# Mögen hätte ich schon wollen, aber dürfen hab’ ich mich nicht getraut



## highcs

Mögen hätte ich schon wollen, aber dürfen hab’ ich mich nicht getraut.

Karl Valentin (1882-1948) 

Hello all,
I am translating the above quote from German to English and wanted to get some second opinions on my attempt.
Here goes....

I would have liked to, but didn't dare to.

I know it's not literal - but I'm trying to go for the "feel" of it....

Thanks for your opinions....

highcs


----------



## brian

Cool quote. I think your translation is definitely the right idea (maybe slightly more literal: _...but I didn't dare allow myself/allow it_).

But it's really hard to come up with an eloquent translation that preserves the nice parallelism of _mögen_ and _dürfen_ in German. At least I can't think of one.. other than:

_To have liked to is certainly what I would have wanted, but to have been able to is what I did not dare allow myself._

I'm assuming it's okay to use the past infinitives here for _mögen_ and _dürfen_.


----------



## highcs

Thank you, brian.  

I like the first suggestion you gave....


----------



## Frank78

Don´t mind if it sounds odd in English, it does in German as well.


----------



## highcs

Frank78 said:


> Don´t mind if it sounds odd in English, it does in German as well.


----------



## Kuestenwache

How about:
To want to I would have liked, but to allow myself to I didn't dare.


----------



## Sidjanga

brian8733 said:


> (...) _To have liked to is certainly what I would have wanted, but to have been able to is what I did not dare allow myself._ _(...)_.


Wouldn't it rather be this way round?

_To have liked to is certainly what I would have wanted, but to have been *allowed* to is what I *did not dare*.

_(and I've just realised that Küstenwache has already suggested something very similar)


----------



## brian

Sigianga said:
			
		

> Wouldn't it rather be this way round?



I took _dürfen_ as "to be able" and _mich trauen_ as "to dare (to allow myself) to."

Basically, "to dare to be allowed" does not make much sense; "to dare to allow oneself *(to do something)*" does make sense if you add the part "*to do something*," or simply the word "*to*," with the rest of the infinitive implied (just like "to have liked to"), so then you'd have:

_To have liked to is certainly what I would have wanted, but to have allowed myself to__ is what I did not dare._

This is perfectly fine. Indeed it's the same translation Kuestenwache proposed, except--like I said in post #2--in English you have to use the *past infinitives* here (_to have liked_ & _to have allowed_); and it also sounds a lot more natural & fluid with the _what_-clauses.

Indeed, I thought of this version as well but opted for the other one (it sounded nicer at the time, though I'm not sure it is nicer). In any case, the meanings are the same in English: _to allow oneself to be able to do something = to allow oneself to do something._


----------



## Momerath

Perhaps you could quote Shakespeare: I let "'I dare not' wait upon 'I would,'"


----------



## sokol

Well, please keep in mind that of course Karl Valentin constructed this sentence *on purpose* in a way which sounds *very *awkward in German. Sure, he also used dialect syntax (Bavarian dialect), but no Bavarian dialect speaker would utter a sentence like that in everyday speech - except in case he or she quotes Karl Valentin. 

The sentence, by the way, is very well known in Austria and Bavaria, and I guess at least to a degree even north of the "Weisswurst-Äquator" (= north of Bavaria). It is one of his most famous linguistic jokes.

This all makes translation really difficult: you should achieve an English equivalent which sounds awkward to English native speakers but still is correct grammatically, to a degree, or probably using colloquial or dialect syntax (while the actual words are, phonologically, written in standard language - as is the case with Valentin's sentence).

So considering all this, I'll try to do my worst to violate English grammar to a degree with is just about bearable:

Or - let's see first what we've got so far:
*Brian:* To have liked to is certainly what I would have wanted, but to have been able to is what I did not dare allow myself.*
Sigianga:*To have liked to is certainly what I would have wanted, but to have been allowed to is what I did not dare.
*Küstenwache:* To want to I would have liked, but to allow myself to I didn't dare.

And *my *try:
I did want to have liked doing it, but I didn't dare to allow myself as much.

Anyhow, the English translation, whatever you choose, should leave the (native) reader (and listener) puzzled; Karl Valentin's sentence is supposed to not being understood on the spot.  Even German native speakers need to take a double take to get the meaning, that is if they don't know the quote already (in which case however they also won't realise what he's talking about ).


----------



## Sidjanga

brian8733 said:


> (...) Basically, "to dare to be allowed" does not make much sense; "to dare to allow oneself (...)


Well, but that's just how I understand the German sentence. 


sokol said:


> (...) Karl Valentin's sentence is supposed to not being understood on the spot.  Even German native speakers need to take a double take to get the meaning, that is if they don't know the quote already (in which case however they also won't realise what he's talking about ).


Yes, I (too) understand it to be somewhere between philosophical and "incomprehensible on purpose", to make the gears in your brain crunch a bit, and to make you think and question rationality, truth, reality, sobriety,...


----------



## brian

Sigianga said:


> Well, but that's just how I understand the German sentence.



...meaning it doesn't make sense to you in German either?

Would this make sense to you?

_Er traute sich nicht, den Apfel *essen zu dürfen*._

If not, then I guess it's okay if it doesn't make sense in English.


----------



## Sidjanga

brian8733 said:


> ...meaning it doesn't make sense to you in German either?


Well, see above (I have just included a bit more in my above post).





> Would this make sense to you?
> 
> _Er traute sich nicht, den Apfel *essen zu dürfen*._ (...)


It depends on the perspective and on context, and especially on how deep into the realms of philosophy you would like to delve, but generally speaking - from an everyday point of view, somewhere between "hardly any" and "definitely not".


