# arouse



## Imaan

> Protestant Reformation has *aroused*, since the 16th century and forward, the relation of religion and salvation with the „religious” institution, i.e. the Catholic Church.


 


> Od XVI w. protestancka Reformacja .... związek religii i zbawienia z "religijną" instytucją, tj. Kościołem Katolickim.


 


arouse -
*1.* pobudzić (_do działania, seksualnie_); rozbudzić (_np. zainteresowania_). 
*2.* budzić; *~ from* obudzić się z (_odrêtwienia, snu_).
 
 Pomożecie?


----------



## NotNow

Have you considered _wzbudzić?_


----------



## Imaan

_Wzbudzić związek_? It sounds weard to me. Furthermore, it would mean that Reformation livened this relation up or made it appear after its absence and I understand that what protestant Reformation did was to "shake" this relation or question it.

Czy można przetłumaczyć to jako: _potrząsnęła związkiem_?


----------



## arturolczykowski

Oryginalne zdanie wydaje mi sie niepoprawne. Bez wtracenia "pytania o', czy "kwestii" brzmi dla mnie bez sensu.... Wogole dal bym tu "raise" zamiast "arouse"



Protestant Reformation has *aroused/raised*, since the 16th century and forward, (the question of) the relation of religion and salvation with the „religious” institution, i.e. the Catholic Church.


----------



## ><FISH'>

What exactly are you asking? Are you translating from Polish to English, or English to Polish? Either way, the English sentence you gave above looks strange and does not make sense.


----------



## Imaan

I am translating from English to Polish. Well, if it looks strange to you both I suppose there is something wrong. I think you're right Artur. Let me say that the author of the text is not a native...


----------



## BezierCurve

Wouldn't it make more sense if we used something different instead of _arouse_, say:

Protestant Reformation has *denied*, since the 16th century and forward, the relation of religion and salvation with the „religious” institution, i.e. the Catholic Church.

Maybe it's just a mistake?

EDIT: Or maybe "has aroused _doubts in_ [...] relation"?


----------



## Thomas1

BezierCurve said:


> [...]EDIT: Or maybe "has aroused _doubts in_ [...] relation"?


This is what occurred to me too; though, with a different prepostion:
...has aroused [...] doubts about the relation...

Anyway, I think if there is something that is missing or is wrong in the sentence, the word looked for should express either some doubt or denial.

Imaan, it's very helpful to provide a source, be it in a form of the title and the author's name or a website.


----------



## Imaan

Thanks Thomas! You're right, I'll try to provide the source next time. I have just found other version of the original text in the web and its seems to be proofread (yupiii!) and the above sentence finally makes sense:


> Protestant Reform, beginning in the 16th Century and after, raised the debate on the issue of the relationship between religion and salvation in relation to the ‘religious’ institution: i.e. the Catholic Church.


 
Just as Artur and Thomas suggested. Thanks once again!


----------



## Ben Jamin

arturolczykowski said:


> Oryginalne zdanie wydaje mi sie niepoprawne. Bez wtracenia "pytania o', czy "kwestii" brzmi dla mnie bez sensu.... Wogole dal bym tu "raise" zamiast "arouse"
> 
> 
> 
> Protestant Reformation has *aroused/raised*, since the 16th century and forward, (the question of) the relation of religion and salvation with the „religious” institution, i.e. the Catholic Church.


 
Użycie czasu present perfect z perspektywy  historycznej wydaje mi się niepoprawną angielszczyzną. Powinno byc’ : Protestant Reformation raised ...


----------

