Re: English/German terminology, git.git's de.po, and pro-git

From: Bernhard R. Link <brl+git@mail.brlink.eu>
Date: May 23, 2013, 18:16 UTC
Message-ID: <20130523181615.GB3270@client.brlink.eu>
In-Reply-To: <CAN0XMOK4oniunZz5KpC1x=JrY4yH4HnecxMSCyPF+kEyYRRjTw@mail.gmail.com>

* Ralf Thielow <ralf.thielow@gmail.com> [130522 17:17]:

Show 13 quoted lines

> >>     remote branch          = Remote-Branch
> >>     remote-tracking branch = Remote-Tracking-Branch
> >>     upstream branch        = Upstream-Branch
> >
> > Yes. What's the main reason for using "Branch" in the German text? Consistency
> > with the commands, or assumed familiarity of the term within the target
> > audience? "Zweig" is available.
> >
> 
> I think it's at the same level as "Commit" and a well known SCM-term. Users
> (even beginners) who know "Commit" and "Tag" do also know "Branch". And
> I think it sounds better in combination with "Remote-", "Remote-Tracking-" and
> "Upstream-" which are english words.

Additionally "Zweig" might be a bit misleading. A branch is not part of the "tree"s. It is called branch because in other VCSes the commits build a tree and a any commit outside of the main branch of that tree is part of exactly one different branch (so the head of that branch and the branch are synonymns). With git the commits are no longer a tree, so a git-branch is no branch and does not describe the whole branch of the tree of commits but is just a names pointer into the graph of commits. As it lost all meanings of the original word "branch", translating it with a translation of the original English word might more confusion than helping anyone.

Show 7 quoted lines

> (same for push). In other messages, the translation is in the same message
> as the command itself. I think it's OK when we just use "fetch" and "push"
> when the command is meant (as it's done for "pull", e.g. in error messages),
> and the translation when the messages tell what the command is doing (e.g. help
> messages). So it would depends on the message whether we translate the word
> or not. This would apply to other terms that are commands, too, like
> "clean" or "revert".

I'd not call it "OK". It's the only sane possibility. If you speak about the magic keyword you have to give the command line, you won't translate it, of course[1]. (The obvious interesting case is where the English text plays with the command name having a meaning as word itself. Here the translation will have to diverge to differentiate between both (or sacrifice one of them, where it is not important)).

[1] Unlike you want to introduce a translated command line interface, like "Depp anfordere Herkunft Original" instead of "git fetch origin master"

Show 15 quoted lines

> >>     diff               = Differenz
> >>     delta              = Differenz (or Delta)
> >>     patch              = Patch
> >>     apply              = anwenden
> >>     diffstat           = (leave it as it is)
> >>     hunk               = Bereich
> >
> > IMHO "Kontext" is better if you use a German word. Technically the context is
> > something else, but in a German text IMHO it fits nicer when explaining to the
> > user where he/she can select the n-th hunk.
> >
>
> Not sure if German users would know what "hunk" means, in case we
> leave it untranslated. And I'm not sure if I would understand "Kontext".
> I tend to leave it untranslated.

Anyone found a German translation of the Patch manpage? Translating the English word-play here, I'd suggest "Block" or "Patch-Block".

Show 5 quoted lines

> >>     paths          = Pfade
> >>
> >>     symbolic link = symbolische Verknüfung
> >>     path = Pfad
> >>     link = Verknüpfung

In the filesystem a "Link" is a "Verweis" in Unix, not a "Verknüpfung" (that are usually the pseudo-links Windows supports).

        Bernhard R. Link