The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[Vixen]

Nope.

Sources that aren't you give several other possible translations. In fact, the definition in the musical sense, meaning to adjust a frequency, is not the primary English translation.

As I explained at length, when presented with several possible translations for any given word, the context must be considered. Here the context is a device whose frequency cannot be adjusted. Therefore "tuned" is pretty much the only wrong translation in this case. The fact that you keep presenting Google Translate's version as if it were somehow superlative in all cases suggests you're lying about your understanding of Finnish, as you typically do about such things about which you claim expertise.

Don't judge others by your standards.

Speaking of musical sense, here's a recent article in TS:

Pianonvirittäjä löytää oikean äänen korvakuulolla – “Jokainen piano on uniikki” https://www.ts.fi/teemat/5256564

Google translate:

"A piano tuner finds the right sound by ear - "Each piano is unique"


There is no ambiguity about the meaning of the word used by Lehtola.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Nope. Correct translation.

Long ago, Marras told us

"Virittää" means both "tuned" and "activated".

[Edited to add: "activate" in the sense of making something ready for action. For example, "virittää ansa" would be "set a trap"

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13695671#post13695671

I regret that I have long since learned not to rely on your claims, however confident you wish to sound. If you recall, you replied that you would not use the verb like that. As if that was the definitive statement on how Finns use their own language.

 

[JayUtah]

The correct verb is exactly the same as in English.

False.

There is no way the two different verbs or actions can be confused in translation.

False.

 

[Vixen]

Indeed, but the EPIRBs were found to transmit correctly when recovered, and could not be adjusted in any case. "Tuned" does not fit the facts. Someone must have misunderstood something at some point.

If you read the article carefully, Lehtola confirms that in the set up phase, the ship's electrical radiographers, 'forgot' to tune the EPIRB's. This omission happened in the set up phase.

Or they were perfectly functional and someone tampered with them.

A whole one hour with a communications blackout as the vessel sank in record time and with a NATO exercise nearby.

 

[JayUtah]

Don't judge others by your standards.

No, I think I will hold you to standards I believe are appropriate to this discussion. More precisely, I am judging your claims by the standards established by noted authorities on the Finnish language, and they do not support your claims.

Google translate:

You seem to rely solely on Google Translate, which suggests you really don't know Finnish. And yes, if you specifically give any translator a musical context, it will translate the verb accordingly. And in the musical context, that is the correct translation. The question is instead what the proper context is for a device that has no means of adjusting its frequency.

There is no ambiguity about the meaning of the word used by Lehtola.

You are an unreliable reporter. I was able to find several other English translations in comprehensive dictionaries in my university library.

 

[Vixen]

Long ago, Marras told us
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13695671#post13695671

I regret that I have long since learned not to rely on your claims, however confident you wish to sound. If you recall, you replied that you would not use the verb like that. As if that was the definitive statement on how Finns use their own language.

Once again, 'set' does not have the same meaning as 'to turn on'. Not in English nor in Finnish.

 

[JayUtah]

If you read the article carefully, Lehtola confirms that in the set up phase, the ship's electrical radiographers, 'forgot' to tune the EPIRB's. This omission happened in the set up phase.

We know it cannot mean that they adjusted the frequency, because it would not have been possible for them to do that. Therefore one of the other possible English translations correctly describes what the radio operators did to the EPIRBs. Native Finnish-speaking contributors to this thread have suggested some. Google Translate cannot possibly know that EPIRBs cannot be tuned. You seem to be relying wholly on inaccurate machine translations.

Do you speak Finnish fluently? Yes or no.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Don't judge others by your standards...

That would apply here, where you wish to constrain what Lehtola could have meant to your own non-native understanding of Finnish, even though we know that meaning could not have been true.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Once again, 'set' does not have the same meaning as 'to turn on'. Not in English nor in Finnish.

Go argue nuance with native Finns.

You can't tune EPIRBs. In any language.

 

[JayUtah]

Once again, 'set' does not have the same meaning as 'to turn on'. Not in English nor in Finnish.

Irrelevant. A native speaker of Finnish disputes your claim and says that the Finnish word can also be translated as "set."

You are simply demanding we take your word for it. Your constant lying on points like this, coupled with your almost fanatical aversion to admitting any error of any magnitude make it necessary that we reject your personal claim to expertise on this point.

