The Translation Profession- Roger Chriss

**AdilAlKufaishi** · 07-18-2006, 07:25 AM

_MD_RE: The Translation Profession- Roger Chriss

Getting Started as a Translator
Wendy Jonas
Native English Speakers (NES)
There are many paths to translation. Among NES, either a prior interest in Japanese language itself (JET, foreign study, time spent in Japan, language study), natural bilinguals (people raised in bilingual homes), professionals in other fields who read Japanese that chose translation - all of these are possible paths to translation. There are various training opportunities for NES: specialized translation schools like the Monterey Institute of International Studies, Bath University, University of Queensland, and others that offer a Master's Degree in Japanese/English translation and interpreting. There is a preparation course for NES translators in offered in Tokyo through Simul International. Native English speakers can also try their chances at entering a Japanese-based translation school, but the instruction is usually geared to NJS. Other possible patterns are "trial by fire," apprenticeships, and on-the-job training.
Native Japanese Speakers (NJS)
Among NJSs, many native J's who like languages and enter the profession for that purpose working their way up from in-house or agency jobs. There are also translator "wannabe" housewives, others who train to be translators using correspondence courses, senmongakko, apprenticeships systems, informal networks, and OJT. Professionals who happen to know English well enough will sometimes get shunted to translation responsibilities at work.
"Those that can't, translate?" Or "Why you need a specialty!"
Those that can't, translate?
Practical or specific experience is necessary in translation for the "skill" of the art, but a specialty is also vastly important. There are a few ways to develop a specialty:
• Choose to translate in a field you have a background in. (ie if you were a biology major and worked as a lab assistant for a few years, biological, medical, or biotech translation would be good.)
• Find a field you LIKE by reading lots in different fields in your non-native language, and gradually building up work experience in that field (research different fields based on business demand in your native language).
• Get training in a non-primary field by either working in house or employing an editor/mentor.
Five Golden Rules for Beginning Translators
Ideally, there are no golden rules. But, these rules will serve you well as a first-time freelancer, and help you from tarnishing your reputation before you know any better!
1. Never Miss a Deadline
Any beginning translator thinks that this will never happen to them. They are properly trained adults who are fine at time management. Then you get a job that somehow conflicts with a prior commitment, is harder than you think it will be, or just takes too long to translate. Or you get sick and can't make it to the keyboard. Regardless of the reason, the client doesn't care. Most agencies give a little leeway in dates in their planning schedules (i.e. they require a document to be turned in on the 15th, and have a deadline of the 12th for you), but you shouldn't expect that. The single biggest way to anger a new client is to miss a deadline. There is a corollary to rule 1 though: If you will miss a deadline, call the client at the earliest possible time and let them know. Two hours before the document is due will not help the client, but 12 or 24 hours will let them do sufficient damage control to save your, and their, reputations.
2. Never Work for a Pittance
The temptation to work for low pay is very alluring for the beginning translator. In fact, this was the piece of advice that was hardest enough for me to believe from my professors/mentors. The only way to get STARTED translating as a freelancer is to work, but if you are a first-time freelancer, how do you find work? No one will hire an inexperienced translator. It's a "vicious circle." At first, I was so excited that someone would PAY me to translate that I took jobs for low rates. And yes, you do have to start somewhere. But the real point is: if you establish client relationships (and you will eventually) at low rates, it is very difficult to raise those rates later on when you have more experience, and consider yourself "worth it". In addition, beginning translators that set rates too low risk alienating the "community" in general, as in general per-word prices are being driven downwards for all translators. You will appreciate this more a few years into your career, trust me.
One problem is knowing WHAT to charge to begin with. Ask fellow translators you know what their rates are, or ask the JAT list what is a "fair wage." In general, any figure per word in the single digits is too low, in my opinion. A rate quoted for me for professionals in the US (J-E native) was 16-18 cents per word, with high-end specialty work going substantially higher. I was offered jobs as low as 9 cents a word, and I did jobs for as low as $0.12, though it was a volume job. Assume that the agency will try and pay you the lowest rate possible, especially if you are an un-tried translator. They are running a business. And have a definite answer ready when you are asked what your rates are. A good rule of thumb is to ask: what is your time worth? If you are paid Y2000 per page of J-E translation, and it takes you one hour to translate one page (which sometimes happens for beginners), you could make more money teaching English conversation in Japan. It is my experience that agencies and clients will pay for quality if you can sell it. Right now I do freelance work as a side business to my in-house job, so I actually set rates as a way of screening clients. When I move freelance full-time, I hope to have enough client relationships established so I don't have to lower rates, but we'll see.
It is acceptable to discount your rates a little (20% or so) if you are beginner to get work in the door. You need to build experience. However, anything lower than that and you are selling yourself short.
3. Never Take on a Job and You Are not Confident You Can Finish Well
Many translators have experienced this. They are offered a big job they are interested in, and either the money or subject matter is too interesting to turn down. But the deadline will be very tight, or the subject matter out of their area of specialization. I contend that taking a job, only to finish it poorly or not at all, is unprofessional. If you are doubtful about your ability to complete the volume expected, offer to negotiate: cut the volume in half or other parts, or offer to split the work up and edit it (always get client approval!). If you are doubtful of the subject matter, speak up—ask for a glossary, a technical edit, or previous documents to help. If your doubts cannot be addressed by the client, then pass up the job. Another job will come along, I promise, but once your reputation with an agency or client is ruined, it takes a long time to be repaired.

