Interesting thread guys.
I'd prefer "got straight down to business".Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
The comma should not be used here.- And those who don't die, go nuts.
"in the rear" would never be used like that. If I were in that position, the question I would ask would be "Why, what's she got on her back?" or "What's wrong with her back?" or "What's on her back?" "What's she got behind her?" (maybe). Rear is usually a euphemism for ass/arse.- What does she have in the rear? - I inquired.
should be "emanating" (a smell does not emit, it is emitted, but emanate is more appropriate here I think).I squatted and again sensed a tart smell emitting from her.
The literal translation of kak is unnatural here. "What do you mean, they don't have a back?!" yes, I know it's a lot of extra words, but it's the most natural sounding equivalent imho.- А у навок спины нету.
- К-как это "спины нету"? - я сглотнул слюну.
- The navkas don't have a back.
- H-How not having a back? - I gulped.
In appearance- Like this, see: On appearance the Navka
This word order is very unnatural in English, the adverbial phrase "in small streams" would have to be put after the verb "crawled". By the way, you might want to try the verb "trickle" instead of "crawl"; it would fit nicely here.Страх тонкими ручейками полез за шиворот и растекся по спине. Мучительно тянуло обернуться и посмотреть: не стоит ли кто-то у меня за плечами?
The fear in small streams crawled from my collar and ran down my back. I was painfully drawn to turn and look: Is there someone standing behind my shoulders?
"those" does not agree with "sees" .. Rather than write "and those of the guys who see ...", you might prefer to throw in an "if": and if any one of the guys should see ... , although it's not there in the original.- И кто из мальчонков навку таку увидит - тот с ума сходит зараз, и ходит, воит, стонет, пока в болото не прыгнет, шоб страх свой похоронить, вона как!
- And those of the guys who sees such a navka,