Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's

Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais || En bas

[POSTER UNE NOUVELLE REPONSE] [Suivre ce sujet]

Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's
Message de brettdallen posté le 12-10-2014 à 17:11:51 (S | E | F)
Hello everybody,
I was in the process of transcribing a passage from a video and found some difficulties here and there. If anyone could spend a few minutes listening to this passage and check/correct it, I would appreciate a lot!
Thanks in advance.
► 5:33► 5:33
Lien internet

Whistleblowers: Daniel Ellsberg on Bradley Manning an Wikileaks
September 29, 2010. San Francisco, CA. Courtesy of City Lights Bookstore

(3:28)... by the way, you can see the first thing he's accused of exposing, the...er.. on Youtube, er.. the Internet, it's the collateral murder video, a title given (to) it by Wikileaks, of an Apache helicopter attack that killed twelve or eighteen, twelve I think, civilian-dressed people in Bagdhad, including a wounded man clearly crawling away, wounded, clearly unarmed, in the street, whom they target and eliminate and you hear their voices on the thing "Get him, get him! Got him!", with ground troops blocks away coming onto the scene. He happened to be a Reuters photographer. They didn't know that, but what they did know was (that) he was a wounded man crawling away for help and they murdered him. And..er.. Julian Assange has been criticized for using the phase "collateral murder". He could have said "collateral damage", you know, the usual comment or.. or no comment at all. People (have) really criticized him for calling that murder. Well, as a matter of fact, anybody who remembers the laws of war that he learned like Howard and I did in the service knows that's a murder. Murder! And nothing other, under those circumstances.

-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 12-10-2014 17:51

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de brettdallen, postée le 12-10-2014 à 18:44:45 (S | E)
Hello Lucile,

I'm sorry about that but I still don't know how to insert the direct link to a video... ("fracture numérique" ;) )

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de lucile83, postée le 12-10-2014 à 18:50:39 (S | E)
Hello,

You just copy and paste the address of the page on which we can watch the video, just like any document.
It is different from inserting a video.
See you

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de melmoth, postée le 12-10-2014 à 20:29:22 (S | E)
Bonjour,
Voici ce que j'entends

(3:28)... by the way, you can see the first thing he's accused of exposing, the...er.. on Youtube, er.. the Internet, it's the collateral murder video, a title given ~~(to)~~ it by Wikileaks, of an Apache helicopter attack that killed twelve or eighteen, twelve I think, civilian-dressed people in Bagdhad, including a wounded man clearly crawling away, wounded, clearly unarmed, in the street, who then they target and eliminate and you hear their voices on the thing "Get him, get him! Got him!", with ground troops blocks away coming onto the scene. He happened to be a Reuters photographer. They didn't know that, but what they did know was ~~(that)~~ he was a wounded man crawling away for help and they murdered him. And..er.. Julian Assange has been criticized for using the phase "collateral murder". He could have said "collateral damage", you know, the usual comment or.. or no comment at all. People ~~(have)~~ really have criticized him for calling that murder. Well, as a matter of fact, anybody who remembers the laws of war that he learned like Howard and I did in the service knows that's a murder. Murder! And nothing other, under those circumstances.

Bien à vous

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de brettdallen, postée le 13-10-2014 à 19:59:09 (S | E)
Thank you very much Melmoth,

You've done a wonderful job, I do appreciate that. There's only one part which even I can't be sure of: "who they". It sounds like "whom they", but it's not always easy to get all the words as people don't always articulate very well or the sound is bad.

Thanks a lot!

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de notrepere, postée le 13-10-2014 à 22:07:04 (S | E)
Hello

Sans doute, il dit 'whom they'.

(3:28)... by the way, you can see the first thing he's accused of exposing, the...er.. on Youtube, er.. the Internet, it's the collateral murder video, the title given ~~(to)~~ it by Wikileaks, of an Apache helicopter attack that killed twelve or eighteen, twelve I think, civilian-dressed people in Bagdhad, including a wounded man clearly crawling away, wounded, clearly unarmed, in the street, whom they target and eliminate and you hear their voices on the thing, you know, "Get him, get him! Got him!", with ground troops blocks away coming onto the scene. He happened to be a Reuters photographer. They didn't know that, but what they did know was (that) he was a wounded man crawling away for help and they murdered him. And..er.. Julian Assange has been criticized for using the phrase "collateral murder". He could have said "collateral damage", you know, the usual comment or.. or no comment at all. People really have criticized him for calling that murder. Well, as a matter of fact, anybody who remembers the laws of war that he learned like Howard and I did in the service knows that was murder. Murder! And nothing other, under those circumstances.

