Merlin: Translation News, Services & Directory

Common sense tells us that being a translator is, like any other profession, fraught with ups and downs, peaks and troughs, although our ups and downs are often intrinsically linked to linguistic competence or know-how, stamina and concentration. The state of one’s mind is just as important as the knowledge we have acquired. Hence, the translator’s, like the writer’s, need for routine, regimented schedules and ‘peace and quiet’.

In a sense, the work of the translator, viewed by some as something akin to the work of the tireless monk scratching away at his calligraphy, requires intellectual discipline, patience and staying power. The freelance translator, often working from home, may often be isolated from regular human contact and, again like the writer, is often engrossed in his or her own mental jugglery ‘battling’ with a text in order to control it and then tame it.

What is more, translators, thanks to their know-how and linguistic prowess are not unfamiliar with multi-tasking. Translators are known to hold down many jobs and (as a previous post suggests) have a wide range of interests, hobbies and pastimes, unlike people working in other professions. Add to this the fact that translators have to deal with the rigours of time management and planning and we are left with an image of a truly multifaceted professional.

With this in mind, it is not surprising that the translator’s lot is a difficult one and only a relatively small group have the pleasure of working in the field. Furthermore, because of the nature of this beast, people unfamiliar with the art (or craft) of translation do not quite understand the import of the work. Moreover, translators themselves are often not always clear on their own role. Is it a full-time profession? Do I want to do it all my life? Is it a calling?

Due to the fact that there are so many conflicting attitudes about translation from both within the field and without it is not surprising that this profession is not always regarded as ‘normal’ (whatever that may mean). What seems to be a pressing issue and most certainly interesting is whether translators themselves feel that they are ‘normal’ (whatever that may mean).

View This Poll
polls

.

Language professionals are often amazed by the similarities that can be found between languages. As we are all aware, groups of languages belong to language families and therefore invariably share the same characteristics and/or structures. It is arguably easier, for example, to translate French into Italian than French into Polish, or, to take it a step further, much easier to translate Polish into Russian than, let us say, Polish into Inuktitut or Xhosa.

However easy it is translating between languages within the same language family (for example, Slavonic to Slavonic, Germanic to Germanic or even Indo-European to Indo-European), there is one imp of a problem that is forever the bane of translators and editors. This is, of course, the infamous false friend, faux ami or fałszywy przyjaciel. Examples abound: preservative in English versus preserwatywa (condom) in Polish, or čerstvý (fresh) in Czech versus czerstwy (stale) in Polish.

A fascinating example of this is the English word biscuit which means different things to different people, depending on which side of the Atlantic one resides. The two most common definitions of biscuit are: (i) British: “small, flat sweet cake” (known as cookie in the US) and (ii) American: “small round bread leavened with soda”. We can also add to this two definitions were are less common: (iii) “pale brown colour” and (iv) “fired piece of unglazed ceramic ware” (usually bisque).

This interesting bifurcation of meaning (British versus American) can be traced to the ambiguous nature of the word’s etymology. Biscuit stems from the 16th century word bisket which in turn can be traced back to the Middle English word bysquyte. This stems from the Old French word bescuit which literally means “twice cooked”, which itself was altered under the influence of the Old Italian biscotto which meant “twice baked” (which is rooted in the Medieval Latin bis coctus. The word’s derivation is fascinating.

The Polish biskwit has a similar cognate line and stems from the French biscuit. Interestingly, the word is a synonym of biszkopt which can also be traced back to the Medieval Latin bis coctus and was originally adopted into Polish as biskokt and then later biszkokt. What is fascinating about this word is its meaning, which is slightly different from the English (British and American).

The Polish biskwit or biszkopt might well be translated into English as a sponge cake, ladyfinger or Génoise (cake) (not to be confused with pain de Gênes, which is an almond cake) and has little to do with the British biscuit and nothing in common with the American biscuit. False friends may well be confusing but are extremely interesting to the language professional.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

Transubstantiation

(courtesy of Omniglot)

The longer one translates, the more obvious it becomes that translation is a craft, like any other, which, like wine, matures and improves with age. What for many a novice translator is confusing and complicated may be second nature or not need a second thought for the experienced linguist.

