Talk:Yoga: The Alpha and the Omega, Vol 1: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "This is for all 10 volumes of Yoga: The Alpha and the Omega. According to an unknown source there was a reprint in 1981. This information is omitted as unlikely. ~~~~") |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
According to an unknown source there was a reprint in 1981. This information is omitted as unlikely. | According to an unknown source there was a reprint in 1981. This information is omitted as unlikely. | ||
[[User:Samadhan|Samadhan]] ([[User talk:Samadhan|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2013 (PST) | [[User:Samadhan|Samadhan]] ([[User talk:Samadhan|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2013 (PST) | ||
---- | |||
hi Sarlo, | |||
we don't list forward translations, only backward. "translated into..." (whatever book) would turn first edition listings into a dogs breakfast, some having been translated into dozens of languages and hundreds of editions. | |||
backward translations only ever point to one original source. --[[User:Rudra|Rudra]] ([[User talk:Rudra|talk]]) 01:08, 28 May 2014 (PDT) | |||
---- | |||
Yes, this makes perfect sense. The legitimate exception is Hindi-into-English translations. I thought that since Hindi was one of our two "special" languages that it might have an exception too but i can see not only now that's wrong but i saw it earlier when i wrote up the Book of the Secrets / Tantra Sutra translations. Must have been overcome with an unconscious fit of egalitarianism. -- [[User:Sarlo|Sarlo]] ([[User talk:Sarlo|talk]]) 08:48, 28 May 2014 (PDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:48, 28 May 2014
This is for all 10 volumes of Yoga: The Alpha and the Omega.
According to an unknown source there was a reprint in 1981. This information is omitted as unlikely. Samadhan (talk) 06:15, 15 November 2013 (PST)
hi Sarlo,
we don't list forward translations, only backward. "translated into..." (whatever book) would turn first edition listings into a dogs breakfast, some having been translated into dozens of languages and hundreds of editions.
backward translations only ever point to one original source. --Rudra (talk) 01:08, 28 May 2014 (PDT)
Yes, this makes perfect sense. The legitimate exception is Hindi-into-English translations. I thought that since Hindi was one of our two "special" languages that it might have an exception too but i can see not only now that's wrong but i saw it earlier when i wrote up the Book of the Secrets / Tantra Sutra translations. Must have been overcome with an unconscious fit of egalitarianism. -- Sarlo (talk) 08:48, 28 May 2014 (PDT)
