SuttaCentral
AN7.63:13.1: Yācīdha mātā bhaginī sakhīti ca,
But the kinds of wives here called
AN7.63:13.2: ‘Dāsī ca bhariyā’ti ca sā pavuccati;
mother, sister, friend, and bondservant;
Everywhere else sakha/sakhi/sakhī has become a “comrade”, but here she’s still a “friend”.
Again in DN31:14.3.
The translation of mahāmatta is ambiguous:
Found in the same sequence:
AN 10.69:1.3 - minister
AN 10.70:1.3 - chief minister
Other examples from AN:
AN 3.100:15.2 - chief minister
AN 4.35:1.2 - chief minister
AN 6.60:2.3 - chief minister
And in commented texts:
DN 16 (throughout) - minister
MN 32:9.10 - chief minister
MN 75:18.2 - minister
MN 88:3.3 - chief minister
MN 108:6.2 - minister
I didn’t collect all its occurrance.
According to Bhante Sujato’s own guidelines mahāmatta should be “chief minister”. Thanks for finding the exceptions!
DN 14:2.18.35, DN 14:2.18.43, SN 12.4:9.4, SN 12.65:2.16, SN 55.28:4.5
«Name and form are a condition for»
18 suttas have «Name and form are conditions for»
DN 14:2.18.31, SN 12.4:8.4, SN 12.12:2.11, SN 12.12:3.10, SN 12.20:3.6
«The six sense fields are a condition for»
16 suttas have «The six sense fields are conditions for»
SN 12.63:6.24
«name and form is completely understood. When name and form are completely understood»
Not sure if they both should use «is» or «are».
MN 115:13.3
«to murder their father … or murder a perfected one.»
MN 115:13.4
«to murder their father … or a perfected one.»
Just wondered if they should be the same after the ellipsis
AN 10.70:1.3
«cities, and nations»
Similar segments have «cities, and countries»
AN 10.70:1.3
«miscellaneous talk»
Similar segments have «motley talk»
SN 56.10:1.2
«street talk and talk at the well»
Similar segments have «street talk and well talk»
AN 10.70:1.3, DN 25:2.2, MN 76:4.2, MN 77:4.3, MN 78:3.2, MN 79:3.2, MN 122:12.2
«and talk about being reborn in this or that state of existence.»
AN 10.69:1.3, DN 1:1.17.2, DN 2:52.2, DN 9:3.2, SN 56.10:1.2
«and talk about being reborn in this or that place.»
«state of existence» vs «place»
I see that the translation for nāga—in case it’s a snake and not an elephant or an enlightened human—has been changed to “cobra”. Since nāgas in myth are often associated with water, perhaps in order to distinguish them from the alagadda (= cobra) in MN22, they could become “water cobras”?
I just realized how many words the Pali has for snake! 
I’ve found these:
| PLI | EN |
|---|---|
| alagadda | cobra |
| nāga | cobra |
| pannaga | adder |
| sappinī/sippinī (river) | Serpentine river |
| sappa | serpent; snake |
| uraga | serpent |
| sarīsapa | serpent; snake |
| ahi | snake |
| amatamada | snake |
| bhujaṅgama | snake; serpent |
| āsī | snake |
| āsīvisa | viper |
The Inuit words for snow is a myth, but the Indian words for snakes is not! Fortunately we aren’t working with the German words for the end of a loaf of bread.
(Still not enough characters …)
In Ud4.8, in segment 6.2 the sentence alajjino ime samaṇā sakyaputtiyā dussīlā pāpadhammā musāvādino abrahmacārino is translated
Shameless are these ascetics who follow the Sakyan, immoral and wicked. They are liars and unchaste.
while in segment 8.1 it is
Shameless are these ascetics who follow the Sakyan, immoral, wicked, liars, and fake chastes.
The translation for bho gotama has been changed from “Mister Gotama” to “worthy Gotama” a while ago. It seems this has now been reverted in a couple of cases (MN73, AN7.50, DN5).
In SN1.13:2.4 sarā has been changed to “lakes”, but in segment 3.4 it is still “waters”.
Note on Snp4.13:7.1:
Reading tapūpanissāya ; see Bodhi’s note 1961. Since in prose tapojigucchā usually occur together, I treat them as such here.
It appears on pasting to read “tapojigucchā usually” but actually appears as “tapojigucchāusually” (not italicised and without a space between the two words) on the website.
@sabbamitta
Bei SN 3.7 “Zu Gericht sitzen” → im letzten Absatz ist ein Fehler: “wie Fische, das in ein ausgelegtes Netz gehen”
und bei SN 3.15 “Eine Schlacht (2)” ist ein Satz doppelt (am Ende des ersten Teils): “Da kleideten sich mehrere Mönche und Nonnen…”
edit: Ich sehe gerade, dass man automatisch auf die englische Übersetzung kommt, wenn man die Sutta-Nummern anklickt. Wahrscheinlich müsste ich den Link hier hinein kopieren? 
Aber Hauptsache man findet es 
VG
Oh wie cool! Ich habe keine Ahnung, wie viele Leute hier Deutsch verstehen! Vielen Dank!!