 

[GlennB]

The correct verb is exactly the same as in English. One never says, 'Tune on the light' or 'Tune off the light'. The verb used by Lehtola is very specifically the one that means 'to tune', not to 'switch on' or 'switch off' or even 'turn on' or 'turn off'. There is no way the two different verbs or actions can be confused in translation.

Google translate says 'to tune' is 'säätää' in Finnish. Is that correct?

 

[Disbelief]

If you read the article carefully, Lehtola confirms that in the set up phase, the ship's electrical radiographers, 'forgot' to tune the EPIRB's. This omission happened in the set up phase.

Or they were perfectly functional and someone tampered with them.

A whole one hour with a communications blackout as the vessel sank in record time and with a NATO exercise nearby.

They can't be tuned in the field and you have never demonstrated that they can as you claim. It's very simple, show us from the manual for the Kannad F that they can be field tuned.

 

[Vixen]

No, I think I will hold you to standards I believe are appropriate to this discussion. More precisely, I am judging your claims by the standards established by noted authorities on the Finnish language, and they do not support your claims.



You seem to rely solely on Google Translate, which suggests you really don't know Finnish. And yes, if you specifically give a translator a musical context, it will translate the verb accordingly. And in the musical context, that is the correct translation. The question is instead what the proper context is for a device that has no means of adjusting its frequency.



You are an unreliable reporter. I was able to find several other English translations in comprehensive dictionaries in my university library.

How little you know.

Do not confuse synonyms with direct translation.

 

[Mojo]

If you read the article carefully, Lehtola confirms that in the set up phase, the ship's electrical radiographers, 'forgot' to tune the EPIRB's. This omission happened in the set up phase.

Or they were perfectly functional and someone tampered with them.

This would require that after they had "popped to the surface appropriately as the ship sank" someone secretly found them and tuned them correctly so that when recovered and turned on they would transmit correctly. The only reasonable interpretation is that either Lehtola made a mistake in what he said, or the reporter made a mistake in reporting it.

Did the final report say anything about them being "untuned"?

 

[Vixen]

Google translate says 'to tune' is 'säätää' in Finnish. Is that correct?

Säätää means to adjust or regulate and is derived from the word for 'rules' säännöt .

Säännöllisesti means 'regularly'.

 

[JayUtah]

How little you know.

Bluster away.

As I said, I don't speak Finnish but I speak several other languages and have considerable experience translating both written documents and spoken language in both general and technically specific contexts.

At this point, based on you bluffery so far, I will assert that I am more skilled and knowledgeable than you are in the art of translation. You can't appear to rise above Google Translate, or cite any authority beyond it.

Do not confuse synonyms with direct translation.

It's a good think that's not what I'm doing. I'm relying on noted authorities on Finnish-English translation who suggest several different words for the Finnish word in question. A skilled translator (which you evidently are not) knows which word to apply in the context.

Do you speak Finnish? Yes or no.

 

[JayUtah]

Säätää means to adjust or regulate and is derived from the word for 'rules' säännöt .

Säännöllisesti means 'regularly'.

Can you explain why Google Translate did not supply a one-to-one correspondence between the English and the Finnish words you say can have no other meanings and no other acceptable translation?

 

[GlennB]

Säätää means to adjust or regulate and is derived from the word for 'rules' säännöt .

Säännöllisesti means 'regularly'.

If that's your way of saying "yes", then can I point out that Google translate gives 'set' as a translation of 'säätää' ?

eta: one of the translations.

 

[Vixen]

This would require that after they had "popped to the surface appropriately as the ship sank" someone secretly found them and tuned them correctly so that when recovered and turned on they would transmit correctly. The only reasonable interpretation is that either Lehtola made a mistake in what he said, or the reporter made a mistake in reporting it.

Did the final report say anything about them being "untuned"?

If it was a military operation and you are determined:

• to stop the illicit cargo reaching enemy hands
• or you are in conflict with A.N. Other, as with serious organised crime

Then to be absolutely sure your operation succeeds you will:

• attack on two fronts
• you will make sure rescue is not possible
• you will ensure radio signals are interfered with
• you will disable any signal that gives out a distress call or mayday.

It is telling that the JAIC do not go anywhere near these issues, suggesting a definite label of 'classified'.

 

[JayUtah]

If it was a military operation...

You didn't answer the question. You're claiming the EPIRBs were sabotaged in some way so that they didn't work on the night of the sinking. But you can't explain how they worked perfectly when discovered and tested by ordinary people. Waving your hands vaguely to "military operation" doesn't answer the question.