About unapproved sentences

You may see some sentences in red. These sentences are not approved by Tatoeba's community. They raise copyright issues or are otherwise problematic. If you are a contributor, please avoid translating them.

Logs

- date unknown
They caught sight of the man among the crowd of people.
- date unknown
linked to 96770
Tobberoth - Dec 22nd 2009, 17:18
linked to 341940
Lenin_1917 - Jan 13th 2013, 13:57
linked to 2142033

Report mistakes

Do not hesitate to post a comment if you see a mistake!

NOTE: If the sentence does not belong to anyone and you know how to correct the mistake, feel free to correct it without posting any comment. You will have to adopt the sentence before you can edit it.

Sentence #306934

eng
They caught sight of the man among the crowd of people.

Important! You are about to add a translation to the sentence above. If you do not understand this sentence, click on "Cancel" to display everything again, and then click on the sentence that you understand and want to translate from.

Please do not forget capital letters and punctuation! Thank you.

Comments

  1. Mar 22nd 2011, 18:22
    "crowd of people" sounds like a tautology to me...a simple "crowd" should do it.
  2. Mar 22nd 2011, 18:27
    Yeah, it's redundant, but the sentence is still correct. So I don't think it should be changed. You can, of course, add an alternate translation.
  3. Mar 22nd 2011, 18:32
    I think tautology should be tagged to warn people.
  4. Mar 22nd 2011, 18:45
    Zifre: even if it is redundant, "They caught sight of the man among the crowd." doesn't necessarily imply it is a crowd of people, does it? I mean: is the word "crowd" used only for human beings?

    Sacredceltic: I think the term tautology could confuse people... but we need a tag for it. Any other suggestions?
  5. Mar 22nd 2011, 18:48
    You can have a crowd of things beside people, but by default, it refers people. I can't imagine any context in which the crowd of this sentence could be made of anything other than people.
  6. Mar 22nd 2011, 19:21
    I didn't know that tautologies were such dangerous things...
  7. Mar 22nd 2011, 19:22
    > I think the term tautology could confuse people...

    That is how it is named http://www.thefreedictionary.com/tautology
    And it is also the same in German or French...
  8. Mar 22nd 2011, 19:26
    >I didn't know that tautologies were such dangerous things...

    I'm not saying they're dangerous, but for a learner, they're not obvious.
    For instance, I just read "beneficial for good health http://tatoeba.org/fre/sentences/show/20214, and if you are, say, Chinese, it is not straightforward that the latin root "bene-" and "good" indicate the same thing, so that if it is "beneficial", it can't be for "bad health"...

    So I suggest it is at least as useful to emphasise tautologies as it is to indicate the number of words of a sentence.
  9. Mar 22nd 2011, 19:34
    Yea, that's true. I just share the same concerns as Zifre here (this kind of goes back to our "usage error" tag argument from oh-so-long ago about a town comprising a population - or vice versa?). Neither usage errors or tautologies are necessarily bad, and sometimes they're better than the "correct" form (more natural, more readily understood even, etc.)

    That's why a tag could be confusing. Moreover, how many people learning English will actually know what "tautology" means? I didn't know this word until last year, and I started speaking English when I was 8...
  10. Mar 22nd 2011, 19:35
    (granted, they could look tautology up in a dictionary, but that doesn't mean they'll understand the full essence of the word)
  11. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:03
    > That is how it is named http://www.thefreedictionary.com/tautology
    > And it is also the same in German or French...

    Yes, I know this term, but I learned its logic meaning before the other ones, and that meaning is quite far from "redundancy". Anyway, I don't doubt it describes well what you explain - that's simply its name. So, at the end, "Tautology" tag on or off?
  12. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:19
    > and that meaning is quite far from "redundancy"

    a. Needless repetition of the same sense in different words; redundancy.
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/tautology
  13. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:25
    And what about tagging it as redundancy instead of as tautology? it's a more common word that would not confuse anyone (I think).
  14. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:30
    @sacreceltic: That's not the meaning it has in logic/maths/set theory/etc.

    2. (Logic) An empty or vacuous statement composed of simpler statements in a fashion that makes it logically true whether the simpler statements are factually true or false; for example, the statement Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not rain tomorrow.
  15. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:31
    I agree with you Shishir, but I can't judge which one is the most accurate...
  16. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:33
    >And what about tagging it as redundancy instead of as tautology? it's a more common word that would not confuse anyone (I think).

    Well, if you're anglophone...Yes of course! Tags are already in English, now English will also pervade the meaning of tags...as it has already!

    I suggested "tautology" because it's a shared latin root for many european languages...
  17. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:34
  18. Mar 22nd 2011, 20:39
    Out of respect for CK, let's just wait for his opinion/say before posting more on this topic.
  19. Mar 23rd 2011, 06:25
    http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/gr...mp;smoothing=3
    interesting

    By the way I don't think the point of Sacredceltic is "it's bad" or "it's not correct sentence" or "People don't say that". So even if was used million of time will not change that in a semantic point of view, there's, according to Sacredceltic, a tautology

    In French for example we do have a single verb 'monter" to say (more or less) "go upstair" but still a lot of people do say "monter en haut" "monter upstair" so which is useless as the verb "monter" already bring the meaning of "upstair", though this sentence is grammaticaly valid and that it's widely spread, it's still a redundant.
  20. Mar 23rd 2011, 08:21
    >o even if was used million of time will not change that in a semantic point of view, there's, according to Sacredceltic, a tautology

    according to me and thousands of linguists.
    Once again, the "proof by Google" is irrelevant. More and more people speak a broken English, and of course, search engines mirror this.
    I already stated this in the past on Tatoeba : currently, even a few gross spelling mistakes in French, outnumber their correct spellings on Google...Google doesn't rule spellings, grammar, or tautologies...
  21. Mar 23rd 2011, 08:29
    >However, the phrase "a crowd of people" is heard quite often in English, so this sentence sounds natural the way it is.

    In French, there is an academy of writers who define the language.
    On Tatoeba, in English, the academy is restricted to one single person : CK and his judgement and subsequent "OK" tags are always FINAL.
    Welcome to a better world.
  22. Mar 23rd 2011, 08:59
    >I have no objection to people tagging sentences in any way they feel appropriate.

    But eventually, you're the one to decide if a sentence is "OK" or not...
  23. Mar 23rd 2011, 12:34
    @sacredceltic: I add many "OK" tags too, and I know some other users do too. No single user has final judgement.

    > More and more people speak a broken English, and of course, search engines mirror this.

    Mostly because you define "correct English" as old English. While certain types of mistakes (such as spelling) are clearly errors, grammar, usage, and logic change over time.
  24. Mar 23rd 2011, 14:33
    >I add many "OK" tags too, and I know some other users do too. No single user has final judgement

    According to what/whose criteria?

    >Mostly because you define "correct English" as old English.

    Says who? No, I don't define Englsih AT ALL. Only you do, with your "OK" tags, actually...

    >While certain types of mistakes (such as spelling) are clearly error

    According to whom?
  25. Mar 23rd 2011, 14:35
    >While certain types of mistakes (such as spelling) are clearly errors

    What difference is there in English by your definition between a "clear" error and an unclear one?

Add a comment

You need to be logged in to add a comment. If you are not registered, you can register here.