|
|
|
|
|
by RandomLensman
950 days ago
|
|
Maybe when read in a strictly narrow sense it is even a good translation. Practically, it is more of a caretaker role (especially in the case of Scheel here), though, and interpreting into the phrasing can be dangerous. Naming things that aren't named is always tough, and even tougher when needing to go from one language to another. I'd agree that often things human are more loose but when there are narrow definitions ignoring them is dangerous. |
|