WIP: add Esperanto translation of the Code of Conduct

[das-g]

Filing as draft, as I'd like the translation to be proofread by more well-versed Esperanto speakers than I am.

Rendered

💚 EO: aldonu Esperantan tradukon de la Kondutkodekso

Aldonante kiel malneton, ĉar mi volas, ke Esperantistoj pli spertaj ol mi provlegu la tradukon.

Bildigita

[Xe]

Dankon! Mia Esperanto estas tre mal, sed mi demandas mia sekvoj de Twitter. Dankon por tradukis!

[das-g]

Some notes about my translation and where I have doubts about it:

[das-g]

Although this is a translation of v2 (cec3e77), I've here taken into account that the wording in v1 (4f562ff) was "sapient" instead of "sentient". I've chosen to use the suggestion "kogna" (meaning ~ "cognitive") from Joop's answer to my question "How to translate “sapient” (as a level of sentience)?" on Esperanto Stack Exchange.

(If I was to translate v1, i.e. with the wording still using "sapient", I might have gone for his other suggestion: Introduce "sapiensa" as a new word into Esperanto.)

I'm not sure, though, whether "kogna" can be used in the meaning able of cognition instead of just that of related to cognition. If not, it should maybe be "kognikapabla" or "kognipova" instead.

[das-g]

When translated that way, it occurs to me that it's actually kinda semantically wrong already in the English original, although maybe not on a practical, but on a categorical level: Being sentient doesn't necessarily imply being limited. While only limited sentient beings might exist (or, for what it's worth, be known to us), it's quite possible to imagine beings (maybe deities?) that are both sentient and non-limited, or at least not limited in the way that's meant here: Being fallible. There could be (hypothetical / imaginary, but nonetheless consistent) beings that are sentient and infallible.

From the history of this sentence in this CoC (in v0 it was "human"), we can recognize this as a simile to "To be human is to err." or "To err is human.", so we can conclude that this isn't actually about being sentient (or sapient) in the sense of having that property, but about being a sentient (or sapient) real being, i.e., being in that category of living things.

I'm thus thinking about whether it should (again, as suggested by Joop on Esperanto Stack Exchange) be something like "kognulo" instead of just "kogna" (or "kognikapablulo", "kognipovulo", in case "kogna" is the false adjective to begin with). "racia besto" as seen in some examples on https://glosbe.com/en/eo/sentient would work in other contexts, but probably not here, because the term "besto" (just like the English "animal") usually excludes humans unless maybe in a very scientific/biologic and purely taxonomic setting.

[das-g]

As the limitation in question apparently is that of our decision-making and of our ability to do the right thing(s), I wonder whether "erarema" would be better than the somewhat too general "limhava".

[das-g]

The more succinct

Suggested change

	En nia limigo ni faras elektojn, kiuj estas malsaĝaj aŭ estas misaj.
	En nia limigo ni faras elektojn malsaĝajn aŭ misajn.

would probably mean mostly the same and be somewhat more elegant, but I've decided to keep the sentence structure of the English original with the relative subordinate clause.

[das-g]

Not quite sure, whether it should be "En", "Dum" or "Pro" here, or whether it would have to be phrased completely different in Esperanto. I'm also not sure whether any of them are actually compatible with "limigo" and whether "limigo" is the right kind of "limitation" here, or whether it should be "limiĝo" (though, is it ourselves who's limiting us?), "limo", "limoj", "limaro" or "limeco" / "limigeco".

I'm thinking maybe "limeco" or "limigeco", as this is really about our "limitedness" ...

[das-g]

I've used -ad- for lern- (learn) and instru- (teach), because those need a place for the process taking place.

For kompren- and komun·ig-, I've however used the plain nouns corresponding to the respective verbs, without focus on the process or on the time the process takes.

[das-g]

Here, I've decided to use a relative subclause where the English original didn't have one. Imitating the sentence structure of the original would have become too unwieldy here, I believe.

[das-g]

I've translated

the tools for other creators to create [...]

as if it were

the tools for helping other creators to create [...]

as Esperanto offers AFAIK no structure directly corresponding to the

<tool> for <subject> <doing something>

of English.

[das-g]

In the English original "Creator" is capitalized here. As I assume that "creator" here is a mere categorization of the reader, not a name, nor a title or god/deity term, I've not capitalized "kreanto" here.

[das-g]

The English original asks to "read the link", but thereby implies reading the content that's being linked to, not the link itself, so I've translated this as "la ligitan retpaĝon" (the linked webpage).

[das-g]

The article in the Esperanto Wikipedia uses "Kondutkodo", but "kodekso" is somewhat more precise than just "kodo".