This becomes especially apparent in translation training and, in particular, when one notes the cognitive and procedural problems faced by translator trainees in the learning and training process. Trainee translators often approach a text differently, they actually ’see’ a text with seemingly different eyes.

The chief problem for translator trainees is the fact that they find it difficult to view a source text holistically. What is more, they are often not aware of the integral relationship between the semantic network of the original with that of the translation. They focus mainly on words and collocations not on ambience and function.

However, the facility to see a text differently, often possessed by up and coming trainee translators, is not always a bad thing. The ability to see a text anew is a valuable skill for all translators, young or old, novice or master – a fact a recent post emphasises.

The translator should, therefore, be able to view a text in several dimensions and at a variety of levels. In other words, every reading should be multi-dimensional. Rather like a satellite picture, the more angles available to the camera, the more detailed the picture.

To summarise, it may be useful for the translator trainee to focus on the ambience and function of a text. It may also be a good idea for the trainee to first read the original text whilst looking for elements of ambience and then a second time looking for functional elements (i.e. to whom is the text addressed and what purpose does it serve?).

Successive readings should focus on other elements – lexis, grammar, style – so that with each reading a new level of detail (and perhaps even ‘magnification’) is gleaned. In this way, the trainee translator regiments not only the procedural part of the process but inadvertently the cognitive part also.

The business of translation is difficult enough. The process of translation requires concentration, mental capacity and competence. The business of freelance translation is even more taxing – the constant quest for that perfect contract. Most freelance translators agree that the job is not easy and there is much more to being a freelance translator than simply being a ‘good’ translator. One needs to be well-versed in the intricacies of running a business, have the ability to advertise oneself and one’s company, and finally, one needs to be able to find contracts, nurture contracts and build upon them. The freelance translator is a multi-tasker in every sense of the word.

The growth of computer technology in the latter half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century has had a huge impact on the working life of the freelance translator. Not only do they now have access to a wide range of computational tools and resources but, through the internet, they also have access to more contacts and clients. The internet truly has opened up a world of possibilities for freelance translators, however, it has also set a large number of traps for those less experienced colleagues who are new to the freelance market.

Unfortunately, many so-called translation companies and agencies use the internet in order to take advantage of those new to the translation market. There are many companies who perpetually send out offers of work either directly or through third parties in the hope that translators will reply. And reply they do. With the first hurdle overcome, these pseudo-agencies then ask the translator to undertake a ‘sample’ translation so that they can ‘test’ the translator’s skills. Once the translator sends their sample, communication, strangely enough, ceases. The agency fails to acknowledge receipt of the translation, gives no feedback, and to all intents and purposes, the agency disappears.

Third party websites that help to bring together people in the translation community are often victims of such deception, unable to filter the chaff from the corn. These bogus companies are aware of this fact and continue to function and take advantage of young or inexperienced freelance translators wanting to take their first steps in the world of translation. So what advice can be given to freelance translators? Several simple steps can sometimes help:

• Always run a background check on the company;
• Exchange emails in order to learn more about the agency;
• Ask for specific information about the company;
• Ensure that any cooperation is contract-bound;
• Enquire as to whether feedback about the sample will be given;
• Ensure that samples are not excessively long.

What else can be done to make life easier for the freelance translator? What can we do to stop these companies taking advantage?

As the Ox Turns

If translation is an attempt to ‘remove the veil’ from a text then the knowledge translators possess must be the tool needed to reveal what is behind this veil. Our task is to see through the linguistic and cultural veil and interpret what lies beyond. Our ability to visit a text with ‘new eyes’ is as important as our knowledge of the languages concerned. In the ‘West’ we are often so preoccupied with our own languages that we sometimes forget the thousands of other languages that exist ‘out there’. What is more, we are often ignorant of the rich wealth of systems used to represent the written forms of these languages. Even non-Latin alphabets appear alien to us; alphabets like Cyrillic (Кириллица), Greek (Ελληνικό αλφάβητο), Georgian (ქართული დამწერლობა) or Armenian (Հայկական գիր). Abjads (writing systems where each symbol therein generally represents a consonant) appear to Western eyes even more outlandish, for example, Hebrew (עִבְרִית) or Arabic (العربية). Abugidas, segmental writing systems, are even further away from western scriptural sensitivities and include alphasyllabaries such as Ge’ez (ግዕዝ) and Devanagari (देवनागरी). It is also worth mentioning logographic writing systems which include Chinese (漢字).

Why is this significant to the translator? Often the mark of an expert translator is his/her ability to find ingenious approaches to solving linguistic problems. The capacity to see a translational quandary from a different perspective is key to our profession. Sometimes, the power to see a text with ‘another pair of eyes’ is invaluable. This ‘defamiliarisation’ is often nurtured through multilingualism and especially multiculturalism. We can go one step further by suggesting that being sensitive to not only linguistic cues but also ‘visual-linguistic’ cues may help develop this sensitivity and ability to ‘de-focus’ and see a text afresh. Knowledge of different writing systems and typographical methods are but two methods of expanding our minds.

Aside from becoming familiar with the scripts mentioned above (in order to become de-familiar with our own script), another useful method of defamiliarisation is to take our own script and read it differently, or rather write it differently. For this we can make use of Boustrophedon (Gr. as the ox turns) which was an Ancient Greek method of writing where alternate lines of the text were read in opposite directions (see picture above). For example, the first line would be read from left-to-right, the second right-to-left, the third left-to-right and so on and so forth. Interestingly, this method, with practice, is actually a faster way to write and read.

More importantly, this is another weapon in the translator’s arsenal. There is much to be said for expanding one’s mind in as many diverse ways as it is possible. A previous blog entry on Linguistic Intelligence is testament to this. The traditional, tried and tested ways of improving competence are invaulable. However, even in the mundane translation of a legal document, medical journal or technical manual an extra iota of creativity and ‘freshness’ can sometimes be the difference between a good piece of work and a great translation.

The teaching of foreign languages has come on leaps and bounds in the period following World War II. Advances in applied linguistics, psychology, education and technology have all combined to make the late twentieth century one of the most exciting times for foreign language teaching (FLT). English teaching and the field of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) benefited most from these new approaches to teaching. The Grammar-Translation Method was the predominant method for a long period of time. It focused on the use of translation as a route into the foreign language as well as the memorisation of grammatical rules.

The Direct Method was developed in opposition to Grammar-Translation. No translation was used here and neither was the mother tongue. Other methods included the Silent Method, the Audio-Lingual Method and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) which has gained ground in recent years and is perhaps one of the most popular approaches nowadays. It was itself a response to the Audio-Lingual Method. In the communicative approach the focus is interaction and the use of authentic texts. This approach led to Task-based Language Learning which has also become extremely popular. In this approach grammar and linguistic elements are not the focus, but rather the task that needs to be realised in the language interaction situation.

With the foundation and strengthening of applied linguistics as a genuine academic discipline and the growth of TEFL as a truly marketable business (including the publication of foreign language learning textbooks), Grammar-Translation became marginalised and forgotten by many. Some of the key terms in FLT now include communication, task realisation and learner autonomy. No place for grammar or translation. Many of the criticisms directed at Grammar-Translation were genuine; there was too great a focus on authenticity (rather than fluency) and the mother tongue (rather than the target language).

However, as with all trends, CLT has perhaps swung too far. Many believe that regimented language learning which is often not highlighted in CLT (but is present in Grammar-Translation) is particularly useful for beginners. Learner autonomy is valuable in language learning but guidance and periodicity is equally important, also present in Grammar-Translation. The early twenty-first century has seen some call for a more hybrid (mix-and-match) approach to foreign language learning where the best ‘bits’ of various approaches are utilised.

Another point is the teaching of translation proper. Is is possible to use a purely communicative approach in translation training? Task-based Language Learning certainly can be used to teach translation but can we use it exclusively? Many teachers are lauding these new hybrid approaches which combine Task-based Language Learning with short ‘doses’ of Grammar-Translation which not only present authentic foreign language texts to students and trainees but also highlight the differences between languages and cultures. Thankfully, the old Grammar-Translation Method has left us. Perhaps it is time for a new one.

Out with the old, in with the new…?

In 1983 Howard Gardner put forward his theory of multiple intelligences which sent shock waves through the educational system in the 1980s and 1990s. The repercussions of Gardner’s theory are still being felt today. What was this theory? In short, Howard Gardner believed that there was more to an individual’s intelligence than one single ability or skill. In his Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences he put forward several different types of intelligence. He refined his ideas over the years concluding that there are seven forms of intelligence.

These include:
bodily-kinaesthetic,
interpersonal
intrapersonal,
logical-mathematical,
musical,
spatial,
linguistic.

An individual with heightened bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence might be well coordinated, have a keen sense of balance, be strong, flexible and sporty. People with high bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence may become sports-people, dancers, actors, doctors or soldiers.

Someone who has interpersonal intelligence is typically able to interpret other people’s moods and intentions, they are sensitive to other people and are often natural leaders, successful speakers, sales people, managers and teachers.

Intrapersonal intelligence is marked by introspection. Individuals with this types of intelligence are self-reflective and are able to understand their own emotions, desires and limitations. Such people make good philosophers, psychologists, and scientists.

Logical-mathematical intelligence, as the name suggests, can be defined as the ability to understand numbers and logical concepts, be able to reason, and think abstractly. Mathematicians, scientists, economists and programmers fall into this category.

Individuals who possess musical intelligence can understand and express musical forms, they are sensitive to rhythm and have a keen sense of hearing. Those with musical intelligence may be most suited to careers as musicians, singers, DJs, composers and even writers.

People who have heightened spatial intelligence are extremely sensitive to shapes and colours and are able to easily visualise objects. People gifted with spatial intelligence often make good architects, artists, map-makers and engineers.

Last but not least comes linguistic intelligence; a key factor, one would think, for linguists, translators and language specialists. Interestingly, actors, lawyers, philosophers, teachers and politicians are also thought to have this form of intelligence in abundance. People with linguistic intelligence are often said to notice grammatical mistakes, they enjoy word games, puns, learning foreign languages and often have large collections of books.

Is this really the case? Do all linguists and translators share a common level of linguistic intelligence? Is there a level of linguistic intelligence above which one will always be regarded as linguistically skilled? Must one posses this level to become a linguist and/or translators? More importantly, can the other intelligences be important to the work of a translator?

View This Poll
opinion

.

There are a thousand and one ‘myths’ about what needs to be undertaken to become a good translator. One of these is the opinion that the ideal translator needs to be bilingual. But is this really the case? Is the mark of a great translator the fact that he or she is bilingual (or even multilingual)? In order to answer this question it is first necessary to try and understand what is meant by the term bilingual (or multilingual).

Generally speaking, a bilingual can refer to someone who fluently speaks two languages. This definition itself poses certain problems. Firstly, how do we define fluency, and secondly, does speaking also include writing? We can assume that fluency is the ability to speak (and write) effectively, skilfully, articulately with smoothness and ease. Obviously, knowing two languages fluently is most certainly a key element in becoming a translator. But is it enough?

Translation is by some seen as a gift, by others it is seen as a craft which can be understood, learnt and perfected. What relation does bilingualism have to these approaches to translation? Should the ideal translator be a ‘native’ bilingual who has learnt both languages since childhood? Or does it matter if one language is learnt later in life, as a second language? Some believe that only childhood bilingualism is the only real way forward, although experience tells us this is not always the case.

This seems to be the main sticking point in discussions of bilingualism vis-à-vis translation. Those who believe translation to be a gift often see bilingualism as a ticket to translational competence and, as such, bilingualism is equated with a ‘gift for translation’. However, it is naive to think there is a one-to-one relationship between bilingualism and translational competence. Although being bilingual is certainly vitally important for the translator, being bilingual does not mean that one will become a translator.

