Wolves in the village - A Zen-story

[JWagner]

Once upon a time in a quaint village small
Hungry wolves caused fear to befall
They devoured houses and fields with delight
As the village lay dormant throughout the night

At dawn, the grip of terror 's strong
“They’ll come again before too long!
How shall we rid ourselves of this wild pack?"
They pondered deeply to keep them back

A master lived within that humble place
Who ventured out into the open space
One night he went without a word to say
Immersed himself in a strong and peaceful way

Indeed, the pack arrived as night grew dark
Their hunger evident and wild, a fearsome mark
They circled round him in a curious trance
Sniffing at his ear, his knee, and his neck's expanse

Yet he remained in tranquil, peaceful grace
The animals couldn't harm him in that place
Two even lay down by his side
All became gentler, ambience clarified

Leftover meals, whatever they could find
People fed the animals, being gentle and kind
The fears vanished, the torment ceased
The village 's protected, the feud released!

[Eisenvorhang]

To enhance the readability in English, you could adjust the syllable count or, if it becomes too complicated, ensure good vowel phrasing.
In the second stanza, "we" makes "ourselves" redundant.

At dawn, the grip of terror strong,
“They’ll come again before too long,”
“How do we rid this wild beast pack?” Or „How we get rid of wild beast pack“
They pondered deep to hold them back.

[Ilka-Maria]

They pondered deeply to hold them back.

[Eisenvorhang]

Would be correct if:

They pondered deeply, holding them back.

or

They pondered deeply, trying to hold them back.

But

They pondered deep to hold them back.

is totally fine and accepted in the English daily language.

There is a little explanation for you, Ilka:

In the sentence "They pondered deeply, holding them back," we have this vivid image of someone lost in thought, their brow perhaps furrowed in concentration. But there's more happening here – the phrase "holding them back" rolls out almost like an afterthought, as if their deep thoughts are also acting like a leash, keeping something or someone at bay. It's the kind of thing you'd say with a slight nod, indicating that the pondering and the holding back are all part of the same motion, happening simultaneously.

Switching gears to "They pondered deep to hold them back," it's like we're shining a spotlight on the intent behind the action. When we use "to hold them back" right after mentioning the deep thought, we're drawing a straight line between the thought and the goal. It's as though the sentence is giving us a little nudge, saying, "Hey, the whole reason for this intense thinking? It's to keep something in check." Here, the "to" is a giveaway that we're talking about purpose – the deep thinking is happening because there's a deliberate aim to restrain or control.

The grammatical difference in both languages/sentences is consistent: the use of a present participle (English) or a simple conjunction (German) in the first sentence, and the use of an infinitive with "to" (English) or "um... zu" (German) in the second sentence to express the intended purpose of the action.

[Ilka-Maria]

Makes no difference: It's an adverb, not an adjective.

There are only few adverbs going without the ending "-ly", for instance "hard" and "hardly" which have different meanings.

Sorry, but your explanations failed to convince me. But it may be okay to accept deviations from this in the language of art, as is also tolerated in the German language if it comes to lyrics, especially popular songs.

I remember a similar controversion in case of a line in a song interpreted by Drafi Deutscher, referring not to an adverb but to a verb: "Marble, stone and iron breaks" rather than "Marble, stone and iron break".

[JWagner]

Thanks a lot for your thoughts and considerations! I took them into account.

[Eisenvorhang]

Zitat von Ilka-Maria

Sorry, but your explanations failed to convince me.

Luckily, that's not my task. My task is to develop skills that help me with my own work. What you think or for what you will use your English... idc.

You can toss that sentence to an Englishman or someone from the USA if you like. But make sure it's nobody from the Bronx.

"They pondered deeply to hold them back."

This is not the answer.

KR

EV

[Ilka-Maria]

Zitat von Eisenvorhang

You can toss that sentence to an Englishman or someone from the USA if you like.

Oh, I can toss any sentence to an Englishman or an American. They are happy with everyone speaking their language. That's not my wishful thinking but experience.

Stick to "ponder deep", no problem.

Coming to the wolves: The poem is a "pack" of clichés. Wolves are not a murderous species. They only do, what nature expects from them to do. They are shy, fearing men as their most effective enemies, and they would avoid to cross men's paths where and whenever they can. There is no single proven report of wolves having premediatedly attacked a human being rather than in self-defence.

[Eisenvorhang]

Aight!

Goodnight, sleep tight (used adverbially for "sleep soundly"), don't let the bedbugs bite!

KR EV

[Ilka-Maria]

Zitat von Eisenvorhang

... don't let the bedbugs bite!

Oops! Whom? I bite them. With great effect. They sent me a letter of comparison befor complete extinction.

But we have to come back to the wolves. Why the hell do they have such a bad reputation as is stated in the poem?

[Eisenvorhang]

Wolves become very dangerous when they turn into wolf hybrids. Because wolf hybrids are not shy but possess the aggression potential (known as "gameness") that makes them dangerous. Currently, hunters in Germany are very concerned because the number of wolf hybrids is increasing.

On the other hand, wolves have rarely been portrayed as peaceful in literature and film.