# contrapié



## mk292

Hola, como puedo traducir 'contrapié'? Estoy traduciendo un artículo del País y la frase es... la mayor tasa de paro en la crisis ha cogido a contrapié a los analistos y al propio Ministerio de Trabajo, que confiaban en un mínimo aumento de la ocupación...

Muchas gracias
MK


----------



## Unbelievable13

"A contrapié" es una expresión que se utiliza en sentido figurado para referirse a una situación forzada o inesperada. Puedes buscar una frase equivalente a ese signficado en inglés.


----------



## Vol Nation

I would say "...ha cogido a contrapié a los analistos..." = ..."has caught analysts off-guard..."


----------



## Spug

Si quieres mantener la metáfora deportiva, puedes usar _wrongfoot_:

the high unemployment rate during the crisis has wrongfooted analysts...


----------



## albertovidal

_...has caught analysts on the wrong foot_?


----------



## Spug

albertovidal said:


> _...has caught analysts on the wrong foot_?




Hola alberto... sí, también sirve. Un saludo.


----------



## albertovidal

Spug said:


> Hola alberto... sí, también sirve. Un saludo.



Gracias, spug. ¡Siempre tan gentil, despejándome dudas!
Saludos


----------



## Filis Cañí

albertovidal said:


> _...has caught analysts on the wrong foot_?



Yo creo que la metáfora tiene más que ver con el baile que con el deporte, por eso prefiero su traducción, Alberto.

Lo de "analistos" tiene miga: Pundits?


----------



## Vol Nation

Though technically I believe "caught on the wrong foot" does mean what the writers above imply, I simply do not think many people would use it in this context, i.e. a news report about unemployment rates "surprising" analysts.  (I am speaking for the U.S. only, as that's what I know.)  If I saw that in a newspaper, I would think it odd.  I have seen that expression, but mainly (a) in British English (upon which I cannot comment), (b) in very specific and mostly literal contexts in American English, and (c) in foreign newspapers translating the news into English.  

As for the metaphor, if it's a crisis the comparison would be to "fighting." Indeed, politicians talk all the time about "fighting unemployment."  I say this fits well because "catching somebody off-guard" is a term commonly used in the "fighting" sports of boxing and fencing (among others).


----------



## Filis Cañí

_A contrapie _doesn't mean off-guard, Vol Nation, it has a different nuance (although you could say that both expressions walk hand in hand).

 Maybe "out of step" is better than "on the wrong foot".

(_Analisto_ is a made-up funny word, combining _analista_ with _listo_.)


----------



## Vol Nation

Filis Cañí said:


> _A contrapie _doesn't mean off-guard, Vol Nation, it has a different nuance (although you could say that both expressions walk hand in hand).
> 
> Maybe "out of step" is better than "on the wrong foot".
> 
> (_Analisto_ is a made-up funny word, combining _analista_ with _listo_.)



Ok.  I am just saying to be caught "off-guard" is a set phrase in contexts such as the one given above. If "contrapié" does not mean off-guard (but rather "goes" hand in hand), we need to wait for a good translation for this context.  None of the ones given fit.  Here is a link that uses "off-guard" in the context of unexpected unemployment rates:

http://www.allbusiness.com/economy-economic-indicators/economic-conditions-recession/13275455-1.html


----------



## Spug

Vol Nation said:


> As for the metaphor, if it's a crisis the comparison would be to "fighting." Indeed, politicians talk all the time about "fighting unemployment."  I say this fits well because "catching somebody off-guard" is a term commonly used in the "fighting" sports of boxing and fencing (among others).




I don't think I understand your comment... the analysts were _cogido de contrapie_ because the unemployment rate rose, whereas they had been expecting a slight increase in employment. The metaphor refers to the reaction of the analysts rather than to the politicians' efforts to lower unemployment. Am I missing something?


----------



## VocabloTrad

Filis Cañí said:


> _A contrapie _doesn't mean off-guard, Vol Nation, it has a different nuance (although you could say that both expressions walk hand in hand).
> 
> Maybe "out of step" is better than "on the wrong foot".
> 
> (_Analisto_ is a made-up funny word, combining _analista_ with _listo_.)



How about:

"...has flown in the face of the so-called experts..."

or simply

"...has gone against the number crunchers..."


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> Ok.  I am just saying to be caught "off-guard" is a set phrase in contexts such as the one given above. If "contrapié" does not mean off-guard (but rather "goes" hand in hand), we need to wait for a good translation for this context.  None of the ones given fit.  Here is a link that uses "off-guard" in the context of unexpected unemployment rates:
> 
> http://www.allbusiness.com/economy-economic-indicators/economic-conditions-recession/13275455-1.html



I would find it more helpful if you argued why "on the wrong foot" or "out of step" don't fit, now that you know what "a contrapie" means. 

