Talk:Ballade des dames du temps jadis

estan
estan = pond, not lake, is that not so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.123.239.160 (talk) 01:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Very true - I overlooked that there is a difference between a lake and a pond. Fixed.--Thomas Arelatensis (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

sage
sage = wise, not the charitable "chaste". Dadofsam (talk) 21:19, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * True. I reverted this unwarranted edit (though I can see where the confusion comes from).Thomas Arelatensis (talk) 02:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Not sure about Middle French, but in Modern French sage does not mean wise, it means behaving, on good behavior. The standard way to dress down an ill-mannered child, is Sois sage! (Behave!) Maybe chaste is in fact correct in context, or was an earlier meaning for the word. Mathglot (talk) 08:37, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Upon further investigation, wise seems closer. According to p. 786 of Philibert Monet's 1636 bilingual (Fr-Latin) dictionary Invantaire des deus langues, francoise et latine Sage means Sapiens [wise], prudens, Cautus [careful], Circumspectus, Consideratus -a -um.  That's about 180 years after Villon's poem, but the closest I could find.


 * The famous 19th c. translation by Rossetti has learned and a more modern one has brilliant.


 * But why are editors supplying a home-brew translation, isn't that WP:OR? We should either include the full text of an out-of-copyright translation, such as Rossetti's, or quote excerpts from a more modern one, along with links to the full translation in the External Links section. Mathglot (talk) 09:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Although wise dominates, there is also support for the sense "chaste, modest" for sage when referring to a woman in Dictionnaire du Moyen Français (1330-1500) . Mathglot (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Snows of yesteryear and coded D-Day warning
I removed the following unreferenced paragraph, which was the totality of the History section in the article: World War II During World War II, a regular feature of English radio was the broadcast of coded messages to operatives in the field. By far the most famous of such messages was the line "where are the snows of yesteryear?". This was broadcast shortly before the D-Day landing to inform the French Resistance that the invasion was imminent. This section was originally [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ballade_des_dames_du_temps_jadis&diff=561810238&oldid=546047501 added] on 27 June 2013 by User:Frisbieinstein (contribs).

I spent some time searching in both English and French for evidence of this, and came up with nada. The French article says nothing about it. This doesn't mean it's necessarily false; it may well be a footnote in some book somewhere that never made it to the internet, but if that's the case, it needs to have a source, and a reference. Until then, it's unsubstantiated, and should not be included. Mathglot (talk) 08:54, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Found the reference. The coded message broadcast by Radio Londres was a single line from a Poem by Verlaine, Chanson d'automne Mathglot (talk) 10:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC) (expanded reference: Mathglot (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC))

"Ballad" and "ballade"
The OED says under "ballad", "In early use difficult to distinguish from ballade n. 1a [which is the French fixed form] and perhaps in some cases comprehending this within a wider class." "Early use" means that meaning is obsolete, and since the earliest citation is from 1458, it's probably obsolete by some centuries. The only other non-musical sense in the OED is "A narrative poem in short stanzas, esp. one that tells a popular story." This poem isn't a narrative. On the other hand, "ballade" means exactly what this poem is. So we should call it a ballad, not a ballade. &mdash;JerryFriedman (Talk) 18:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

"ne Thaïs" (vs. "né Thaïs")
I have not found any other transcriptions of the poem that include an accent aigu on "ne" in the third line. The accent (and the word's consequent translation as "born") do not make sense in this context: Archipiada and Thaïs are clearly different women, not the married and maiden names of the same woman. Throughout the Grand Testament, Villon uses the spelling "ne" where in modern French one would find "ni": e.g. "Combien qu’il n’ayme bruyt ne noyse", "D’etoille ne d’autre sydère". "Ni" would be translated as or/nor: a meaning that is much more fitting here.

