Art De La Guerre
Bienvenue sur le forum de discussion de la règle de jeu l'Art De La Guerre
 
FAQFAQ RechercherRechercher Liste des MembresListe des Membres Groupes d'utilisateursGroupes d'utilisateurs S'enregistrerS'enregistrer
ProfilProfil Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés ConnexionConnexion
Translation question, p24, attaching commanders
Page 1 sur 2 Aller à la page 1, 2  Suivante
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Auteur Message
madaxeman
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1469
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
MessagePosté le: Sam Aoû 13, 2016 6:57 pm    Sujet du message: Translation question, p24, attaching commanders Répondre en citant
Bottom of first column, it says the commander stays attached to the unit until the "end of the Game Turn or the end of the melee if it is engaged in melee."

As this has been translated currently, this currently suggests that a commander cannot ever leave a unit when that unit is in combat, even if he is not engaged in the melee himself.

I suspect that this should say "if he is engaged in melee", so this section would then refer to the general being in combat, not the unit.
_________________
www.madaxeman.com
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
Icaunais
Légat


Inscrit le: 21 Sep 2012
Messages: 649
MessagePosté le: Sam Aoû 13, 2016 8:09 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
From my point of view, you're right. A general in melee can't leave the unit until the melee is finished so sometimes several game turns.
_________________
Mes Figurines 15mm
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
footslogger
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 12 Jan 2015
Messages: 166
MessagePosté le: Sam Aoû 13, 2016 8:34 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I would take the "it" to refer to the general....
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
madaxeman
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1469
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
MessagePosté le: Sam Aoû 13, 2016 10:21 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
footslogger a écrit:
I would take the "it" to refer to the general....


I agree.

At the moment this is unclear, as "it" could mean the unit or the general.

I suspect the original French version would be clearer
_________________
www.madaxeman.com
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1544
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 2:20 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
this was covered somewhere and clarified the unit. Play as you normally would
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
footslogger
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 12 Jan 2015
Messages: 166
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 3:07 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hazelbark a écrit:
this was covered somewhere and clarified the unit. Play as you normally would


*cough* *cough* put it in the faq *cough*

But play as I normally would, would not be "it" referring to the unit.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Stephen
Archer


Inscrit le: 24 Mai 2015
Messages: 65
Localisation: Wheeling, West Virginia, United States
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 4:24 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
My 4th grade grammar teacher suggests that normal rules of English grammar do not result in the word it referring to the general but to the unit.

Is there a reason that I should question that which appears to be plain language or are we indulging in the antiquated practice of seeking interpretation to avoid the rule? A relic of WRG 5th Edition?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Envoyer un e-mail
Wagmestre
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 27 Juil 2010
Messages: 1225
Localisation: Ballainviliers (France)
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 8:38 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
It's just an error of translation.
In french language, there's nothing similair as "it" (only he / she).

The rule is that the general can't leave the fighting unit until the end of the mêlée, if the general is engaged in the mêlée with this unit.

As a good guy, he is probably fighting in the first rank.... Twisted Evil !


He is in a similair situation as an included general when his unit is fighting.



If he is just attached but not engaged, of course he can leave the fighting unit.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Stephen
Archer


Inscrit le: 24 Mai 2015
Messages: 65
Localisation: Wheeling, West Virginia, United States
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 11:06 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Il ou Elle, I bet there is a qui
Or quoi in the French version. At any rate, the English appears clear. Why do we need to clarify that which is clear? It ain't butter for a soufflé
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Envoyer un e-mail
plefebvre
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 30 Déc 2009
Messages: 1166
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 1:53 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Wagmestre a écrit:
It's just an error of translation.
In french language, there's nothing similair as "it" (only he / she).

The rule is that the general can't leave the fighting unit until the end of the mêlée, if the general is engaged in the mêlée with this unit.

As a good guy, he is probably fighting in the first rank.... Twisted Evil !


He is in a similair situation as an included general when his unit is fighting.



If he is just attached but not engaged, of course he can leave the fighting unit.


I totaly agree with wagmestre
_________________
patrick lefebvre

"sic transit gloria mundi"
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Wagmestre
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 27 Juil 2010
Messages: 1225
Localisation: Ballainviliers (France)
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 2:36 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
madaxeman a écrit:
footslogger a écrit:
I would take the "it" to refer to the general....


I agree.

At the moment this is unclear, as "it" could mean the unit or the general.

I suspect the original French version would be clearer


Absolutly !
In the french rules, it's perfectly clear.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Stephen
Archer


Inscrit le: 24 Mai 2015
Messages: 65
Localisation: Wheeling, West Virginia, United States
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 3:24 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Having realized that the English edition of the rules is a mere translation and not an edition of the rules notwithstanding the title on the book, I decided that it might be helpful in my historical task of perverting the rules to compare the mere English translation to several other versions - a common and accepted academic practice. I found that the Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Hutu, and Classical Greek versions do not even use the word "commander". (Not sure about the Urdu knock off.) We need a FAQ to determine whether or not commanders are authorized by the real rules.😂

Some of my commanders are on a base with a standard bearer. As they are not "individually based", it appears that they can be attacked by enemy units in melee or by shooting. Do I need a FAQ to define "individually based"?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Envoyer un e-mail
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 14, 2016 9:12 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
From a rules / translation perspective, the rules use two terms for the general,
  • Attached to a unit; (near or adjacent),
  • Engaged in melee; (fighting alongside the specified unit).
I agree with madaxeman that for clarity the wording should say that the general cannot leave the unit "if he is engaged in melee" or better, following what Wagmestre said; "if he and the unit are engaged in melee".

This is because the entire section is referring to the general being attached to a single unit, rather than being engaged (with the unit) in melee with an enemy.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
madaxeman
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1469
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 15, 2016 9:35 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Stephen a écrit:
My 4th grade grammar teacher suggests that normal rules of English grammar do not result in the word it referring to the general but to the unit.

Is there a reason that I should question that which appears to be plain language or are we indulging in the antiquated practice of seeking interpretation to avoid the rule? A relic of WRG 5th Edition?


If "it" refers to the unit, the general would never be able to leave a fighting unit even if he was not joining in/assisting the combat. This is not what is intended, so the 'plain language' is out of sync. Its a translation effect from French-English, not someone looking for lawyerish interpretations.

In 5th there were very similar effects translating from Barkerese to English....
_________________
www.madaxeman.com
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
fdunadan
Tribun


Inscrit le: 12 Juin 2009
Messages: 978
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 15, 2016 12:34 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
in french version "une fois attaché à une unité, il le reste jusqu'à la fin du tour ou de la mêlée s'il s'engage en mêlée" in french, "il" can only means the general, it would have been "elle" if it was for the unit.
so with the correct subject in () this is in English:

"when attached to a unit, (the general) stays with that until until the end of the turn or the end of the melee if (the general) is engaged in melee"
_________________
Audentes fortuna iuvat.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Page 1 sur 2 Aller à la page 1, 2  Suivante
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet Toutes les heures sont au format GMT

 
Sauter vers:  
Vous ne pouvez pas poster de nouveaux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas éditer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas supprimer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas voter dans les sondages de ce forum