How do you like "the pundits where caught whistling the wrong tune"?


----------



## Vol Nation

Spug said:


> I don't think I understand your comment... the analysts were _cogido de contrapie_ because the unemployment rate rose, whereas they had been expecting a slight increase in employment. The metaphor refers to the reaction of the analysts rather than to the politicians' efforts to lower unemployment. Am I missing something?



Probably not   My reasoning is not that important.  My main points were that "analysts being caught off-guard" seemed a fairtranslation because (a) it fairly conveys the meaning of the original sentence, and (b) news reports use that phrase all the time to convey analysts' surprise/shock when something unexpected happens, i.e it sounds like how people speak and receive the news in English.


----------



## albertovidal

*a contrapié: *En el tenis, se pilla al rival _a  contrapié_ al lanzar la bola hacia el lado opuesto al que el rival  espera, de forma que este no sea capaz de rectificar su movimiento a  tiempo.
_"off-balance"_?


----------



## Billbasque

"A contrapié" only means that both analysts and policy makers were expecting one thing (an increase in employment), but they got something else (an increase in unemployment). Since they had probably made provisions/forecasts/etc.. based on that different scenario that didn't turn out to be true, they were in a way caught "off-guard", and were left to redo all the work according to the new reality.


----------



## Filis Cañí

albertovidal said:


> _"off-balance"_?



Perita en dulce, Alberto. Ni siquiera Vol Nation podrá oponerse a _off balance_.


----------



## Vol Nation

Billbasque said:


> "A contrapié" only means that both analysts and policy makers were expecting one thing (an increase in employment), but they got something else (an increase in unemployment). Since they had probably made provisions/forecasts/etc.. based on that different scenario that didn't turn out to be true, they were in a way caught "off-guard", and were left to redo all the work according to the new reality.



  Billbasque, gracias.  Me gusta su explicación.

Y en cuanto a "off-balance," no es incorrecto; de hecho, las dos palabras son muy parecidas, y "off-guard" es la mejor traducción.  Es una frase muy común y se entenderá inmediatamente en todas partes.

Otro ejemplo:

http://m.examiner.com/exSanFrancisco/pm_75809/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=pB6862v7


----------



## Spug

albertovidal said:


> *a contrapié: *En el tenis, se pilla al rival _a  contrapié_ al lanzar la bola hacia el lado opuesto al que el rival  espera, de forma que este no sea capaz de rectificar su movimiento a  tiempo.
> _"off-balance"_?




alberto, con tu permiso, una pregunta... ¿también se usa _coger de contrapie_ en cuanto al fútbol?


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> . . . "off-guard" es la mejor traducción.



So, unable to find any other natives to agree with you, you resort to the oldest of rhetorical devices: "my translation is the best because I say so". 


Using the tennis analogy, the players weren't caught staring at their belly buttons, off guard, but actually very well guarded though running _in the wrong direction.
_


----------



## Vol Nation

Filis Cañí said:


> So, unable to find any other natives to agree with you, you resort to the oldest of rhetorical devices: "my translation is the best because I say so".
> 
> 
> Using the tennis analogy, the players weren't caught staring at their belly buttons, off guard, but actually very well guarded though running _in the wrong direction.
> _



  You obviously didn't read Billbasque's comment.  He is a very apt bi-linguist and his definition squared with mine.  And your tennis analogy shows you don't know what "off-guard" means.  You just gave the definition of off-guard!!!!  If you are caught by surprise, or off-balance, you are caught off-guard.  It is a colloquial expression that comprehends exactly the situation you described.  Alberto's example was perfect; it's just not said in the context we are talking about.  As for examples from natives, I provided 2 news articles in English that were directly on point and answered the question.  Everyone else seemed to accept them.

And please watch your tone.  I do not like it.  And it is worse when you are wrong, and you were wrong.  It is OK to be wrong; I am wrong sometimes, too.  But turning abusive is not helpful.  We look forward to your future input.

Thanks,
Vol Nation


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> You obviously didn't read Billbasque's comment.



Not only did I read it, I also understood it. He told you the same thing I told you before: that even if one expression usually implies the other, they are not the same.

I am sorry that I hurt your feelings.


----------



## albertovidal

Spug said:


> alberto, con tu permiso, una pregunta... ¿también se usa _coger de contrapi*é*_ en cuanto al fútbol?



Sí, sin duda, cuando un futbolista hace un amago de ir hacia un lado, el futbolista contrario inclina su cuerpo hacia ese mismo lado. Cuando el primero de los futbolistas (el que hizo el amago) va hacia el lugar opuesto al que apuntó al principio, el segundo futbolista queda con su inercia desplazado en el sentido contrario hacia donde debería haber ido o girado. Entiendo que en inglés se diría que "the soccer player (the second one) got off-balanced" o _"lo cogió a contrapié"_


----------



## Vol Nation

Filis Cañí said:


> Not only did I read it, I also understood it. He told you the same thing I told you before: that even if one expression usually implies the other, they are not the same.
> 
> I am sorry that I hurt your feelings.



