[blml] he, he/she, or they for whom the bell tolls

[Robert Geller]

Dear BLMLers,

The Introduction to the 2007 Laws contains the following sentence. 
**************************************************
Finally, unless the context clearly dictates otherwise, the singular
includes the plural and the masculine includes the feminine, and vice versa.
****************************************************
This sentence makes perfect sense as applied to the English
language version of the laws.

On the other hand, in the Japanese language there are no "masculine"
or "feminine" forms used in the 2007 Laws (basically the "...if he has...,"
and so on, which are so common in English, are not used at all in ordinary
Japanese).  Similarly, the Japanese language doesn't have "singular"
or "plural" forms either.   That being the case, this sentence makes no
sense whatsoever as applied to the Japanese edition of the 2007 Laws.

How then should we treat this sentence?  
 (A) Omit it from the Japanese laws altogether as it is irrelevant to the 
Japanese language?
 (B) Include a literal translation in the Japanese edition even though it
makes no sense, because the RA in each NBO should translate everything 
exactly as it stands in the English edition?
 (C) Other (please specify)
 
Any opinions?   Also, any reports on how this sentence was handled in
other countries?

-Bob 



 

-----------------------------------------------------
Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com