Was the translation process a limiting factor in the Maddie case?

[Mr Gray]

'Your translation' is 'the translation you have claimed is correct', not 'the translation you personally have made of the original Portuguese' because it is blindingly obvious that either 1) you have not read the original Portuguese, and/or 2) you cannot translate Portuguese into English.

Is there something about a past participle in Portuguese that you still don't understand after my lengthy explanation?

its seems the person who does not understand is you..none of the translations are mine.

one is from the mccann files and the other is from the pjmccann files...Im sure everyone else can see apart from you


These are the translations everyone on every forum is using...feel free to tell them they are all wrong and only you are right

[Robittybob1]

'Lido' is 'read' (rhymes with red) and is a past participle.  I see you are now quoting a completely different translation of the stuff at the bottom.

There is no ways that 'lido' (read) can be translated accurately as reads.  Lido is past tense.  Read (rhymes with reed) is current tense.

Ler, to read, is irregular, and the correct word for (he/she/it) reads is 'lê', which of course looks absolutely nothing like 'lido'.

Rather than argue from this standpoint, if you are in Portugal, can you find the relevant legislation for giving evidence and post it in Portuguese on the forum please and then we will attempt to translate it

[Mr Gray]

'Lido' is 'read' (rhymes with red) and is a past participle.  I see you are now quoting a completely different translation of the stuff at the bottom.

There is no ways that 'lido' (read) can be translated accurately as reads.  Lido is past tense.  Read (rhymes with reed) is current tense.

Ler, to read, is irregular, and the correct word for (he/she/it) reads is 'lê', which of course looks absolutely nothing like 'lido'.

have you managed to understand yet that the translation s are not mine

[Mr Gray]

'Lido' is 'read' (rhymes with red) and is a past participle.  I see you are now quoting a completely different translation of the stuff at the bottom.

There is no ways that 'lido' (read) can be translated accurately as reads.  Lido is past tense.  Read (rhymes with reed) is current tense.

Ler, to read, is irregular, and the correct word for (he/she/it) reads is 'lê', which of course looks absolutely nothing like 'lido'.

perhaps ypu shoud inform the mccann files and the pj mccann files that their translations are wrong

[ShiningInLuz]

Rather than argue from this standpoint, if you are in Portugal, can you find the relevant legislation for giving evidence and post it in Portuguese on the forum please and then we will attempt to translate it

The topic of relevant Portuguese legislation does not interest me, given that I do not think any significant errors occurred in the way the statements were handled.

Portuguese media had access to the statements when the files were released.  There does not appear to be any criticism of a supposed pig's ear being made of the statements.

English media had access to the statements when the files were released.  There does not appear to be any mention of this pig's ear.

[Robittybob1]

The topic of relevant Portuguese legislation does not interest me, given that I do not think any significant errors occurred in the way the statements were handled.

Portuguese media had access to the statements when the files were released.  There does not appear to be any criticism of a supposed pig's ear being made of the statements.

English media had access to the statements when the files were released.  There does not appear to be any mention of this pig's ear.

The litmus test is to see the legislation Goncalo or whoever was working to.  If that says the statements were supposed to have been in English from the English speaking persons then he did it wrong.  I'm not saying there was factual errors in the statements produced by the method they used but with the method they used there is no way to check that for we don't have the English version to compare it to.

[Mr Gray]

The topic of relevant Portuguese legislation does not interest me, given that I do not think any significant errors occurred in the way the statements were handled.

Portuguese media had access to the statements when the files were released.  There does not appear to be any criticism of a supposed pig's ear being made of the statements.

English media had access to the statements when the files were released.  There does not appear to be any mention of this pig's ear.

the Telegraph....thats quite a serious paper if you havent heard of it....ran a story saying portuguese detectives felt that errrors in translation may have been responsible for inconsistencies in the mccann statements.

[Robittybob1]

In the article at the top of that list http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mccann-errors-in-translation-520692 shows up the mistake in a big way

As part of a root-and-branch review of the six-month probe, police are now checking for faulty translations of all the statements given in the days after the four-year-old vanished.

What are they comparing them to?  They need the original English version and unless secretly they were making an English version in the form of notes they would have nothing to compare the Portuguese version to.

[Mr Gray]

In the article at the top of that list http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mccann-errors-in-translation-520692 shows up the mistake in a big way What are they comparing them to?  They need the original English version and unless secretly they were making an English version in the form of notes they would have nothing to compare the Portuguese version to.

could you post alink to the telegraph article
#

[Robittybob1]

mccanns errors in translation...
could you google and ppost links to show how little sil actually kmows about the case

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1569143/Madeleine-McCann-Possible-translation-errors.html
Madeleine McCann: Possible translation errors

By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz2:16PM GMT 12 Nov 2007
Inconsistencies in the statements given by the McCanns and the group of friends who were dining with them at the time of Madeleine's disappearance may have been caused by errors in translation, it emerged today.
Madeleine investigation: Full coverage
Madeleine McCann apartment: first picture
Portuguese detectives investigating the case of the missing four-year-old have admitted that they are reassessing the original witness statements to look for inaccuracies in their translation.

Once again it isn't explained how they can do that without the original signed English versions.  Surely they didn't knock up forgeries of these and forge the signatures of the witnesses!  That would be the real bombshell if they did.  They must have something to compare but it was not released.  To me that is very suspicious.

[Alfie]

The question I would raise about the translations, certainly of the initial statements is - once Murat was constituted arguido, why were the statements not taken again and translated by someone who wasn't a suspect in the case?  Surely any translation by a key suspect of other witnesses' statement would potentially not be worth the paper it was written on?

[ferryman]

The question I would raise about the translations, certainly of the initial statements is - once Murat was constituted arguido, why were the statements not taken again and translated by someone who wasn't a suspect in the case?  Surely any translation by a key suspect of other witnesses' statement would potentially not be worth the paper it was written on?

(while I don't think Murat had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance) that's a good point!

[Mr Gray]

(while I don't think Murat had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance) that's a good point!

of course its a good point

[Alfie]

(while I don't think Murat had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance) that's a good point!

We all know that now, but at the time ie: May 2007 he was the only arguido in the case and therefore his translations could, potentially, have been tainted, biased, whatever.  Surely best practice would have been to diisregard them completely and start again?

[ferryman]

We all know that now, but at the time ie: May 2007 he was the only arguido in the case and therefore his translations could, potentially, have been tainted, biased, whatever.  Surely best practice would have been to diisregard them completely and start again?

YES!!!!!