Thoughts On Translating English To Portuguese

Reflexões sobre a tradução do inglês para o português

Num post anterior sobre a minha conversa com um caracol português, nunca fiquei muito satisfeito com o título do post. Trocando opiniões com um caracol – Trocando opiniões com um caracol

O motivo foi simplesmente ignorância minha. Obviamente, o caracol conseguia ver-me, e eu via-o. Mas também tivemos uma troca verbal e uma troca de opiniões. Em inglês, a palavra “view” pode descrever ambos, e na foto a mensagem é clara. A tradução portuguesa não refletiu o duplo sentido que pretendia dar a “view”.

Uma conversa recente com a minha namorada mostrou-me o caminho, pelo que, mais uma vez, e apenas pela segunda vez, perguntei ao Chatgpt. Não referi ao Chatgpt que o meu encontro foi com um caracol. Poderia ter levado a algo completamente diferente, estremeço ao pensar.
Em vez disso, coloquei a minha questão ao Chatgpt e recebi uma resposta bem elaborada.
Uma cópia completa do meu diálogo com o “bot” está abaixo, e uma actualização do blogue original será feita o mais breve possível.

[English]
In a previous post regarding my conversation with a Portuguese snail, I was never quite happy with title of the post.Exchanging views with a snail – Trocando opiniões com um caracol

The reason – quite simply my ignorance. Quite obviously, the snail could see me, and I could see him/her. But we also had a verbal exchange, an exchange of opinions. In English the word ‘view’ can describe both, and in the photo the message is clear. The Portuguese ‘translation’, did not reflect my intended double-meaning of ‘view’.

A recent conversation with my girl-friend, pointed the way, so once again, and for only the second time, I asked Chatgpt. I didn’t mention to Chatgpt that my encounter was with a snail. That might have led somewhere else entirely, I shudder to think.
Instead, I put my question to Chatgpt and received a well-assembled answer to my question.
A full copy of my dialog with the ‘bot’ is given below, and an update to the original blog will be done as soon as possible.

Foreword: The following includes both English and Portuguese. So I’m still trying to climb up a greasy pole. There’s an old saying: ‘When in doubt – give up.’ So no attempt will be made now to attempt translating the translations..

Prefácio: O texto que se segue inclui o inglês e o português. Então, ainda estou a tentar subir uma escada escorregadia.
Há um velho ditado: Na dúvida, desista. Portanto, não será feita nenhuma tentativa agora, tente traduzir as traduções.

A minha pergunta para o Chatgpt:

[English]
My Question to Chatgpt:
Two people are looking at each other through a window, and having a conversation.
In English I would describe this as an exchange of views.
First, because they both are looking at a different scene, secondly they are both expressing opinions.
So that the ‘exchange of views’ means two different things. How can I express this in Portuguese?

ChatGPT said:

That’s a clever bilingual play on words!
Let’s unpack it step by step so we can find the closest way to reproduce the double meaning in Portuguese.

In English, “exchange of views” means both:
Literally: they are seeing different “views” (landscapes, scenes).
Figuratively: they are exchanging opinions (views).

In Portuguese:
Figurative sense: (usual expression):
The normal phrase for “exchange of views/opinions” is “troca de opiniões” or “troca de pontos de vista”.

Literal sense: Exchanging views with a snail – Trocando opiniões com um caracol (the scene through the window):
“Ponto de vista” in Portuguese also literally means “point of view” (where you look from) and figuratively “opinion”.
That makes it a very useful bridge.

So, if you say:
“Eles estão numa troca de pontos de vista.”
it carries the same double meaning:

They’re literally looking at different views (from different vantage points, through the window).
They’re metaphorically exchanging opinions.

– Best equivalent pun in Portuguese:
“Uma troca de pontos de vista.”

That way you keep both senses alive, just like in English.

Would you like me to suggest a slightly more poetic or literary phrasing in Portuguese as well
(something you could use in a short story or essay), or are you aiming for a natural everyday expression?

You said:
No, I’m happy with that.

