 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.castle, René Hoffmeister writes:
<snip>
> "Yeoman Archer" - If "yeoman" means to be not dependent on strict rules.
Well, that's not what my dictionary says... Yeoman:
"An attendant, a servant, or a lesser official in a royal or noble household.
A yeoman of the guard. (1)
A petty officer performing chiefly clerical duties in the U.S. Navy.
An assistant or other subordinate, as of a sheriff.
A diligent, dependable worker.
A farmer who cultivates his own land, especially a member of a former class of
small freeholding farmers in England."
> "Battlerider / Battle Horseman" - He's not only a knight. He belongs to a
> company of Heavy Cavallary. But maybe you called them "Cavaliers"
Cavaliers would be a good description, yes. I don't think there's a phrase in
English like "horseman"... but that's the problem with translations. Ugh!
> "Guards Horsewoman" - I can't believe that that shall sounds crazy for you.
> And, Shiri, YES, she IS a woman (I have 10 of them). She's one of the
> bodyguards of the royal family.
Oh, I know she's a woman! I was just saying that it is SO obvious that you
don't (IMO) have to say it.
Well anyhow, glad I could be of any use! Seeing I'm a fellow ESLer, I can
often see what you're trying to say, because I used to make the same
translation glitches (like translating proverbs and idioms literally). Now
that I live in the US I have no choice but to learn English well. :-)
-Shiri
(1) This is my favorite! What's a yeoman? It's a yeoman! (like, duh :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.castle, Shiri Dori writes:
> In lugnet.castle, René Hoffmeister writes:
> <snip>
> > "Yeoman Archer" - If "yeoman" means to be not dependent on strict rules.
>
> Well, that's not what my dictionary says... Yeoman:
> "An attendant, a servant, or a lesser official in a royal or noble household.
> A yeoman of the guard. (1)
> A petty officer performing chiefly clerical duties in the U.S. Navy.
> An assistant or other subordinate, as of a sheriff.
> A diligent, dependable worker.
> A farmer who cultivates his own land,
> especially a member of a former class of
> small freeholding farmers in England."
[snip]
> (1) This is my favorite! What's a yeoman? It's a yeoman! (like, duh :)
According to my understanding of medieval history in England,
a yeoman was a peasant farmer who wasn't a serf.
What's a serf? Well, a serf was a peasant farmer
who was tied to the land, but was otherwise free,
as opposed to a slave.
Thus, at the bottom of the heap was "slave",
then came "serf" with a little bit more freedom,
then came "yeoman".
(It was much later on that "yeoman" acquired
the additional meaning of "helper of ship's captain", etc.)
A slave was property, end of story.
A serf was -- technically -- *not* property,
and thus could not be sold as a slave to another nobleman,
but the serf could not leave the land to which he was assigned
without the permission of the landowner (the noblman).
A yeoman however *could* move on to better pickings
if he so desired. Also, he could own his own land
(instead of farming the nobleman's land
and paying "rents" and "taxes" out of the food he produced).
Another point to consider is that *only* a gentleman or a noblman
could own, carry, or use traditional military weapons
(the armor and swords of the knighthood).
As "peasants", serfs and yeoman were restricted
to such farm-like implements as flails, staves, slings,
and so on, including *bows* (but don't let the wardens
catch you poaching the nobleman's deer, or you'll hang!).
Later on, the English passed laws *requiring* the yeoman
to learn how to use the longbow. (Ask the French
about Agincourt...)
Hope this helps! :-)
Thanks,
Franklin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.castle, Shiri Dori writes:
> In lugnet.castle, René Hoffmeister writes:
> <snip>
> > "Yeoman Archer" - If "yeoman" means to be not dependent on strict rules.
>
> Well, that's not what my dictionary says... Yeoman:
> "An attendant, a servant, or a lesser official in a royal or noble household.
> A yeoman of the guard. (1)
> A petty officer performing chiefly clerical duties in the U.S. Navy.
> An assistant or other subordinate, as of a sheriff.
> A diligent, dependable worker.
> A farmer who cultivates his own land, especially a member of a former class of
> small freeholding farmers in England."
Perhaps "Freeman" or "Mercenary" (if he hires himself out to fight for others)
would be better?
>
> > "Battlerider / Battle Horseman" - He's not only a knight. He belongs to a
> > company of Heavy Cavallary. But maybe you called them "Cavaliers"
>
> Cavaliers would be a good description, yes. I don't think there's a phrase in
> English like "horseman"... but that's the problem with translations. Ugh!
From www.dictionary.com:
1. A gallant or chivalrous man, especially one serving as escort to a woman of
high social position; a gentleman.
2. A mounted soldier; a knight.
3.Cavalier. A supporter of Charles I of England in his struggles against
Parliament. Also called Royalist.
I wouldn't use "cavalier", as it is definitely *not* the first definition (most
common). I'd use "Cavalryman" (actually, "Horseman" would work, too. I'm
sure I've seen it used before), since he is a part of a Heavy Cavalry unit.
www.dictionary.com definition of "cavalry":
1.A highly mobile army unit using vehicular transport, such as light armor and
helicopters.
2.Troops trained to fight on horseback.
Both refer, IMO, to what René seems to be getting at.
Jeff
| | | | | | |
