<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can someone tell me if this Chinese to English translation is accurate?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://translationonlineguide.com/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-chinese-to-english-translation-is-accurate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://translationonlineguide.com/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-chinese-to-english-translation-is-accurate/</link>
	<description>Professional Translation and Free Translator For All Your Translation Needs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:17:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: extremely grooved</title>
		<link>http://translationonlineguide.com/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-chinese-to-english-translation-is-accurate/comment-page-1/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>extremely grooved</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:05:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://translationonlineguide.com/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-chinese-to-english-translation-is-accurate/#comment-44</guid>
		<description>??!?????(?)??,??????????????????????.  N? hao! Wo xiang hé n? zuo (Wei) Peng you, bu zh? dao n? bu ke ke y? jie shou wo de q?ng Qiu? Tong Yi de hua q?ng hé wo .......( trasy Sentence off) Nie wiem dlaczego, to przek?ada si? na pe?ne zdanie.  &quot;Hello! Chcia?bym by? twoim przyjacielem, mo?na zaakceptowa?? Je?li si? zgadzasz, napisz do mnie, okay?&quot; ?- zuo - &quot;nie&quot; (mo?e oznacza? &quot;by?&quot; w tym kontek?cie) ?- Wei - &quot;staj? si?&quot; (nie jest konieczne w tym kontek?cie)  Wi?c??- zuo Wei - to &quot;nie sta?&quot;, &quot;sta? si?&quot; lub ewentualnie &quot;robi?&quot; (Jego podwójne czasownik struktur?, która nie jest konieczna). Zauwa?, ?e wy?ej wskaza?em, jak?- (Wei) powinien / mo?e by? usuni?ty.  &quot;?????,????,??????.????????&quot;.  N? fei hao Chang was dan shì Bao Qian, wo bu liao jie Zhongwen. Wo zh? huì du hé jiang Ying Yu.   &quot;Jeste? bardzo dobry, ale sorry, I don&#039;t understand chi?ski. Czytam i mówi? tylko w j?zyku angielskim.   Oczywi?cie, nie s? to s?owa t?umaczenia s?ownego, tak jak jest to mo?liwe jedynie w krótkich zda?. Jednak?e przeka?nik dok?adnie zamierzony sens.  Mandarin kiedy? napisane z tradycyjnej postaci. Przej?cie od tradycyjnych do uproszczonego na kontynencie mia?a miejsce gdzie? w drugiej po?owie po?owy ubieg?ego wieku (1930 - 1940). Zrobi?em odsy?aniu ?e wysuwa argument, kiedy to si? zacz??o i jak d?ugo trwa?o.  Jednak?e tradycyjne znaki s? norm? w Tajwanie, Hong Kongu, w wielu chi?skich spo?eczno?ci za granic? (zachowane ze wzgl?du na brak &quot;wp?yw&quot;). Tradycyjny i uproszczony s? wykorzystywane zarówno w Cantonese; jej tylko regionalnych wniosku. Mieszkam w Guang Dong (Kanton), a wi?kszo?? Cantonese G?o?niki wykorzystuj? uproszczone.  Odpowiednim miejscem do sosnowal]???? ???? (?) ?????????????????????????.

N? ha?o! Wo? xia?ng hé n? zuo? (wéi) péng yo?u, bu? zh? da?o n? ke? bu? ke? y? jie? sho?u wo? de q?ng qiu?? To?ng yì de hua? q?ng hé wo.......(Sentence trails off) I don&#039;t know why, it translates to a complete sentence.

&quot;Hello! I would like to become your friend, can you accept this? If you agree, please contact me, okay?&quot;

? - zuo? - &quot;do&quot; (can mean &quot;become&quot; in this context)
? - wéi - &quot;become&quot; (it is not necessary in this context)
So, ?? - zuo? wéi - is &quot;do become&quot;, &quot;become become&quot; or possibly, &quot;do do&quot; (Its a double verb structure that is not necessary). Note that above, I indicated how ? - (wéi) should/could be deleted.


&quot;?????, ????, ???????????????.&quot;

N? fe?i cha?ng yo?u ha?o ,da?n shì ba?o qia?n,wo? bu? lia?o jie? Zho?ngwén. Wo? zh? huì du? hé jia?ng Y?ng yu? . 

 &quot;You are very kind, but sorry, I don&#039;t understand Chinese. I read and speak English only.&quot;
 

Obviously, these are not word for word translations, as this is only possible in short sentences. However, they relay the exact meaning intended.

Mandarin used to be written with traditional characters. The transition from traditional to simplified on the mainland took place sometime in the later part of the middle of the last century (1930&#039;s - 1940&#039;s). I have done cross-referencing that puts forth argument as of when it began and how long it took. 

However, traditional characters are the norm in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and in many Chinese communities abroad (preserved due to the absence of &quot;influence&quot;). Traditional and simplified are both used in Cantonese; its only a regional application. I live in Guang Dong (Canton), and most Cantonese speakers use simplified.

