/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22765408]

>trying to get more accurate translation for certain parts of Jung's Red Book with gpt4 turbo
>realize english is too much of a brainlets' language for the expression of its true meaning

is this it? one has to learn german if he wishes to understand (or even write) philosophical texts beyond a certain level?

do these limitations exist in the other way around? are there sentences that sound natural in english, yet leave more freedom for interpretation than any of their possible german translations?

[Anonymous No.22765437]

Isn't it just that "our concepts of truth and error" CAN, unlike yes and no, yield?

[Anonymous No.22766057]

>>22765437
what happens to wohl? how would you translate the sentence differnetly if the wohl was omitted? or it's not possible to convey this word over to english?

[Anonymous No.22766069]

I blame Jung for not writing in English.

[Anonymous No.22766075]

>>22765408
Why are you even using turbo. Retard. OpenAI fucked it up and is updating it.

[Anonymous No.22766086]

>>22765408
Urmom is a pretty big brainlet too

[Anonymous No.22766468]

>complains about a language being for brainlets
>translates with GPT, asks it for opinions on German syntax, and reads its gibberish all 100% unironically
jesus christ

[Anonymous No.22766863]

>>22766468
>expecting a techtard to not be a retard
Captcha: DAGAY

[Anonymous No.22767153]

>>22766057
wohl is affirming what the first part couldn’t.
I’d translate the sentence as: Yes and no cannot yield, for they are; our concepts of truth and error, however, can [yield].

[Anonymous No.22767177]

>>22766468
gpt is based as fuck actually, you must have your sperging experience with 3.5
like it gave me an example from the bible when nachsten is actually translated as neighbour, because neither collins nor en.bab.la gave me this particular meaning of the word, and google said it's only translated to neighbour with very low frequency.
it also dismissed my theory of it referring to the near future in the context.

[Anonymous No.22767176]

>>22765408
you trust what it's telling you?

[Anonymous No.22767188]

>>22767153
if wohl wasn't there, you'd omit the however?

[Anonymous No.22767206]

>>22765437
>>22766468
These. There does seem to be more ambiguity in the wohl construction but contextually the first anon’s reading seems right. I feel both you and GPT are making too big a deal of it… There are always slippages of ambiguity in translation (ie. to give a simple reverse example, the ambiguity of the “you” in English is replaced with the specificity of du, Sie and ihr in German) and but it’s not always fraught with philosophical meaning.

[Anonymous No.22767224]

>>22767206
>but the AI told me there's a 71.356% chance of philosophical implication and that's irrefutable

[Anonymous No.22767226]

When you know multiple languages you realize that there are words and/or concepts that don't exist in a different language.

[Anonymous No.22767230]

>>22767226
well but the beauty of language is that you should still be able to describe any term and substitute the word/concept with a description of what it means in the context

[Anonymous No.22767261]

>>22767226
>When you know multiple languages you realize that there are words and/or concepts that don't exist in a different language.
Nah, not true - there are words and concepts that can be very elegantly and neatly expressed in one language, but take a few more words in a more clumsy structure to express using a different language.

[Anonymous No.22767294]

>>22767261
i mean there are 2 scenarios where it's true.
movies and such, where you're limited by space AND texts with meaning that nobody yet truly understands, and the author can't verify whether the translation conveys his meaning of it. if jung was alive and lectured the translation of his red book, it'd undoubtedly be a highly accurate translation, but that's not possible. this would not be an issue if languages only differed syntactically and you had identical words just with different sounds and shapes in different languages, but that's (actually quiet interestingly), not how language works.

[Anonymous No.22767299]

>>22766468
>GPT
A better translator than 99% of humans.

[Anonymous No.22767317]

>>22767299
That’s because 99% of people are monolingual, or have a form of pigdin English as an ESL, it’s like saying Lebron James is the tallest person in Korea

[Anonymous No.22767463]

>>22767188
No, aber is but/however. Without the wohl, then the sentence would be incomplete (like the English, which is just a bad translation imo)

[Anonymous No.22767831]