4. Always Check Proper Nouns
In the context of J-E translation, this means check on the Internet, reference books, and other materials (even asking someone!) for English references to determine the most commonly used English word for the Japanese. Names, company names, places, person names, titles of books and songs: see if it has been translated before! This is an area I always check when going over out-sourced work at my in-house job. It is just a little effort that can go a long way in reducing an editor's job. Conversely, if you have been lax in doing your research in translating proper nouns, it is one of the first things an editor or project manager will notice.

5. Always Spell/Grammar Check
This again seems obvious, but you would be surprised at how many people do NOT follow these rules. I always consider this sort of mistake a waste - an automatic spell-check or grammar-check function on your word processor can help stop these misses. Also, try and EDIT your document at least once for readability before sending it off!
Winning Your First Job—a Timeline
Steps:
1. Develop translation skills. Practice translating, and have translations edited by someone knowledgeable and bilingual. Expect to pay for the privilege.
2. Develop a resume and a target specialty area. Your resume should CLEARLY list your A&B languages, your past experience if pertaining to translation, your education (any translation related courses, etc.), your study abroad, your TOEIC etc. scores, and your computer environment. Target major companies/agencies in your specialty area.
3. Network, network, network! Tell everyone you know that you are a beginning translator looking for work. If you are lucky, an established translator will outsource some work to you, check it, and mentor you. Get to know these people! Attend JAT meetings or like-minded gatherings. I think 75-80% of the best translation jobs are spread from person to person.
4. Begin to study your target market area. Read trade and industry publications in your native and especially target languages. Become familiar with the terms in the field in both languages. Build your personal glossaries. Meet people in the field and ask them to tour a factory, show you their office. Ask them about an average day. The more people you know, the more potential business you have. Also, learn about translation agencies that specialize in your field. Ask about potential trial translations, jobs, etc. Meet translators in the field and ask them for advice too.
5. If no work still comes your way after all this networking, THEN begin to send unsolicited resumes or assuming the freelance strategy fails, think about in-house. Marketing yourself, and making the effort, will result in better client relationships down the road.
Mentoring/Editing Possibilities
Beginning translators would do well to find a reliable mentor or editor to work with. Ideally, a mentor would be a senior translator in your field of specialization. However, if finding such a person is difficult, then even finding someone to check your translation from the Japanese to English and find meaning errors and critique your translation style would be beneficial.
I think mentors should be paid - both people get more out of their relationship this way. Mentors should be compensated for meeting time or editing time at a REASONABLE, would you pay any less for language lessons or other professional services? Another option is to work long-distance with a senior translator in an apprentice-type relationship (ie they subcontract work to you, you receive feedback and edits for a cut of the overall per-word or per-page price). These types of relationships can be helpful and hurtful sometimes - it is important to consider personal relationships and translation styles carefully. In all, mentoring is a vital tool for beginning J-E translators who do not have access to full or part-time formal training opportunities.
Also, it is doubtful you will get substantial and or useful help for free. Most successful freelance translators are very good at measuring their time in money—you will be likely to get the most help by appealing to this instinct. Remember they are training their future competition!