That's not what he said.  And I don't know what else to say: "Caught off-guard" is the native way to express the thought in question.  It just is; the news articles I posted affirmatively showed that. 

And abusive behavior does not hurt my feelings.  Haha....If only you knew what I do for a living!!  But abusive behavior IS against forum rules.  So, again I caution you to watch it.  So long as you are cordial, we welcome and look forward to your input in the future.
-Vol Nation


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> That's not what he said.  And I don't know what else to say: "Caught off-guard" is the native way to express the thought in question.  It just is; the news articles I posted affirmatively showed that.
> 
> And abusive behavior does not hurt my feelings.  Haha....If only you knew what I do for a living!!  But abusive behavior IS against forum rules.  So, again I caution you to watch it.  So long as you are cordial, we welcome and look forward to your input in the future.
> -Vol Nation



Two other natives proposed different ways to express the same idea. Maybe your "nativeness" is better than theirs?

If you think that me pointing out how you are tooting your own horn is abusive behavior, you only need to report it to the moderators. 

Who is _we_? Are you using the majestic plural on yourself now?


----------



## Spug

albertovidal said:


> Sí, sin duda, cuando un futbolista hace un amago de ir hacia un lado, el futbolista contrario inclina su cuerpo hacia ese mismo lado. Cuando el primero de los futbolistas (el que hizo el amago) va hacia el lugar opuesto al que apuntó al principio, el segundo futbolista queda con su inercia desplazado en el sentido contrario hacia donde debería haber ido o girado. Entiendo que en inglés se diría que "the soccer player (the second one) got off-balanced" o _"lo cogió a contrapié"_



Don alberto, gracias por responder mi pregunta y por corregir mi error de tipeo.  En inglés el verbo _wrongfoot _se encuentra muy frecuentmente en contextos del fútbol. Un abrazo...


----------



## ptak30

Vol Nation said:


> That's not what he said.  And I don't know  what else to say: "Caught off-guard" is the native way to express the  thought in question.  It just is; the news articles I posted  affirmatively showed that.
> 
> And abusive behavior does not hurt my feelings.  Haha....If only you  knew what I do for a living!!  But abusive behavior IS against forum  rules.  So, again I caution you to watch it.  So long as you are  cordial, we welcome and look forward to your input in the future.
> -Vol Nation



Off guard according to Webster's means "in an unprepared or unsuspecting  state". Other dictionaries refer to being "caught napping". Most, if  not all, the Spanish-speaking contributors are right on the money with  wrongfooted, off balance. caught them on the wrong foot. etc.These are the sort of tactics invariably found in European games with well-matched opponents. The analysts were not looking the other way or napping - to extend the metaphor they were on the wrong platform.
I don't think that defending your position by "It's a set phrase" or "It's our native way of describing things" (I paraphrase) is helpful. There was absolutely nothing abusive in Filis's posts, but I did find your use of the papal "we" rather amusing.


----------



## Vol Nation

ptak30 said:


> Off guard according to Webster's means "in an unprepared or unsuspecting state". Other dictionaries refer to being "caught napping". Most, if not all, the Spanish-speaking contributors are right on the money with wrongfooted, off balance. caught them on the wrong foot. etc.These are the sort of tactics invariably found in European games with well-matched opponents. The analysts were not looking the other way or napping - to extend the metaphor they were on the wrong platform.
> I don't think that defending your position by "It's a set phrase" or "It's our native way of describing things" (I paraphrase) is helpful. There was absolutely nothing abusive in Filis's posts, but I did find your use of the papal "we" rather amusing.



Yes, you are paraphrasing.  I did not defend my position by saying "it's our native way of describing things."  I said it's a set phrase because it is; it is simply how news outlets here in the U.S. describe the situation presented.  But I _defended_ my position by attaching two news articles (of the many I found) that supported my point.  

Finally, I was not using the royal "we."  Perhaps I was being a bit presumptive, but I was speaking on behalf of all those on the thread.  I value Filis's input, and I am sure others do as well.


----------



## ptak30

Vol Nation said:


> Yes, you are paraphrasing.  I did not defend my position by saying "it's our native way of describing things."  I said it's a set phrase because it is; it is simply how news outlets here in the U.S. describe the situation presented.  But I _defended_ my position by attaching two news articles (of the many I found) that supported my point.
> 
> Finally, I was not using the royal "we."  Perhaps I was being a bit presumptive, but I was speaking on behalf of all those on the thread.  I value Filis's input, and I am sure others do as well.