Zwei Leute sind es schon mal - das wissen wir jetzt zumindest! 
On a more general note:
When reading a sutta on SC, you can forward to “next” sutta or go back to “previous” sutta showing the names of the suttas. When I’m reading in German, it still shows the titles of the suttas in English. This is obviously nothing grave or urgent - I just thought it would be nice (in the future) to have it all in one language if this can be done.
Oh there are more! It’s a nice surprise each time I discover another one.
I know it’s a bit hidden, but SuttaCentral does have a language setting!
Click on the three vertical dots in to upper right corner, then on “Language: English”. Then you see the language selection:
You can see the entire interface in the language you select, as far as it has been translated. German is among the most complete interface languages.
P.S. If you happen to come across any interface terms that are not translated into German, we’d be most grateful for any feedback in this thread.
Oh, and it’s actually not that hidden. It’s more like “Tomaten auf den Augen”. 
Thanks for showing me!
Will do 
The term udakamaṇikaṁ patiṭṭhāpeti is translated “set up a water jar” in SN35.243:2.1, Ud8.6:2.1, and DN16:1.21.1; and “set out a water jar” in MN92:4.5 and 6.3 and in Snp3.7:4.9.
Ajahn @Brahmali
Bi Ss 1:1.1
«Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery», all the other places in your translations capitalized «monastery» in «Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery».
Bhante Sujato’s translations were a bit more inconsistent with the capitalization of «x’s monastery»
SN 1.1:1.2, SN 1.31:1.2, SN 1.34:1.1, SN 1.35:1.1, SN 1.41:1.2, and Ud 1.10:4.2.
«Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery»
248 places with «Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery».
SN 12.68:1.1
«Ghosita’s monastery»
33 places with «Ghosita’s Monastery»
AN 4.24:1.1
«Kāḷaka’s monastery»
DN 25:1.3, DN 25:1.10, DN 25:24.6
«the lady Udumbarikā’s monastery»
DN 24:1.18.38, DN 24:1.19.2, DN 24:19.4, and DN 24:1.19.15
«Pāṭikaputta’s monastery»
MN 81:7.2, MN 81:7.10, MN 81:8.2, and MN 81:9.2
«Buddha Kassapa’s monastery»
Thag 10.4:2.2, Thag 10.4:3.4, Thig 16.1:71.4
«Saṅgha’s monastery»
MN 78:2.7 and DN 9:2.3
«Mallikā’s monastery»
MN 78:1.3 and DN 9:1.3
«Mallikā’s single-halled monastery»
AN 3.64:2.6, AN 3.64:3.1
«wanderers’ monastery on the banks of the Serpentine river»
AN 3.64:10.4
«wanderers’ monastery on the bank of the Serpentine river»
AN 4.30:1.3
«wanderer’s monastery on the banks of the Serpentine river»
AN 4.185:1.3
«wanderer’s monastery on the bank of the Serpentine river.
AN 4.185:1.2 and AN 4.30:1.2
«monastery of the wanderers on the bank of the Serpentine river»
I think the Pali was the same.
«bank» vs «banks»
«wanderer’s monastery» vs «wanderers’ monastery» vs «monastery of the wanderers», looked like the latter was used in other suttas, like «monastery of the wanderers in the peacocks’ feeding ground»
AN 4.30:1.3
«Serpentine river, He sat down»
Should probably be a period after «river».
I saw sometimes there was «sat down on the seat spread out» and sometimes «sat on the seat spread out». And sometimes a comma after «out», and sometimes not.
AN 10.50:2.1
«He sat down on the seat spread out, and addressed the mendicants»
AN 8.30:13.2
«He sat on the seat spread out and addressed the mendicants»
MN 128:7.5, MN 61:2.5, MN 31:5.3
«The Buddha sat on the seat spread out, and washed his feet.»
MN 128:10.5
«The Buddha sat on the seat spread out and washed his feet.»
Ud 8.5:10.4
«The Buddha sat on the seat spread out, and said to Venerable Ānanda»
AN 7.61:1.7
«He sat on the seat spread out and said to Mahāmoggallāna»
SN 55.27:3.1
«He sat down on the seat spread out and said to Anāthapiṇḍika»
SN 55.26:4.1, MN 143:3.1
«He sat down on the seat spread out, and said to Anāthapiṇḍika»
SN 55.26 title is «Anāthapiṇḍika (1st)»
SN 55.27 title is «With Anāthapiṇḍika (2nd)»
Ud 6.1:13.4
Missing an ending quotation mark.
Mills’ translation of Snp 5.19
«As one who’s mind is made up.»
Maybe «whose» instead.
Maybe unnecessary to report since it’s a legacy text.
SN 47.11:1.2
«Then Sāriputta went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to the Buddha»
Seven other suttas with the same Pali use:
«Then Sāriputta went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to him»
I think there were 14 «went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to the Buddha» and 157 «went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to him»
Thig 15.1:8.2
«I bowed with my head to the feet
of my father and mother-in-law,»
SN 16.11:9.7
«Then I bowed with my head at the Buddha’s feet»
Was wondering if Thig should change «to» to «at» since it was similar to SN.
