|
May I offer my two pence - I have checked my translation and tend to agree here with Alan
I have this
and said what an abomination (CV1) it was for Gunnar to have outlawed (declared as outlaw) all he had killed
This strikes me Alan that 'er' is indeed the equivalent of 'that' - which indeed I would necessarily have used - if I had not done it the way I did
I saw that there was an abomination in calling them outlaws - well to Morð's way of thinking it certainly was but one abomination covering all deaths - and the act of declaring 'that' they were outlaws was the abomination - if we use 'when' then it implies that if he said they were outlaws then at that time - it was wrong - but if he had waited until later it might not have been so bad - I do believe I may have caught the gist of what you are getting at Alan - it is the fact that - they are called outlaws at all - that upsets Morð - who was stirring it at the time
JMO
Whew - I hope I have explained myself
Kveðja
Patricia
-------Original Message-------
-----Original Message----- og sagði hver firn voru er Gunnar skyldi hafa óhelgað þá alla er hann Maybe. Compare: It is unfortunate when something happens with It is unfortunate that something happens Both completely appropriate in English and shows that you cannot fully separate the idea that an event happens from its occirrence in time. If that had been meant here why not use at (að) as occurs regularly throughout the text? Point on plurale tantum taken but I regarded the proclamation against each separate dead body as a separate abomination in its own right J Alan
No virus found in this incoming message. No virus found in this outgoing message. | |||
|
|