3 ms·

No, it translates directly to "ninety-seven" or to however you spell "97" in any other language.

jimmaswell 5y ago
> Literal translation, direct translation or word-for-word translation, is a translation of a text done by translating each word separately, without looking at how the words are used together in a phrase or sentence. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_translation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_translation
- johncoltrane 5y ago
  I only knew term #1 and term #3, thanks. Let's prove that English is insane by making a literal translation of that Wikipedia definition in French: > Littéral traduction, direct traduction ou mot-pour-mot traduction, est le traduction de un texte fait par traduire chaque mot séparément, sans regarder à comment le mots sont utilisé ensemble dans un phrase ou phrase.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    I'm not sure what you're trying to show there. Literal translations are always janky but can still be used to demonstrate things. A similar literal translation from english to english of 97 would be nine-tens-seven. English has some irregularities in the teens but it's decimal all the way through. French switches from decimal to vigesimal.
    - johncoltrane 5y ago
      > I'm not sure what you're trying to show there. Literal translations are always janky but can still be used to demonstrate things. I'm trying to show that using a method that can only produce nonsense out of a given source is not the best way to demonstrate/prove _anything_ about the source. At best, it proves that literal translation is garbage, which is something everyone knows (except at tech giants, apparently). There is only one way to translate "quatre-vingt-dix-sept" in English while preserving its meaning: "ninety-seven". Pointing out the decimal <-> vigesimal switch (and the historical debates around it, for example) or the fact that the two systems cohabit would be far more useful and interesting than constructing a strawman in order to conclude that a language is "insane".
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        A literal translation is the easiest way to show what happens. I don't see the problem. If you perform the same literal translation to 57, it doesn't look "insane". When you say the method "can only produce nonsense", I think you're just flat-out wrong.
schrijver 5y ago
If you’re a native speaker I imagine that’s true, but if you learned the language later in live it remains a pain. I feel comfortable discussing love, art and politics in French but I still dread writing down a phone number!

> Literal translation, direct translation or word-for-word translation, is a translation of a text done by translating each word separately, without looking at how the words are used together in a phrase or sentence. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_translation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_translation

johncoltrane 5y ago
I only knew term #1 and term #3, thanks. Let's prove that English is insane by making a literal translation of that Wikipedia definition in French: > Littéral traduction, direct traduction ou mot-pour-mot traduction, est le traduction de un texte fait par traduire chaque mot séparément, sans regarder à comment le mots sont utilisé ensemble dans un phrase ou phrase.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  I'm not sure what you're trying to show there. Literal translations are always janky but can still be used to demonstrate things. A similar literal translation from english to english of 97 would be nine-tens-seven. English has some irregularities in the teens but it's decimal all the way through. French switches from decimal to vigesimal.
  - johncoltrane 5y ago
    > I'm not sure what you're trying to show there. Literal translations are always janky but can still be used to demonstrate things. I'm trying to show that using a method that can only produce nonsense out of a given source is not the best way to demonstrate/prove _anything_ about the source. At best, it proves that literal translation is garbage, which is something everyone knows (except at tech giants, apparently). There is only one way to translate "quatre-vingt-dix-sept" in English while preserving its meaning: "ninety-seven". Pointing out the decimal <-> vigesimal switch (and the historical debates around it, for example) or the fact that the two systems cohabit would be far more useful and interesting than constructing a strawman in order to conclude that a language is "insane".
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      A literal translation is the easiest way to show what happens. I don't see the problem. If you perform the same literal translation to 57, it doesn't look "insane". When you say the method "can only produce nonsense", I think you're just flat-out wrong.

schrijver 5y ago

If you’re a native speaker I imagine that’s true, but if you learned the language later in live it remains a pain. I feel comfortable discussing love, art and politics in French but I still dread writing down a phone number!