That made it even more amusing, since you seemed to be at odds with the majority of people in the thread. Your statement saying "....I caution you to watch it"  to Filis sounded like a threat to me. I thought that sort of thing was against the forum rules.


----------



## Vol Nation

If you read the thread, "it" modifies "tone." And what qualifies by your subjective standard, and moreover as someone who was not involved in the discussion, as a threat is not important to me.  (I made no threat.)  I also do not think Filis needs a defender; he and I have chatted in the past and he is quite capable of speaking for himself -- and doing it very well in 2 languages. In any event, I am quite sure that replowing this ground serves no one's interest. 

Turning to the substance at hand: What would be your suggestion as to the best and most natural translation of the original text into English?


----------



## The Prof

How about simply:  ... _took _... _and even _... _by surprise_?


----------



## Vol Nation

The Prof said:


> How about simply: ... _took _... _and even _... _by surprise_?



  Hahaha.....Sometimes brilliance requires nothing more than discarding the nuances and proceeding with the simple.  I think everyone can agree on the propriety of caught/took "analysts by _*surprise*_."


----------



## mijoch

"Were caught with their knickers in a twist"

M.


----------



## ptak30

...." were side-stepped...." 
....."were nutmegged....."
but I prefer "caught on the wrong foot" or "caught off balance".as has been suggested before.


----------



## albertovidal

In don't think "by surprise" is what the OP means in his/her phrase.


----------



## The Prof

If someone is caught/taken by surprise, it can mean that they are caught unprepared - that is how I interpreted the original post.


----------



## albertovidal

I don't think they were caught unprepared but on the wrong direction.


----------



## Vol Nation

The Prof said:


> If someone is caught/taken by surprise, it can mean that they are caught unprepared - that is how I interpreted the original post.



And to address a previous (and valid) point: If you are taken by surprise, it can mean you were "unprepared" for what ultimately happened.  In other words, you were 100% prepared for some other result; you were "taken by surprise" -- or caught "off balance" or "off-guard" or "on the wrong foot" or whatever we wish to say -- with repsect to what in fact transpired.  

So, AlbertoVidal's tennis analogy was a good one for "taken by surprise": You were expecting your opponent to hit one shot (and you were well-prepared for that shot), and the shot he in fact hit "caught/took you by surprise."


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> If you read the thread, "it" modifies "tone." And what qualifies by your subjective standard, and moreover as someone who was not involved in the discussion, as a threat is not important to me.  (I made no threat.)  I also do not think Filis needs a defender; he and I have chatted in the past and he is quite capable of speaking for himself -- and doing it very well in 2 languages. In any event, I am quite sure that replowing this ground serves no one's interest.
> 
> Turning to the substance at hand: What would be your suggestion as to the best and most natural translation of the original text into English?



_I _also took it as a threat (empty as it is), but I hold no grudge against you. I would have preferred something with more teeth, though, to be honest.  

I already opined that I found Alberto's find excellent (without putting down anyone else's contributions), and still think so, emboldened by the other natives' opinions.

My opinion on "off guard" is that it is a perfectly good option, since using it doesn't change at all what the writer is really trying to say. Same with "by surprise". That said, I still believe they don't mean the same as "off balance". If our native OP believes that "off balance" would sound funny, I'd recommend replacing it with "off guard", "by surprise", "with their knickers around their ankles", or whatever other similar expression he/she prefers.


----------



## albertovidal

Vol Nation: Sorry but I disagree with you. The tennis example means that one player had his/her body tilted towards one side and the othe player serviced to the opposite side, so the first player could get balanced to racket the ball back.


----------



## Vol Nation

Filis, In retrospect I can see that perhaps my choice of words was imprudent; but I assure you I meant no threat.  If you took my words as a threat, I sincerely apologize.  (There is no sarcasm here.  Being a Tennesseean, apologies don't come easy; but I'll give them where deserved.  And you deserve one.)

To the substance:  I actually think the crux of what's happening here revolves around how the two languages -- and in fact the British and Americans, and even different parts of America -- "think about" things.  The way you think about a situation informs how you express it, obviously.   

 In any event, (erveryone knows!) I prefer "off-guard."  I like it because I think it's the best option (obviously, or I would like some other option better).  That said, I'm not wedded it.  It's just an opinion -- and you know what they say about those!!


----------



## Spug

Filis Cañí said:


> My opinion on "off guard" is that it is a perfectly good option, since using it doesn't change at all what the writer is really trying to say. Same with "by surprise". That said, I still believe they don't mean the same as "off balance". If our native OP believes that "off balance" would sound funny, I'd recommend replacing it with "off guard", "by surprise", "with their knickers around their ankles", or whatever other similar expression he/she prefers.




