Page talk:Aleksander Głowacki - O odkryciach i wynalazkach.djvu/12

Ping User:Piotrus:

As discussed on the page 9 [5] talk page, I have to this article page (12 [8]) added "–Translator" to 6 bracketed interpolations.

These are merely necessary explanatory interpolations which otherwise in no way affect the author's text.

There are no other remaining bracketed interpolations in Prus' article.

Thanks.

Nihil novi (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

User:Nihil novi: I have one nitpick here: "as many złotych or even rubles as they now cost groszy". If we use English rubles shouldn't we try to use złotys and groszes? Złotych and groszy is some form of declination anyway, I think it is a bit jarring. One złoty, two złotys... one grosz two eerrrr groszes? --Piotrus (talk) 04:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

User:Piotrus: Interesting question.

"English translations" of authentic declensional forms of "zloty" and "grosz" jar on me, while those Polish declensional forms may jar on Anglophones who have heard of the currency. I suspect that many fewer Anglophones have heard of the zloty than of the ruble. (One of the disadvantages of no longer being a great power !)

Moreover, there are several ways of "Englishing" the Polish currency's name.

Fortunately, Wikipedia readers can find a guide to the Polish permutations at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_z%C5%82oty#Name_and_plural_forms

Since, in this article, the Polish currency appears only once, on this page, I think that on balance I would favor keeping the present authentic forms as the default. That would hold the added benefit, for readers, of habituating them to some of the complexities of the universe.

Nihil novi (talk) 11:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I'll defer to you, since if there is no ideal choice, well, trust the experts :) --Piotrus (talk) 03:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)