qu’il en eût l’art de les faire valoir

05:47 Apr 28, 2017 

I did check too because I thought that 2nd en was a mistake, typo or whatever but never found the correct sentence that bohy and Charles have dug up. Why? Because I forgot to remove the "*". Doh! bohy, I beg to disagree with your pas d'un pays tout entier (think about the what the authors of L'Encyclopédie tried to achieve), but never mind, it's irrelevant now. Bon week-end à tous!

05:00 Apr 28, 2017 

Il paraît que nous avons eu la même idée. La morale est qu'il vaut toujours la peine de vérifier les sources.

20:35 Apr 27, 2017 

I pasted the beginning of the sentence into Google, and got 5 references to Fontenelle's writings (before a reference to this Proz post), and none of them mentions this second "en". This source text is simply incorrect (in grammatical and literary terms). CQFD.

20:27 Apr 27, 2017 

I think that reading is grammatically valid, and certainly ingenious, though I personally think the "art" referred to here is more likely to be that of the ruler, acquired through knowledge.

However, this pesky "en", which has had us all racking our brains, turns out to be a typo! Here is this very passage in Histoire de l'Académie Royale des Sciences. Année MDCCXXV (Paris: De L'Imprimerie Royale, 1727), 119, and it reads "& qu'il eût l'art de les faire valoir", without "en". So we can all relax.
https://books.google.es/books?id=mMBeAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP135&lpg=P...

20:26 Apr 27, 2017 

Franchement, cette interprétation du 2e "en" est hautement improblable, ne serait-ce que parce que cet "art de mettre à profit..." (ou de faire valoir) les avantages d'un pays est le propre de certaines personnes, pas d'un pays tout entier !

20:20 Apr 27, 2017 

The end of my previous message got shortened. I was referring to Charles's contribution, of course, and I've now realized that Carol and he trod that path before I did. Will definitely put that bottle away.

20:12 Apr 27, 2017 

I had initially thought that the second en was 18th century usage. However, given that the first en refers to pays, can we not assume that the second en refers to it as well ? In that case, the sentence would be l’art [de son pays] de faire valoir [ses avantages]. Could art be understood to mean ‘the way they do things in a country’ ? Cf. Ensemble de moyens, de procédés conscients par lesquels l'homme tend à une certaine fin, cherche à atteindre un certain résultat (ATILF)? Cf. also the French phrase l’art et la manière (de faire quelquechose)? In other words, the master must have an excellent knowledge of the way(s) things are done in his country (which is why, incidentally, he must study his country like a geographer and a physicien) in order to be able to turn the country’s advantages to account* in the same way or perhaps using the same methodology; something like (simplified) le maître doit étudier son pays avec soin pour en connaître tous les avantages et les mettre en valeur selon les méthodes de son pays. Does that make any sense or have I had one glass too many tonight?
(*directly borrowed from Ch

16:47 Apr 27, 2017 

which does look redundant at first glance, although I'd still assign it to "de son pays", which gives "... know how to make the best use of its advantages" or words to that effect!

16:40 Apr 27, 2017 

of its advantages

"of its" (i.e., of the land/country) representing "en"

16:40 Apr 27, 2017 

If that is right, by the way, then strictly speaking it does add meaning and really ought to be translated. I suppose it might be expressed as "thereby", or perhaps "consequently", and perhaps "avoir" would then mean "acquire" rather than "possess" (which is possible, in principle; "avoir" can mean "entrer en possession de").

16:26 Apr 27, 2017 

No problem about the first one ("qu’il en connût..."), which clearly does refer to "son pays", but I must admit I share bohy's view of the second ("qu’il en eût l’art"); it does seem superfluous to me. I wonder whether it expresses the source of the "art", referring to the previous clause as a whole and indicating that the art is derived from acquisition of knowledge: sort of "from this".

16:14 Apr 27, 2017 

"les avantages".

Which is perfectly in keeping with Charles's suggestion as well as bohy's comment.
It really is good to hear from a real Frenchman on these issues...:))

16:05 Apr 27, 2017 

for what it's worth, I simply see both of the last two "en"s (qu’il en connût..) and (qu’il en eût l’art de) as relating to "son pays"

13:36 Apr 27, 2017 

Cette expression de "faire valoir" s'employait couramment pour un domaine agricole, et signifiait avant tout en tirer un bon profit, le "mettre en valeur".
Ici "l'art de les faire valoir" signifie donc "l'art de tirer profit de tous les avantages du pays".
Cela dit, la phrase présente une bizarrerie sur le plan grammatical, je ne vois pas trop ce que fait ici le deuxième "en" : c'est joli pour le rythme de la phrase, mais que remplace-t-il et quelle fonction grammaticale pourrait-il avoir ???? En fait, on devrait dire "qu’il en connût parfaitement tous les avantages et qu’il eût l’art de les faire valoir".
Je ne ferai par contre aucune suggestion quant à la traduction en anglais, mais l'essentiel me semble être de bien comprendre le français (jusque dans ses imperfections) ici.

10:23 Apr 27, 2017 

Yes, I suppose any attempt to go "archaic" is fruitless and far beyond my abilities! I was just hoping to sound a little less modern and Charle's suggestion is along the lines of what I was looking for. I have tons of options for "faire valoir", some of which are from Linguee, the problem is almost which to choose. Thanks!

10:19 Apr 27, 2017 

English, then I'd advise you not to attempt to make it sound archaic. I imagine that simply putting it into good (literary) English would suffice. But perhaps you should check with the outsourcer...?
As for "faire valoir", have you tried Linguee? Whilst this may or may not come up with the definitive solution that suits your text, it would certainly throw up a plethora of possibilities that could send you along the right track.
Incidentally, while Linguee is extremely useful - giving examples of how other translators have dealt with the term in question - it is definitely not definitive! As with any source that is made up of users' contributions (like Wordreference, etc), it needs to be used with caution!

10:09 Apr 27, 2017 

I guess I am trying to make it sound a bit "archaic", or at least consistent with the rest of the sentence, but I suppose I should just give up on that! Perhaps the problem is that "faire valoir" is already a bit of a pain to translate, so adding the historical aspect is just giving me a headache!

10:07 Apr 27, 2017 

Thanks for the link, very useful. In the end I guess it's not really the subjunctive that's the problem, but "faire valoir" in a more literary sense...

10:06 Apr 27, 2017 

which is in common everyday use. Perhaps you should start with that (along the lines of what you've been thinking). But I trust you're not going to try to make this sound "archaic". Or is that what you're getting at by "correct register"?

10:02 Apr 27, 2017 

09:53 Apr 27, 2017 

All of it! :) I suppose what's troubling me is finding the correct register for a a flowery 18th century eulogy. I rarely translate historical/literary texts, this is just one 'old' bit in an otherwise straightforward document and my attempts all sound too modern and American to my ears. I was hoping someone out there would have some more appropriate suggestions...

09:42 Apr 27, 2017 

Is it "qu’il en eût" or "faire valoir"?

If it is the former, then, as writeaway points out, this is merely the subjunctive mode, which is normal following the verb falloir (il faudrait que...). What we don't see so often nowadays, perhaps, is the use of the pluperfect subjunctive, as in the three subsidiary verbs in this sentence.

09:17 Apr 27, 2017 

as a literary tense (still used)