One can only be so unsensible, you know. -> explain please?












4
















One can only be so unsensible, you know.




That line came from an Anime, so it's Japanese to English translation. The original Japanese line is something like "A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent(= Just get some common sense!)", which is my translation anyway.



But here I was wondering how that line could be translated into the one at the title. I'm not questioning the translation quality, just not getting used to the sentences start with One, always. And the key point, I think, lies with the word Only, but I can't quite grasp the whole idea.



Could you be so nice and parse it step by step?










share|improve this question



























    4
















    One can only be so unsensible, you know.




    That line came from an Anime, so it's Japanese to English translation. The original Japanese line is something like "A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent(= Just get some common sense!)", which is my translation anyway.



    But here I was wondering how that line could be translated into the one at the title. I'm not questioning the translation quality, just not getting used to the sentences start with One, always. And the key point, I think, lies with the word Only, but I can't quite grasp the whole idea.



    Could you be so nice and parse it step by step?










    share|improve this question

























      4












      4








      4


      1







      One can only be so unsensible, you know.




      That line came from an Anime, so it's Japanese to English translation. The original Japanese line is something like "A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent(= Just get some common sense!)", which is my translation anyway.



      But here I was wondering how that line could be translated into the one at the title. I'm not questioning the translation quality, just not getting used to the sentences start with One, always. And the key point, I think, lies with the word Only, but I can't quite grasp the whole idea.



      Could you be so nice and parse it step by step?










      share|improve this question















      One can only be so unsensible, you know.




      That line came from an Anime, so it's Japanese to English translation. The original Japanese line is something like "A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent(= Just get some common sense!)", which is my translation anyway.



      But here I was wondering how that line could be translated into the one at the title. I'm not questioning the translation quality, just not getting used to the sentences start with One, always. And the key point, I think, lies with the word Only, but I can't quite grasp the whole idea.



      Could you be so nice and parse it step by step?







      word-meaning translation






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Jan 21 at 12:38









      dolcodolco

      45328




      45328






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5














          One might find it necessary to question the quality of the translation. 



          Translation for anime has a constraint that doesn't exist in text-only and audio-only media.  The audio has to match the video.  The new words are paired with the same old mouth movements. 



          That being said, the two sentences in question do share some common meaning. 




          One can only be so unsensible, you know. 




          The "you know" at the end of this statement can mean things like as you do know or as you should know or even which I want you to know.  It also can mean pretty much nothing at all, acting as a semantically empty interjection.  I think we can safely ignore it. 



          This usage of "one" is something that used to be called the impersonal pronoun.  It represents a person, but which person is left unspecified.  It might indicate me.  It might indicate you.  It might indicate someone, anyone, or everyone. 



          In this context, the word "unsensible" does mean something like lacking common sense.  To my native-reader's eye, it's an unusual, somewhat unnatural word choice.  In other contexts this word might mean imperceptible or unconscious.  Without your alternate translation, I wouldn't have known which sense of this word was intended.  Perhaps those syllables were chosen to match the animation, rather than to sound clear and natural. 



          The combination of "only" and "so" carries the same meaning as only to a limited degree or only in a limited manner.  A statement like "it's so good" uses "so" as an intensifier.  A statement like "it's good, but it's only so good" uses "only so" as a limiter. 




          One can only be so unsensible, you know. 

          A person can only be foolish to a limited degree. 

          A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent. 




          Here we have three different sentences that express pretty much the same sentiment.  The original translation might be only so good, but it is adequate. 






          share|improve this answer































            1














            "One" is somewhat archaic english, but it just means "a person" or usually is used just as a more unpersonal version of "I"



            "Only" is used as a limiter here, the literal translation "to a certain extent" is correct.



            "unsensible" is just the negative of "sensible" or, having sense. Not a word I've ever seen used before.



            "you know" is used to emphasize the sentence, and to include the other person in the conversation.



