sylvester wrote:In Western language philosophy, the complementiser's function is fulfilled by the word "that" (he sees that A is B), whereas in Pali, the complementiser is framed with the iti markers instead (he sees "A is B"). I've said before that the contents of such complementisers in vipassana are sacca-s (truths).
Do you know of any translators who translate in the way you recommend, so we can compare how this plays out in practice?
I'll start with a meditation text where this can be contrasted. I don't know how old this translation is, but it was attributed to ATI by VRI -
Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long.  Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short.  He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body, and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body.  He trains himself to breathe in calming the bodily processes, and to breathe out calming the bodily processes.
The Pali, with all its iti-s, is -
Dīghaṃ vā assasanto ‘dīghaṃ assasāmī’ti pajānāti, dīghaṃ vā passasanto ‘dīghaṃ passasāmī’ti pajānāti; rassaṃ vā assasanto ‘rassaṃ assasāmī’ti pajānāti, rassaṃ vā passasanto ‘rassaṃ passasāmī’ti pajānāti; ‘sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati; ‘passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ passasissāmī’ti sikkhati.
The current translation on ATI preserves the iti clitic -
 Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.'  Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.'  He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.'  He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'
To be fair and precise, the example above was probably a poor one, since the "iti" was not functioning as a complementiser, but to indicate goal or motive.
A good example of the complementiser that was recently discussed, is a doctrinal text, namely MN 38 here -viewtopic.php?f=25&t=10017#p153428
The contrast was in how Ajahn Thanissaro rendered the clitic, versus BB using the Western form of the complementiser.
Ajahn Thanissaro -
Haven't I, in many ways, said of dependently co-arisen consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is no coming-into-play of consciousness'?
versus MLDB -
"Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways consciousness to be dependently arisen since without a condition there is no origination of consciousness?"
Someone who promoted a labelling approach to satipatthanas, based on the iti markers -http://theravadin.wordpress.com/2008/03 ... llakkheti/
but he may have changed his mind more recently -http://theravadin.wordpress.com/
(scroll down to his 11 Jul 11 entry)