I agree with you—and there is an important point implicit in  your comment. To wit: just as with most phrases, there are many ways of translating _cogido de contrapie_ into English (British, American, or any other variety) that retain the essence of the Spanish, given its context. Un saludo...


----------



## Vol Nation

albertovidal said:


> Vol Nation: Sorry but I disagree with you. The tennis example means that one player had his/her body tilted towards one side and the othe player serviced to the opposite side, so the first player could get balanced to racket the ball back.



*En el tenis, se pilla al rival a contrapié al lanzar la bola hacia el lado opuesto al que el rival espera, de forma que este no sea capaz de rectificar su movimiento a tiempo.

*OK. I understood your example, in pertinent part, to say that a player may catch his opponent "off-balance" by hitting the ball to the side opposite that which his opponent expects.  In this case, the opponent expected you to hit the ball to one side and you hit it to the other.  You rightly point out that the opponent can be said to have been caught "off-balance."  I was only saying that this event may also fairly be described as catching the opponent "by surprise."

I hope I didn't misunderstand.  If I did, please accept my apologies.


----------



## Vol Nation

Spug said:


> I agree with you—and there is an important point implicit in your comment. To wit: just as with most phrases, there are many ways of translating _cogido de contrapie_ into English (British, American, or any other variety) that retain the essence of the Spanish, given its context. Un saludo...



I actually agree.  After thinking about it, it finally hit me that this thread is an excellent example of how language works.  I think it points out that different speakers prefer different phrases -- perhaps because they are used to those phrases, or perhaps because they have always ascribed one or another meaning to them (which may vary a bit from the meaning another speaker ascribes to it).  In any event, the way you "think about" a situation informs how you describe it, and I think how people "think about" a situation varies by language, by country, by region, by province, by state and even by city.  

Just a thought...


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> If you took my words as a threat, I sincerely apologize.



Don't worry, Vol Nation, I didn't think you meant any harm.

The first analogy you mentioned was fencing, back in page one. It is hard for me to understand that you would consider that stabbing someone when their guard is down, and stabbing someone after feinting to the right and coming instead from the left are both "catching your opponent off guard".


----------



## Vol Nation

Filis Cañí said:


> Don't worry, Vol Nation, I didn't think you meant any harm.
> 
> The first analogy you mentioned was fencing, back in page one. It is hard for me to understand that you would consider that stabbing someone when their guard is down, and stabbing someone after feinting to the right and coming instead from the left are both "catching your opponent off guard".



First, thank you.

Second, I see your question.  Wow, it's a good one.  Let me see if I can explain!!  Perhaps fencing wasn't the best example because contestants are required to confirm that they are, in fact, "en garde."  So perhaps under the fencing rubric, one could never be off-guard unless they were not confirmed to be "en garde."  

But feinting generally is a good example.  One feints by taking a certain action designed to give the impression that he/she is going to do one thing while in fact plans to do another.  It is used in war, ie, Side A launches a feint attack to draw Side B's attention to one place so that Side A may catch Side B "off-guard" on another front.  "Caught by surprise" would work here as well.

I think it goes to my previous comment: I think of being caught off-guard as (almost) any situation where one is caught by surprise, ie, they were expecting one thing and got something else.  And, to further the fencing analogy in a different context, being caught off-guard does not to my understanding necessarily (though it may) imply inaction or unpreparedness on the part of the party taken by surprise.  Those who predict the American stock market, for example, are often caught off-guard when a stock they thoight would perform well does not.  Some analysts I have talked to have claimed to be taken off-guard by the depth of the American recession.  That is, they thought it would bottom out and then rebound fairly quickly.  (The wisdom of that prediction aside, that was their guess.)

In American football, as another example, a Quarterback can get to the line of scrimmage and see that a defense is going to blitz (perhaps because the defense thinks it knows what play is coming).  Once the Quarterback sees the blitz coming, be can change the play to one specifically designed to defeat the blitz.  In that case, he would catch the defense off-guard (perhaps off-balance, definitely by surprise).  

Maybe I am trying to say that being caught off-guard has less to do with the situation and more to do with the speaker's evaluation that somebody (maybe even the speaker) got something they were not expecting.  In that sense, it differs in my mind from "off-balance" slightly in that being off balance is more literal (a state of imbalance) and perhaps more readily observable.  So, you could catch me off-balnce in tennis if I was leaning right and you hit it left.  (Off-guard or by surprise woild also work, but off-balance would be more precise because I was verifiably in a state of physical imbalance.)  But, I think I would say "off-guard" if it was not readily apparent that your opponent was in a state of physical imbalance but rather got some shot other than what he expected; in that case, I would tend to say that your opponent was caught off-guard or by surprise.  (I say that realizing that tennis, as are most sports, is a game of balance.)  Perhaps this last point is why I prefer analysts being caught off-guard instead of "off-balance" -- unless of course they actually ARE physically imbalanced.  I also think that perhas, as with expressions, others might use it a bit differently.  Either way, and regardless of which is "better" to one speaker, both would be understood.

