Mexican Spanish to Tibetan: reporting an agreement is different from witnessing a meeting
Quedar can describe an arrangement rather than staying somewhere
In Mexican Spanish, a message with quedar can concern an agreement, a location, something left over or a promise that was not fulfilled. Before translating a meeting update into Tibetan, decide which event the speaker actually reports. A shared Spanish verb does not mean that all these messages concern remaining in a place.
El Colegio de México’s dictionary distinguishes quedar de or quedar en, used for agreeing to do something, from quedarse, used for remaining somewhere. It also records quedar algo en pie for something still being valid and quedarle mal a alguien for failing to fulfil a promise adequately. These readings make the surrounding phrase essential.
For an original museum visit, Quedamos de ir el sábado reports an arrangement to go on Saturday. It does not establish that anyone has already arrived. If a later message says the arrangement remains valid, preserve that confirmation rather than changing it into a report that somebody stayed at the museum. A planned event and a completed visit need different interpretations.
Keep the person who supplied the information
Tournadre and LaPolla distinguish a report’s source from access to the information in Standard Tibetan. Their analysis shows that reported speech can retain information about the reported speaker’s access, while the enclosing report represents the current speaker’s access. Hearing somebody describe an event does not mean the current speaker witnessed the event itself.
The authors also give a Standard Tibetan hearsay example with -za. The sensory material within that construction concerns the source’s access, rather than automatically claiming direct observation by the person now speaking. This is a reason to preserve attribution, not an instruction to attach one suffix to every Spanish dijo.
Imagine an original message from a visitor: the organiser said that the group agreed to change the meeting point. There are three relevant participants: the visitor relaying the update, the organiser supplying it, and the group making the agreement. Removing the organiser from the translation could make the visitor appear to guarantee a decision they only learned about secondhand. Keep that chain understandable.
Do not turn an explanation into a stronger claim
A report that somebody failed to keep an arrangement differs from a report about where they were. If the original Spanish uses quedar mal, identify the promised action and the shortfall. A late arrival, an incomplete task and a complete absence are different outcomes; the expression alone does not supply all those details.
For an original volunteer handover, explain that a person promised to bring signs but brought only the stands. That makes the incomplete commitment clear without inventing an absence. If the writer learned this from another volunteer, retain that attribution as well. The Tibetan recipient needs both the practical problem and the basis of the report to decide what to bring next.
The Tibetan source discussed here concerns Standard Tibetan examples, not a universal formula for every Tibetic variety or literary register. When saving the finished update, label it as an agreement, a confirmation or a report of nonfulfilment. Include the information source where relevant. Reusing a sentence about a witnessed arrival for a secondhand planning update can change both the event and the speaker’s responsibility for the claim.
Language references