0

For the English sentence:

The flood of explanations came pouring forth again.

Google suggests something like (I am changing a few things):

Die Überschwemmung der Erklärungen sprudelte wieder heraus.

But this, it seems to me, corresponds more closely with:

The flood of explanations poured forth again.

Could any of these possibilities be correct alternatives?

Die Überschwemmung der Erklärungen kam wieder herausgesprudelt.

Die Überschwemmung der Erklärungen kam wieder herauszusprudeln.

Die Überschwemmung der Erklärungen kam wieder heraussprudeln.

Regarding the last one, I note that Hammer's German Grammar states that with verbs of motion if the 'ing' form expresses a purpose, a bare infinitive is used. (11.6.5b).

Improve this question

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
2

No translation here is proper semantically, your second suggestion as well as Google's work grammatically.

Semantics:

Flood needs to be translated here as Flut or Schwemme.

Grammar and semantics mixed: 'Come doing sth' is a difficult beast to translate. One might also go with 'etwas begann zu tun'. But that said, I fail to see a difference in meaning in your two English sentences 'come pouring forth again' and 'poured forth again' beyond the speaker's feeling whether the action has still lasting effect. This does not translate, so all of this is correct:

sprudelt wieder hervor

begann wieder hervorzusprudeln

kam wieder hervorgesprudelt

Depending on context and emphasis along the lines of discovering or uncovering the things flowing, you might use hervorsprudeln instead of heraussprudeln.

Having slept on the answer and similar to the comments: I think the words "Flut" and "hervorsprudeln" somewhat double the image and it would IMHO be good to leave that out. Similar expressions might go like:

Die Erklärungen sprudeleten wieder hervor.

Die Erklärungen rissen nicht mehr ab

Die Erklärungen kamen wieder wie ein Wasserfall

Die Erklärungen brachen wieder (wasserfallartig) (aus ihm/ihr) heraus.

Improve this answer
3
  • 2
    generally i am of your opinion but i would forego "hervor" altogether: Die (eine?) Flut ... begann wieder zu sprudeln" sounds better, because a "Flut" has no direction ("hervor" implies that) at all. It just raises and falls. Maybe the "flood" picture that works in English (but IMHO not so well in German) should be translated completely, like i.e. "... eine Erklärung jagte die andere ...", "die Flut an Erklärungen riß nun nicht mehr ab". etc.
    – bakunin
    Jul 14, 2022 at 5:57
  • 2
    @bakunin I think you should make that an answer. Your translation suggestions are excellent imo.
    – Olafant
    Jul 14, 2022 at 11:02
  • I agree. While sleeping over the anwer the came to my mind a few IMHO better ways to express the situation.
    – planetmaker
    Jul 14, 2022 at 11:12
1

Planetmakers Vorzug für Flut unterstütze ich, da nicht jede Flut mit Überschwemmungen einhergeht.

Dass er die Flut wieder streicht wäre eine Kritik, die schon an das englische Original gerichtet gehörte - Aufgabe der Übersetzung ist es nicht.

Die Flut an Erklärungen sprudelte wieder hervor/herein.

Die Flut an Erklärungen brach wieder los.

Improve this answer
1

I don't like most of the given translations, since Überschwemmung ist not something, which pours out itself, but caused by something other pouring out. This also applies to Flut and Schwemme, which are better translations of flood, since they are more common in the non-literal flood.

The context is still a bit sparse, but a good phrase would be:

Er/sie drohte, einen weiteren Schwall (unerwünschter?) Erklärungen/Ausflüchte herauszusprudeln.

or

Er/sie setzte zu einem Schwall weiterer Erklärungen an (hier könnte z. B. folgen: "ehe ich unterbrechen konnte.")

Improve this answer
3
  • Von einer Drohung ist im Original nicht die Rede, sondern es sprudelt schon. Und die Erklärungen sind im Original das Subjekt, weder ein Sie, noch ein Er ist in Sichtweite. Ebenso könnte es sich um ein Es oder eine Mehrzahlform handeln.
    – user unknown
    Jul 14, 2022 at 14:09
  • 1
    When researching, Überschwemmung, Schwemme and Flut in Duden, I, too, was disappointed with the degree of correspondence between Duden's definitions and the meaning intended here. But I think that Schwall is an excellent suggestion and an exact fit.
    – user44591
    Jul 14, 2022 at 14:18
  • @user44591: A good resource for insights on actual usage is the DWDS copora.
    – guidot ♦
    Jul 15, 2022 at 10:26
1

The flood of explanations came pouring forth again.

The verb »sich ergießen« offers an additional option of translation:

Wieder ergoss sich eine Flut an Erklärungen.

The »an« could be replaced by »von«.

Improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.