livrer des banalités
English translation: spoke only platitudes
| GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 12:29 Sep 9, 2009 |
| French to English translations [PRO] Art/Literary - Esoteric practices / Automatic Writing | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|  Selected response from: Lianne Wilson United Kingdom Local time: 10:33 | ||||||
Grading comment
| |||||||
| Summary of answers provided | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 +3 | spoke only platitudes |
| ||
| 3 | told us nothing we hadn't heard before |
|
Answers
6 mins confidence: 
told us nothing we hadn't heard before Explanation: He didn't give his name and told us nothing we hadn't heard before. "Livrer" here really just means "to say" (you can "livrer une conclusion" for example). A more direct way would be "spout banalities" although "spout" is maybe a tad pejorative. "Made trite remarks" - ideas as they come to me! |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
| Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) | |||
51 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +3
peer agreement (net): +3spoke only platitudes Explanation: He didn't give his name and spoke only platitudes. Possibly a bit literary for some people's taste, but I think it works, the esoteric does sometimes seem to favour that kind of style. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2 hrs (2009-09-09 15:24:15 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Personally I would say that 'he' is probably okay even if the 'personnage' is not a normal man, but it would be worth checking with the client, if that's possible. If you prefer keeping it vague you could always try something like:"A presence manifested/appeared through these writings who gave no name and who spoke only in platitudes...etc." -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs (2009-09-09 15:58:39 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Absolutely, if that's what you feel is best. I myself would be happy to use 'who' with 'beings' that aren't human (certainly people write about God, spirits, etc. using 'who'), but you may certainly use 'that' if you prefer. Incidently, in case you're interested it is discussed a little here: http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/who-versus-that.aspx Example sentence(s):
Reference: http://primaryjourney.wordpress.com/2008/01/04/caveats/ |
| ||
Grading comment
| |||
Notes to answerer
| |||