when that thing had exploded

[Boris Tatarenko]

Hello.

Today my friend has translated a text about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I don't like his translation at all, but I can't correct it.

When that thing had exploded, when it clicked that the US can destroy a whole city with just one bomb, a scientist told his father: "Now science cognized what a sin is". Do you know what his father said? He said: "what's a sin?".

First of al,l I'm not sure in the tenses.
Secondly, does "when it clicked..." sound well?

As I said I don't like it at all.

Can you correct all mistakes there?

Thanks in advance.
Boris.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Hello.

Today my friend has translated a text about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I don't like his translation at all, but I can't correct it.

When that thing had exploded, when it clicked that the US can destroy a whole city with just one bomb, a scientist told his father: "Now science cognized what a sin is". Do you know what his father said? He said: "what's a sin?".

First of al,l I'm not sure in the tenses.
Secondly, does "when it clicked..." sound well?

As I said I don't like it at all.

Can you correct all mistakes there?

Thanks in advance.
Boris.

"When it clicked" in that use means "when it became clear" or "when I realized".

"Cognized" (not commonly used) means "became aware of", "realized".

The scientist evidently believed that dropping the bomb was a sin.

I would probably substitute "device" for "thing" (third word) and I would change "Now" to "Then".

 

[Barb_D]

I like Mike's use of "device."

Of course it's hard no knowing what the original said (and I can't speak Russian, so no help in posting it), but something like this reads more naturally to me:

When that device exploded -- when it sunk in that the US could destory an entire city with only one bomb -- a scientist said to his father, "Now we know that science can create sin." Do you know what the father replied? He said, "What was the sin?"

This may have a different meaning than the original.
Mine says that science created the sin, not that it "understood" what a sin was. I don't think science can understand things - people do.

Mine suggests that the father did not think that dropping the bomb was a sin. The original (which would requrie a capital W in any case) suggest the father wants to engage in a discussion about what a sin is.

 

[Boris Tatarenko]

Thanks for your replies.

First of all, I've just read the original text in Russian. Honestly, I don't understand what the father meant by "what's a sin?". In the original text it seems like the father doesn't know this word. :-D Probably, we can find a hidden meaning in his words.

Secondly, Barb, why did you write "the US could destroy"? instead of "can destroy". Does your sentence sound better?

Sure, there's a huge difference between English and Russuian languages. For me, there is nothing wrong with "Now science cognized what a sin is", but I strongly agree with your explanation.

The last question is: is there any difference between "with just one bomb" and "with only one bomb"? I think they have the same meaning in this case, what do you think? Am I right?

Thanks in advance.
Boris.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Thanks for your replies.

First of all, I've just read the original text in Russian. Honestly, I don't understand what the father meant by "what's a sin?". In the original text it seems like the father doesn't know this word. :-D Probably, we can find a hidden meaning in his words.

Secondly, Barb, why did you write "the US could destroy"? instead of "can destroy". Does your sentence sound better?

Sure, there's a huge difference between English and Russuian languages. For me, there is nothing wrong with "Now science cognized what a sin is", but I strongly agree with your explanation.

The last question is: is there any difference between "with just one bomb" and "with only one bomb"? I think they have the same meaning in this case, what do you think? Am I right?

Thanks in advance.
Boris.

In my opinion, the father's question is an opening to discuss the matter of the bomb. Many believe it was a good thing because it ended a long and brutal war; others believe it was an immoral act. The main difference between Barb's understanding and mine involves the word "cognized". But I don't know the meaning of the word that was translated to "cognized". For me, "cognized" does not mean "created". Can you tell us other words that the original word could be translated to?

"Just one bomb" and "only one bomb" have the same meaning.

 

[Boris Tatarenko]

It's quite difficult because we don't use frequently that word in Russian as well.

I would describe it as: obtain a knowledge.


This man is sitting and thinking about his life. He tries to answer on questions like: why does he live for? what is a life? and etc. And when he finish he'll obtain a knowledge, a philosophical thought. And "cognize" means this process.

I hope you understand something :-D.

 

[Barb_D]

Now science must contemplate sin. -- How about that?

I changed "can" to "could" to make the tenses harmonize. It doesn't not mean "it was able to before, but no longer can."

Once you saw what I could do... (Once you saw what I could do, you wanted to do it too.)
Now you see what I can do... (Now you see what I can do, and you want to do it too.)

But you use "exploded" in the past so I made it past as well.

 

[Boris Tatarenko]

I would use "contemplate" if it sounds well, but only a native speaker can say whether it sounds well or not.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I would use "contemplate" if it sounds well, but only a native speaker can say whether it sounds well or not.

For me, the context supports some sort of learning, realizing, becoming aware, understanding, etc.

 

[User1291]

not a teacher

"Just one bomb" and "only one bomb" have the same meaning.

Personally, I would prefer something akin to "with but a single bomb".
I don't know about you but with either "just one bomb" or "only one bomb" the sentence sounds rather choppy to me.

 

[MikeNewYork]

not a teacher


Personally, I would prefer something akin to "with but a single bomb".
I don't know about you but with either "just one bomb" or "only one bomb" the sentence sounds rather choppy to me.

They don't sound choppy to me.