ChatGPT said:

Perfect! Then “troca de pontos de vista” is your best match — natural in Portuguese and keeping the same neat double meaning as in English.

Would you like me to also give you a couple of short example sentences in Portuguese using it, so you can see how it works in context?

You said:
Yes.
ChatGPT said:

Great! Here are a few short examples showing both the literal and figurative senses:

Literal + figurative (like your window scene):

Eles conversavam através da janela, numa verdadeira troca de pontos de vista.
(“They were talking through the window, in a true exchange of views.”)

More everyday, figurative use:

A reunião terminou com uma troca de pontos de vista bastante produtiva.
(“The meeting ended with a very productive exchange of views.”)

Playful, highlighting the double meaning:

Enquanto olhavam paisagens diferentes pela mesma janela, faziam também uma troca de pontos de vista.
(“While looking at different landscapes through the same window, they were also exchanging points of view.”)

1938 Chamberlain & Hitler; 2025 Trump & Putin

Who said ‘History repeats itself’? – Give that man top prize.

Update: 16th August 2025
As is usual with Mr. Trump, lot’s of gas, but nothing gained.
Mr. Trump is consistently big on promises, but pathetically little on delivering them.
As my Pa used to say: ‘His promises are like pie-crust, easily broken.’
I guess that makes him ‘The Pie-crust President’.

The following link leads to a short observation by Anthony Zurcher, he says it all for me.
So much hot air

Later today, Ivo Daalder, former US NATO representative has said ‘No one in Europe today trusts Donald Trump’s US to defend them if they were attacked, and no-one in Ukraine is going to believe that unless and until they are the member of the one organisation that exists explicitly for that purpose.’ (Credit BBC News)

My suspicions regarding ‘Deal-maker Donald’, are that he and Putin are quite happy to carve up the world between them. His gloating tweets about all of the lovely NATO cheques crediting the US, from Europe for arms to help Ukraine are sick-making. Neither he, nor Putin want Ukraine in NATO, Donald because it’s a good deal better (more money for US) than supporting a Ukraine in NATO, and Putin ‘Vlad the Cad’, because he’s a fascist dictator, not unlike Hitler.

Here’s what Vitaly Shevchenko (BBC Anchorage) has to say: Putin is a happy man

In 1938 at Munich, Chamberlain got an international agreement that Hitler should have the Sudetenland in exchange for Germany making no further demands for land in Europe.
Chamberlain said it was ‘Peace for our time’.
Hitler said he had ‘No more territorial demands to make in Europe.’
On 1 October German troops occupied the Sudetenland:
Hitler had got what he wanted without firing a shot. What came after was truly dreadful. Millions died.

Quote from BBC News:
Trump had signalled that Ukraine might have to cede territory in order to end the war, which began with Russia’s full-scale invasion of its neighbour in February 2022.

Trump said at the White House on Friday:
You’re looking at territory that’s been fought over for three and a half years, a lot of Russians have died. A lot of Ukrainians have died.”

“It’s very complicated. We’re going to get some back, we’re going to get some switched.
There will be some swapping of territories, to the betterment of both
.”

The US president did not provide further details of what that proposal would look like.

Well Donald, it may seem complicated to you, but other’s, particularly in Europe, will see the stark reality of you rewarding Putin for his illegal acts of land grab, and the wanton slaughter of Ukrainian citizens.

Comments. Should you wish to comment, please do so, and simply ignore’ the ‘Block’ bullshit.
Please see what I think about WordPress’s idea of what a ‘comment’ is here: What is a comment?

Thanks for Nothing Expatica, and Goodnight

Hi. Did a foray, in my search for a soulmate, as neither myself nor Mr/Mrs Snail, has had much luck lately.
This is a recent attempt with Expatica. Maybe my words are too long for the AI ‘inspector’ to understand?

Click on the image to see it correctly in your browser.
The error message reads:
Error: description not submitted. Please edit your description and resubmit for approval

My ‘description’ reads: “Hi, Despite the vagaries of age, I’m fit and well. Fun-loving and a little naughty.”

My answer to Expatica. “On your bike, and take your AI rubbish with you.