>>22766057
"Wohl" is essentially the opposite of "not" in english; english does not express that explicitly but rather implicitly. Like, you say "he is not a retard", and to contradict that you don't say "he is (yes) a retard". Rather, you would introduce something like "in fact", which would make "he is, in fact, a retard".
It's not really that german is more "precise", as is commonly said. In my opinion it's just more the fact that it does things differently, owing to the fact that it e.g. prefers to express sentiments through germanic compounds of simpler words rather than using romance loans entirely divorced from the everyday germanic vocabulary as is standard in english. This is basically why Heidegger is considered so hard to translate, because he forms his own expressions on the go through compounds, and english has trouble with that.
What you're getting hung up on, however, is more just a matter of the fact that english is more analytical, linguistically speaking, than (literary) german is, which allows german much greater berth in how it structures sentences. This is not much to be envied at all, it basically just allows them to arrange sentences in different ways, mostly for aesthetic effect, which just makes it more annoying to read for someone whose native language didn't preserve case distinctions.
It's probably a bit annoying for the everyday, uneducated german as well, because spoken german doesn't generally use these features either, and you'd sound like an autist speaking like that, much like someone unironically speaking in shakespearean english.

[Anonymous No.22767890]

>>22767831
Ayo
This nigga right here
He be smart an shiet

[Anonymous No.22768053]

>>22767890
ja danke mein neger

[Anonymous No.22768060]

>>22765408
Lol werent you satisfied with the last thread?
Why do you want this so much?

[Anonymous No.22768445]

>>22767177
>you must have your sperging experience with 3.5
GPTards always defer to this, it's always the other person who is in the wrong because they haven't paid for the newer version of GPT. The exact same argument was used when only GPT 2 was freely accessible, then 3, now it's 3.5. A literal cult.
>Nächsten
That's not 'neighbour' but 'neighbours'. Your genius program can't tell apart singular from plural forms.
>neither collins nor en.bab.la gave me this particular meaning of the word, and google said it's only translated to neighbour with very low frequency
Interesting how you criticise people for not buying the subscription to the bestest version of GPT, but you use random shitty dictionaries (en.bab.la looks like it's halfway machine generated itself) as well as fucking Google, and conclude that's all there is that you can check. In reality, Oxford German dictionary translates it exactly as 'neighbour', so does Langenscheidt (online edition) along with the metaphorical meaning 'fellow man'. But those dictionaries are compiled by humans, eww. God forbid you actually learn some basic German and aid yourself with German dictionaries.
Half of those GPT replies are pretentious gibberish on the level of a philosophy student trying to meet the required word count.

[Anonymous No.22768909]

>>22768060
>>Lol werent you satisfied with the last thread?
what last thread retard-kun?

[Anonymous No.22769035]

>>22768445
>God forbid you actually learn some basic German
gatheting knowledge for the sake of knowledge is the most brainlet thing imaginable. i will learn exactly as much german as completing my task of understanding the red book better (until i've had enough of it) makes me gain. not a single word more.

[Anonymous No.22769061]

>>22769035
Indian compsci student view of the world

[Anonymous No.22769084]

>>22767831
There are several other adequate renderings with English idioms. Getting hung up on the target language's 'inadequacy' is nearly always the defect of the translator.

[Anonymous No.22769106]

>>22769061
one of the key points of being human is exactly that our knowledge is limited. knowledge limits understanding and limits us developing our more important aspects, aspects of our being that are far more complex than the concept of mere knowledge.
chasing knowledge for the sake of chasing knowledge is none better than chasing money for the sake of chasing money. both are just escape from facing your true self and experiencing your lack of knowledge.

in fact, it could be easily possible that the real reason why doing a certain activity a lot of times makes you "develop" knowledge, is that your omniscience, which all of us have in our mind, realizes you have experienced "not knowing", making mistakes enough, and you can now be let on the knowledge experiencing the lack of which is no longer necessary for your development.

learning is about experiencing mistakes, not the repetition of mere statistical patterns.

[Anonymous No.22769219]

>>22769035
>i will learn exactly as much german as completing my task of understanding the red book better
That would be perfectly fine, entirely in line with my recommendation, but you're not doing that at all currently, you're just being fed GPT gibberish.

[Anonymous No.22769414]

>>22769219
you're just racist against AI

[Anonymous No.22769423]

>>22768445
>nooo why are you using AI it has nothing on humans!! h-humans are just as ...g-good! *snifff*

[Anonymous No.22769644]

>>22765437

He's saying the words yes and no have firm meanings but our interpretation of them can foster more or less truth or error.

[Anonymous No.22769768]

>>22769644

[Anonymous No.22769775]

>>22769768
original translation

[Anonymous No.22769807]

>>22769775
original text

[Anonymous No.22769942]

>>22765408
>accurate translation
Keep dreaming