In sum, your question made me think harder aboit my suggestion; this is the most I have thought about these phrases in my life.  As there are with most figurative expressions, there are some holes in the logic of how I/we use "off-guard" in everyday spech.  I also realize I have processed my thoughts as I was writing to some extent, which I prefer not to do.  I hope, however, that despite (and maybe because of) these shortcomings you can see where I am coming from (and how my brain is moving) on this point.  If not, I apologize for rambling!!


----------



## The Prof

I agree that there are several ways of translating the expression in question, and I also agree that our individual preferences vary according to many factors.

That said, for me, Spug's "*wrongfooted*" seems ideal - it is a close translation and is definitely being widely used in what I believe is exactly the right context:

Oil imports push Britain's goods trade gap to £8.7bn for the month of November, *wrongfooting *City economists ...

Britain's goods trade gap for the month widened to £8.7bn from an upwardly revised £8.6bn in October. This was the biggest deficit since monthly records began in January 1980, *confounding City expectations of a narrowing*.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jan/12/uk-trade-deficit-record-high-oil


But that doesn't mean that I think that everyone else's suggestions are wrong.


----------



## Vol Nation

Ah, the Queen's!  I do enjoy British English; I learn something new all the time.  I would never have thought of using "wrongfooted," in the context of a news report, in a million years.  Nor have I found a traditional American outlet that has used that phrase in the very specific context of economics.  Indeed, there is a specific vocabulary.  I suppose "ideal" depends upon the country in which one finds oneself.  It appears, based upon your news report, that you have found the truly British way of expressing the idea.  No doubt.  I say, "Bravo!"


----------



## Filis Cañí

I see what you mean, Vol Nation: you emphasize the surprise factor over the _en garde _factor when thinking about being caught off guard.

On my first post, I said that I saw the metaphor as pertaining more to dancing than to sports. The tennis analogy was very good, but in my mind, I can't see _analistos_ doing any kind of strenuous effort, while I can picture them easily dancing merrily to the tune they have created in their heads, all of a sudden realizing, with a foot dangling in midair, that the song that is playing is not the one they are dancing; doing the _conga_ when what is playing is a_ requiem_. How would you translate _that_?


----------



## Vol Nation

No sé, porque no la entiendo.  Bueno, entiendo las palabras pero no capto la idea entera.  Pero Ud. es nativo, y conocerá mejor que yo la traducción que busque.  Vengo a éste foro para que pueda aprender y hacerles preguntas a los nativos.

Le sugiero que abra un nuevo hilo y la discutirémos.  Me gustaría escuchar sus comentarios y sugerencias.  Pero ya nos desviamos (hablando estrictamente) del tema de "contrapié," y por eso le sugiero el nuevo hilo.
-Vol Nation


----------



## Zaskaburcio

mk292 said:


> Hola, como puedo traducir 'contrapié'? Estoy traduciendo un artículo del País y la frase es... la mayor tasa de paro en la crisis ha cogido a contrapié a los analist*a*s y al propio Ministerio de Trabajo, que confiaban en un mínimo aumento de la ocupación...
> MK



analista (género común)  el analista-la analista-los analistas-las analistas.

 Primero que nada, entender el contexto: aprender español a partir del ¿periódico? "El País", es como aprender alemán con el "Mein Kampf" o aprender chino con el "Little Red Book". A "El País" en España mucha gente lo llama "El Pis" . Es un ¿periódico? de izquierdas que usa un lenguaje no-racional, emocional, propagandísitico, extraído de las técnicas de Joseph Goebbels y otros.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

Entendido el contexto: el lenguaje que utiliza este ¿periódico? es muy emocional, irracional, manipulador y exagerado. Por eso usa esta expresión "a contrapié" = "on the wrong foot", para indicar simplemente que "los analistas *no* se esperaban este resultado" ¿Por qué usa esta expresión tan exagerada? Fácil: porque todo el mundo *sí* que se esperaba este resultado y "El País" intenta hacer "scapegoating" y echar la culpa a los que no son de los suyos . Siempre que traduzcas algo de este ¿periódico? deberás tener en cuenta este contexto.


Saludos
ZK.


----------



## ptak30

Talking about American football, let's suppose a defensive tackle puts a move on his opposite number, dumping him and sacking the Quarterback (no flag). The dumped offensive tackle could say "Hey, I caught a cleat", or "It's my wrong time of the month", or "I popped a knee". What he couldn't say is "I was caught off guard", because, when that ball is hiked, he had better be on guard to protect his Quarterback - or he's toast. On the opposite side of the line, a successful trick play may bamboozle or surprise the defense but it should never catch them off-guard.