Snp 5.1:52.4
«and fell with his head to the Buddha’s feet.»
Don’t know if this should be «at the Buddha’s feet.»
DN 16:5.22.4, DN 21:1.8.5, DN 21:1.8.5, DN 21:1.10.4, and MN 88:4.3
«bows with his head at your feet»
13 places
«bows with his head to your feet»
2 places
«bows with her head to your feet»
Should DN 16, 21, and MN 88 change «at» to «to»?
MN 127:2.2
«Please, worthy man, go to Venerable Anuruddha, and in my name bow with your head to his feet. Say to him,»
Similar segments like MN 88:4.2 always use a colon instead of a comma, «Say to him:».
AN 4.159:1.5
«Sir, the nun named so-and-so is sick, suffering, and gravely ill.
SN 22.87:1.5
«Sir, the mendicant Vakkali is sick, suffering, and gravely ill.»
I think similar segments didn’t use «and», they just use «Sir, x is sick, suffering, gravely ill.»
MN 39:14.8
«Suppose a person was sick, suffering, and gravely ill»
DN 2:70.1, DN 10:2.8.1, AN 5.194
«Suppose there was a person who was sick, suffering, gravely ill.»
Maybe MN 39 should be like the others.
Snp 3.7:7.9 (+ Snp 3.7:7.7 and MN 92:9.1)
«Worthy Keṇiya, did you say ‘the awakened one’?»
MN 92:9.3
«Did you say ‘the awakened one’?»
Same Pali.
MN 92:13.6, Mn 92:13.10, Snp 3.7:11.4
«whether the private parts are covered»
Snp 3.7:10.6
«whether the private parts were covered»
«are» vs «were»
Thag 16.6:9.4, Snp 3.7:21.4
«of the teaching you rolled forth?
MN 92:18.8
«of teaching you rolled forth?»
Thag 16.6:10.3, Snp 3.7:22.3
«the supreme wheel of the teaching»
MN 92:19.3
«the supreme wheel of teaching»
MN is missing «the» in these segments.
Thag 16.6:23.3, MN 92:28.12
«by not grasping, like a lion,»
Snp 3.7:41.3
«you are a lion, free of grasping,»
Thag 16.6:23.4 MN 92:28.13
«you’ve given up fear and dread.»
Snp 3.7:41.4
«with fear and dread given up.»
Snp not matching the others, I think the Pali was the same.
Snp 3.7:8.9
Doesn’t have a quotation mark at the end like MN 92:10.9 does.
Snp 3.7:10.2
Ends with a period instead of a comma like MN 92:13.2 does.
Thag 16.6:6.3
«Gotama, you should reign»
Snp 3.7:18.3, MN 92:16.23
«Gotama, may you reign»
«you should» vs «you may».
Sangha instead of «Saṅgha»
Kp 1:2.3, Kp 1:3.3, Kp 1:4.3, Thig 3.5:3.4, Thig 6.1:6.4, Thig 12.1:14.2, Thig 12.1:15.2, Thig 13.2:16.4, Thig 13.2:19.2, Thig 13.2:20.2, Thig 13.4:20.2, Ud 2.4:1.6, Ud 2.8:9.1, Ud 2.8:14.2, Ud 4.3:5.1, Ud 4.8:2.1, Ud 5.6:9.3
I also saw that the note to DN 33:1.1.2, DN 16:1.6.13, and DN 16:6.4.1 used «Sangha», but it might be on purpose in the notes.
DN 14:3.29.18 and DN 14:3.30.13
«wheel of Dhamma»
I think everywhere else capitalized «wheel» in «Wheel of Dhamma».
SNp3.7:8.9: Sace kho pana agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajati, arahaṁ hoti sammāsambuddho loke vivaṭṭacchado.
But if he goes forth from the lay life to homelessness, he becomes a perfected one, a fully awakened Buddha, who draws back the veil from the world.
Segment should end with closing quote mark (compare MN92:10.9).
Comment to SN2.9:7.3:
Abhigīta first appears with regards to a drop of Soma that has been “chanted over”, “besung”, or “enchanted” and hence imbued with potency (Rig Veda 9.96.23). Throughout Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 8.5.4 it is used more prosaically: a history of horse sacrifices is listed, each event honored with a specific verse “sung about” it. In Pali, the phrase gāthābhigīta is found only in this passage and when the Buddha refused to eat food “chanted over” by a brahmins (eg. sn7.8:8.1). In both cases the chanting has a mysterious potency, so I render “enchanted with verse”.
“Food ’chanted over‘ by a brahmins” should either be “food ’chanted over‘ by a brahmin” (singular) or “food ’chanted over‘ by brahmins” (plural).
The translation for devaputta has generally been changed from “god” to “godling” (I learned a new English word! 
). In SN2.17:4.2 there is still a “god” (the Pali devaputta hiding behind the “…pe…” abbreviation of the previous segment).
Again, devaputta is a “god” in SN11.14:3.2.