AI, a latter day ‘Kings New Coat’ or God, Lord, Saviour et al.

The current furore over chatGPT’s ‘sycophantic’ answers, is in itself, ridiculous. A game of ‘follow my leader’ by many companies, and apparently a large percentage of the population, that expects sensible and suitable results from them doing ‘naff all’, is not unlike praying to a God, for what they want, instead of simply doing it themselves.

True machine learning is a very useful tool. Using shit scraped from existing websites and hosted in an LLM, ends up as an aggregation, in other words, a bag of shit. My view is simple, users of these ‘bots’ get exactly what they deserve, nothing useful whatsoever.

So-called social-media, facebook, ‘X’ plus a long list of other garbage sites that deliberately post news of this, so folks can ‘have their say’, is a simple scam, to promote discord and argument to sell advertising space, so that the weak-minded that follow, are lead like lemmings, into parting with their hard-earned dosh.
Latterly, Google puts a so-called ‘summary’ from AI, at the top of a search page, adding to the crap I have to ignore in front of me.

I advertise nothing. I believe in no ‘god’, and no hype. Frankly, I care not if folks dislike what I post, the truth apparently, can ‘hurt’. The bywords on my ‘compliments slip’ for many years, has been ‘Belief In Divine Intervention Proved Worthless, So I Did This Stuff Myself.”

SONOFF POW Mains Monitor

I’ll give my verdict first – a complete waste of time and money.
Yes, it’s a while since I purchased this thing and I’ve already referred to ‘Home Assistant’ – which if it was human, would have been dismissed forthwith.
So latterly I installed it. The first ‘hurdle’ is the so-called ‘User Manual’. I had to use a head-band magnifier to read it.
The 2nd ‘hurdle’ the connection diagram IS INCORRECT. Below a photo demonstrating both the almost unreadable text and the INCORRECT CONNECTION DIAGRAM. I’ve also laid an SD Card holder, to give an idea of scale.
Clicking on a photo DOES allow reading of the text due to the High-def pic taken with my old, but loved Agfa DC2030r 12 Megapixel camera.

Following this diagram will result in NO READINGS OTHER THAN ZERO.
Not surprising really, because the CT transformer needs to ENCLOSE ONLY ONE LEG OF THE MAINS SUPPLY, NOT TWO.
My photo below shows the CORRECT CONNECTION – only the ‘L’ leg of the supply going through the CT core.

On the left, is shown only the ‘L’ (Black in Portugal) leg of the mains connection inserted through the CT Transformer.

There are one or two conclusions that can be drawn from this experience.
NO-ONE has attempted to carry out the instructions provided. Primarily, because these are unreadable, and secondly it simply doesn’t work as stated.
This is so typical of the complete shit emanating from China.
Full of promise, complete failure to deliver.
‘Box-shifters’ like Robert Mauser here in Portugal, obviously trust the ‘CE’ given on these products, which are certified as such by the original supplier themselves. To me, ‘CE‘ inevitably signifies COMPLETE EXCREMENT.

And relax..

I can read the display, but I refuse to use the ‘Home Assistant’ crap. Instead I will use the device readings to calibrate my own design, which will be documented later in Tabuascasa

Bot or Not?

Tried to access hotels.com and was presented with this, on which I followed the instruction.
So I rotated the ‘object’ to face the hand:

Got this result after following the instruction:

Now who is the ‘bot’ here? The ‘admonition’ contained the important context of what was being asked for, missing in the question. WTF couldn’t they ask the correct question in the first place?
An irritating bag of shite – obviously run by ‘bots’. (I’m too polite here to use the term I would like to use about the authors of this crud.

Needless to say, hotels.com, didn’t get my custom.

Comments. Should you wish to comment, please do so, and simply ignore’ the ‘Block’ bullshit.
Please see what I think about WordPress’s idea of what a ‘comment is here: What is a comment?

Fatima, Wherefore Art Thou?

Fátima, porque estás?

Tradução para Português
Proudly announced on the website of ‘The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Manila’ on Nov. 10th 2024.

