19171
Could somebody help me with translation of the following sentence.

> 留守を預かる者として、主の家を汚した蒙昧――八つ裂きにされようと文句は言えぬ。

Text:

> 理屈など通用しない。 ただ一人でも、どんなに卑小な者だろうと、名誉と忠誠に反した愚者を、黒円卓に存在させた罪は罪。 故に罰。
> 留守を預かる者として、主の家を汚した蒙昧――八つ裂きにされようと文句は言えぬ。

Some sort of translation:

> An ignorance of staining master's house, as a person taking a charge of it
> during his absence --

Context: The master of a some sort of group is not present for some long
period of time, so he entrusted the control of the group to his subordinates.
However one of them done something bad, so the master is punishing all of his
subordinates.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-10-17T14:31:56.570
19139
2014-10-21T06:38:10.977
2014-10-17T14:58:06.937
3183
question
translation
Translation of phrase 「留守を預かる者として、主の家を汚した蒙昧」
Maybe something like:

> As deputy in his absence, one cannot question the tearing of limb from limb
> for the ignorance of defiling the house of the Lord.

主{ぬし} (おも, あるじ) bears the meaning of "lord", "chief", "master" and similar. 主
is also used to reference "the Lord" in Christian writings, such as the Bible,
e.g. [Colossians 3-23](http://biblehub.com/colossians/3-23.htm) and [コロサイ
３：２３－２４](http://www.believers.org/jp/jbel202.htm). Given the context of
someone involved in 主の家を汚した蒙昧, I concluded that "the Lord", as in "God", would
be the proper translation, rather than "his lord", as in some "master" person
in general.

The phrase "defiling the house of the lord" (or similar) is common in the same
context of Christianity.

A 留守{るす}を預{あずかる}かる者{もの} is someone left in charge when the usual person of
authority is not present (see for example
[コトバンク](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%95%99%E5%AE%88%E3%82%92%E9%A0%90%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B-411693)).
I'm not sure if "deputy" is the best translation, but to my mind and ears it
fits both the meaning and context of the source. People who debate matters of
Christianity and do Bible studies sometimes refer to for example Jesus as
being the "deputy of the Lord".

I found [this Wiki
entry](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%AB%E3%81%A4%E8%A3%82%E3%81%8D%E3%81%AE%E5%88%91)
describing how to properly "tear a person to pieces", as in 八{や}つ裂{ざ}き.

Maybe this approach was wrong all together. Is this actually some アニメ or 漫画
related stuff? If so, I still think that the original aims to mimic the kind
of language used in religious contexts, but the reference to "the Lord" in my
translation would be wrong, of course.

**Edit:** I found the response made by @snailboat very enlightening, and as a
result, I propose a new translation:

> What ignorance, defiling the house of your lord while acting his deputy ――
> Drawing and quartering could not be questioned!

The technical term for 八{や}つ裂{ざ}き is probably
"[quartering](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismemberment)" in English. I think
[Robert-François Damiens](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert-
Fran%C3%A7ois_Damiens) was among the first to be subjected to this gruesome
treatment in real history. (As "drawing and quartering" seems as a "set
procedure", and because I felt the flow of the sentence was nice, I included
both in my translation rater than just the one.)

The "――" part I now interpret as a pause during which the speaker contemplates
the gravity of of the situation, before finishing of with illustrating his (or
her) sentiment by proposing a suitable punishment.

Leaving all of my old translation untouched for reference.

**Edit:** I feel the phrase "could not be questioned" is somewhat awkward.
Maybe this is better:

> What ignorance, defiling the house of your lord while acting his deputy ――
> Drawing and quartering would not be disputed!

Even the literal translation of 文句{もんく}は言{い}えぬ is quite open, including
vocabulary such as "complaint", "grumbling" and "objection" for 文句. I think
this new version sounds better, while still conserving a slightly archaic,
stubby tone.

Depending on the context, alternatives for "deputy" include such words as
"delegate", "representative" or even "legate". (Of course, if the culprit
responsible for the alleged act of desecration, is a group of people rather
than a single person, these can all be pluralized, as in "deputies".)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-10-17T23:10:04.603
19145
2014-10-21T06:38:10.977
2014-10-21T06:38:10.977
7519
7519
19139
answer
I tried my hand at a free translation, because I couldn't figure out how to
translate it preserving the meaning or sentence structure precisely:

> Utter nonsense. The crime of allowing even one fool who has gone against
> honor and loyalty at the black round table, no matter how low they might be,
> is nonetheless a crime. And so, there must be punishment. **Such
> foolishness, to have defiled your lord's house so while it was left in your
> care** ―it would be only just were you rent limb from limb.

Unfortunately, this doesn't match up perfectly with the original. I'll try to
comment on your translation and the original sentence:

> 留守を預かる者として  
>  _as a person taking a charge of it during his absence_

You seem to understand the literal meaning of this part fairly well. But the
master entrusted it to an entire _group_ , right? So it's "people" rather than
"a person". For people who were left in charge of the master's house while the
master was gone . . .

> 主の家を汚した蒙昧  
>  _An ignorance of staining master's house_

My comments:

  1. In this case, I think 汚した is figurative (as it often is), so I chose to translate it with "defile" instead. Their crime of allowing even one such person, no matter how low their station, to be at the black round table has defiled their master's house, and so they must be punished.

  2. Translating 蒙昧 is hard, and I had to rely on dictionaries to figure this out. I think it's figurative, literary language, in which the metaphor is **light as knowledge or intellect** , and **darkness as the lack thereof**. The word 蒙昧 represents that lack, and I've chosen to translate it as "foolishness".

  3. I don't think "An ignorance of" really makes sense or captures the relationship between 蒙昧 and the rest of the sentence. I think that grammatically the entire clause is a gapless relative that modifies the following head noun 蒙昧. Basically, 蒙昧 "sums up" the clause. (I think it's what Martin calls a "summational epitheme" in his _Reference Grammar of Japanese_.)

That is, for people who were left in charge, defiling the lord's house (with
their crime) was utter foolishness.

This text, by the way, uses a rhetorical device called 体言止め several times. It
adds force to the original by ending on a noun (e.g. 罪 or 罰). In this
sentence, the last word is 蒙昧, but it's followed by a long dash, after which
the speaker elaborates with another sentence, "It would be only just (or
literally 'You could not complain if') you were torn limb from limb", which is
a comment on that foolishness.

So basically, the lord/master guy is pretty cheesed off.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-10-20T09:41:30.153
19171
2014-10-20T09:41:30.153
19139
answer