Disputatio:Enter the Dragon

Quid significat nomen pelliculae?[fontem recensere]

A native speaker of English may not hear the grammar the way it's now implied:

Enter the Dragon (scilicet "draconem intra")

but instead might hear it this way:

Enter the Dragon (scilicet "Draco intrat")

or perhaps, to retain in Latin the reversal of the English syntax:

Enter the Dragon (scilicet "Intrat draco")

The phrase enter the dragon evokes the pattern seen in stage directions regarding entrances & exits, and so it could be said to mean, in untechnical English, 'the dragon enters' or 'let the dragon enter' (in which case intret might be more accurate). Another example of this syntax is found in the song "Enter Sandman," meaning 'the sandman enters' or 'let the sandman enter', most definitely not 'go inside the sandman'. It's said that one of Bruce Lee's real-life nicknames was Dragon, and that could be relevant here. ¶ This syntax sounds completely different from that of the name of the film Enter the Void, which may indeed mean 'go into the void'. ¶ So in Enter the Dragon and Enter the Void we may have phrases that look as if they express the same underlying grammatical relations but actually don't. If English did more conjugating and declining, the difference would be clear! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:29, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Try explaining to Google Translate that difference between Enter the Dragon and Enter the Void ... not forgetting that, as Jonah would understand, Enter the Whale might work either way. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:16, 25 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good points! The subjunctive (or 3rd person imperative) would be quite logical, but modern Latin dramatic texts seem to use the indicative. See page 25 of this text for the phrase "Redit Caesar." So the correct translation is (as you offer above) "Intrat draco". I will make the change.

Oddly enough, if the opposite move was being indicated, there would be no need even to translate the verb, because English borrows the Latin word in that case: "Exit pursued by a bear;" "Exeunt." Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:39, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Num post disputationem tam longam de nomine Anglico latine interpretando certitudinem consecuti sumus? Nonne simplicius est interpretationi Latinae vale dicere? Aliquid ironici esse videtur in "scilicet" illo, quod rem luce clariorem esse prae se fert. Neander (disputatio) 17:48, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nonne utile esse censes titulum lingua quadam vernaculari compositum verbis Latinis explicare? Id Donatello facere conatus est, sed, linguam Anglicam haud satis intelligens, erravit. O rem fortunatam! Donatello enim ipso facto monstravit hunc titulum difficile esse intellectu. Versionem eius iam in pagina ipsa correxi.

Fortasse sententiam tuam male intellegi, mi Neander? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:25, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another question: is the original title English or Chinese? Someone more knowledgable may correct me, but 龍爭虎鬥 seems to mean "dragon fight, tiger fight" or maybe "the dragon fights, the tiger struggles," using two different words for "fight." Lesgles (disputatio) 19:34, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! If the original title is in Chinese the above is indeed entirely irrelevant :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:49, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[Haec scripsi antequam bonam admonitionem Lesglesianam vidi.] Interpretationes Latinae, si utilitatem sibi arrogant, fide dignae esse debent. Si vero "intrat draco" cum sensu Anglico congruit, bene est. Interdum tamen nomina pellicularum (librorum, melodiarum, etc.) ambigua sunt, et quidem magis in forma (vel indiciis "intertextualibus") quam in re posita. De hac pellicula nescio, sed quaerere decet, cur ceterae linguae sua quaeque ratione nomen converterint nec nomen Anglicum (quod saepe ultima norma esse videtur) conservaverint. ¶ De conversionibus Latinis in genere: Interdum perquam pueriles sunt. Stipulam Guns 'n' Roses vel "Arma e' Rosae" [sic!] legenti cum aliae tum hae conversiones discorum praebentur: "The Spaghetti Incident?" (Farinae longorum tenuumque fasciarum casus); "Chinese Democracy" (Rei Publicae Popularis Sinarum Populi Imperium). Sat sapienti. Neander (disputatio) 08:02, 25 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ego hic nuper adventus (anno 2006), eadem ratione quam tu proponis adducta, usum titulorum Latinorum, tam librorum quam pellicularum, a nobis conversorum in nomina paginarum statim interdicere volui. Vici. Scio enim (interpres interdum merui) conversionem talium titulorum opus esse dubium et difficile, tironibus haud temptandum. Nobis autem explicationem verborum non Latinorum principalium in textu paginarum necesse est. Scriptor omnis encyclopaedicus id facere debet si potest. Casus Donatelli rursus cito (da veniam, mi Donatello!) Ille multilinguis, Anglice iam bene loquens, sensum huius tituli non intellegit. In textu paginarum, si ambiguitatem sentimus, verbis sufficientibus exponere licet. Qui dicit "id vertere non possum" sive "id verbis puerilibus tantum vertere possum" fortasse recte dicit. Qui dicit "id nemo vertere potest" pessimista se proclamat! Licet me Whorfianum esse, nihilominus optimista sum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:08, 25 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

De titulis pellicularum et librorum latine reddendis tibi concedo. At quid de melodiarum titulis censes? Interdum enim tam arcani sunt, ut ne Anglophonis quidem luceant (ut credo ...). De Whorfianismo, cuius genera duo sunt — W. absolutus et W. modicus — tibi facile assentior. Nam si veritas in Whorfianismo absoluto ("nemo potest") esset, aliorum vitae rationem nullo modo intellegeremus. Neander (disputatio) 11:51, 25 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Haud dissentimus! Discipulus modicus Beniamini Whorf, ex operibus eius rationem didici cur translatio difficilis sit. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:16, 25 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Iacobus, It should be Intret Draco. However the full name would be Licet intret draco which is translated from what the complete English name would be "Let the dragon enter". --Jondel (disputatio) 12:05, 25 Maii 2016 (UTC)[reply]