Vreleksá

eldin raigmore

I like this one because its main clause contains two complement clauses each of which contains a relative clause. So it has subordinate-clauses-of-subordinate-clauses.
If your language doesn't have subordination; or doesn't have infinitives; or doesn't have relative clauses: you may still find a way to say this.

It's better to have what you don't need than to need what you don't have.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission

Hemicomputer · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 610 Location: Calgary, Alberta

Hosi nv Cohi:
I sỹho fi lio cepõ fiki ki pito i cepõ fi lio sỹho fiki ki.
/i 's@~xo p\i lio cE'po~ p\i'ki ki pi'to i cE'po~ p\i lio 's@~xo p\i'ki ki/

I can't really figure out how to gloss it, but a rough translation would be "the event of having the thing you don't need is better than the event of needing the thing you don't have."

And Hòsi n'Ésio, a descendant of Hosi Ny Cohi:
Sýŋhui li giebònvi bidó giebòni li sýŋhuvi.
/'s@_HNhy li giE'bo_Lnvi bi'do_H giE'bo_Lni li 's@_HNhuvi/

StrangeMagic · Admin Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 640

It's better to have what you don't need than to need what you don't have.

What you not-need to have better is you not-have to need.

I susamlé cander niebéan shi sucandé samler.

What NEG-to need-2nd-PRS to have to be good-COMP to be-3rd-PRS NEG-to have-2nd-PRS to need.

(I wonder after a very long time, whether I would be able to figure out what it meant if I was only given the Eleypherion version of it.)

Hemicomputer · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 610 Location: Calgary, Alberta

Holxws:
Gí ord úengavacws i jókxóc helmvó gí ord úenjókxócws i gavac.
gí ord úen-gav-ac-ws i jókxó-c helm-vó gí ord úen-jókxó-c-ws i gav-ac
the thing neg-need-2-adj inf have-2 good-comp the thing neg-have-2-adj inf need-2
/NaI Or\D wEnN{v{SUks i ZokXoS RElmvo NaI Or\D wEnZokXoSUks i N{v{S/

eldin raigmore · Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:47 am Post subject:

Maybe
"It's better to not need what you have than to not have what you need"
would be easier?

And, thanks to all contributors so far. Very Happy

_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission

Aert · Joined: 03 Jul 2008 Posts: 354

Aert:

Baćy keinjśyé ẃrin ginsk ś’dézălh vrän’zălh ginsk ś’déẃrin.
Baćy ke-inj-śyé ẃrin ginsk ś-dé-zălh vrän-zălh ginsk ś-dé-ẃrin.
It* (be in a condition)-good-comparative (to have infinitive) that (one/a person/you) negative-need than (to need infinitive) that (one/a person/you) negative-have.
/Bætʃʲ kɛ.Indʒʃʲ ɔərIn gInsk ʃdizeɪəl vrɑːnzeɪəl ginsk ʃdi.ɔərIn/
or /Bætʃʲ kɛ.Indʒ ɔərIn gInsk ʃdizeəl vrɑːnzeəl ginsk ʃdi.ɔərIn/
(the ă is pronounced like air, I don't know the correct IPA for it)

*Things in general, hard to describe correctly.

A good saying and interesting translations; my language sounds like Russian in this sentence Confused

eldin raigmore · Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject:

Thanks, Aert.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission

kyonides · Joined: 28 Aug 2008 Posts: 301

English:
It's better to have what you don't need than to need what you don't have.

Spanish (lit.):
Es mejor tener lo que no necesitas que necesitar lo que no tienes.

Kexyana:
Ereinsha nayl sha mezaele nin dens Daya sha derenos mezel sha aninsaele.

good-COMP-that to-have-3rd-PRS what NEG-to-need-3rd-PRS-SUBJ what/that always to-need-3rd-PRS what to-lack-3rd-PRS-SUBJ.
(It's better to have what you don't need in your life(time) than to always need what you lack (of?).)

It can also be formulated as a negative statement...

Edisnash(a) derenos mezel sha aninsaele sha nayl sha mezaele nin dens Daya.

Edisnash(a) derenos mezel aninseish sha nayl mezeish nin dens Daya.

It's also possible to conjugate all the verbs in 4th person Galnas, you just need to replace the -l(vowel) ending with a -v(vowel) one.
_________________
Seos nivo adgene Kizne tikelke

The Internet might be either your best friend or your worst enemy. It just depends on whether or not she has a bad hair day.

