Danish to traditional Mongolian: translate the expression, then read its script
A book word can belong to a larger expression
A Danish phrase about a book, a library or an educational activity should not be translated by selecting one isolated noun and assembling the remaining pieces mechanically. The Mongolian explanatory dictionary’s entry labelled ном in Cyrillic lists both the ordinary book sense and wider uses connected with learning, religious teaching and established rules. The surrounding expression determines which sense is intended.
For orientation, its номын сан denotes a library or collection of books, while ном унших concerns reading written works. These Cyrillic labels are dictionary lookup aids here, not examples of the traditional-script output promised by this page. A Danish reference to a library should preserve the established institution or collection meaning, rather than turn into a literal phrase that happens to contain the target word for book.
Traditional writing has its own order on the page
Unicode describes traditional Mongolian as vertical writing from top to bottom, with columns progressing from left to right. That differs from the ordinary horizontal Danish line. A translated paragraph displayed as upright columns can therefore be correctly ordered even though the reader cannot follow it using Danish reading habits. The column sequence should not be reversed to imitate another vertical writing tradition.
The standard also describes a horizontal fallback for systems without vertical support. Short Mongolian passages may be laid out left to right in that environment. Consequently, orientation alone does not establish that the translator selected Cyrillic or produced the wrong language. First distinguish the actual script characters from the way the application arranges them on the page.
One letter can have more than one contextual shape
Mongolian shaping selects positional forms according to the surrounding letters. Unicode also documents invisible joining controls that can affect those forms. A Danish reader accustomed to recognizing a largely stable printed letter should therefore avoid correcting an unfamiliar joined shape by replacing it with an isolated-looking character. The appearance can be a normal consequence of the word’s context.
When copying a traditional-script expression into a Danish document, preserve its character sequence rather than rearranging signs to imitate a screenshot. Disconnected display can be a rendering problem rather than a different lexical translation.
The source object still needs to be identified
Traditional-script output does not remove the underlying Mongolian distinction between a specific object and a nonspecific one. Tokyo University of Foreign Studies explains this through its Cyrillic teaching examples: a particular identified book and an unspecified book use different object constructions. The Danish article or demonstrative can supply an important clue, but the whole referent must be understood.
Danish pronoun forms provide another clue: jeg and mig distinguish subject from object, and object forms also follow prepositions in the Language Council’s account. Preserve those roles while the sentence is recast in Mongolian. Changing script is only one part of this direction; it must not conceal a reversal of who is reading, lending or receiving the book.
Language references