The question we were asked was "what is the English translation of "a contrapie" in the El País article".  *Zaskaburcio * doesn't like El PaIs and the use of "a contrapie". He would like to delete the term and substitute one of his own for translation. I could say that the analysts' shots on goal had hit the corner flag. I may think it describes the situation better; but that is not the question. 

Normally, contributors use context and synonyms to decipher good translations. Please let's keep it that way. When backing is sought to reinforce a point of view let it be from Logic and not from dubious sources such as the literary gurus of the National Enquirer (I exaggerate).


----------



## nangueyra

En Argentina, en referencia al fútbol, decimos "tomó/agarró a la defensa/los defensores a contrapié"

¿Cómo se dice en inglés "Nadal le jugó un contrapié a Federer?


----------



## ptak30

"Nadal caught Federer on the wrong foot" or "Nadal wrong-footed Federer". Me gusta más la primera oración.


----------



## Vol Nation

ptak30 said:


> Talking about American football, let's suppose a defensive tackle puts a move on his opposite number, dumping him and sacking the Quarterback (no flag). The dumped offensive tackle could say "Hey, I caught a cleat", or "It's my wrong time of the month", or "I popped a knee". What he couldn't say is "I was caught off guard", because, when that ball is hiked, he had better be on guard to protect his Quarterback - or he's toast. On the opposite side of the line, a successful trick play may bamboozle or surprise the defense but it should never catch them off-guard.
> 
> You are right; an offensive lineman should never be caught off-guard. But it happens all the time, and the situation is described that way all the time. Here are just two articles I found in a quick search describing Offensive lines being taken off-guard. One describes a college O-Line and the other an NFL O-Line. (As I mentioned above, different people think of the terms in different ways -- though like I said it has its logical flaws, as do many figurative expressions -- but the key to understanding the point is that "off-guard" = "by surprise" in this context, and as you point out O-linemen can be taken by surprise):
> 
> http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2003/10/05/uga_394405.shtml (ninth paragraph from top)
> 
> http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/1997/01/06/oth_202200.shtml (13th paragraph from bottom - quote by former RB Jerome Bettis)
> 
> Here is an article (containing an interview), which asks a player if there is anything his team can do to catch the other team's offense off-guard:
> 
> http://auburnbeat.blogspot.com/2011/11/lemonier-drops-four-letter-word-on.html (12th paragraph from top)
> 
> All the first two articles are saying is that offensive lineman were taken off-guard by the defense's rushing schemes. Granted not every time an O-Lineman goes down will he be taken off-guard; he may get exactly the pass rush he expects and simply be over-powered by the defensive lineman, which seems to be the situation you reference. But, in general, Offensive linemen (and others, including entire offensive and defensive units) can be taken off-guard as that term is commonly used.
> 
> Speaking of defenses, they can be taken off-guard as well:
> 
> http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants (defensive player admitting his defense was caught off-guard in the game because the opposing offense was doing things they had never seen before, i.e. the defense was "surprised" and as a result played poorly)
> 
> I hope this clears it up a little...The expression is widely used to simply mean "taken by surprise."


----------



## ptak30

I don't think we are going to agree on this. You are quoting a usage which I think is faulty but which you think is perfectly sound. The fact that a trick play like a flea-flicker or Statue of Liberty pass works, could well be reported by some the US press as the defense "being caught off-guard" but we would consider that the defense had just  been bamboozled. It may be that there are a lot of newspapers which have reported it correctly (by our lights) and your example is selective. I don't know. As I said before proffering selective quotations from US newspapers or quoting from people who may well be semi-literate  is not productive in this debate.


----------



## Vol Nation

ptak30 said:


> I don't think we are going to agree on this.



 You are right. I think I understand that in British English the term is not used the same as it is here. Everytime my suggested usage has come under attack, I have posted articles supporting my point.  And I posted articles with different contexts -- an article discussing economics and the surprising unemployment rate (the topic of this thread) and articles discussing sports. That is about all I can do. I think I have shown my point to be a valid one, i.e. that "off-guard" = "by surprise" in many contexts in American English.  Questioning someone's literacy doesn't change that. 


P.S.: Despite the possible implication, a "stunt" is not a trick play. A stunt is a commonly used defensive technique in American football; variations on the theme are what catch offense lines (and blockers out of the backfield) off-guard.


----------



## ptak30

Neither the flea flicker or the Statue of Liberty are defensive plays, and they were the only specific plays I mentioned.


----------



## Vol Nation

ptak30 said:


> Neither the flea flicker or the Statue of Liberty are defensive plays, and they were the only specific plays I mentioned.