See for example: pp. 62. Jacob PL. Œuvres complètes de François Villon. Jannet: Paris, 1854. Entry on Google Books — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mewahl (talk • contribs) 13:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The French article agrees with you that the non-accented ne is not "born", but in the transcription into modern French, renders it as et ("and"). For what it's worth, so do the German, Spanish, and Portuguese articles, but the Russian one deals with it by dropping Thaïs entirely. Mathglot (talk) 07:13, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Following up, I've changed "né" to "ne" and the translation (wondering how Mr Alcibiades got in) to "Archipiada, or Thaïs". Wikiain (talk) 03:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Hear
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeG1CpuhVsQ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.212.116.112 (talk) 21:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Incorporated. Wikiain (talk) 02:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Inclusion of second translation
I'm seeking consensus that a second translation recently added to the article by User:Wikiain should not be included here. This edit linked a containing a translation of the poem to the article. In a subsquent edit, the entire text of the translation was added as well. This translation and all links to it should be removed. Mathglot (talk) 01:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The translation is relatively recent, and not distinguished, afaict.
 * It appears to be self-published material.
 * It appears to be self-promotional: the translation was created by Wikiain and uploaded to Commons by Wikiain, and then included here by them.
 * I had invited Mathglot to respond to a reply to her/his message on my Talk page, but discussion here is fine.
 * I added the translation because I believe it gives some idea of the literary qualities of the original, which the literal translation does not attempt to do. Mathglot (fr-3) is entitled to whatever opinion of my literary abilities and/or ability as a translator.  However, I believe that my rendering is sufficiently accurate—apart from some liberties for the sake of scansion or rhyme, which are obvious and a teacher could invite exploration of reasons behind them.  Whether it is "relatively recent" (from 1976?) does not seem relevant.  I did not see why this material should be excluded simply because it is posted by its author.  WP accepts "own work" photographs—why not a translation of an old poem?
 * I'd be very interested in other views on whether my translation should be (all or any of):
 * in the body of the article (whether in a box or in some other way)
 * in Commons
 * footnoted in the article (the journal is not online but is available in some academic libraries as well as for sale e.g. by Amazon). Wikiain (talk) 04:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did indeed raise an issue at your talk page because of the user behavioral portion of the issue concerning possible promotion and COI of including your own translation and then edit warring to keep it. Whether all, or a portion of your translation, or a footnote to it should be included here, is an article content dispute and is an appropriate subject to discuss here on the article talk page, and should be decided by consensus of uninvolved editors. That's why I responded in both places.
 * In response to your questions:
 * relatively recent: because of possible WP:COPYVIO issues (even if you are the author)
 * posted by its author: see WP:PROMO and WP:COI. Even without your own text included, you are likely a connected contributor, and that fact should probably be posted in the Talk page header using the Template.
 * And now we should hear from other editors. Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 08:22, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you're a bit over the top there, but I'd be happy to add a note such as "This text is posted by its author, who is the copyright owner." Wikiain (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Note: Listed at relevant board and WikiProjects. Mathglot (talk) 09:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the objection is here, that a second translation is redundant, or that this particular one shouldn't be allowed because it's self-promoting?

I've added my own translations to WP articles. I'm not promoting myself when I do so, it's just that we need a translation and don't have one, so I create one. Anyone is welcome to modify, improve replace my translations if they can do better (which generally wouldn't be difficult). But if the author here is attempting to boost book sales by plastering WP with his translations, or increase his fame, then that would indeed be a problem.

As for having two translations, in general I approve. Something that reads poetically in English may not give a good sense of the meaning of the original, and something faithful to the original may sound terrible in English. I like to be able to compare both with the original.

In this case, though, I don't see the point of the second (boxed) translation. If the famous translation weren't very accurate, then a more accurate one might be nice. But it seems to be less accurate, and so does not add anything to the article. For example, why is belle translated as "renowned"? Or trop plus qu'humaine as "too much over-human", which seems needlessly awkward. Or chantoit as "to a rower sang"? Given that it appears to be both an inferior translation and does not clarify the original text, I would delete it even without questions of COI. — kwami (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC) −
 * Thank you, kwami. I too have previously added my own translations to WP articles:  La Brabançonne (French and German) and St. Ivo of Kermartin (Latin), although in these cases only with my pseudonym.  The present case is of text already published, so that the author has to be identified.  I certainly get no personal benefit from this:  I haven't published anything poetical since then and have never earned anything from poetry.


