I'm not sure if there is a need to open a detailed debate about perfecting the Finnish translation but I would like to make a couple of observations to the linguistic analysis by Dakkus.Dakkus wrote:I'd say "euroalue" instead of "eurovyöhyke". Vyöhyke sounds like a public transportation ticket zone, such as Berlin AB, or something like that. "Alue" means area instead of zone.
"Euroalue" is an established word for the intended use. Google seems to agree with me.
The conjugated form of "vyöhyke" should anyway be "vyöhykkeelle", not "-seen", because Slovakia doesn't go somehow inside the "zone" (underground? ), but stays over the ground
Therefore, a bit better form of the line in Finnish:
"Onnellista uuttavuotta 2009 ! EuroBillTracker toivottaa Slovakian tervetulleeksi euroalueelle ! Seuraa setelien kiertoa Slovakiassa !"
1) uutta vuotta -> uuttavuotta (uusi vuosi = a year that is new, uusivuosi = the new year's night. "Uutta vuotta" wouldn't be incorrect, but "Uutta vuotta 2009" is.)
2) eurovyöhykkeeseen -> euroalueelle (zone changed to area, illative form changed to allative form.)
3) Revamped the whole last sentence. The original said: "Follow the circulation of the notes of Slovakia", my version says: "Follow the notes' circulation in Slovakia". I find the original clumsy. I find my own version quite clumsy, as well, but at least less clumsy than the original. I might also mention, that I personally find "setelien" an erroneous plural genetive form and would definitely say "seteleiden" instead. However, googling seems to show "setelien" to be used in all official sites (and almost /only/ there O.o) and "seteleiden" on the sites with people just babbling (and almost /only/ there O.o), so "setelien" is probably better anyway. Probably a dialect thing. I come from the east and the written Finnish from the west.
1) I don't quite understand why Dakkus thinks that "uutta vuotta 2009" is incorrect. The currently prevailing way of writing New Year's greetings is to write it using two separate words "uutta vuotta". You can see this by making a simple Google search and checking the results. It may well be that the original way was to write "uuttavuotta" but if the majority already writes it differently then it is not a mistake anymore but just natural development of a language.
2) Dakkus is correct that "euroalue" is the word systematically used by ECB. But the English word (also used by ECB) for "euroalue" is "Euro area", not Eurozone. If the original text speaks about Eurozone then the correct translation is "Eurovyöhyke". So Dakkus is indirectly suggesting a modification to all language versions: "area" isntead of "zone". However, if we keep the notion of zone in the Finnish text as well as in other language texts then I suggest returning to the form "eurovyöhykkeeseen". Saying "eurovyöhykkeeseen" would mean that Slovakia becomes part of a zone while using "eurovyöhykkeelle" would imply that Slovakia is entering (physically moving into) the zone. But this is a matter of semantics. No matter which form you use the message will get through.
3) Here again, Dakkus is in fact suggesting a modification to all language versions. Instead of saying "Slovakian notes / notes of Slovakia" he is suggesting to say "notes in Slovakia" (and Dakkus is in fact right; Initially there will not be real Slovakian Euro notes but lots of imported Euro notes from other Euro countries). If you, however, choose to retain the English text "Slovakian notes" then the Finnish translation is "slovakialaisten setelien" or "slovakialaisten seteleiden". Both forms are correct but "setelien" is gradually gaining ground.