Jul 1, 2014 20:05
9 yrs ago
English term
Step on
English to Spanish
Art/Literary
Art, Arts & Crafts, Painting
In my correspondence and discussions with Virgil I have often compared seeing X to stepping on X. This had led to some unfortunatemisunderstandings, but the comparison was meant to illustrate the difference between (1) and such possible misinterpretations as (2a) and (2b).
Just as one can step on X with or without a knowledge of (or belief about) what one is stepping on, one can see X with or without a knowledge of (or belief about) what one is seeing. Seeing X, just like stepping on X, is compatible with no beliefs about X.
I can't find a way to fit a meaning to "step on" i thought as "ser" or "ponerse en el lugar de".
Just as one can step on X with or without a knowledge of (or belief about) what one is stepping on, one can see X with or without a knowledge of (or belief about) what one is seeing. Seeing X, just like stepping on X, is compatible with no beliefs about X.
I can't find a way to fit a meaning to "step on" i thought as "ser" or "ponerse en el lugar de".
Proposed translations
(Spanish)
| 3 | ponerse en la piel de X / ponerse en el lugar de X / ser X |
JohnMcDove
|
| 4 | entenderlo/comprenderlo |
Susana Jeronimo
|
| 3 | Intuir |
InesV
|
Proposed translations
12 hrs
JohnMcDove
United States
United States
Native in Spanish
Specializes in field
United States
Related KudoZ points
:
96
Selected
ponerse en la piel de X / ponerse en el lugar de X / ser X
Adoptar el papel de, ponerse en el pellejo de, adoptar el rol de...
... he comparado a menudo la acción de ver X a la acción de ponerse en la piel de X.
... he comparado a menudo el ver a X con ponerse en el lugar de X.
“You can be what you can see, you can see what you can be”...
Creo que lo que sugieres de “ser” también es aceptable. O sea, puedes ver X y eso se compara con “ser X”. Aunque creo que resulta más claro usar “ocupar el rol” o “ponerse en el lugar de”.
Si la expresión se repite bastante en tu texto, yo sugeriría algo como “adoptar la esencia de [una estrella, una roca, un gato]”... o “adoptar las características de X”... aunque si me pongo a darle vueltas quizás “ser X” sea lo más sencillo.
Un poco más de contexto tal vez nos orientaría a darte una respuesta más adecuada. Pero si en tu contexto se explica con claridad “ser X” tal vez sea lo mejor.
Como decía Quevedo, “soy un fue, un será y un es cansado”
http://elpuente.blogia.com/2010/072501-es-cansado.php
Suerte.
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
4 hrs
Intuir
Propongo esta interpretación después de leer tus "discusiones".
Supongo que habrás sopesado la correlación con el significado de "tropezar con.." (stepping on)
Saludos.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 hrs (2014-07-02 00:41:57 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
...pues a veces, se intuye algo y se esquiva y otras,
se tropieza con algo y se ve...
Supongo que habrás sopesado la correlación con el significado de "tropezar con.." (stepping on)
Saludos.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 hrs (2014-07-02 00:41:57 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
...pues a veces, se intuye algo y se esquiva y otras,
se tropieza con algo y se ve...
20 hrs
Susana Jeronimo
Argentina
Argentina
Native in Spanish
Specializes in field
Argentina
Related KudoZ points
:
18
entenderlo/comprenderlo
Ver a una persona es distinto a "step on" . significa comprenderla, entenderla - sin prejuicios a favor o en contra.
Discussion
Almost everyone agrees that one can see an X (a star, a rock, a cat)
without believing (and, therefore, without knowing) that it (what is
seen) is an X. I have seen stars that I took to be airplane lights, rocks
that I took to be small animals, and cats that I took to be squirrels.
Disagreement exists over whether some belief is necessary to the seeing, whether one can seen an X without taking it to be anything whatsoever.
This is not a question about whether one can see an X without any
beliefs at all.6 Nor is it a question about whether, in fact, people have
beliefs about the things they see. It is a question about whether their
having a belief about the perceptual object is essential to its being a perceptual object - essential, that is, to its being seen.