**AdilAlKufaishi** · 08-01-2006, 06:50 AM

_MD_RE: The Translation Profession- Roger Chriss

Teaching through translation
by Jonathan Stoddart

Translation is one of the greatest resources teachers have at their fingertips, since there is a wealth of ready-prepared, authentic materials which have great generative potential if exploited well. However, it is frequently discredited, for, among other things, being 'uncommunicative', or for focusing purely on accuracy, and teachers have been programmed to view translation as 'bad' classroom practice. My aim in this article is to show that translation does have a place in the classroom and that its implementation Carl be beneficial for learners. Besides, students do, and always will, translate into their L1, no matter how often we exhort them not to - Atkinson (in Harbord, 1992) calls it a "learner-preferred strategy . . . and an inevitable part of second language acquisition". Perhaps we should stop working against this tendency and turn it to our advantage.
Less didactically, over 60% of the world is bi- or multi-lingual, so translation is an everyday activity for many people, with extremely practical applications. The fact that translation has been frowned upon implies that we take a very Euro-centric view of language: since (most) European countries are monolingual (at least officially), we seem to think this is the norm, not the exception, and that 'good' practice should reflect this. This is hugely unjust to the millions of people who speak two - or more -languages daily.
Furthermore, the majority of my students are professionals or University students who have (primarily passive) contact with English in their jobs or studies. To assume that these students, outside my classroom, read in English without translating, is, I think, a gross misjudgement. Using translation in class and encouraging learners to develop useful, applicable techniques to deal with it is surely more beneficial to learners' real needs than, say, role-play or cloze exercises.
As international integration grows, translation will become more and more necessary for non-native speakers of English. I think it would be unfair of me to withhold this valuable technique from my learners.
Translation in the development of language teaching
Translation has always played a role in language teaching. Until the end of the eighteenth century, learning a foreign language implied learning Latin and was based around bi-lingual word lists and parallel texts. When 'modem' languages began to be taught at the end of the century, the same approach was followed, and the structures of English, French, Italian and so on were presented in relation to the structure of Latin. Speaking was not the aim of learning the language: the focus was on the translation of model sentences, chosen to exemplify the structural idiosyncrasies of the language system. Richards and Rodgers (1986) give this example of language having no surrender-value whatsoever for the student:
The philosopher pulled the lower jaw of the hen.
My sons have bought the mirrors of the Duke.
The cat of my aunt is more treacherous than the dog of your uncle.
Titone 1968:28 (in Richards and Rodgers, 1986)
This approach became known as the Grammar-Translation method, since students were presented with rules and then applied them in translation. The theoretical underpinning was "memorising rules and facts in order to understand and manipulate the morphology and the syntax of the foreign language" (Stern, in Richards and Rodgers, 1986). The importance of structure in this approach has resulted in the view that translation is unpedagogical and uncommunicative, which still persists today. The 'Communicative Approach', which most teachers today would profess to use (in some form or other) in the classroom is ambiguous in its approach to translation. Purists argue that all interaction should be undertaken in the L2, although some advocates claim that translation can - and should - be used (judiciously) in class. Howatt (in Richards and Rodgers, 1986), for example, writes: "translation may be used where students need or benefit from it."
Other approaches which use L! in practice include 'Community Language Learning' (where students are provided with language after saying it in the mother tongue) and 'Suggestopaedia' (where learners are frequently exposed to bilingual word-lists or parallel Ll-L2 texts).
While preparing this article, I looked at a number of Advanced-level coursebooks to see how they approached translation. I was surprised to find that none of those I consulted included the technique as a classroom activity, although a number of lower-level coursebooks did. Here is one example:
Translate
• I've been to the United States.
• I went there in 1987.
• Have you ever tried Indian food?
• I live in the capital city of my country. I've lived here all my life
This would imply two things. Firstly, materials are designed with international markets in mind, including multi-lingual classes, where using translation would be unwieldy. Secondly, learners who have reached an advanced level of proficiency in English are considered not to need translation as a tool for acquisition, since they are already able to manipulate the language system successfully and do not need L! reassurance as they gain new language.
A summary of translation theory and problems translation poses
There is a great deal of theory behind the different concepts of translation. I will now consider some of the issues central to the translation process. It is worthwhile looking at these issues since I can confirm that the problems they give rise to are all apparent in my learners' production. The errors they commit in speaking and writing are all unquestionably due to translating (often unconsciously) directly from their L!
Decoding and recoding
This Saussurian principle dictates that language is conveyed through a combination of signs, these being the letters or sounds the writer/speaker uses to convey meaning. These signs vary from language to language, so in order to translate a message the translator must, firstly, decode the signs of the source text to understand the message, secondly, analyse the message for meaning, thirdly, transpose the content into the target language and, finally, reformulate the message using the signs of the target language. The model below summarises the process:

SOURCE LANGUAGE TEXT RECEPTOR LANGUAGE TRANSLATION

ANALYSIS RESTRUCTURING

TRANSFER

(Nida, in Bassnett-McGuire, 1991)

Obviously, the closer the source language is to the target language, the easier it will be to transfer meaning successfully. Difficulties arise, though, when the L! and the L2 are more distant, or when the "meaning-patterns" (Sapir, in Manko, 1998) of the L! differ from the L2, in which case they are likely to influence target production.
Translation, therefore, goes beyond simply linguistic equation of meaning, since in practice anyone involved in the process must be aware of the paralinguistic implications of the message being conveyed. A good example is the translation of the English pronoun you. Although context often indicates the relationship between speaker and hearer, English makes no distinction between number, nor shows levels of formality, using periphrasis to overcome this. Thus the translator, recoding you into, say, French, must decide whether tu or vous is more appropriate. In Portuguese, this pragmatic choice is further complicated by the existence of eight possible renderings of you.
Strategic decisions
The translator has to take strategic decisions. These encompass the semantic and pragmatic features of the text, and address one of the most controversial issues of translation: how close should the target text be to the source text? Translators must decide whether their version should be nearer the source text, and thus risk L2 fluency, or be a free-standing example of discourse in the target language, and risk being an unrecognisable version of the source text. Hervey and Higgins (1992) claim, however, that to think in terms of a translation being either 'literal' or 'free' is untenable, since all translations fall somewhere on the cline below (adapted from Hervey & Higgins, 1992) :
Literal
Faithful
"Core"
Idiomatic
Free
Linguistic Equivalence
This concept rules that every lexical item carries with it a set of culture-bound connotations, which makes the process of translating one message accurately into another very difficult. Native speakers are aware of these connotations and so there is little scope for serious misunderstanding between them. However, when non-native speakers use language, they may be unaware that some L2 expressions are not fully equivalent to an L1 term, which can lead to misunderstanding, or, in extreme cases, offence. For example, the Portuguese adjective simples when applied to a person is a positive quality, implying a down-to-earth, uncomplicated character; the semiotically similar English lexeme simple carries different connotations.
As well as being interlingual, non-equivalence may also occur on an intralingual level, for example the different concept of bathroom for British and American speakers.
Overcoming problems of equivalence involves using either a different item or combination of items, in order to ensure what Jakobsen (in Bassnett-McGuire, 1991) terms 'adequate interpretation' in the target language. In practice, this means the translator will either subinterpret the text (giving the target audience less information than the source audience) or superinterpret the text (giving the target audience more information).
Loss and gain
This occurs when the target language has no direct equivalent of a source language concept. A frequently-quoted example is the range of Eskimo terms for snow (now discredited in Pullum's The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax, quoted by Swan, in Schmitt and McCarthy, 1997), or the difficulties of expressing time in languages of the Indian subcontinent, where time is viewed as revolving around a point in the present, not as past, present and future as in European languages (for example, the Hindi word kal means either yesterday or tomorrow, depending on the context). The fact that there are no dichotomous translations for a lot of L 1 -L2 (and, obviously, L2-L1) items raises many difficulties for learners. This manifests itself frequently in the classroom. For example, in practice I have noticed that my learners have difficulties rendering some areas of the Portuguese language system, e.g., fazer (do/make) into English, or the variety of words for coffee. Conversely, verbs like glitter, sparkle, gleam, shine, etc., or stare, peek, peer, glance, glimpse, etc. are impossible to translate into Portuguese without using periphrasis.
Meaning
In translation, meaning is either 'attitudinal' or 'associative'. Attitudinal meaning is used to show the attitude of the writer/speaker to something, and is indicated in his/her choice of words. Hervey and Higgins (1992) give the example of the choices between the police, the fuzz and the pigs, and the different attitudes expressed by the choice of word used. Associative meaning shows associations made by the reader/listener. For example, saying He's a nurse or She's a soldier is syntactically and lexically correct, but the reader/listener may feel it to be semantically 'wrong'. Associative meaning can also be extended to names, dates and places too. For example, November 5th has high associative meaning in Britain, as does 25th April in Portugal.
Untranslatability
This occurs when there is no exact syntactical or lexical equivalent in the target language. Examples would include English phrasal verbs, rendered by single lexemes in other languages, or the Portuguese reiterative reply, where the short answer 'echoes' (reiterates) the main verb in the question:
Portuguese: Gostas? Gosto
English: Do you like it? *I like.
Obviously, these problems can be easily remedied, and, in most cases, learners are unaware of the fact that theorists classify them as untranslatable.
Disadvantages of using translation as a teaching resource
Using translation in the classroom has been associated with a number of drawbacks, the most frequently quoted being:
• It focuses solely on two skills (reading and writing).