            So another translation could be "I can only be stupid to a certain extent" but that is somewhat weird english and really depends on the character who is speaking.



            For "One can only be so unsensible, you know." I'd imagine an older lady, probably rich and/or noble. A very formal speaker who tries to look detached.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1





              I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

              – RubioRic
              Jan 21 at 14:50











            • Really depends on the context though.

              – Borgh
              Jan 21 at 14:51






            • 2





              Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

              – RubioRic
              Jan 21 at 15:28













            • "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

              – Borgh
              Jan 21 at 15:31






            • 1





              I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

              – RubioRic
              Jan 21 at 15:39











            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "481"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f193672%2fone-can-only-be-so-unsensible-you-know-explain-please%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            5














            One might find it necessary to question the quality of the translation. 



            Translation for anime has a constraint that doesn't exist in text-only and audio-only media.  The audio has to match the video.  The new words are paired with the same old mouth movements. 



            That being said, the two sentences in question do share some common meaning. 




            One can only be so unsensible, you know. 




            The "you know" at the end of this statement can mean things like as you do know or as you should know or even which I want you to know.  It also can mean pretty much nothing at all, acting as a semantically empty interjection.  I think we can safely ignore it. 



            This usage of "one" is something that used to be called the impersonal pronoun.  It represents a person, but which person is left unspecified.  It might indicate me.  It might indicate you.  It might indicate someone, anyone, or everyone. 



            In this context, the word "unsensible" does mean something like lacking common sense.  To my native-reader's eye, it's an unusual, somewhat unnatural word choice.  In other contexts this word might mean imperceptible or unconscious.  Without your alternate translation, I wouldn't have known which sense of this word was intended.  Perhaps those syllables were chosen to match the animation, rather than to sound clear and natural. 



            The combination of "only" and "so" carries the same meaning as only to a limited degree or only in a limited manner.  A statement like "it's so good" uses "so" as an intensifier.  A statement like "it's good, but it's only so good" uses "only so" as a limiter. 




            One can only be so unsensible, you know. 

            A person can only be foolish to a limited degree. 

            A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent. 




            Here we have three different sentences that express pretty much the same sentiment.  The original translation might be only so good, but it is adequate. 






            share|improve this answer




























              5














              One might find it necessary to question the quality of the translation. 



              Translation for anime has a constraint that doesn't exist in text-only and audio-only media.  The audio has to match the video.  The new words are paired with the same old mouth movements. 



              That being said, the two sentences in question do share some common meaning. 




              One can only be so unsensible, you know. 




              The "you know" at the end of this statement can mean things like as you do know or as you should know or even which I want you to know.  It also can mean pretty much nothing at all, acting as a semantically empty interjection.  I think we can safely ignore it. 



              This usage of "one" is something that used to be called the impersonal pronoun.  It represents a person, but which person is left unspecified.  It might indicate me.  It might indicate you.  It might indicate someone, anyone, or everyone. 



              In this context, the word "unsensible" does mean something like lacking common sense.  To my native-reader's eye, it's an unusual, somewhat unnatural word choice.  In other contexts this word might mean imperceptible or unconscious.  Without your alternate translation, I wouldn't have known which sense of this word was intended.  Perhaps those syllables were chosen to match the animation, rather than to sound clear and natural. 



              The combination of "only" and "so" carries the same meaning as only to a limited degree or only in a limited manner.  A statement like "it's so good" uses "so" as an intensifier.  A statement like "it's good, but it's only so good" uses "only so" as a limiter. 




              One can only be so unsensible, you know. 

              A person can only be foolish to a limited degree. 

              A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent. 




              Here we have three different sentences that express pretty much the same sentiment.  The original translation might be only so good, but it is adequate. 






              share|improve this answer


























                5












                5








                5







                One might find it necessary to question the quality of the translation. 



                Translation for anime has a constraint that doesn't exist in text-only and audio-only media.  The audio has to match the video.  The new words are paired with the same old mouth movements. 



                That being said, the two sentences in question do share some common meaning. 