Tolkien_Freak · Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:33 pm Post subject:

It's better to have what you don't need than to need what you don't have.

Elayin uzariken uzaruzagyureyiken uzaruzagikeyime uzarrureyiken.
/elajin Mza4iken Mza4MzaNjM4ejiken Mza4MzaNikejime Mzaru4ejiken/
elay-in uzar-ike-n uzar-uzag-yur-ey-ike-n uzar-uzag-ike-yime uzar-rur-ey-ike-n
good-COMP have-NOM-STAT have-NECESSARY-NEG-ADJ-NOM-STAT ave-NECESSARY-NOM-COMP have-NEG-ADJ-NOM-STAT

Literally, 'Having what you don't need to have is better than not having what you need to have.'

(You adjectivalize and then nominalize to get 'that which' instead of '-ing'.)

eldin raigmore · Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 1:20 am Post subject:

Great, kyonides!
And, thanks, T_F!
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission

Tolkien_Freak · Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:48 am Post subject:

And in Emitaryui (a descendant of Kilhiryui I'm working on). The grammar's identical.

Elen uzaiken uzauzayureken uzauzaikeme uzarureken.
/eleN\ Mzaiken MzaMzajM4ekeN\ MzaMzaikeme Mza4u4ekeN\/

achemel · Joined: 29 Mar 2009 Posts: 556 Location: up for debate

Here in my four coherent languages:

Tadváradcel
Hysr lam bïe rwlas fi ssä hssýth ä s bïe hssýthis fi ssä rwl ä
(be-PRES better (inf) have-INF what neg-need-PRES you than (inf) need-INF what neg-have-PRES you)

Hemnälg
Sum lorsaa rhittic rhäb gyl samnech nu sanmec rhäb gyl rhittå
(be-PRES-(colloquial) good-er(n) have-INF what that(prep) need-NEG than need-INF what that(prep) have-NEG)
or
sum lorsaa rhittic rhäb gyl sjä samne nu sanmec rhäb gyl sjä rhitt
(be-PRES-(colloquial) good-er(n) have-INF what that(prep) NEG need than need-INF what that(prep) NEG have)

Ra cel
Ia weraëthi thlâdh c-cnù tölla gyn thli ná töllagh c-cnù thlâ gyn thli
(be-PRES pre-sup-good have-INF that-which need-PRES-NEG you than need-INF that-which have-NEG you)

Ualaxx
hhsəiinaagohoneeocunacaa oonaauuuənnaah hhocunaagohoneesəiinacaa
hh-səiin-aa-goho-nee-ocun-acaa oon-aa-uuu-ənnaah hh-ocun-aa-goho-nee-səiin-acaa
(NEG-need-AOR-thing-ACC.pl.-have-AOR.CONT be-AOR-good-over NEG-have-AOR-thing-ACC.pl.-need-AOR.CONT)
“having what you don’t need is better than needing what you don’t have”
_________________
I have some small knowledge of:
English, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Spanish, French
I would like to learn:
Italian, Norwegian, Gaelic
Main conlangs:
ddamachel, tadvaradcel, ra cel, lashel, hemnalg, nomah

Kiri · Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy

Some Vaijerīna action Very Happy

It's better to have what you don't need than to need what you don't have.

It's better to have unneeded things than to need things you don't have.

not needed things to have better than not had things to need is

ba deban Attes posēret al bonnan kā ba posēran Attes debet pere.

ba deb-an Att-es posēr-et al bonn-an kā ba posēr-an Att-es deb-et per-e

NEG need-ADJ thing-PL.ACC have-INF more good-ADJ than NEG have-ADJ thing-PL.ACC need-INF be-3

Aeetlrcreejl · Joined: 08 Jun 2007 Posts: 839 Location: Over yonder

Badr es setfí èbómèsfí bónotfí èsemèsfí.

good-COMP is being-4PS.DAT NEG-being-OPT-pres.pass.participle-4PS.DAT being-OPT-ABL-4PS.DAT NEG-be-pres.pass.participle-4PS.DAT
_________________
Iwocwá ĵọṭãsák.
/iwotSwa_H d`Z`Ot`~asa_Hk/
[iocwa_H d`Z`Ot`_h~a_Hk]