• It is an unnatural process, since "no two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality" (Sapir, in Bassnett-McGuire, 199 1).
• Translation is usually product-focused, with emphasis on final versions. This gives students no scope for discussing meaning, especially if the translation is set for homework. Students see it as a mechanical, dull activity because they are not aware of the benefits of translation as a process.
• It places high emphasis on accuracy, contradicting current methodological thinking. This brings into question the whole problem of how to evaluate translation. Evaluation is highly subjective, since there is no universal canon dictating which source and target structures equate. It is therefore difficult to say what is correct and what incorrect, although, presumably, rendering cat as chien would be considered an error. It is easy to focus on the weaknesses of the translation, rather than on its strengths.
• Traditionally, there have been two ways to focus on the effectiveness of a translation: either its closeness to the source text, or its value as a free-standing text in the target language. It seems to me that, in order to evaluate fairly, the teacher needs to be less dogmatic than this, bearing in mind the literal-free cline above. Popovic (in Bassnett-McGuire, 199 1) claims that within several target texts there will be an 'invariant core' of features present in all. The teacher can use this as a basis for evaluation.
• The teacher is required to have a high level of competence in the students' language. Also, translation can only be used successfully in monolingual teaching situations. There are a number of 'paratextual features' in any source text which will cause the translator difficulties, especially in very genre-specific texts, such as poetry or technical manuals. In the classroom, this manifests itself as features of L1 appearing in L2. For example, when writing formal letters, students may use the valediction "*I sign myself respectfully" rather than the standard "Yours faithfully/sincerely", because the former is closer to the conventional form of Portuguese.
• Many texts used are decontextualised and graduation is often overlooked. Advanced students may be able to cope with most, if not all, texts on a linguistic level, but may have more problems decoding and recoding messages between source and target texts.
• Translation can only be used in a limited number of situations. It can be a useful practice activity, (especially if the text is chosen for the linguistic features it contains), and also for testing or evaluation, but cannot be used for, say, presenting new language.
• To translate successfully requires a deep knowledge of both source and target culture. The transposition of ideas and concepts becomes very difficult if the target culture is unknown, or only partly known. (Fortunately, my students are aware of target anglophone culture(s), through TV, films and music, and also through classroom exposure.)
• Students risk becoming over-reliant on translation and will be unable to acquire new language fully until they have translated it.
Advantages of using translation as a teaching resource
Applied linguistics has taken a great interest in translation recently, and in the classroom it benefits students because:
• It is ideal for studying the language system: its focus can be altered to make it genre, lexis, structure or function-specific.
• It encourages learners to think about meaning and form concurrently. This is because in translation they have already been provided with what they have to say, but need to say it in the target language.
• There is a wealth of ready-prepared, fully authentic texts at our fingertips, with examples of all kinds of real language in use for learners to notice. This is surely a better way for learners to build up a holistic picture of the language system than giving them strings of language manipulation exercises. If necessary, or with low levels, texts can be made semi-authentic to highlight specific features of the target language, especially if translation is being used as a practice or evaluation activity, or for remedial and revision work.
• As mentioned, it reflects my learners' contact with English outside the classroom, since they use the language predominantly in its written form.
• Students' world knowledge is improved through authentic exposure to the target culture(s).
• It can be used at all levels, and from the first lesson if required.
• It is a very humanistic approach, since all students are able to follow the development of the lesson.
• It helps students notice non-equivalent linguistic, semantic and pragmatic features of the second language. In doing so, their attention is drawn to the differences between two language systems. This can dispel some of the mysteries of L2, as students are made aware that its structures have a familiar equivalent in their language. Learners can become more prepared to take risks in the target language when they realise that other people use is as a means of communication, just as they themselves do in their own language. This can help students lower their affective filter, in turn making the acquisition of new language easier.
• Using translation can help teachers draw students' attention to ingrained errors, such as false cognates, word order or time-tense distinctions.
• It gives students excellent practice in the subskills of reading and writing. For example, using L2 to L1 translation will improve, among other things, the following L2 reading subskills:
1. recognising the script of the L2 (if different from L1)
2. identification and familiarisation with style, register and appropriacy
3. deducing the meaning and use of unfamiliar lexical items and meaning-patterns in the second language (including metaphorical and non-standard language)
4. understanding conceptual meaning
5. understanding the communicative function of clauses, sentences and paragraphs