                One can only be so unsensible, you know. 




                The "you know" at the end of this statement can mean things like as you do know or as you should know or even which I want you to know.  It also can mean pretty much nothing at all, acting as a semantically empty interjection.  I think we can safely ignore it. 



                This usage of "one" is something that used to be called the impersonal pronoun.  It represents a person, but which person is left unspecified.  It might indicate me.  It might indicate you.  It might indicate someone, anyone, or everyone. 



                In this context, the word "unsensible" does mean something like lacking common sense.  To my native-reader's eye, it's an unusual, somewhat unnatural word choice.  In other contexts this word might mean imperceptible or unconscious.  Without your alternate translation, I wouldn't have known which sense of this word was intended.  Perhaps those syllables were chosen to match the animation, rather than to sound clear and natural. 



                The combination of "only" and "so" carries the same meaning as only to a limited degree or only in a limited manner.  A statement like "it's so good" uses "so" as an intensifier.  A statement like "it's good, but it's only so good" uses "only so" as a limiter. 




                One can only be so unsensible, you know. 

                A person can only be foolish to a limited degree. 

                A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent. 




                Here we have three different sentences that express pretty much the same sentiment.  The original translation might be only so good, but it is adequate. 






                share|improve this answer













                One might find it necessary to question the quality of the translation. 



                Translation for anime has a constraint that doesn't exist in text-only and audio-only media.  The audio has to match the video.  The new words are paired with the same old mouth movements. 



                That being said, the two sentences in question do share some common meaning. 




                One can only be so unsensible, you know. 




                The "you know" at the end of this statement can mean things like as you do know or as you should know or even which I want you to know.  It also can mean pretty much nothing at all, acting as a semantically empty interjection.  I think we can safely ignore it. 



                This usage of "one" is something that used to be called the impersonal pronoun.  It represents a person, but which person is left unspecified.  It might indicate me.  It might indicate you.  It might indicate someone, anyone, or everyone. 



                In this context, the word "unsensible" does mean something like lacking common sense.  To my native-reader's eye, it's an unusual, somewhat unnatural word choice.  In other contexts this word might mean imperceptible or unconscious.  Without your alternate translation, I wouldn't have known which sense of this word was intended.  Perhaps those syllables were chosen to match the animation, rather than to sound clear and natural. 



                The combination of "only" and "so" carries the same meaning as only to a limited degree or only in a limited manner.  A statement like "it's so good" uses "so" as an intensifier.  A statement like "it's good, but it's only so good" uses "only so" as a limiter. 




                One can only be so unsensible, you know. 

                A person can only be foolish to a limited degree. 

                A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent. 




                Here we have three different sentences that express pretty much the same sentiment.  The original translation might be only so good, but it is adequate. 







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Jan 21 at 14:52









                Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan

                9,7021027




                9,7021027

























                    1














                    "One" is somewhat archaic english, but it just means "a person" or usually is used just as a more unpersonal version of "I"



                    "Only" is used as a limiter here, the literal translation "to a certain extent" is correct.



                    "unsensible" is just the negative of "sensible" or, having sense. Not a word I've ever seen used before.



                    "you know" is used to emphasize the sentence, and to include the other person in the conversation.



                    So another translation could be "I can only be stupid to a certain extent" but that is somewhat weird english and really depends on the character who is speaking.



                    For "One can only be so unsensible, you know." I'd imagine an older lady, probably rich and/or noble. A very formal speaker who tries to look detached.






                    share|improve this answer



















                    • 1





                      I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 14:50











                    • Really depends on the context though.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 14:51






                    • 2





                      Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:28













                    • "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 15:31






                    • 1





                      I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:39
















                    1














                    "One" is somewhat archaic english, but it just means "a person" or usually is used just as a more unpersonal version of "I"



                    "Only" is used as a limiter here, the literal translation "to a certain extent" is correct.



                    "unsensible" is just the negative of "sensible" or, having sense. Not a word I've ever seen used before.



