Help with Identification please

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

This discussion is developing into the type of thing that interests me. Thank you gentlemen for your input.

Jean, you have given us a translation that Henk, who is apparently a native speaker of Dutch, has told us is a good translation:-

Only for correctness, not Jean has translated the text, it have been my humble self who have done it.

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you Detlef, and my apologies.

This error has been corrected.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Thank you Detlef, and my apologies.

This error has been corrected.

Nothing to apologize!

BTW, I have read the original german text posted by guwaya again and again and think to be sure that Groneman write about three different hilt/ukiran forms:

1. ukiran in form of human or animal shape
2. ukiran in form of corn cobs or flowers (called gana)
3. ukiran from tree roots resemble the human shape

since he has done a enumeration following the german grammar in my humble opinion. So I am with Henk who read the netherlands text in the same manner.

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, as I have already said, I know nothing of German, thus I can only understand what is written in English.

If you tell us that in German what has been written is difficult to be be certain of, if Guwaya recognises that it can be read in a couple of different ways, if Detlef needs to read the same text several times to come to a clear understanding, and if David can find an alternative understanding in the English translation, with which I agree, I really do think that our attempts to clarify this matter have gone well beyond our abilities. I consider that this has become a job for a certified translator, not a linguist, that is to my understanding a separate field again, but a translator, preferably one who specialises in legal translations.

Hopefully when I get complete feedback from Tim Rogers and through him from Peter Richardus, we may have something that we can accept without confusion.

Hopefully.

Edit

It has occurred to me that my "--- not a linguist---" above could be misunderstood as a rejection.

Its not.

I feel that at this point any expert opinion must carry more weight than our opinions, however in accordance with my understanding, and my understanding could be in error, a linguist is one who studies one or more languages and can specialise in a particular aspect of language, whereas a translator is one who reproduces in a language other than the original, the intent of the writer in the original language.

This is why I keep harping on the "certified translator" theme.

Kai, if you have access to relevant linguists, I am certain that we would welcome their opinions.