites from other sources. That I was both the original author (translator) and the editor doesn't make any difference. By placing this (and two other) translations on Wikipedia AND citing them, I simply assented to their use on Wiki, not to their modification -- the same as any other cited source. Korossyl (talk) 16:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I have no problem leaving the translation as it has been for the last four years, just correcting the website address and removing the "more pleasing" nonsense in the footnote link to the other translation. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." --Taivo (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I was curious if there were other translations out there that might avoid WP:COPYVIO and WP:COI, but found only two English translations out there--Wikipedia's and the rhyming one (which I think is a fairly bad translation). I didn't find any others. --Taivo (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I forgot, there is a third one, but it is also "unsatisfactory" and rhymes: "On your feet now, Hungary calls you! / Now is the moment, nothing stalls you," Yuck. --Taivo (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

@Korossyl:

a. Ta for the translation! B. Re "simply assented to their use on Wiki, not to their modification -" sorry but you did agree to its modification thereby. Read the wiki copyright terms and wp:own. C. The other translation: yuck indeed ;). Zezen (talk) 22:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Zezen: thanks! I'm truly not trying to be an ass here, but WP:OWN applies to regular edits, not to citing sourced material -- which this is. That I happen to be both the editor and the author of the source material is, in this case, irrelevant, because I am not trying to claim any protection for any of my edits -- just the quoted material. Korossyl (talk) 01:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Taivo: Thanks, and thanks for removing the "more pleasing" comment -- obviously, I didn't write that, but I didn't want to make it seem like I was protecting my POV by deleting it. It really is atrocious -- "our grandchildren will cuddle," and all that. Korossyl (talk) 02:16, 3 January 2016 (UTC)