A good site for Pinyin tones]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>??!?????(?)??,??????????????????????.  N? hao! Wo xiang hé n? zuo (Wei) Peng you, bu zh? dao n? bu ke ke y? jie shou wo de q?ng Qiu? Tong Yi de hua q?ng hé wo &#8230;&#8230;.( trasy Sentence off) Nie wiem dlaczego, to przek?ada si? na pe?ne zdanie.  &quot;Hello! Chcia?bym by? twoim przyjacielem, mo?na zaakceptowa?? Je?li si? zgadzasz, napisz do mnie, okay?&quot; ?- zuo &#8211; &quot;nie&quot; (mo?e oznacza? &quot;by?&quot; w tym kontek?cie) ?- Wei &#8211; &quot;staj? si?&quot; (nie jest konieczne w tym kontek?cie)  Wi?c??- zuo Wei &#8211; to &quot;nie sta?&quot;, &quot;sta? si?&quot; lub ewentualnie &quot;robi?&quot; (Jego podwójne czasownik struktur?, która nie jest konieczna). Zauwa?, ?e wy?ej wskaza?em, jak?- (Wei) powinien / mo?e by? usuni?ty.  &quot;?????,????,??????.????????&quot;.  N? fei hao Chang was dan shì Bao Qian, wo bu liao jie Zhongwen. Wo zh? huì du hé jiang Ying Yu.   &quot;Jeste? bardzo dobry, ale sorry, I don&#39;t understand chi?ski. Czytam i mówi? tylko w j?zyku angielskim.   Oczywi?cie, nie s? to s?owa t?umaczenia s?ownego, tak jak jest to mo?liwe jedynie w krótkich zda?. Jednak?e przeka?nik dok?adnie zamierzony sens.  Mandarin kiedy? napisane z tradycyjnej postaci. Przej?cie od tradycyjnych do uproszczonego na kontynencie mia?a miejsce gdzie? w drugiej po?owie po?owy ubieg?ego wieku (1930 &#8211; 1940). Zrobi?em odsy?aniu ?e wysuwa argument, kiedy to si? zacz??o i jak d?ugo trwa?o.  Jednak?e tradycyjne znaki s? norm? w Tajwanie, Hong Kongu, w wielu chi?skich spo?eczno?ci za granic? (zachowane ze wzgl?du na brak &quot;wp?yw&quot;). Tradycyjny i uproszczony s? wykorzystywane zarówno w Cantonese; jej tylko regionalnych wniosku. Mieszkam w Guang Dong (Kanton), a wi?kszo?? Cantonese G?o?niki wykorzystuj? uproszczone.  Odpowiednim miejscem do sosnowal]???? ???? (?) ?????????????????????????.</p>
<p>N? ha?o! Wo? xia?ng hé n? zuo? (wéi) péng yo?u, bu? zh? da?o n? ke? bu? ke? y? jie? sho?u wo? de q?ng qiu?? To?ng yì de hua? q?ng hé wo&#8230;&#8230;.(Sentence trails off) I don&#8217;t know why, it translates to a complete sentence.</p>
<p>&#8220;Hello! I would like to become your friend, can you accept this? If you agree, please contact me, okay?&#8221;</p>
<p>? &#8211; zuo? &#8211; &#8220;do&#8221; (can mean &#8220;become&#8221; in this context)<br />
? &#8211; wéi &#8211; &#8220;become&#8221; (it is not necessary in this context)<br />
So, ?? &#8211; zuo? wéi &#8211; is &#8220;do become&#8221;, &#8220;become become&#8221; or possibly, &#8220;do do&#8221; (Its a double verb structure that is not necessary). Note that above, I indicated how ? &#8211; (wéi) should/could be deleted.</p>
<p>&#8220;?????, ????, ???????????????.&#8221;</p>
<p>N? fe?i cha?ng yo?u ha?o ,da?n shì ba?o qia?n,wo? bu? lia?o jie? Zho?ngwén. Wo? zh? huì du? hé jia?ng Y?ng yu? . </p>
<p> &#8220;You are very kind, but sorry, I don&#8217;t understand Chinese. I read and speak English only.&#8221;</p>
<p>Obviously, these are not word for word translations, as this is only possible in short sentences. However, they relay the exact meaning intended.</p>
<p>Mandarin used to be written with traditional characters. The transition from traditional to simplified on the mainland took place sometime in the later part of the middle of the last century (1930&#8217;s &#8211; 1940&#8217;s). I have done cross-referencing that puts forth argument as of when it began and how long it took. </p>
<p>However, traditional characters are the norm in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and in many Chinese communities abroad (preserved due to the absence of &#8220;influence&#8221;). Traditional and simplified are both used in Cantonese; its only a regional application. I live in Guang Dong (Canton), and most Cantonese speakers use simplified.</p>
<p>A good site for Pinyin tones]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bibsian</title>
		<link>http://translationonlineguide.com/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-chinese-to-english-translation-is-accurate/comment-page-1/#comment-43</link>
		<dc:creator>bibsian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:27:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://translationonlineguide.com/can-someone-tell-me-if-this-chinese-to-english-translation-is-accurate/#comment-43</guid>
		<description>for the first bit this would be better

hello , i consider you a friend , and i wish to know if you can understand my request to contact you


i am sorry but i dont know about the chinese bit

hope the first bit helps

all the best
Ian</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>for the first bit this would be better</p>
<p>hello , i consider you a friend , and i wish to know if you can understand my request to contact you</p>
<p>i am sorry but i dont know about the chinese bit</p>
<p>hope the first bit helps</p>
<p>all the best<br />
Ian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
