# EN: the very turpitudes that



## JonnyDr

Hi. I'm confused about where to place 'même' in the following sentence. I mean it in the sense of 'the very turpitudes...'.

_Je me suis rendu compte que tout ce qui rapproche le nihilisme n'a pour resultat que l'abstention et l'ascétisme, lesquels même turpitudes qu'il brigue de refouler._

Right place?

P.S. I know it's utter crap - I'm just playing around!


----------



## Lezert

Hello,
I would say: ...,les mêmes turpitudes...
or
..., les turpitudes mêmes ...

by the way, 
..que tout ce qui _s'approche_ du nihilisme...
and at the end: "briguer" doesn't fit here, better to say qu'il ambitionne/ qu'il prétend/ qu'il aspire à... ( briguer + noun is OK, but not briguer + verb ( as here with refouler ))


----------



## JonnyDr

Thanks very much. 

By the way, by 'tout ce qui rapproche..' I mean something that serves to bring someone closer to nihilism, not neccessarily closer to it in itself. As in 'toutes transgressions, même minimes, rapprochent les enfers'. The deviations from a path bring hell closer to _you_, not to themselves. So s'approche or rapproche?

And one more thing.. if I omitted 'même' would the usage of 'lesquels' be correct?

Cheers.


----------



## Lezert

Ah, I understand
to bring someone closer to hihilism : tout ce qui rapproche du nihilisme
to bring nihilism closer( to ...): tout ce qui rapproche le nihilisme (de ..)
tout ce qui approche/ s'approche : what is  similar  ....
Sorry for lesquels, I didn't understood at first ( because of the accordance , in relation with turpitudes, it mut be fem ): Yes, you can use _lesquelles _
_lesquelles turpitudes qu'il prétend refouler_
_( and I would have say too:  lesquelles turpitudes il prétend refouler)
__or_
_lesquelles turpitudes mêmes qu'il prétend refouler_
_lesquelles mêmes turpitudes qu'il prétend refouler_

without _mêmes , _there is not the same emphasis ( the same as in english with "_the very ..."_


----------



## JonnyDr

Of course, my fault, sorry. 

So now I'm left with a grammatically immaculate, postmodernist platitude! Thanks for getting me there.


----------



## maarten-martin

_Je me suis rendu compte que tout ce qui_ le/me/nous _rapproche_ du _nihilisme n'a pour r_é_sultat que l'abstention et l'ascétisme, les turpitudes_ même _qu'il_ entend/prétend/désire/souhaite/rêve de/veut/voudrait _refouler._

Correct, if still a bit difficult to understand. 
You must put a pronoun before "rapprocher", "même" here is an adverb (not sure about that, though), "briguer" is a desire for something more material (e.g. salary, position...).


----------



## JonnyDr

Wonderful, thanks Martin. So I suppose the reason 'rapproche' in the example I gave earlier ('...les enfers') doesn't need a pronoun because it's clear who's transgressing, in this case? Or should it have one?


----------



## L'Inconnu

JonnyDr said:


> Wonderful, thanks Martin. So I suppose the reason 'rapproche' in the example I gave earlier ('...les enfers') doesn't need a pronoun because it's clear who's transgressing, in this case? Or should it have one?



I think the idea is that you should use a pronoun, but not the reflexive one. _Tout ce qui_ nous _rapproche_ du _nihilisme n'a pour r_é_sultat que l'abstention et l'ascétisme, les turpitudes_ même _qu'il_ _prétend_ (or some other verb) _refouler._​Notice that we have left out lequel (?), which is really a pronoun, not an adjective. If ‘rapprocher de’ is still confusing you, you’re not alone. However, verbs like ‘conduire’, ‘amener’ and ‘mener’ should work here too. They have the advantage of being easier for we English speakers to grasp conceptually. _Tout ce qui_ nous _conduit_ au _nihilisme n'a pour r_é_sultat que l'abstention et l'ascétisme, les turpitudes_ même _qu'il_ prétend _refouler._​At this point, the only thing that confuses me are words like asceticism and turpitudes. Wouldn't you rather we knew what you are talking about, rather than be impressed by your vocabulary?Everything that brings us closer to nihilism only results in abstinence and self denial, the very depravity that it tries to suppress. ​


----------



## taz64

maarten-martin said:


> _Je me suis rendu compte que tout ce qui_ le/me/nous _rapproche_ du _nihilisme n'a pour r_é_sultat que l'abstention et l'ascétisme, les turpitudes_ même _qu'il_ entend/prétend/désire/souhaite/rêve de/veut/voudrait _refouler._
> 
> Correct, if still a bit difficult to understand.
> You must put a pronoun before "rapprocher", "même" here is an adverb (not sure about that, though), "briguer" is a desire for something more material (e.g. salary, position...).



Sorry, but i dont' think one MUST put a pronoun before "rapprocher".As far as i'm concerned, "...tout ce qui rapproche du nihilisme..." is correct.

cheers,


----------



## JonnyDr

L'Inconnu said:


> I think the idea is that you should use a pronoun, but not the reflexive one.



In this case I'm sure you're right. I'm still slightly confused about how it differs from the '...enfers' example though, which doesnt seem to need one.



L'Inconnu said:


> Notice that we have left out lequel (?), which is really a pronoun, not an adjective.



It can be also used as a relative adjective though, if not very elegantly.

I suppose I used 'rapprocher' to convey the feeling of being edged closer to something potentially calamitous. 



L'Inconnu said:


> Wouldn't you rather we knew what you are talking about, rather than be impressed by your vocabulary?



I'm not trying to impress anyone, I promise. I left them in since they are the same in french and are in fairly common use in english (perhaps I read weird books!). Your simplification does convey the meaning nicely though.

The english language feels less than complete without 'rapprocher', the more I think of how to translate it.


----------



## JonnyDr

taz64 said:


> Sorry, but i dont' think one MUST put a pronoun before "rapprocher".



Well, the admirable Michel Onfray agrees with you Sir - you're in respectable company.


----------



## taz64

JonnyDr said:


> Well, the admirable Michel Onfray agrees with you Sir - you're in respectable company.



I'm honored my Lord.


----------



## maarten-martin

taz64 said:


> Sorry, but i dont' think one MUST put a pronoun before "rapprocher".As far as i'm concerned, "...tout ce qui rapproche du nihilisme..." is correct.
> 
> cheers,


I think you are right, I shouldn't have said "MUST". I agree that, from a strictly grammatical point of view, the pronoun may be omitted. Nevertheless, I feel it sounds better with the pronoun than without - clearer. 
Digging further, I should keep the use of turpitudes to its literal meaning -something very close to crime (even if not legal crime, at least "morally reprehensible" action, like debauchery, offending behaviour, ingratitude, etc.). Here "_errements_" for instance would be more in tune with the rest of the vocabulary.


----------



## JonnyDr

I completely agree Martin. The fustian and bombast is pretty much included as a joke and I didn't put much thought into selecting suitable words - I delved into my mental thesaurus and grabbed whatever popped up first! I suppose I really meant 'unfortunated outcomes' or 'calamitous results'.

Thanks all for sorting out the 'rapprocher' and pronoun issues and also for you kind suggestions.


----------