6. familiarisation with cohesion
7. familiarisation with coherence
8. identifying important/relevant information
9. deducing meaning from context
10. heightening awareness of genre and identifying sources
11. heightening awareness of different schemata
12. skimming
13. scanning
The writing subskills that follow will also be developed when learners approach L1 to L2 translations:
1. focusing on new information
2. guiding the reader through the message of the text
3. layout and script manipulation
4. replicating the function of stress and intonation
5. selection and use of register
6. selection and use of style
7. spelling
8. cohesion
9. coherence
10. 0 sequencing ideas
11. 1 connecting clauses, sentences and paragraphs
12. 2 referencing (adapted from Stokes, 1993/1994)
• Translation can help make students' writing more sophisticated if they think of what they want to say in L1 and then, with help, transpose those ideas into L2. This supports the argument that students are rarely willing to take risks, or that once they reach a certain level of linguistic development they stagnate and refuse to stretch themselves.
• Students are unaware of the implications of decoding and recoding a message, or of any of the problems such as equivalence, or loss and gain. Making students more aware of these concepts will (hopefully) sensitise them to the pitfalls of word-for-word translation which frequently occurs in their writing. Students need to be focused on the pragmatic functions of language, rather than on the linguistic features it displays, and, in my view, translation fulfils this objective well.
• Students need to be made aware that some items show no L1-L2 equivalence at all, and that they will have to sacrifice some of the connotative weight of the L1 (or L2) expression. Examples from (British) English could include trying to render Christmas pantomime or Wimbledon into another language.
• Making translation more process-focused provides learners with a more holistic view of the L2. Translation can be made a truly integrative activity, practising all four skills, and encouraging students to manipulate the target language together, through drafting, editing and reviewing, which makes translation less mechanical and product-focused.
• Encouraging students to bring in texts which interest them or which they 'need' will increase motivation and ensure that their needs are constantly met.
Conclusions: implications for the practising teacher
Translation can be a very valuable classroom activity. It is especially -beneficial in the monolingual classroom and can be tailored in such a way that it is highly practical, learner-focused and process-based.
It seems to me that translation can be a highly effective way of drawing learners' attention to the linguistic, semantic and pragmatic features of the target language. I think I should therefore make an effort to give my students greater access to translation as a classroom activity if they want it.
Many of the linguistic errors produced by students are put down to L1 transfer, but I feel it would be more exact to call this phenomenon L1 -L2 mistranslation. Sensitising students to this will hopefully help them iron out at least the more common of these errors. Allowing students simply to 'notice' the salient features of the target language system is not enough to make students competent L2 users (doing so would probably take years in a non-English speaking environment). It is surely more efficient (both for us as teachers and for our learners) to make some of the unique features of the English language system (phrasal verbs, modality, word-final "-s", and so on) more accessible to students by any means necessary, including explicit contrast between L1 and L2 systems. In the course of my reading I came across the term 'refraction' propounded as an alternative description of L1 influence, which is, in my view, an excellent description, implying an imperfect but clearly-discernible image.
In the classroom, then, when we use translation as a technique, there are number of strategies we can usefully adopt. They are:
• To make students more aware of the equivalent affect of what they translate (i.e. whether the effect of the target text will be equal to that of the source text).
• To ensure that texts used are interesting, relevant and, as far as possible, authentic. Using shorter texts in the classroom and longer ones at home which can then be discussed in class will maximise the time spent in class and will encourage spontaneous speech, negotiation and discussion.
• To make translation a process-based activity, including all students at all stages of the process. This will include giving time to plan, reflect, discuss, review and edit their work, and also encourage meaningful, independent interaction in English.
• To try and provide students with learner-centred, cognitive translation activities to help them notice the differences (and similarities) between L1 and L2 meaning-patterns (in the short term), and of the language system as a whole (in the long term). Hopefully, this will help them acquire the patterns of the L2 and lessen the influence of the L1 on their developing interlanguage.
Bibliography
Aitken, R., 1992, Teaching tenses (Longman)
Bassnett-McGuire, S, 199 I, Translation studies (Routledge)
Duff, A., 1989 Translation (OUP)
Harbord, J., "The use of the mother tongue in the classroom" in ELT Journal, Vol. 46/4 (October 1992)
Hervey, S. & Higgins, I., 1992, Thinking translation (Routledge)
Manko, I., 1998, "Cognitive vs Communicative" in IH Journal, April 1998.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S., 1986, Approaches and Methods in language teaching (CUP)
Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (eds.), 1997, Vocabulary (OUP)
Soars, J. & Soars, L., I99 I, Headway Pre-Intermediate (OUP)
Stokes, J., l993/4, "Writing and teaching writing" in IHTT RSA/UCLES DTEFLA Distance Training Programme

