en_tn/ecc/02/11.md

35 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
# all the deeds that my hands had accomplished
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
Here the author refers to himself by his "hands." AT: "all that I had accomplished" (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-synecdoche]])
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
# vapor ... an attempt to shepherd the wind
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
These two phrases are both metaphors that emphasize the idea of things being useless and futile. (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-parallelism]])
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
# vapor
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
"mist." The author speaks of useless and meaningless things as if they were "vapor." See how you translated this in [Ecclesiastes 1:14](../01/12.md). AT: "as useless as vapor" or "meaningless" (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-metaphor]])
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
# an attempt to shepherd the wind
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
The author says that everything that people do is as useless as if they were trying to control the wind. See how you translated this in [Ecclesiastes 1:14](../01/12.md). AT: "are as useless as trying to control the wind" (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-metaphor]])
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
# There was no profit under the sun in it
2017-06-21 20:47:54 +00:00
2017-06-21 20:50:04 +00:00
"But it had no profit under the sun"
# under the sun
This refers to things that are done on earth. See how you translated this in [Ecclesiastes 1:3](../01/01.md). AT: "on the earth" (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-idiom]])
# madness and folly
The words "madness" and "folly" have similar meanings and refer to foolish thinking and behavior, respectively. See how you translated this in [Ecclesiastes 1:17](../01/16.md). (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-doublet]])
# For what can the next king do who comes after the king, which has not already been done?
The author uses this rhetorical question to emphasize his point that the next king will not be able to do anything more valuable that what he had already done. This question can be written as a statement. AT: "For the next king who comes after the king can do nothing that a king before him has not already done." (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-rquestion]])
# the next king ... who comes after the king
"the king ... who succeeds the current king" or "the next king ... who comes after me"