You're welcome.
Take a look at this too.
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2005/20050125.htm
http://www.gbible.org/index.php?proc=tvw&tid=6430
http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/V/VESSEL/

The most neutral translation is čovjek, ljudsko tijelo.
But you can also cheat.
Find a Croatian Bible from Kršćanska sadašnjost, all the paragraphs in all biblical translations wordwide are marked the same, and just copy the sentence.

"And that's how you get laid!"

Can anyone please translate this?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... get%20laid
Still waters run deep

I na taj način/tako...... možeš doći do... pip komada

Please, write only in English...!


P.S. ... or moderators will get laid somebody!!

Shouldn't it go like this :
... or moderators will get somebody laid !
?

Perhaps, but who care, that is not the point!

Or we can ask moderators would they get laid somebody or get somebody laid... ;)

Moderators are lazy!

Is there any difference between using "in spite of" and the word "despite"?

For example:

- In spite of the bad weather, he came yesterday.
- Despite the bad weather, he came yesterday.

I believe it should be "who cares"

Correct .


Then is it correct:
moderators will get laid somebody
or
moderators will get somebody laid ?

No, there isn't any difference between them semantically speaking, but people often mix the two forms, and use expressions like despite of or something alike.
That's wrong.

The second one. Or to be exact it would be if the verb to get laid is transitive, but it isnt, which means that it doesn't normally take the direct object.
Somebody is here an object, so the sentence is, in fact, incorrect.

To get laid is somewhat a passive construction, for construction of this kind it's normal not to have a object, if they do you have to use by.

Let me translate.
To get laid doesnt mean poševit ću (nekoga).
It means bit ću poševljen (od nekoga).

Correct form
The moderators will get laid
Or the moderators will get laid by someone.


http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/get_laid
http://chrishibbard.hubpages.com/hub/Gr ... lain--laid

This part of the sentence is strange for me:



In this case the word off is the part of the verb wipe off, isn't it?

It sounds more logically to say: wipe off Israel of the face of the Earth. Where I make mistake?

First of all you should have typed this : . "Logically" is completly unnecessary here . Second your "more logical" choice is incorrect because "off" is not part of the verb . And third is inccorect , and should go in past tense like this : "Where did I make mistake?"

Thank you mr. Zadar.

My first choice was logical, and then afterward I've edited post.

No problem m8 .

Snowflake: I had a situation recently where I had to translate an article full of Biblical passages into English and that is exactly what I did. I just copied the verses out of the English bible instead of translating them. I figured it was the best thing to do and then on the bottom of the translation I posted something that the Bible verses were from on online Bible and then posted the link.

That's the thing to do when dealing with biblical text.
Because you can almost never be completely true to this kind of text.
They are among the hardest to translate due to their complex and often archaic language.

Even a language professional would do it in a similar way.
On condition, of course, that the text is in fact from the Bible, and not some loosly paraphrased bundle for some other liturgical use.

Even though this is supposed to be tongue in cheek, it is pretty much spot on.

I love New York.

Could someone translate this into English, please?

“Ovdje se ne živi samo da bi se živjelo. Ovdje se ne živi samo da bi se umrlo. Ovdje se i umire da bi se živjelo.”

Mehmedalija Dizdar, književnik

Rory, you have to wait forum experts for english. It's a little bit complex.