 * As to relative quality, I demur. The first translation is not the famous one by Rossetti: it is a useful literal rendering, apparently and very properly of no poetical ambition.


 * Here is Rossetti's translation:

Tell me now in what hidden way is Lady Flora the lovely Roman? Where's Hipparchia, and where is Thais, Neither of them the fairer woman? Where is Echo, beheld of no man, Only heard on river and mere,-- She whose beauty was more than human?... But where are the snows of yester-year? Where's Heloise, the learned nun, For whose sake Abeillard, I ween, Lost manhood and put priesthood on? (From Love he won such dule and teen!) And where, I pray you, is the Queen Who willed that Buridan should steer Sewed in a sack's mouth down the Seine?... But where are the snows of yester-year? White Queen Blanche, like a queen of lilies, With a voice like any mermaiden,-- Bertha Broadfoot, Beatrice, Alice, And Ermengarde the lady of Maine,-- And that good Joan whom Englishmen At Rouen doomed and burned her there,-- Mother of God, where are they then?... But where are the snows of yester-year? Nay, never ask this week, fair lord, Where they are gone, nor yet this year, Except with this for an overword,-- But where are the snows of yester-year?


 * It is inaccurate to the point of absurdity ("steer"?), clumsy ("overword"?) and sometimes both at once ("Dead Ladies"??). Whether it is good poetry is a matter of taste, but at any rate tastes have changed:  I don't even understand "dule and teen".  I don't claim to have done better overall, but to have done reasonably well and in some useful ways differently.


 * Or one might try David Georgi: "Where's the snow that fell last year?"
 * I rest my case. Wikiain (talk) 03:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm not following. You say, "so that the author has to be identified", but neither translator is identified. — kwami (talk) 04:10, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I identified myself in a footnote as the author of my translation.
 * However, I have deleted my translation, although maintaining a ref to its original published version.
 * I had hoped to make a contribution of educational value—from which I could not have derived any personal benefit. Nonetheless, I recognise independently that it does not seem possible under WP rules to add one's own work and then revise it, without producing impermissible conflict. I'd be very open to a solution, if any editor can suggest one.  Wikiain (talk) 11:30, 2 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Some responses:
 * It is inaccurate to the point of absurdity...
 * It seems just a bit arrogant to me, to make a comment like that about a 19th century English poet's translation of a 15th century French poem, by a poet known to use difficult language, and in-jokes.
 * from which I could not have derived any personal benefit.
 * Monetary reward is not the only kind of benefit. WP:PROMO is another; Wikipedia being one of the top websites of the world, material here has a very high PageRank, and your translation is likely to be visible when people find this article through web search. That may cast suspicion on your motives. It would be better, if another editor who found your translation valuable added it, and not you. Mathglot (talk) 11:55, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Please accuse only with evidence.
 * How does "Fust jetté en ung sac en Seine" suggest "steer"? The man is dead.
 * I didn't refer to monetary benefit and have explained my motives. Wikiain (talk) 22:30, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Rendering of Temps jadis
There is little agreement on how to translate the last two words. Here are some of the options in published books: Mathglot (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Days Gone By
 * Former Times
 * Other years
 * Bygone Times
 * Time Gone By
 * Olden Days
 * Long Ago
 * Olden Times
 * Ancient Times

Alcibiades
I removed the Alcibiades link from the English translation. Nothing in this or the Alcibiades article says anything to explain his presence; in fact, neither article has anything connected with the other. Needless to say he was not a "dame". Zaslav (talk) 04:04, 1 January 2023 (UTC)