# déjà



## hamlet

Comment traduit-on 'deja' dans une phrase comme :
"Il y a deux definitions : alors que la premiere est positive, la deuxieme est DEJA plus sarcastique"


----------



## pieanne

I'd use "already"


----------



## Tweety20

je n'utilise aussi que already mais comme en francias je pense que tout est dans l'intonation, en effet le deja positif et le DEJA negatif n'a pas la meme intonation en francais, à mon humble avis je dirai que c'est la meme chose en anglais!


----------



## Trisia

Yes, already would normally do, but I'm trying to find something else too.

There are two definitions. Whilst the first one is positive/has a positive connotation, the second is slightly more sarcastic.

I think it depends a lot on the context. Are they trying to compare the two definitions?


----------



## hamlet

no they're exposing 2 definitions of a word


----------



## pieanne

It's true that "already" is not really required in the sentence...
I guess it could be, were there a third and definitely negative definition.


----------



## hunternet

peut-être "the second tends to be more sarcastic"


----------



## hamlet

En fait, j'ai ecrit : "Yet the second already tends toward a more sarcastic meaning" et mon prof a barre le already..


----------



## hamlet

Il ya une explication à cela?


----------



## broglet

hamlet said:


> Comment traduit-on 'deja' dans une phrase comme :
> "Il y a deux definitions : alors que la premiere est positive, la deuxieme est DEJA plus sarcastique"


'déjà' n'est pas 'already' ici!  

Est-ce que quelqu'un peut expliquer en français précisément qu'est-ce que c'est que le mot 'déjà' ajoute à la signification de la phrase ?


----------



## dunescratcheur

hamlet said:


> Comment traduit-on 'deja' dans une phrase comme :
> "Il y a deux definitions : alors que la premiere est positive, la deuxieme est DEJA plus sarcastique"



Alors, moi, je dirais "rather more"


----------



## hamlet

broglet said:


> 'déjà' n'est pas 'already' ici!
> 
> Est-ce que quelqu'un peut expliquer en français précisément qu'est-ce que c'est que le mot 'déjà' ajoute à la signification de la phrase ?



C'est une expression que je ne sais pas vraiment expliquer mais qui donne de la dynamique à la phrase. Je peux donner un autre exemple de phrase :

"Ce tableau est issu d'une période triste. Celui-là par-contre tend DEJA vers quelque chose de plus joyeux"


----------



## broglet

Merci hamlet.  C'est difficile.  Je me demande si un mot comme 'definitely' est l'équivalent:

"This picture is from a sad period.  There is, however, definitely something more joyful about this one"

"There are two definitions: while the first is positive, the second is definitely more sarcastic"


----------



## dunescratcheur

broglet said:


> 'déjà' n'est pas 'already' ici!
> 
> Est-ce que quelqu'un peut expliquer en français précisément qu'est-ce que c'est que le mot 'déjà' ajoute à la signification de la phrase ?



"rather" - j'y tiens!


----------



## mungolina

'rather' is good - 'somewhat' would work as well. 'Definitely' is not bad, but it works better in the second example, which is moving from negative to positive, than it does in the original you want to translate, which goes from positive to negative!


----------



## Blancheneige

In the context of this thread, "déjà" reinforces an affirmation. Another example: "_Ce n'est déjà pas si mal!_" -> "That's not bad at all"
Could it be that there is no set word in English to translate this, and that it just depends on the sentence/context ?


----------



## Sweetnersmiling

I'd say "is a lot more sarcastic" It's an intensifier, here.


----------



## broglet

Blancheneige said:


> In the context of this thread, "déjà" reinforces an affirmation. Another example: "_Ce n'est déjà pas si mal!_" -> "That's not bad at all"
> Could it be that there is no set word in English to translate this, and that it just depends on the sentence/context ?


C'est déjà toujours vrai en plus!


----------



## mungolina

C'est déjà ça, en effet.

Sweetnersmiling, I think 'a lot more' is too strong. If you wanted to make it stronger, you might say 'considerably'. I certainly wouldn't go further than 'quite a lot more'.


----------



## broglet

mungolina said:


> 'rather' is good - 'somewhat' would work as well. 'Definitely' is not bad, but it works better in the second example, which is moving from negative to positive, than it does in the original you want to translate, which goes from positive to negative!


That definitely seems rather debatable


----------



## Sweetnersmiling

Actually, you don't need to translate DEJA in English, just get rid of it. There's only a slight intensification operating here that seems to be really hard to adapt, so I think you don't need to translate it. What's important is not DEJA, it's the fact that it's "more sarcastic." in the sentence.
So I'd say, forget about DEJA here.


----------



## broglet

Sweetnersmiling said:


> Actually, you don't need to translate DEJA in English, just get rid of it. There's only a slight intensification operating here that seems to be really hard to adapt, so I think you don't need to translate it. What's important is not DEJA, it's the fact that it's "more sarcastic." in the sentence.
> So I'd say, forget about DEJA here.


What you say here seems at odds with what you said in your previous post!  Have you changed your mind?  Oxford-Hachette says that this usage of 'déjà' is 'pour renforcer' - so the question that needs answering is "What word(s) in English convey a similar degree of _renforcement _or is it such a slight_ renforcement_ as to be more or less meaningless?" I suspect there is no single answer but one has to look at each case separately.


