ANCAP.CH---English To Nigerian Pidgin English (2025 Words)

Project Details
This project is totally based on the Liberation and Anarcho-capitalist text resource project. And the creator/owner of the project Thi (swfsql) has done very well in making this project being possible to be translated in different languages and i really liked that.

Github link - https://github.com/ancap-ch/from-en
https://crowdin.com/project/ancap-ch/pcm#
https://crowdin.com/project/ancap-ch/pcm/activity

My CrowdIn Profile Page: https://crowdin.com/profile/TheOutspokenKing
My CrowdIn Activity Page: https://crowdin.com/profile/TheOutspokenKing/activity.

Language Source
The project's source language is British English.

Translated Language
The translated language is Nigerian Pidgin (or simply Pidgin).

Proofs of Work
The proofs or my work are simply outlined below in a progressive manner......

Before i got started on the project:

And as i started working on it:

And when i was done working on it...Further proofs below:

And below is a short excerpt from the translation:
Him also talk put for dis argument say, "Either dis correct and make sense, or de principles wey economic science dey based on nor correct or invalid."2

As e come be so, na only one sure way dey out for dis unpleasant (for all de socialists, that is) conclusion: wey be say na to argue say particular goods dey wey be say for some special reasons, de economic reasoning nor apply to am at all.
Na dis matter de so-called public goods theorists dey seriously wan prove so.3
But as e come be so, me go demonstrate say dat kind special goods or special reasons nor exist ka ka, and also say de production of security nor even dey cause problem wey even different from de ones wey dem take dey produce any other goods or services, like say house, cheese or insurance sef.
Even tho say e get many followers, de whole theory of public goods dey faulty wella, de reasoning nor bam, and plenty inconsistencies full am, even de argument nor even follow, and e just dey play on people dey believe or assume but e nor get any scientific merit at all.Him also talk put for dis argument say, "Either dis correct and make sense, or de principles wey economic science dey based on nor correct or invalid."2

As e come be so, na only one sure way dey out for dis unpleasant (for all de socialists, that is) conclusion: wey be say na to argue say particular goods dey wey be say for some special reasons, de economic reasoning nor apply to am at all.
Na dis matter de so-called public goods theorists dey seriously wan prove so.3
But as e come be so, me go demonstrate say dat kind special goods or special reasons nor exist ka ka, and also say de production of security nor even dey cause problem wey even different from de ones wey dem take dey produce any other goods or services, like say house, cheese or insurance sef.
Even tho say e get many followers, de whole theory of public goods dey faulty wella, de reasoning nor bam, and plenty inconsistencies full am, even de argument nor even follow, and e just dey play on people dey believe or assume but e nor get any scientific merit at all.4

---

Posted on Utopian.io - Rewarding Open Source Contributors

---