----------



## highcs

Wow... I went offline for a few hours and came back to such a rich discussion!  Thank you all for your input - so very, very informative and helpful on so many levels.  
After reading all of your opinions, I think this is what I will use (feedback is, of course, still welcome!):


_I wanted to have liked to, but I didn't dare allow to.

_(I am consciously choosing to leave out the _myself_ in the second clause....)


----------



## sokol

Brian, Karl Valentin's sentence *does *make sence, in a way (in a very *weird* way, admittedly, but still ).

The sense being: "I would have liked to want (doing sth.), but I didn't dare to being allowed doing it."
(Problem here being that "dürfen" is an active verb in German while in English you'd use a passive construction.) This more literal translation however isn't very witty, or is it?

Just keep in mind that Karl Valentin intended to create a _bon mot_ - which he has, by the way.  He has been a _Kabarettist _after all (I can't say that I like the English suggestions for this German word, but that would be a discussion topic for a new thread ).


----------



## brian

highcs said:


> _I would have wanted to have liked to, but I didn't dare be allowed to._



The original has the conditional, hence "would have wanted."

Also, _dürfen_ means "to be allowed to" (intransitive), not "to allow to" (transitive). [Edit: sokol and I have just said the same thing here.]

With these corrections, I think it sounds perfectly grammatical and semi-sensical, just as the author intended.


----------



## highcs

Brian,

but is the permission coming from within or from without?
Because if it's coming from within - even though the verb is intransitive, don't you think you have to translate it as I have?

Maybe I'm just missing something here...

Thank you!!!


----------



## brian

highcs said:


> Brian,
> 
> but is the permission coming from within or from without?
> Because if it's coming from within - even though the verb is intransitive, don't you think you have to translate it as I have?
> 
> Maybe I'm just missing something here...
> 
> Thank you!!!



This is exactly why I originally translated it as "_allow *myself* to_"--because 1) I think the "allowing" comes from within, and 2) in English "_allow_" is active, so it needs an object ("myself").

The way you said it, "_but I didn't dare allow to_," it begs the question "Didn't allow *who* to??!?"

See what I mean?

So I agreed with you originally that it seems the "allowing" is coming from within--because "I" am the one daring--and that's why I originally said "allow myself to."

However, the passive is perfectly fine as well since it implies the allowing is within. That is, _I dare to be allowed to do X = I dare allow myself to do X_, except that the former is closer to the original German.

Edit: Actually, those two are slightly different in meaning...philosophically speaking.  Better to just stick with the former, as it's closer to the German.


----------



## johndot

I would have wished it well enough, but didn’t trust to dare as much.
 
Could that work? (Even though I've 'altered it a bit'!)


----------



## brian

No.... that has a much different meaning.... well, many meanings. It's very ambiguous and different.


----------



## Sidjanga

johndot said:


> I would have wished it well enough, but didn’t trust to dare as much.
> 
> Could that work? (Even though I've 'altered it a bit'!)


Hm, above all, I really don't think that _dare _appropriately reflects the meaning of _dürfen_ here.


----------



## highcs

brian8733 said:


> This is exactly why I originally translated it as "_allow *myself* to_"--because 1) I think the "allowing" comes from within, and 2) in English "_allow_" is active, so it needs an object ("myself").
> 
> The way you said it, "_but I didn't dare allow to_," it begs the question "Didn't allow *who* to??!?"
> 
> See what I mean?



Yes, I do see what you mean - except that I think it's clear from the context who is allowing... since the I is already there in the first clause.  And the German - although perhaps not initially clear - is so....  clean and simple in it's construction.... I wanted to keep that feeling if I could.



brian8733 said:


> So I agreed with you originally that it seems the "allowing" is coming from within--because "I" am the one daring--and that's why I originally said "allow myself to."
> 
> However, the passive is perfectly fine as well since it implies the allowing is within. That is, _I dare to be allowed to do X = I dare allow myself to do X_, except that the former is closer to the original German.
> 
> Edit: Actually, those two are slightly different in meaning...philosophically speaking.  Better to just stick with the former, as it's closer to the German.



You lost me here - which one is the former?



Thank you!!!


----------



## brian

The former is: _I dare to be allowed to do X_.

Or within the sentence: *...but I dare not be allowed to.*

Simply put, "_but I dare not allow to_" violates English idiom because it is ungrammatical... it makes no sense--not just from a philosophical/logical point of view, but from a grammatical point of view. The word _allow_ requires an object in English.

It's the same reason why you can't say, for example, _Computers allow to communicate easily. _ You must say _Computers allow *you/people/us* to communicate easily. 
_


----------



## highcs

Ok!!!  
So I'll put the myself back in and I think that will solve the problem - yes?
(Please tell me yes - I want to go to bed!!!!  lol)

_I would have wanted to have liked to, but I didn’t dare to allow myself to._


----------



## brian

Yeah that's fine... although technically I think we decided that "_didn't dare (to*) *be allowed to*_" was technically more correct/closer to the German. 

*I prefer _dare be allowed_ without "_to_" (just like "Don't you dare enter that house" instead of "Don't you dare *to* enter that house").


----------



## Lykurg

brian8733 said:
			
		

> However, the passive is perfectly fine as well since it implies the allowing is within. That is, _I dare to be allowed to do X = I dare allow myself to do X_, except that the former is closer to the original German.


Brian, I am not so sure that the allowing comes from within - so I'd second Sigianga's "to be allowed to" here.


----------



## rio1

How about this:

I would indeed have liked to have wanted to, but I didn't dare to allow myself.


----------

