GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
14:05 Aug 5, 2004 |
French to English translations [PRO] Art/Literary - Art, Arts & Crafts, Painting | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Michael McCain (X) France Local time: 18:35 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
2 +6 | they are often 'forgotten' about due to the fact that they considered such commonplace objects |
| ||
5 +1 | see note. |
| ||
4 +1 | we overlook it |
| ||
5 | which eventually becomes invisible/which tends to be forgotten after a while |
| ||
5 | which ends up being ''forgotten" |
| ||
3 +1 | ...that we have a tendency to forget |
| ||
3 | interpretation |
| ||
3 | that it blends in completely with its surroundings |
|
...que l’on finit par « oublier » see note. Explanation: The text seems to be saying that oftentimes marginalised (or you can find a better term for banalisé) the chair is the part of the ensemble that ends up being forgotten |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
...que l’on finit par « oublier » they are often 'forgotten' about due to the fact that they considered such commonplace objects Explanation: I understand it to mean that chairs can be considered such commonplace objects that people often tend to 'forget' about them, to the point of no longer being aware of their existence - they are perhaps more concerned about the design of the tables, shelves, cupboards etc. and don't pay as much attention to the chairs. That is how I interpret it anyhow. A bit more context would help understand it more fully, however. HTH Sheila |
| |