----------



## mally pense

This is a fascinating discussion, and it seems to me that there is probably no single word to fit every case. However, for the following example:



> "_Ce n'est déjà pas si mal!_" -> "That's not bad at all"


 
I'm surprised that "so" is not used in the translation, e.g. "That's not so bad at all", but I'm wondering if "really" (a re-inforcing word I overuse myself) might not word here, as in "That's really not so bad" ?

For the other examples, I'm wondering if "a little" would work (on the same lines as someone else's "slightly"? _(sorry, can't cite easily, it's on another page)_


----------



## hamlet

Pour la phrase "C'est déjà pas si mal", je trouve que "That's not (so) bad at all" ne véhicule pas vraiment la même idée. "That's not bad at all" est plutôt un compliment alors que "c'est déjà pas si mal" est plus : "He did his best, take it or leave it"


----------



## mally pense

hamlet, peut-etre vous avez raison 

Mally


----------



## mungolina

If you just say 'that's not so bad', it give the rather doubtful feel.


----------



## Aoyama

*Il y a deux definitions : alors que la premiere est positive, la deuxieme est DEJA plus sarcastique*

D'abord, l'emploi de *déjà* est éminemment critiquable ici. Il n'apporte rien et c'est en fait un simple _tic de langue_ . On peut s'en passer.

*There are two definitions : while/whereas the first one is positive, the second one seems/sounds more sarcastic.*


----------



## hamlet

Désolé mais je suis pas d'accord


----------



## marget

Aoyama said:


> *Il y a deux definitions : alors que la premiere est positive, la deuxieme est DEJA plus sarcastique*
> 
> D'abord, l'emploi de *déjà* est éminemment critiquable ici. Il n'apporte rien et c'est en fait un simple _tic de langue_ . On peut s'en passer.
> 
> *There are two definitions : while/whereas the first one is positive, the second one seems/sounds more sarcastic.*


 

To use "more" sarcastic in the second half, I would that that some degree of sarcasm would have to be attributed to the first definition.


----------



## hamlet

Comment peut-on traduire "deja" dans la phrase suivante :
"Deja que hier tu n'as rien fait, tu pourrais nous aider maintenant"
"Beaucoup de gens m'embetent : deja le chien, et puis lui lui et lui"

Merci


----------



## SwissPete

hamlet said:


> Comment peut-on traduire "deja" dans la phrase suivante :
> "Deja que hier tu n'as rien fait, tu pourrais nous aider maintenant"
> "Beaucoup de gens m'embetent : deja le chien, et puis lui lui et lui"
> 
> Merci


 
Already you did nothing yesterday ***; could you help us now?
A lot of people bug me: first the dog, and him and him and him.

But again, in the first sentence, the _déjà_ is not needed (_tu n'as rien fait hier_), so it could also be left out in English.

*** Is is too colloquial?


----------



## coiffe

marget said:


> To use "more" sarcastic in the second half, I would that that some degree of sarcasm would have to be attributed to the first definition.



I agree with this, and would suggest "rather," as stated before, or "even rather," i.e. "Whereas the first one is positive, the second is even rather sarcastic."


----------



## Aoyama

> Comment peut-on traduire "deja" dans la phrase suivante :
> "Deja que hier tu n'as rien fait, tu pourrais nous aider maintenant"
> "Beaucoup de gens m'embetent : deja le chien, et puis lui lui et lui"


As I said in my post #27, this use of *deja* is "idiosyncratical". Though correct and reasonnably frequent, it is colloquial.
- To begin with, you didn't do anything yesterday. You could [very well] help us now.
- lots of folks are nagging me : it started with the dog, now him, him and him.


----------



## hamlet

Si on veut utiliser "déjà" pour comparer, comme dans "Cette explication est mauvaise, l'autre est déjà plus sérieuse"? Si on dit simplement "This is a bad explanation (c'est correct de dire "this explanation is bad"?), the other one is more serious", j'ai l'impression que le lien entre les deux propositions manque..


----------



## ottawaguy

hamlet said:


> Comment traduit-on 'deja' dans une phrase comme :
> "Il y a deux definitions : alors que la premiere est positive, la deuxieme est DEJA plus sarcastique"


 
I would say one is positive and the second one is more or less sarcastic.


----------



## hamlet

hamlet said:


> Si on veut utiliser "déjà" pour comparer, comme dans "Cette explication est mauvaise, l'autre est déjà plus sérieuse"? Si on dit simplement "This is a bad explanation (c'est correct de dire "this explanation is bad"?), the other one is more serious", j'ai l'impression que le lien entre les deux propositions manque..



In fact I'd asked this


----------



## ottawaguy

My apologies

What about, this is a bad explanation but the other is just as bad if not worse?


----------



## Aoyama

> Si on veut utiliser "déjà" pour comparer, comme dans "Cette explication est mauvaise, l'autre est déjà plus sérieuse"? Si on dit simplement "This is a bad explanation (c'est correct de dire "this explanation is bad"?), the other one is more serious", j'ai l'impression que le lien entre les deux propositions manque..


Plutôt que le lien, c'est la _nuance_ dans le lien qui manque ...



> What about, this is a bad explanation but the other is just as bad if not worse?


 Not really ...

Le problème est qu'ici _déjà_ est une figure de style idiomatique ou idiosyncratique qui est difficile à rendre :
This is a bad explanation  the other one* looks/appears*  more serious.


----------



## hamlet

peut-être "That explanation is bad while this other one looks more serious"... C'est correct "this explanation is bad"?


----------