**AdilAlKufaishi** · 08-01-2006, 07:23 AM

_MD_RE: The Translation Profession- Roger Chriss

Translation as a communication process
by Frédéric Houbert
The translator, before being a “writer” as such, is primarily a “message conveyor.” In most cases, translation is to be understood as the process whereby a message expressed in a specific source language is linguistically transformed in order to be understood by readers of the target language. Therefore, no particular adapting work is usually required from the translator, whose work essentially consists of conveying the meaning expressed by the original writer.
Everyone knows, for instance, that legal translation leaves little room for adaptation and rewriting. Similarly, when it comes to translating insurance contracts, style-related concerns are not paramount to the translating process; what the end reader needs is a translated text that is faithful to the source text in meaning, regardless of stylistic prowess from the translator.
Yet, in an number of cases, the translator faces texts which are to be used within a process of “active communication” and the impact of which often depends on the very wording of the original text. In these specific cases, the translator sometimes finds it necessary to reconsider the original wording in order to both better understand the source text (this also sometimes occurs in plain technical texts) and be able to render it in the target language. This is the moment when the translator becomes an active link in the communication chain, the moment when his communication skills are called upon to enhance the effect of the original message.
The translation process here becomes twofold: firstly, the translator needs to detect potential discrepancies and flaws in the original text and understand the meaning they intend to convey. To do this, the translator often needs to contact the writer of the text to be translated (or any other person who is familiar with the contents of the text) in order to clarify the ambiguities he has come across. Secondly, once this first part of the work is over, the translator will undo the syntactic structure of the original text and then formulate the corresponding message in the target language, thus giving the original text added value in terms of both wording and impact. It is important to stress that this work will always be carried out in cooperation with the original writer, so that the translator can make sure the translated message corresponds to the meaning the writer originally intended to convey; remember, the translator is essentially a message conveyor, not an author.
In order to give an example of this value-added part of the translator’s work, let us take the following excerpt, taken from a speech to be delivered by a local official working for a French “Mairie” (i.e., the local authority managing public services in French towns and cities) on the occasion of a visit from British partners as part of a twinning agreement (I could also have chosen an excerpt from a translated advertisement, for instance, in which the rewriting work of the translator is also of the essence). This translating assignment meant more than just converting information from one language into another: it involved paying particular attention to the point of view of the translation user (in this case, the listener speaking the target language), in addition to fully understanding the ideas to be transmitted. This is obviously accounted for by the fact that a speech, just as any other direct communication text, includes an extra dimension as compared to usual informative texts: this dimension could be referred to as the “listener-oriented” aspect of a text. Obviously, the text of a speech not only has a written dimension, a quality shared by all other texts whatever the field, but also an oral dimension. This double dimension obviously needs to be taken into account by the translator in his work: more than is the case with other types of texts, the viewpoint of the reader/listener should be kept in mind at all times.
