Welsh to Indonesian: a short answer can change the person being referred to
The answer’s person may differ from the question’s
The official Welsh Foundation guide teaches short answers matched to verbal constructions. Its conditional table pairs a question addressed to you with a first-person answer when the respondent answers about themselves. Other examples answer a question about we with a form referring to you.
This means a Welsh question-and-answer exchange cannot be translated by keeping every person reference tied to the original questioner. Indonesian Universal Dependencies lists distinct first-, second-, and third-person expressions. For an original arrangement, a question asking whether the listener would pay may be followed by confirmation that the respondent would. The target needs that shift in perspective; it should not report that the original questioner has agreed to pay.
A Welsh we does not specify whether the listener belongs to it
Indonesian documentation distinguishes exclusive kami from inclusive kita. Both can be glossed we or our, but the distinction concerns whether the addressee is included. The Welsh Foundation guide’s ni-based plural answers do not independently spell out that Indonesian contrast.
For an original Welsh reply saying that we would help, determine whether the respondent means themselves and the listener or themselves and other people. The surrounding request may make this explicit: a request for help from an outside team differs from a proposal that speaker and listener work together. The Indonesian answer should preserve that membership rather than choose a form simply because the Welsh has a first-person plural ending.
A later Welsh reference to our task may continue the same group or introduce a broader one. The possessive meaning does not eliminate the membership distinction. Keep the participants supplied in the source available when choosing the Indonesian plural reference; a shift between kami and kita can change who is committed to the proposed activity.
A short Welsh form is not a universal word for yes
The Welsh guide provides different short answers for would, would like, could, should, and several future verbs. They affirm or deny the proposition associated with the question; their verbal form contributes to understanding what is being confirmed.
An original Welsh response confirming willingness differs from a response confirming ability. Indonesian documentation likewise lists separate modal expressions associated with ability, permission, and obligation. A translation should not turn every affirmative response into a statement that something is required. Recover the question’s modal meaning before expanding or interpreting its short reply.
The same distinction matters in negative answers. If a Welsh speaker says they would not like to do something, that is different from saying they cannot do it or should not do it. A bare target denial may be clear in its original conversation, but a translation that repeats a modal must repeat the right relationship. Read the question with the answer, preserve the respondent’s perspective, and resolve inclusive or exclusive group membership from the participants actually described. These are separate decisions even when the Welsh reply consists of only one or two words.
Language references