It’s likely to get more and more incoherent as we go, but let’s why not.
All of Galia is divided in three parts, of which one inhabit Belgians, another Aquitanians, third, Celts in their own toungue, we call Gauls.
Here all toungues, institutions and laws differ. The Garumna flows between the Gauls and the Aquitanians, the Belgians the Matrona and the Sequana divide.
Now, all of them extremely strong the Belgians are, proper of those who have been cultivated very far from human provinces, minimally merchants knowing how to bring to them that which effeminate spirits consider important.
Goddamnit, even already incolunt is extremely resistant to English.
“All Gaul is divided into three parts, of which one the Belgians inhabit, another the Aquitanians, a third [those] who by the tongue of themselves are called the Celts, by ours the Gauls. These all differ between themselves by tongue, institutions, laws. The Gauls from the Aquitanians divides the Garumna river, from the Belgians the Matrona and the Sequana.”
Carry on.
It’s an extremely nice word. Pululate is the only thing that comes to mind as appropriate, but it can’t be right.
We’re going to ignore here many "the"s. We consider them superfluous, the reader gets it and it’s more Roman. For the rest, we are going to avoid the trap of overwording things and adding horrid s to translate what is a very simple and elegant passage.
Inhabit is not perfect for incolunt. To habit, to live in, is different from colunt, which is more like “just is there,” but more alive. That’s why so far I can only think of pululate.
Your translation tries to add things that are not there to make it easier for the barbarian [Gothic] reader. Latin is good at indicating things without pasting them on the screen, and we believe this implication will translate. The mind doesn’t cease to function because it is now using a barbaric toungue.
From the top, then.
All of Galia is divided in three parts, of which one Belgians occupy, another Aquitanians, third, Celts in their own toungue, we call Gauls.
Sure, I just wanted to show what it literally said.
Yes, it literally means something like “inbuild”; we may want to consider Heidegger’s claim that the German wohnen means both “to dwell” and “to build” (compare “indweller”).
Here all toungues, institutions and laws differ. The Garumna flows between the Gauls and the Aquitanians, the Belgians the Matrona and the Sequana divide.
It doesn’t literally say any of that, though. That is the headache of translation. You are adding what you feel it says for the benefit of the reader.
Now, all of them extremely strong the Belgians are, proper of those who have been cultivated very far from human provinces, minimally merchants knowing how to bring to them that which effeminate spirits consider important.
Fuck, occupy doesn’t work either.
I am this close to just using pululate.
Well, this also adds things, though. For example, it says “All Gaul” rather than “All of Gaul”.
Also, it’s certainly not true that it doesn’t say any of what I said. Grammatically, it says exactly what I said. So I’ll only correct myself this far:
“All Gaul is divided into three parts, of which one Belgians inhabit, another Aquitanians, a third who by the tongue of themselves are called Celts, by ours Gauls. These all differ between themselves by tongue, institutions, laws. Gauls from Aquitanians divides river Garumna, from Belgians Matrona and Sequana.”
The whole point of it being Latin and not English is that grammatically it is incoherent in English.
“All” in Latin can have suffixes that alter it. You have to accpet the modality of English.
Once agian, then.