As the worldwide Catholic Church prepares for the 100th anniversary celebration of the apparition to Our Lady of Fatima to The Venerable Sr. Lucia dos Santos in Pontevedra, Spain next year, the World Apostolate of Fatima (WAF) Philippines invites the faithful to take part on the National Fatima Convention on the Centenary of the Five First Saturday Devotion of December 10th 2024.’

Hmmm! Now I always thought, and was taught, that ‘Our Lady of Fatima’ referred to the ‘manifestation’ of the Virgin Mary to three girls in Fatima, Portugal. There is not one mention of that in this article.
‘Smacks’ to me like another copycat ‘apparition’ used to boost tourist income.

Wickipaedia has this: ‘Fátima is a Portuguese city located in Serra de Aire , headquarters of the Parish of Fátima of the Municipality of Ourém , in the former province of Beira Litoral , and in the current region Oeste e Vale do Tejo and NUT3 of Médio Tejo , a parish with 71.29 km² of area [ 1 ] and 13,212 inhabitants ( 2021 census ) [ 2 ] , therefore having a population density of 185.3 inhab./km².

Its worldwide fame is due to the phenomenon of the apparitions of the Virgin Mary reported by three shepherd children from May 13 to October 13 , 1917.

I also have another issue with the article, I quote ‘worldwide Catholic Church prepares for the 100th anniversary celebration of the apparition to Our Lady of Fatima to The Venerable Sr. Lucia dos Santos in Pontevedra, Spain’

Who wrote this rubbish?

For more ‘icing on the cake’, and slapping it on thick, read this: Apparitions at Pontevedra

Português
Orgulhosamente anunciado no site da ‘Arquidiocese Católica Romana de Manila’ a 10 de novembro de 2024

‘Enquanto a Igreja Católica mundial se prepara para a celebração do 100º aniversário da aparição de Nossa Senhora de Fátima à Venerável Irmã Lúcia dos Santos em Pontevedra, Espanha, no próximo ano, o Apostolado Mundial de Fátima (WAF) Filipinas convida os fiéis a participar sobre a Convenção Nacional de Fátima no Centenário dos Cinco Primeiros Sábados Devocionais de 10 de Dezembro de 2024.’

Hmmm! Ora sempre pensei, e ensinaram-me, que “Nossa Senhora de Fátima” se referia à “manifestação” da Virgem Maria a três meninas em Fátima, Portugal. Não há uma menção a isso neste artigo.
‘Parece-me’ como outra ‘aparição’ imitadora usada para aumentar o rendimento turístico.

A Wickipedia tem isto: ‘Fátima é uma cidade portuguesa situada na Serra de Aire, sede da Freguesia de Fátima do Concelho de Ourém, na antiga província da Beira Litoral, e na actual região Oeste e Vale do Tejo e NUT3 do Médio Tejo, freguesia com 71,29 km² de área[1] e 13.212 habitantes (censos 2021)[2], tendo portanto uma densidade populacional de 185,3 hab./km².

A sua fama mundial deve-se ao fenómeno das aparições da Virgem Maria relatadas por três pastorinhos de 13 de Maio a 13 de Outubro de 1917. ‘

Tenho também outro problema com o artigo, cito ‘A Igreja Católica mundial prepara-se para a celebração do 100º aniversário da aparição de Nossa Senhora de Fátima à Venerável Irmã Lúcia dos Santos em Pontevedra, Espanha’

Quem escreveu este lixo?

Para mais ‘cereja no topo do bolo’, e para dar um tapa na espessura, leia isto:Aparições em Pontevedra

National Fatima Convention to be held in Quezon City

If you wish to comment, simply ignore the shit about ‘blocks’ foisted on each post by wordpress, and simply type in your comment.

Se quiser comentar, simplesmente ignore a merda dos ‘bloqueios’ imposta em cada post pelo wordpress, e simplesmente digite o seu comentário.

Accidents and Incidents

‘Acidentes’ e Incidentes.

Porquê a referência acentuada aos acidentes? Porque, como sabemos pelos velhos e sábios pais que nos ensinaram, e pelos seus pais, e pelos pais antes deles – “os acidentes quase nunca acontecem”.

