# باق - باقية حتى الآن



## Huda

Please help me.
What's the appropriate translation of this phrase in the following sentence?
بنيت على قمة الجبل عدة أبنية عسكرية مازالت آثارها باقية حتى الآن
I have this suggestion: their remains are still left over up till now.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## elroy

...whose remains survive to this day.


----------



## Mahaodeh

I understand that 'whose' has been used for inanimate objects historically, even by some of the top English authors. However, personally I don't feel comfortable with that and if it were me I would use 'which' instead. Since 'which' is not possessive, I would re-phrase to: 

… traces of which survive/remain to this day.


----------



## ayed

maha, you could avoid "whose" 
Several military buildings were constructed on the hilltop, with some remains servive (still are visible)


----------



## elroy

In modern English, “whose” is entirely unremarkable in reference to inanimate objects. 

Also, the two suggested rewordings do not refer to all the remains, as in the original.


----------



## Mahaodeh

elroy said:


> Also, the two suggested rewordings do not refer to all the remains, as in the original.



I'm confused, how does my suggestion not refer to all? Is it because I used 'traces'? If so, then I only used traces because I felt that it is a more accurate translation of آثار. 

If on the other hand what was meant by آثار is actually أطلال then I believe the word in English should be ruins: _several military buildings were constructed on the hilltop/mountain top, *the ruins of which still survive/remain to this day*._


----------



## elroy

آثار is definitely used to mean "remains/ruins" and not just "traces"  ("archaeology" is علم الآثار), and it's obvious the former is meant in this context. 

But no, that wasn't the issue.  "Traces of which" means "some traces of which."


----------



## Ibn Nacer

In french (lol) : ...des bâtiments militaires dont les vestiges perdurent/subsistent jusqu'à aujourd'hui

J'ai traduit le mot آثار  par "vestiges"...


----------



## Mahaodeh

elroy said:


> "Traces of which" means "some traces of which."


So the issue is that it's indefinite? Maybe if it were _the _traces of which?


----------



## elroy

Yes, but “the X of which” is generally an inelegant alternative to “whose X.”


----------



## Ibn Nacer

If I delete مازالت, does the sentence sound fine to you? 

بنيت على قمة الجبل عدة أبنية عسكرية آثارها باقية حتى الآن


----------



## elroy

Yes, that works.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

elroy said:


> Yes, but “the X of which” is generally an inelegant alternative to “whose X.”


Google translates my translation into French ("_...des bâtiments militaires dont les vestiges perdurent/subsistent jusqu'à aujourd'hui_") by "... military buildings *whose* vestiges remain / remain until today"

He uses "*whose*"...


elroy said:


> Yes, that works.


Thank you.
Does مازالت  add emphasis ?
I do not think anyone translated this part, right? Unless the verb "survive" is already strong ? 

If I translated this part then the sentence would be heavy :
_...des bâtiments militaires dont les vestiges perdurent/subsistent *toujours* jusqu'à aujourd'hui_ 
_...des bâtiments militaires dont les vestiges *continuent *de subsister jusqu'à aujourd'hui_ 

In French the verb "perdurer" is already strong enough, in addition the part "حتى الآن" (_ jusqu'à aujourd'hui_) confirms the meaning.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Ibn Nacer said:


> He uses "*whose*"...


I'm not saying that the use of whose is incorrect, at least not in English. I believe Shakespear used it to refer to inanimate objects, meaning that it's been correct for at least the last four centuries. I was saying that I, myself, am not comfortable with it. I'm not alone in this, a lot of people try to avoid using whose to refer to inanimate objects even though it's not incorrect.



elroy said:


> آثار is definitely used to mean "remains/ruins" and not just "traces"  ("archaeology" is علم الآثار),



I'm aware of the modern usage. I'm just sometimes a little picky about the words. It _is _sometimes used to refer to ruins in modern days, but technically it means _'the signs left after the thing is gone_' as in آثار الأقدام.



Ibn Nacer said:


> If I delete مازالت, does the sentence sound fine to you?
> 
> بنيت على قمة الجبل عدة أبنية عسكرية آثارها باقية حتى الآن



It seems fine to me. I prefer it with ما زالت أو لا زالت but I don't think that this is wrong. I feel (and it's just a feeling, I have no explanation for it) that ما زالت pulls the two parts of the sentence together. 


Ibn Nacer said:


> Does مازالت add emphasis ?



No, not really.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Thank you.



Mahaodeh said:


> I'm aware of the modern usage. I'm just sometimes a little picky about the words. It _is _sometimes used to refer to ruins in modern days, but technically it means _'the signs left after the thing is gone_' as in آثار الأقدام.


I translated this word by "vestige" and if we look at the definition of this word (vestige), for example (source :Définitions : vestige - Dictionnaire de français Larousse)


> Marque, trace laissée par quelque chose qui a été détruit : Les vestiges d'un ancien temple grec.



This is close to what you said (_'the signs left after the thing is gone_')...


----------



## elroy

It should be made clear, in case it isn't already, that Maha's objections to "whose" for inanimates and to آثار meaning "ruins" are personal idiosyncrasies.  I doubt that "a lot" of English speakers object to "whose" for inanimates, and آثار is not just used "sometimes" to mean "ruins": it is _the_ default, standard word for "ruins," and the same root is used for things related to archaeology.  I wonder what Maha would call an archaeologist or an archeological site if not عالم آثار and موقع أثري? 

المعاني says:

علم الآثار : العلم الخاصّ بدراسة القديم من تاريخ الحضارات الإنسانيّة ، أو علم معرفة بقايا القوم من أبنية وتماثيل ونقود وفنون وحضارة 
عالِم الآثار : من يدرس الآثار ويهتمّ بمعرفتها ، 
دار الآثار : متحف يضم آثارًا معيَّنة
تعريف و شرح و معنى أثر بالعربي في معاجم اللغة العربية معجم المعاني الجامع، المعجم الوسيط ،اللغة العربية المعاصر ،الرائد ،لسان العرب ،القاموس المحيط  - معجم عربي عربي صفحة 1

In this long thread, the objection to "whose" for inanimates is clearly a minority opinion.  Note that in the face of strong arguments, the most adamant proponent of this view backs down in #46.


----------