Let us take an excerpt from the speech in order to better understand the above-described process. One section of the text reads: “Je me dis qu’il est bon aussi de formaliser de temps en temps ces rencontres pour créer une mémoire collective de nos correspondances.” A rough translation in English would give the following result: “I feel it is useful from time to time to give these meetings formal expression in order to create a collective memory of our correspondence.” The latter part of this sentence sounds rather funny and the reader/listener will probably find it difficult to see what it means exactly. This is why I thought the source text needed a couple of clarifications; for one thing, the French “mémoire collective” has a historical dimension to it which I felt was inappropriate in a text meant to convey a positive, future-oriented message. In the mind of most French people, the collocative “mémoire collective” brings about images of the two world wars and of other vivid French historical events such as “Mai 68,” which as you probably know was a period of turmoil marked mainly by students’ demonstrations. Secondly, the French term “correspondances” is inadequately used (after consulting the author of the text, I found that it meant “all of the mutual achievements of the twinning partners since the signing of their agreement”). In short, the overall notion given by the French text is rather blurred, past-oriented, and the author fails to convey his ideas in a persuasive way.
After having analyzed these two inaccuracies with the help of the author, I came up with the following translation: “I feel it is useful from time to time to give these meetings formal expression in order to put on record our mutual achievements for better future cooperation.” This adapted translation is much more suitable for two essential reasons: it clarifies the original message, and consequently gives it greater power while also providing it with a positive dimension. I deliberately chose to add “for better future cooperation” in order to reinforce the cogency of the message, which the French original obviously failed to convey.
By making this choice, I decided to take an active part in the communication process by giving the message an extra dimension which it lacked in the original text: I simply chose to consider my work as a creative process in the best interest of the original message.
Let us look into another example taken from the same text. The first line of the last paragraph begins with the following words: “Nous souhaitons ce renforcement des échanges...,” i.e., literally, “We support this intensifying of exchanges....” When I first read this, I thought, well, who wouldn’t support a positive, fruitful exchange process? In order to avoid obtaining the same awkwardness in English, I therefore chose to stress the idea of support by inserting the adverb “fully,” which again causes the overall impact of the message to be enhanced. The edited translation finally read as follows: “We fully support the idea whereby exchanges should be intensified....”
As these two examples show, the work of the translator often involves a great deal of creativity, as well as a wide range of communication skills. This aspect of translation was also the subject of an article by Steve Dyson which appeared in Traduire (2/96), the journal of the Société Française des Traducteurs (French Society of Translators). Dyson calls this creative process “interlingual copywriting” and defines it as “the necessity, where appropriate, to give effective communication priority over fidelity to the original.”
Professional translators, while giving the above issues a serious thought, should however never forget that most texts to be translated do not require “adaptation” or “reader-oriented rewriting”; a full understanding of the source text and accurate rendering in the target language usually prove enough to give the client satisfaction and make the task of the translator an intellectually gratifying one. As with all other communication skills, creativity is best appreciated and yields the best result when used appropriately.

The Translation Profession- Roger Chriss

The Translation Profession- Roger Chriss

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

إحصائيات Arabic Translators International _ الجمعية الدولية لمترجمي العربية