0

I'm currently trying to translate a text in English, that I wrote in French. It is a bit complicating when it comes to my writing style, as in French we tend (I do) to use a lot of analogies and metaphors, and it may appear wrong if not translated well.

I'm struggling to see if that sentence is correct :

With your fingertips, you brush the curiously smooth, almost silky skin of your left cheek, that had been infatuated with the plastic tablecloth for the last fifteen minutes.

or

With your fingertips, you brush the curiously smooth, almost silky skin of your left cheek, which had been infatuated with the plastic tablecloth for the last fifteen minutes.

Does it make sense ?

About the use of "what" or "which", I'm not sure which one is correct.

Thank you !

Louisa
  • 59
  • 2
    Why is my left cheek infatuated with the tablecloth? – KillingTime Oct 01 '21 at 17:24
  • It's an analogy, but now I'm not sure it's correct to say it like this in English. In French, the adj. "épris" or even "amouraché" meaning "infatuated" - we can use it in an analogy/metaphor, and therefore could write "my hands are infatuated with that piano" in a way to express "lyrically" that you enjoy very much to play the piano. – Louisa Oct 01 '21 at 17:34
  • 1
    The point of KillingTime's comment is that the way you've written the sentence, it's the cheek that is infatuated, rather than the fingertips. My French is rusty, but I think the problem with this translation is that in your original, infatuated would be conjugated to show that the subject was plural (fingertips). In English, this is not possible, so the antecedent will be the last object mentioned: the cheek. – Juhasz Oct 01 '21 at 17:49
  • Thank you both for your comments. In my original sentence, I'm implying that it's the "left cheek" that is infatuated. So, it's not cleat with the actual construction of the sentence ? Or is it just too awkward to use this adj. in that way ? – Louisa Oct 01 '21 at 17:53
  • Oh! In that case the grammar is fine; either that or which would work. But the meaning is unclear to me (and, it seems, to KillingTime). I understand how fingers could be infatuated with a tablecloth - they would stroke or caress it. The only way I can imagine a cheek being infatuated with a tablecloth is if the cheek has been pressed against it. The metaphor doesn't work for me. But this kind of thing is highly subjective. – Juhasz Oct 01 '21 at 18:18
  • Oh, alright ! Well, it's a weird way for me to explain why the "smooth, almost silky skin" (first part of the sentence) : because when you rest your head on a table, sometimes, your cheeks can feel like this afterwards ? So, because the "cheek was infatuated with the tablecloth, it now feels silky to the touch"... Not sure it works after all haha – Louisa Oct 01 '21 at 18:22
  • ... What or that? – Edwin Ashworth Oct 01 '21 at 18:56
  • I'd use that only to mean that there some left cheeks infatuated and other left cheeks that are otherwise engaged. Not really. – Yosef Baskin Oct 01 '21 at 19:39
  • Oh, ok ! Thank you ! :-) – Louisa Oct 01 '21 at 19:44
  • Where is "what" in either of the versions? The first version has "that", not "what". – Barmar Oct 01 '21 at 23:21
  • To me it sounds better with "which". – Barmar Oct 01 '21 at 23:23
  • You only have one left cheek, so the relative clause is a supplementary (non-defining) one where strictly speaking only "which" is possible. "That" is only used for integrated (defining) relative clauses. – BillJ Oct 02 '21 at 07:04
  • Barmar - sorry it was a mistake ! I meant to write "that". Thank you all for your help, it helped me a lot to better understand the construction of my sentence. :-) – Louisa Oct 02 '21 at 08:34

0 Answers0