I know.  One or more of the articles I posted talked about stunts.  I was assuming you had read them before posting your response.  If not, I aplogize; I meant no offense.


----------



## albertovidal

En español "tomar a alguien por sorpresa/con la guardia baja" (off-guard) *no es lo mismo que* "tomar a alguien a contrapié" (on the wrong foot/off-balanced)
Saludos


----------



## ptak30

Vol Nation said:


> I know.  One or more of the articles I posted  talked about stunts.  I was assuming you had read them before posting  your response.  If not, I aplogize; I meant no offense.


No offence taken. There are a lot of American Football (NFL and College)  fans in this country. My own experience goes back aways before the  Montana-Taylor SB.


----------



## nangueyra

ptak30 said:


> "Nadal caught Federer on the wrong foot" or "Nadal wrong-footed Federer". Me gusta más la primera oración.



Muchas gracias


----------



## helenduffy

off balance


----------



## Filis Cañí

Vol Nation said:


> No sé, porque no la entiendo.  Bueno, entiendo las palabras pero no capto la idea entera.  Pero Ud. es nativo, y conocerá mejor que yo la traducción que busque.  Vengo a éste foro para que pueda aprender y hacerles preguntas a los nativos.
> 
> Le sugiero que abra un nuevo hilo y la discutirémos.  Me gustaría escuchar sus comentarios y sugerencias.  Pero ya nos desviamos (hablando estrictamente) del tema de "contrapié," y por eso le sugiero el nuevo hilo.
> -Vol Nation



What I meant, Vol Nation, is how you would translate "a contrapié" in that sentence if it never crossed your mind that it was a sports metaphor, and thought of it as a dance metaphor.


----------



## Filis Cañí

Zaskaburcio said:


> . . . aprender español a partir del ¿periódico? "El País", es como aprender alemán con el "Mein Kampf" o aprender chino con el "Little Red Book".



En su opinión, Zaskaburcio, ¿qué periódico español deberíamos leer para recibir información imparcial y bien sopesada? (Trick question.)


----------



## Vol Nation

Filis Cañí said:


> I see what you mean, Vol Nation: you emphasize the surprise factor over the _en garde _factor when thinking about being caught off guard.
> 
> On my first post, I said that I saw the metaphor as pertaining more to dancing than to sports. The tennis analogy was very good, but in my mind, I can't see _analistos_ doing any kind of strenuous effort, while I can picture them easily dancing merrily to the tune they have created in their heads, all of a sudden realizing, with a foot dangling in midair, that the song that is playing is not the one they are dancing; doing the _conga_ when what is playing is a_ requiem_. How would you translate _that_?



OK, I see your question now.  Two things:  (1) If the analysts started dancing BEFORE the music started, and it appears they did NOT in your example, I would say they were caught off-guard if they were anticipating something that had not yet happened, ie, they expected one tune and got another; (2) If they were dancing to one tune as it was playing (reacting to something after it happened) and then realized they were performing the wrong dance steps, I would say they were dancing to the wrong tune (literally and figuratively).  If in the process they almost fell over due to their efforts to change dance steps, I would say they were maybe off-balance (but only maybe, because some people can balance on one foot quite well).

Note that if they started dancing before the music played, and were caught with a foot dangling as tbey trked to change steps, they could be caught off-guard AND off-balance.

Then again, if they created the tune themselves (and therefore knew what it was beforehand), it is hard to imagine they would be caught either "off-guard" or "off-balance" unless they were total idiots.


----------



## Zaskaburcio

Filis Cañí said:


> En su opinión, Zaskaburcio, ¿qué periódico español deberíamos leer para recibir información imparcial y bien sopesada? (Trick question.)




*¡Ninguno! * Pero para no entrar en off-topic, te diré que no hay que leer periódicos españoles de izquierdas como "El País", "Público" o "El Plural". Periódicos nacionalistas catalanes o vascos como "La Vanguardia". Tabloides como "Intereconomía". Ni periódicos muy de derechas como "ABC". El resto de los periódicos mayoritarios, incluyendo los free daily newspapers, los puedes leer... con una pinza en la nariz .

Como he dicho, para no caer en off-topic, puedes leer "El País" para ver cómo se usa en español el lenguaje emocional-irracional con finalidades manipulativas. "El País" es especialista en usar estas técnicas que tuvieron gran desarrollo en la alemania nazi  http://iidh-webserver.iidh.ed.cr/mu...2010/1748ce0d-6e76-440a-bbad-6b3fc59fc6a1.doc

En este caso, el uso de "*a contrapié" *no tiene sentido. Lo que hace el artículo es decir que el aumento del paro en España, *no* ha sido causado por los contrarios, *que no, que no y que no*... con lo cual está diciendo *que sí* .


Saludos
ZK.


----------