Existe geralmente alguém, ou mais provavelmente o comportamento separado, mas combinado, de alguém e de outros, que, à primeira vista, não são partes no “acidente”, todos “contribuem” para o “acidente”.

Fale com um polícia de trânsito – não há “acidentes” de trânsito, certamente não no Reino Unido, alguém, talvez mais, desempenhou um papel no incidente. Assim sendo, o que antes era a abreviatura ‘RTA’, agora RTI – Incidente de Trânsito Rodoviário. E acredito com razão.

A lógica “difusa” pode ser aplicada, perante uma medida de responsabilidade a todos os envolvidos, quer estejam presentes ou não.

Dê uma vista de olhos nesta fotografia. o que acha?

[English]
‘Accidents’ and Incidents.

Why the accented reference to accidents? Because as we know from the wise old parents that taught us, and from their parents, and parents before them – ‘accidents hardly ever happen’.

There is usually someone, or more likely the separate, but combined behavior of someone and others, who, at first glance are not party to the ‘accident’, all ‘contribute’ to the ‘accident’.

Talk to a traffic cop – there are no road traffic ‘accidents’, certainly not in the UK, someone, maybe more, have played a role in the incident. Therefore, what used to be the shorthand ‘RTA’, is now an RTI – Road Traffic Incident. And I believe rightly so.

‘Fuzzy’ logic can be applied, given a measure of responsibilty to all concerned, whether they be present or not.

Take a look at this photograph. what do you think?
Click on photo to enlarge it.
Clique na foto para a ampliar.

Eu tenho um cenário para ti. Um idoso está a falar com um amigo por cima de uma vedação. A conversa termina e o tipo volta para a estrada, mesmo no caminho de um camião carregado, não muito diferente do acima. O condutor pisa forte no travão e para o veículo antes de atingir o idoso.

A energia cinética armazenada na pilha mal protegida de blocos empilhados demasiado alto atrás dele faz com que a pega fraca, aplicada incorretamente, se rompa e os blocos sejam catapultados para a frente, atingindo o senhor idoso. Morre mais tarde no hospital.

Há algum tempo, um familiar meu próximo veio passar uma curta estadia. Testemunhou mais do que um incidente com o exemplo do comportamento do “velho cavalheiro” e, pior, de pessoas muito mais jovens, a fazerem exatamente a mesma coisa. Ele observou que isto cheirava a “solipsismo”. [procure!]
Uma perspectiva interessante, pensei.

Tenho aqui as minhas próprias opiniões sobre quem é o culpado, e também o “grau” da sua respectiva culpabilidade.
Diga-me o que pensa.

Esteja ciente de que existe a tentação de sugerir que a “teoria da probabilidade” poderia ser utilizada para distribuir graus de culpa. Isto seria errado, pois na verdade todos os “acidentes” têm “cenários” diferentes.
Lógica difusa(Wikipedia)

[English]
I have a scenario for you. An elderly guy is talking over a fence to a friend. Their conversation ends, and the guy steps back onto the road, right into the path of a loaded truck, not unlike that above. The driver steps hard on his brake, and brings his vehicle to a stop before hitting the elderly gentleman.

Kinetic energy stored in the badly-secured stack of blocks piled too high behind him, result in the feeble strap, incorrectly applied, snapping, and blocks catapulting forward, hitting the elderly gent. He dies later in hospital.

Some considerable time ago, a close relative of mine came for a short stay. He witnessed more than one incident of the example of the ‘old’ gent’s behaviour, and worse, by folks much younger, doing exactly the same thing. He had remarked that it smacked of ‘solipsism’. [look it up!]
An interesting perspective, I thought.

I have my own opinions about who is being culpable here, and also the ‘degree’ of their respective culpability.
Tell me what you think.

Be aware that there is a temptation to imply that ‘probability theory’ could be used to apportion degrees of guilt. This would be wrong, as in fact all ‘accidents’ have different ‘scenarios’.
Fuzzy Logic (Wikipedia)