[blml] "board" vs. "deal" (opinion poll) [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Herman De Wael]

Alain Gottcheiner wrote:
> John (MadDog) Probst a écrit :
>>> the law-makers).
>>>
>>> Will Herman De Wael be translating the Laws into
>>> Flemish?  If so, how does Herman intend to translate
>>> Law 20F5(a)?
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>>     
> Don't laugh. The laws have been translated in Dutch. Translating them 
> into Flemish is still to be done, and needed, as Flemish bridge lingo is 
> different from the Dutch one. For example, "forcing" means "strong 
> relay" in Flemish, and suit names are always given in the plural form, 
> even when calling a card from dummy.
> 

That is also true - but it's not a question of language, only of usage.
There used to be a problem in the laws which meant that "zonder 
troef", the literal translation of "without trumps" was not legal in 
the dutch laws, whereas "sans atout" was. In Belgium, we use the dutch 
version, in the Netherlands, the french one (yes, we're crazy). That 
was changed under the 1997 laws (zonder troef being mentioned in a 
footnote). However, West-Flemish "koeken", a synonym for "ruiten" 
(diamonds) and more general "pikken" (piques = spades), which are 
often used at the table, did not make it into the lawbook.

The most crazy difference between Belgian and Netherlands usage is the 
word "binnen". When a dutchman says "het contract is binnen", he means 
he's made it. When someone from Antwerp says "twee binnen", it's two down.

But no Alain, we don't need a flemish translation, much like we don't 
need a Wallon one.

> Best regards
> 
>     Alain
> 


-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://users.skynet.be/hermandw/index.html