Talk:Til Ungdommen

message: maybe this translation is better: http://home.online.no/~bjni/tilungd.htm SKvalen 01:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled comment 

message: Unfortunately, the article includes neither references nor citations. As such, it's not a bad article, but being Danish and not Norwegian, I'm not qualified to improve on it. (I took the liberty of adding it to WikiProject Norway.) One final question, though: Could parts of the article possibly be problematic w.r.t. copyright? Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen (talk) 09:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently, that's done on this page, who'd have known? ;) Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen (talk) 09:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing references 

message: While the Rod Sinclair translation is poetic on its own, it omits a few verses, has one that I can't match to the Norwegian, and in my opinion, shifts the message of some lines.
I'm Danish, not Norwegian, but I can read the language.
Below is my own translation which might be a little less poetic, but a perhaps little truer to Grieg's poem.
For the youth.
Surrounded by foes, 
enter your time.
Under a bloody storm – 
dedicate yourself to battle.
Perhaps you ask in fear,
uncovered, open,
what shall I fight with
what is my weapon?
Here is your defence from violence,
here is your sword:
Faith in our lives, 
the value of mankind.
For all our future’s sake,
seek it and praise it,
die if you must – but:
Increase and strengthen it.
Silently the grenades 
glide in their trajectory.
Stop their drive for death
stop them with spirit.
War is contempt for life.
Peace is creation.
Put your efforts in:
Death must lose!
Love and enrich with dreams
all that was great!
Head for the unknown
seize answers there.
Unbuilt built power plant,
unknown stars.
Make them with spared lives'
bold minds!
Noble is mankind,
the Earth is rich.
If there is need and hunger
it is due to deceit.
Crush it! In the name of life 
injustice shall fall.
Sunshine and bread and spirit
is owned by all.
Then lowered are the weapons 
powerless down!
If we make human worth
we make peace.
One who with right hand
carries a load,
dear and irreplaceable
cannot kill.
This is our promise 
from brother to brother:
We will become good towards
mankind’s Earth.
We will take care of
the beauty, the warmth
as if we carried a child
gently on our arm!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakobsen1978 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  English translation 

message: The text is not free, it is protected 70 years after the end of the year Nordahl Grieg died (1943). ZorroIII (talk) 19:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: From the current Norwegian copyright law (Åndsverkloven ) you can see in § 61  that it replaced the law "Lov om åndsverker" from 6 June 1930.  I'm not very well versed in this kind of wordings but it might look like it also replaced "Lov om forfatterrett og kunstnerrett" from 4 July 1893, revised 25 July 1910.  However, finding the original text of these laws online seems to be beyond my searching skills.  (Maybe someone is able to get it digitalized from Riksarkivet, if it isn't already  ?)  -Laniala (talk) 09:08, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text may be copyrighted until 2014 

message: While the "literal translation" is mostly good, it is not always an entirely literal translation. In particular, there are a few instances where the translator seems to struggle with the nuances of certain words in both languages. Is this translation taken from an external source (in which case it is best left alone and referenced) or is it simply an attempt at a literal translation by a Wikipedia contributor (in which case I will make a few minor alterations to make it more literal)? Maitreya (talk) 09:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They have already been (more or less) corrected through various edits by different users.  -Laniala (talk) 18:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracies in Literal Translation 

message: (Note:  this refers to a translation added by me, which was the "third" one at the time.  It was subsequently removed, for reasons that I do not understand Joe Gorman (talk) 03:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't really matter, as the text is not free and should be removed from the article. ZorroIII (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

text: If it is not allowed to publish the original Norwegian text in the first place, then I agree:  the pros and cons of different translations don't matter because they should not be published either.  I've raised some issues about the copyright issue in the section above about copyright.  Perhaps we can get some clarity from further discussion about that.  If it is after all OK to publish the original Norwegian in a setting such as this, or if we can obtain permission through proper means, then the issue of the advantages of different translations becomes relevant. Joe Gorman (talk) 10:31, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reasons for adding a "third" translation 

message: I agree that the page was getting a bit untidy with so many translations. This is partly because some careless editing spoiled line alignment, and partly because there were just too many and the page was too broad.
But it seems to be that this has been "solved" in a rather simplistic way, just deleting a few translations, with no apparent logic about which to delete.  My translation (Joe Gorman) is the only one which includes a rationale in this "talk" for its usefulness (see "Reasons for adding a third translation").  No one has challenged that, or complained that my translation did not meet its objectives.   So I find it objectionable that is has been removed.     
Also, if it is felt useful to offer several translations they could be shown under one and other to avoid formatting problems.  That would have been an alternative "tidy up" operation that would have avoided apparently arbitrary deletions.   
Two recurring themes in the discussion here have been:  (a) Should names of translators be shown?  (b) Should it be allowed to show the text of the poem at all, due to copyright concerns?  I can see arguments both ways for (a).  On balance I think that it seems OK to show names, but have no strong feelings on that, and would not mind my name (Joe Gorman) being removed from my translation if others felt strongly about that.  On (b), there are also arguments both ways.  On the one hand, the poem is VERY obviously in the public domain.  On the other hand, it may be true (I am no lawyer) that it really is against copyright rules to display the poem, or a translation of it.  BUT:  if copyright laws apply, they apply to ALL the translations (and the original).  So if copyright is being used as the basis for deleting my translation, and one other, then why has the same principle not been applied to the other translations and the original, i.e. why haven't all the texts been deleted?  And if copyright was NOT the basis for deciding which translations to delete, what was?  It looks to me like it was a simple "revert" to an older status - which seems too simplistic, and throws away (what some would consider) progress in later translations.
Joe Gorman (talk) 03:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What criteria have been applied in deciding which translations to retain and which to delete? 

message: Can words such as this be linked to sections in any of our other articles?
*Højskolesangbogen (:da:H%C3%B8jskolesangbogen)
--Hirzflag (talk) 08:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Words in the text that are not linked 

message: Great thanks to user Rinellie for correcting my previous update of the 'Text of the poem' section, I suddenly realized I had inadvertently removed parts of Grieg's original prose. I'm personally thrilled about Rod Sinclair's 2004 English version of the poem in rhyming prose and hope it will stay in the article, but would it be valid to add a third, say, middle column with a literal English translation of the original Norwegian verses as well? --CEngelbrecht2 (talk) 13:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Text of the poem' section 

message: While the original poem is Public Domain due to age, an English translation, especially a "poetic" one where substantial creative effort went into it, generates a new copyright to the translator for the translation. Indeed the source for the English translation includes a copyright notice. CrowCaw 12:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright of translation