                    "you know" is used to emphasize the sentence, and to include the other person in the conversation.



                    So another translation could be "I can only be stupid to a certain extent" but that is somewhat weird english and really depends on the character who is speaking.



                    For "One can only be so unsensible, you know." I'd imagine an older lady, probably rich and/or noble. A very formal speaker who tries to look detached.






                    share|improve this answer



















                    • 1





                      I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 14:50











                    • Really depends on the context though.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 14:51






                    • 2





                      Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:28













                    • "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 15:31






                    • 1





                      I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:39














                    1












                    1








                    1







                    "One" is somewhat archaic english, but it just means "a person" or usually is used just as a more unpersonal version of "I"



                    "Only" is used as a limiter here, the literal translation "to a certain extent" is correct.



                    "unsensible" is just the negative of "sensible" or, having sense. Not a word I've ever seen used before.



                    "you know" is used to emphasize the sentence, and to include the other person in the conversation.



                    So another translation could be "I can only be stupid to a certain extent" but that is somewhat weird english and really depends on the character who is speaking.



                    For "One can only be so unsensible, you know." I'd imagine an older lady, probably rich and/or noble. A very formal speaker who tries to look detached.






                    share|improve this answer













                    "One" is somewhat archaic english, but it just means "a person" or usually is used just as a more unpersonal version of "I"



                    "Only" is used as a limiter here, the literal translation "to a certain extent" is correct.



                    "unsensible" is just the negative of "sensible" or, having sense. Not a word I've ever seen used before.



                    "you know" is used to emphasize the sentence, and to include the other person in the conversation.



                    So another translation could be "I can only be stupid to a certain extent" but that is somewhat weird english and really depends on the character who is speaking.



                    For "One can only be so unsensible, you know." I'd imagine an older lady, probably rich and/or noble. A very formal speaker who tries to look detached.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Jan 21 at 13:35









                    BorghBorgh

                    922110




                    922110








                    • 1





                      I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 14:50











                    • Really depends on the context though.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 14:51






                    • 2





                      Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:28













                    • "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 15:31






                    • 1





                      I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:39














                    • 1





                      I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 14:50











                    • Really depends on the context though.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 14:51






                    • 2





                      Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:28













                    • "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

                      – Borgh
                      Jan 21 at 15:31






                    • 1





                      I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

                      – RubioRic
                      Jan 21 at 15:39








                    1




                    1





                    I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

                    – RubioRic
                    Jan 21 at 14:50





                    I think that the pronoun in your "another translation" should be "you" instead of "I", representing "people in general". The speaker doesn't seem to be talking about himself.

                    – RubioRic
                    Jan 21 at 14:50













                    Really depends on the context though.

                    – Borgh
                    Jan 21 at 14:51





                    Really depends on the context though.

                    – Borgh
                    Jan 21 at 14:51




                    2




                    2





                    Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

                    – RubioRic
                    Jan 21 at 15:28







                    Notice that you have pointed that "one" is equivalent to "a person". The pronoun "I" is not an anonymous person, it's not any person, it's the speaker. He/she may be including himself/herself but not explictly in this case.

                    – RubioRic
                    Jan 21 at 15:28















                    "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

                    – Borgh
                    Jan 21 at 15:31





                    "one" can both be used to mean "I" and "you" or even "unspecified theoretical person", all variations on the meaning "a person", the exact meaning varies depending on the context.

                    – Borgh
                    Jan 21 at 15:31




                    1




                    1





                    I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

                    – RubioRic
                    Jan 21 at 15:39





                    I agree with you but if you use "I" then you're limiting the possibilities. The final meaning is open in the original sentence, it depends on the context. "I" does not represent the same than "one" in every context but "you" (people in general) does.

                    – RubioRic
                    Jan 21 at 15:39


















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f193672%2fone-can-only-be-so-unsensible-you-know-explain-please%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    An IMO inspired problem

                    Management

                    Investment