This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
"The subtitle in question, of which the phrase at issue in this discussion is only one part, comes on at 03:52 and disappears at 04:00." It is not a question of when the exact words matching one fragment of the subtitle are uttered.
That's all I have to say on this, because I find the feeling of being sucked into an endless, petty back-and-forth rather distasteful - even if that was not your intention.
In linguistics, meaning is what the hell is going on source or sender expresses, communicates, or conveys in their message to the observer or receiver, and what the receiver infers from the current context.
Yes, "we need to be sure" there is room and time for the subtitles. We are helped by the fact that the video has already been subtitled in Russian, so we already know approximately what size subtitle will fit the time available for each piece. The subtitle in question, of which the phrase at issue in this discussion is only one part, comes on at 03:52 and disappears at 04:00. That's 9 seconds. Obviously, one does not change the subtitle every 3.5 seconds, or the poor viewer would get a headache like from a strobe light. One fits the translation of a reasonable length of phrase or number of phrases into one subtitle, displayed for an amount of time in which a viewer can grasp it. For a very short subtitle, that could be 4 or 5 seconds. In this case, it's easy to combine a few pieces of the dialogue into a 9- or 10-second subtitle, as the Russian subtitlers did. In any event, even if we look only at the half-phrase at issue in this question: "Это не по-человечески" is 21 characters including spaces, and "It's way out of line" is 20, so it is, indeed, already "shorter," and I don't think much would be gained by shortening it to 11 characters and shifting the meaning.
Rachel, we are expressing ideas rather than arguing; we have 3.5 sec shot,not 9, I think; we need to be sure there's sufficient time to read the translated phrases, that's why shorter version is always better providing it still renders the idea; the number of characters in Russian does not matter as there will be no Russian subtitles as far as I understand;
I can't believe you are seriously arguing about this, but the 46 characters including spaces to which I referred are these: "Это не по-человечески, вот чем они занимаются." That is the full line in the Russian subtitle, part of which the asker has requested help with translating into English. And here is my suggestion for that same entire line, which is 41 characters including spaces: "It’s way out of line, what they’re doing." Both of them fit fine into the allotted space/time in the video. In the Russian version, the subtitle of which this statement is a part is displayed for 9 seconds, which is plenty of time for a subtitle.
Unhuman Culture By Daniel Cottom Publication Year: 2011 It is widely acknowledged that the unhuman plays a significant role in the definition of humanity in contemporary thought. http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9780812201697
"Unhuman" is a word in English, but doesn't fit in a context like this. The normal opposite of "human" is "inhuman", which denotes qualities, or types of behavior, not typical of humans. But, it's also not colloquial enough for this context, and, anyway, "по-человечески" has its own sense, as several of the answerers have pointed out (not nice, etc.). As for "unhuman", it's far stronger, as well as being used, on the relatively rare occasions when it is used, mostly in passages concerning psychology, theology, ontology: https://www.google.com/search?q=unhuman&btnG=Search Books&tb...
It doesn't matter what this or that dictionary says (malo li chto na saraye napisano - a tam drova). The real litmus test is usage. To make sure I am not making this up, I googled the word. The only kind of usage that popped up is in combinations like UN Human... <whatever>... (which kind of makes one wonder). The rest of them are entries from dictionaries (i.e. writing on those sarai's) - which is no proof of usage at all. Wake up, folks - I mean, those of you who think this is indeed a legitimate word.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
2 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +6
This is (utterly) unhuman
Explanation: *
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 15 мин (2015-05-16 20:30:29 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
'Utterly' - в 'скобках'. На случай, если Вы захотите 'усилить' сказанное.
Oleg Lozinskiy Russian Federation Local time: 18:37 Native speaker of: Russian PRO pts in category: 36