I should probably add that Doña Francisca was talking about Spanish sailors who went down with the ship in a skirmish.

Try like this:

Aunque (tengo que decir que) les está bien empleado, por andarse en esos juegos.

"Estarle a alguien bien empleado" es una expresión hecha que significa que alguien se merece lo malo que le ocurre: "¡Le está bien empleado, por egoísta!"

Muy bien. Y ¿qué significa juegos aquí? La traducción a inglés se lee así (me parece raro, y difícil de comprender)

"Lord have mercy on them!" ejaculated [sic] Doña Francisca. "They were but ill-employed to be snatched away to judgment."

Lazarus said:

:

Try like this:

Aunque (tengo que decir que) les está bien empleado, por andarse en esos juegos.

"Estarle a alguien bien empleado" es una expresión hecha que significa que alguien se merece lo malo que le ocurre: "¡Le está bien empleado, por egoísta!"

Looks like a very loose, or even poor, translation. The original means something more like: "Even though it serves them right, for getting mixed up things like that."

Thank you. Along with Lazarus' explanation of the idiom, that makes a lot more sense. I was going to say something like "They got what was coming to them, for fooling around in those games of war."

Muchas gracias a los dos.

James Santiago said:

Looks like a very loose, or even poor, translation. The original means something more like: "Even though it serves them right, for getting mixed up things like that."

>

James Santiago said:

Looks like a very loose, or even poor, translation. The original means something more like: "Even though it serves them right, for getting mixed up things like that."

"They were but ill-employed to be snatched away to judgment." (playing Devil's advocate):
"ill-employed" can be understood to mean "up to no good" / "engaged in wrong-doing". and
"to be snatched away" as elliptical for "fit only to be ..." / "deserving to be ..."

However, that requires giving a distinctly (early) 17th century interpretation of the sentence which seems out-of-place when talking about a battle that occurred near the beginning of the 19th century. So the translator may have actually intended the same meaning that you provided but have been suddenly overcome by an irresistible "literary" impulse.

To me, "to be snatched away to judgment" is a euphemism for "to die." And I'm guessing that dieing is part of what is being discussed here, what with naval battles, ships sinking, and such. And the speaker goes on to say "If they had been quietly at home as God intended...," with the clear implication being that they wouldn't have died in that case. However, it would seem to me that the translator misunderstand the Spanish here.

The original is:
Válgame Dios -dijo Doña Francisca-. Aunque bien empleado les está, por andarse en esos juegos.

I translate this as:
"Lord bless me," said Doña Francisca, "Even though it serves them right for getting mixed up in these games."

Whereas I would rewrite the English translation:
"They were but ill-employed to be snatched away to judgment."

as this:
"They were not doing anything to deserve to die so young."

That is, I don't see "ill-employed" as you do, and instead think it means literally "not used properly."

Literary translations are hard, that's for sure.

James Santiago said:

That is, I don't see "ill-employed" as you do, and instead think it means literally "not used properly."
Under most circumstances (and, certainly, in conversation) I would agree with "not used properly". If, however, this had been written by Shakespeare (or one of his contemporaries), I would feel obliged to consider seriously the possibility that it would mean "employed toward bad/evil ends". In a similar vein, the phrase "ill-gotten gains" has survived into modern English (albeit, with a certain old-fashioned flavor). "Ill-intentioned" (intending harm to someone), even more old-fashioned.

But, again, I agree with your basic point that this is not a good translation for modern readers.

Since samdie has taken up the cause of our dear translator . . .

A short while later, the original says: Aquellos condenados nos llevaron a Inglaterra, no como presos, sino como detenidos . . .

The translation says: Those d---|d wretches carried us off to England, not as prisoners, but as détenus. . .

I had to consult the French-English dictionary on wordreference to decide that it should have been "not as prisoners, but as detainees" (clearly a difference in semantics, not in fact).

So . . . was the translator translating poorly, or displaying his command of several languages'

Natasha said:

A short while later, the original says: Aquellos condenados nos llevaron a Inglaterra, no como presos, sino como detenidos . . .

The translation says: Those d---|d wretches carried us off to England, not as prisoners, but as détenus. . .

I had to consult the French-English dictionary on wordreference to decide that it should have been "not as prisoners, but as detainees" (clearly a difference in semantics, not in fact).

So . . . was the translator translating poorly, or displaying his command of several languages?
My first thought was that the translator was just showing off (since I was under the impression that "détenus" = "detainees"). However, the OED has the following entry (in part) for "detenu":
"Applied especially to the English subjects detained as prisoners in France, and the French subjects detained in England during the Wars 1793­-1815."

That would make its use in this context historically appropriate. Whether a modern reader should be expected to know this is a wholly different matter.

Thanks, samdie!

samdie said:

Natasha said:

A short while later, the original says: Aquellos condenados nos llevaron a Inglaterra, no como presos, sino como detenidos . . .

The translation says: Those d---|d wretches carried us off to England, not as prisoners, but as détenus. . .

I had to consult the French-English dictionary on wordreference to decide that it should have been "not as prisoners, but as detainees" (clearly a difference in semantics, not in fact).

So . . . was the translator translating poorly, or displaying his command of several languages?

My first thought was that the translator was just showing off (since I was under the impression that "détenus" = "detainees"). However, the OED has the following entry (in part) for "detenu":

"Applied especially to the English subjects detained as prisoners in France, and the French subjects detained in England during the Wars 1793­-1815."

That would make its use in this context historically appropriate. Whether a modern reader should be expected to know this is a wholly different matter.

>