-------------------
Modifié par notrepere le 13-10-2014 22:08

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de brettdallen, postée le 13-10-2014 à 23:38:00 (S | E)
Hello Notepere,

Once again, I have to thank you very much for the job you did. Details, I know, but they are worth the while! You seem to understand my way of thinking; now there's this "whom they". For me, there's a little doubt but as you said it's quite likely he said that. That's what I can hear. I hope you like the storyline I'm developing through my transcriptions, it's so interesting and you're so much on the front line on this matter, aren't you? But we are too...
Thank you so much Ourfather! ;)

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de melmoth, postée le 14-10-2014 à 00:04:45 (S | E)
Bonsoir,
Je trouve l'élocution de la personne qui parle très claire. Le seul endroit confus est effectivement celui où vous entendez 'whom they', pour ma part j'ai l'impression qu'il prononce trois syllabes très vite et je crois deviner 'who then they' mais je ne suis pas du tout sûr. Bien à vous.

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de brettdallen, postée le 14-10-2014 à 00:24:31 (S | E)
Hello Melmoth,

I'm just like you, I can't be sure of what I hear. It sounds like "whom they" but as you said there's something more and I guess it's not even a word maybe... Thanks for showing so much interest, though. Maybe no one will ever be sure of what he said! ;) That happens quite often, we're not always speaking a perfect language...

Thanks for your help!

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de notrepere, postée le 14-10-2014 à 00:31:33 (S | E)
Hello, it's not as common to hear "whom" nowadays, but many from the older generations, who learned to use it properly, still use it. Now, if only we could have peace on earth.

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de hushpuppy, postée le 14-10-2014 à 04:23:41 (S | E)
Hello,
He definitely says "whom they", which is not that uncommon when referring back to the person of discussion. In this case, it distinguishes between the question "who?" and the fact that the speaker is talking, indeed, of the poor man crawling away.
Dear melmoth, you are not too far off. He does, actually, pause for a split-second between the "who" and the "m", probably to think about what he is about to say. However, it is only a split-second pause and then he finishes the word "whom" and continues. And, yes, as someone who has learned, and is still learning, how to speak French, that pause would be an eternity in French!! ^^

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de brettdallen, postée le 14-10-2014 à 23:40:47 (S | E)
Hello everyone,

I'm glad we've sort of come to a conclusion on this tricky "whom they"... This is what I heard and this is what made more sense to me grammatically, although, as NP said, it is not so common as that in modern (American) English. But Ellsberg is quite old, he is in his eighties, and was no doubt a brilliant student (PhD in Economics, Harvard) and a highly skilled professional.
I'd like to thank you all for the help you've given me and for the time you spent on apparently trivial language things. For me these details make a difference. And I agree with you Notrepere, I hope one day making war will be seen as square by the community of nations...

Best regards.

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de hushpuppy, postée le 15-10-2014 à 02:29:17 (S | E)
Hi Brett,
It is a sure conclusion, that is what he said. I just wanted Melmoth to understand why he thought he heard a third word. I, personally, wouldn't have given the prolongation between the two letters a moment's notice if he hadn't pointed it out. I like what you're doing here, this promises to be very interesting when finished. I do hope you give us a link?

Réponse: Transcription /Ellsberg on Snowden's de melmoth, postée le 15-10-2014 à 07:25:44 (S | E)
Hello,
I've heard the passage anew, and I agree that he can't be saying anything but 'whom they'. But there's something strange about the way he says it, prosodically. He does make it a bit longer as expected. That's what troubled me, but probably such oddities happen all the time when one speaks... maybe the speaker stuttered a bit at that point. Even Homer sometimes nods. Thank you hushpuppy for understanding and explaining my perplexity. Best regards.

[POSTER UNE NOUVELLE REPONSE] [Suivre ce sujet]

Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais