Post History
I really like the -ar plural, and I think you should keep it regardless. You don't always have to obey the rules of English if your original word isn't. English is rife with loan words from other l...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2019-12-13T12:00:42Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/26438 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T06:02:13Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/26438 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
I really like the _-ar_ plural, and I think you should keep it regardless. You don't always have to obey the rules of English if your original word isn't. English is rife with _loan words_ from other languages, so there's plenty of precedent. Look at _cherub_ and _cherubim_ (the correct plural, I believe from Hebrew). As far as the translation, do what works for your story. If your Bäckahäst is more of a selkie than a kelpie, then that's how you should treat and translate it. You can even have a character mistranslate Bäckahäst as "kelpie" and be corrected, so the reader knows you're doing it on purpose. No matter which way you go, be consistent. If you use _-ar_ for one Scandinavian plural, use it for all of them.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2017-02-01T21:01:20Z (almost 8 years ago)
Original score: 11