Transport Tycoon Forums

Hi all,

as pointed out already in the NARS translation thread, I´ve added part of my collection of railway terms into a new TTD Railway Dictionary, a concept that should be helpful in future newgrf set design.

Would be nice if lots of other people would provide input there too. This would be highly beneficial for future set development.

regards
Michael

Nice idea, it looks very useful!

Very good, Michael! I just started to add/update the Dutch strings. You've added a great deal of them yourself, so my job is easy now

Just added quite a few Dutch translations, those where I wasn't 100% sure I added a (?). Also, I added "catenary" in the catenary page, as it seemed to be missing.

Top stuff as ever Michael - cutting edge technology on your back, as ever!

FooBar, Purno wrote: [...]

Thanks for the input, guys (and the warm words, Zephyris & Dave ).

I just added some more entries, this is becoming fun. Now, waiting for someone non-Dutch ... hehe.

regards
Michael

I have 4 free days from work so I'll go with Estonian ones! We'll see when they are done!

ISA wrote:I have 4 free days from work so I'll go with Estonian ones! We'll see when they are done!

Nice to hear.

I´ve uploaded the Estonian flag symbol, just use {img src="img/wiki_up/EST.png"} for your entries.

regards
Michael

michael blunck wrote:

ISA wrote:I have 4 free days from work so I'll go with Estonian ones! We'll see when they are done!

Nice to hear.

I´ve uploaded the Estonian flag symbol, just use {img src="img/wiki_up/EST.png"} for your entries.

regards
Michael

I just tought where I can get a flag glad I read this theard before asking dumb questions

Very useful thing from Michael, as allways!

Estonian ones are added only the largest one is in todo list. Because I made it ready but it take so much time that if I clicked save I automaticly was logged off and I must start all over again

ISA wrote:[...] it take so much time that if I clicked save I automaticly was logged off and I must start all over again

Yeah, that´s annoying. Simply hit "preview" now and again.

Thanks for the input.

regards
Michael

michael blunck wrote:Thanks for the input.

Don't mention it!

Snail wrote: corrected some french entries, added the italian ones

Very good work.

A question:

chassis - telaio
frame - telaio

?

And, @all

community wrote:push-pull equipment

I don´t think "materiale reversibile" or "matériel réversible" (or the other translations, except English and German?) would be the right term here. Searched for isn´t "rolling stock" for push-pull service, but the term for "technical means" for setting-up (resp facilitating) push-pull service in the first place, i.e. a more general term, whether a trailer/locomotive would be able to be used in push-pull service at all (by having the controls, the cablings, etc.)


Very good work so far! I always missed something like this when working on newgrf sets. And now it would be useful for everybody in that same situation.

And BTW, feel free to make entries even if there´s no English term available ATM.

regards
Michael

"push-pull train" is not equal to "push-pull equipment". The latter usually ends up in the former. I updated the (again) Dutch string, but I think the other ones are correct. Maybe you can read along with my Dutch version, to understand how I came to that. The English "push-pull equipment" should IMO be translated as the Dutch "trek-duwmaterieel", where "materieel" is the "equipment" used for a "trek-duw" (="push-pull") train. Correct?

And then if the Italian "treno reversibile" (literally "reversible train") is equal to the English "push-pull train", then I think "materiale reversibile" is the correct translation for "push-pull equipment"...

FooBar wrote:[...] And then if the Italian "treno reversibile" (literally "reversible train") is equal to the English "push-pull train", then I think "materiale reversibile" is the correct translation for "push-pull equipment"...

Mmh, yes. I´m not sure. I just added terms for "rolling stock" and I don´t know the correct Italian term either (for "material", in this context). Let´s wait for Snail to clear this up.

Thanks for your help.

regards
Michael

Ok all is complete! To be honest then some still are empty cuz I cant find word about it!

michael blunck wrote:

Snail wrote: corrected some french entries, added the italian ones

Very good work.

Thanks dude!

michael blunck wrote:
A question:
chassis - telaio
frame - telaio
?

What is the technical difference exactly? AFAIK, they both refer to the structural part of the vehicle, where the supports on the axles/bogies are, and which sustain the whole vehicle together. Maybe the chassis refers more to the connection to the wheels, and the frame refers more to the general structure of the vehicle?

michael blunck wrote: And, @all

community wrote:push-pull equipment

I don´t think "materiale reversibile" or "matériel réversible" (or the other translations, except English and German?) would be the right term here. Searched for isn´t "rolling stock" for push-pull service, but the term for "technical means" for setting-up (resp facilitating) push-pull service in the first place, i.e. a more general term, whether a trailer/locomotive would be able to be used in push-pull service at all (by having the controls, the cablings, etc.)

I see... then something like "prédisposition pour réversibilité" ("possibility of push-pull service") would be more appropriate? If so, I'll change it and add the Italian equivalent as well.

There's another issue, I think, with languages like French, Spanish and Italian, where adjectives are written in different ways according to the noun's gender. For instance, if we're speaking about a locomotive introduced in year X, the French translation would be "mise en service en X"; but if it's a railcar, it would be "mis en service en X". To get the best results, the text should be able to tell which version to use in each case... otherwise the results would be funny.
A compromise would be to write "mis(e) en service en X" instead. If we choose to go this way, I can edit all the entries so far.

Also, in Italian you say "locomotiva" if it's a steam engine, and "locomotore" if it's a diesel or electric. So, for instance, "freight locomotive" could be translated in either way depending on the nature of the vehicle. That's why I put both terms in quite a few entries. Any way the text can figure out the correct entry?

Keep up the great work!

Snail wrote:[chassis vs. frame]
What is the technical difference exactly? AFAIK, they both refer to the structural part of the vehicle, where the supports on the axles/bogies are, and which sustain the whole vehicle together. Maybe the chassis refers more to the connection to the wheels, and the frame refers more to the general structure of the vehicle?

Yes. Especially for steamers, "frame" is an important building part of the locomotive, whereas "chassis" is seldom or never used.

I see... then something like "prédisposition pour réversibilité" ("possibility of push-pull service") would be more appropriate?

It´s quite long. I think I´ve seen a shorter term but ATM, I can´t remember ..

There's another issue, I think, with languages like French, Spanish and Italian, where adjectives are written in different ways according to the noun's gender. [...]

I´ve begun to add the article now, maybe that´ll help?

Also, in Italian you say "locomotiva" if it's a steam engine, and "locomotore" if it's a diesel or electric. So, for instance, "freight locomotive" could be translated in either way depending on the nature of the vehicle. That's why I put both terms in quite a few entries. Any way the text can figure out the correct entry?

Maybe "locomotiva (for steam)" and "locomotore (non-steam)", or something like that?

regards
Michael

*bump*

Meanwhile, there has been put quite a number of railway terms into the TTD Railway Dictionary, so it should be of growing interest for set designers.

However, some of the sections still lack important input.

E.g., the "track", "signal", and "depot" sections are missing Italian translations alltogether (Snail?), and we have only very very little Swedish terms in the whole dictionary (Anders?).

Ah yes. And we miss some Russian input ... George?

Could some of you native-speakers please have a look sometime?

And @everybody: feel free to enter important, yet not available terms directly, or - if you prefer - discuss it here.

regards
Michael