The other side to the story is the common belief that someone who is bilingual is automatically a translator. Bilingual (non-translators) are perplexed by questions from monolinguals who ask them to translate a word, phrase or text. “But I’m not a translator,” is the most common reply, often followed by the retort, “But you speak two languages fluently…” In these situations, blingualism can often be seen as more of a curse than a blessing…

For many freelance translators there is a time for sowing and a time for reaping. There is also a time for waiting; the doldrums; a lull in work where little happens and offers of work are few and far between. What should translators do in this time of stagnation? If we treat this period as a ‘time for sowing’ rather than a lull in work then we can turn a potentially deadening and depressing time into a productive and industrious period. We can use this ‘window of opportunity’ to search for new clients, new contacts and, of course, new contracts. We can also use this time to brush up on cultural and linguistic areas that have heretofore been neglected by us. The silly season need not necessarily be ’silly’.

From a translational point of view, silly season is a fascinating phrase. In British English the silly season refers to that time of year characterised by exaggerated (silly) media news stories because of the lack of serious news due to the fact that politicians and celebrities are usually on holiday. In the United Kingdom this is usually late summer. Other European languages have their own equivalent phrases. French uses the term la morte-saison (the dead season), German has two terms: das Sommerloch (the summer hole) and Sauregurkenzeit (pickled gherkin time), the second being a common motif across Europe.

Gherkins and cucumbers seem to be a recurrent theme in many languages. Dutch uses komkommertijd, Norwegian agurktid, Danish agurketid (cucumber time). Norwegian refers to agurknytt (cucumber news). The non Indo-European Hungarian uses uborkaszezon (cucumber season) which is mirrored also in Czech and Polish. These Slavonic languages respectively use: okurková sezóna and sezon ogórkowy (cucumber season). Another term referring to the summer period which occurs in Polish is kanikuła, fascinating from an etymological point of view.

Kanikuła comes from the Latin canicula referring to the time of year between 22 June and 23 August when the sun (used to) rise at the same time as Sirius (the Dog Star, Latin Canicula). It also refers to the hottest days of the year. What makes this Polish phrase fascinating is the fact that etymologically it is equivalent to the English phrase dog days referring to that time of year which is hot or stagnant or when there is a period of inactivity. Therefore, when we refer to this seasonal lull in English we can use silly season or dog days and in Polish sezon ogórkowy or kanikuła.

Many of us have had professional schooling, undertaken some form of linguistic training or scholarly preparation to become translators. Some of us have become translators by accident, through our love of languages or downright (non-academic) hard work. Whatever the path towards becoming a translator has been, we all have strong views about what translation is or rather should be.

When we sit down to translate all of us have some sort of concept in our heads, some sort of idea. What is interesting is finding the connection between this idea, this form, and the reality of the translation act, the matter. We can use this terminology (in the Platonic sense) and talk about an ideal translation that exists somewhere perhaps beyond our reach and the material translation that is the result of our work.

If this is the case then in each translation situation, for each translation event, there should be an ideal form where there are universals which we can somehow trace and attempt to reach. But are there such universals? Can we, in fact, talk of an ideal translation? Experience shows that ambiguity exists even at the word level, so what possibility is there for postulating the concept of an ideal translation?

The answer, perhaps, lies again with Plato and his allegory of the cave. If the translations that we produce are shadows, poor reflections of some sort of ideal, then, in a sense, the search for a better version is a worthwhile endeavour in itself. Woe betide the translator who is satisfied! We should always be attempting to produce a better text, a more polished translation, a clearer document.

The translation that we produce is a constantly-flickering shadow of nether-text, always moving, always bending. Our aim is to pin it down, flesh it out, make it whole. What could be more rewarding? The knowledge that our final text is simply a twisted shadow is the first step in the search for the ultimate signified which can be found (perhaps) at the end of a long and shadowy chain of signifiers.

Transubstantiation has the honour of announcing that we have been nominated for the prestigious, international Lexiophiles Top 100 Language Blogs competition. Transubstantiation has the chance to be inducted into the language blog hall of fame if it makes the Top 100. If you are interested in helping Transubstantiation become one of the Top 100 language blogs on the internet (or even help us win the competition), please click on the link below and then find the appropriate radio button – the list is alphabetical so you’ll find Transubstantiation under ‘T’, towards the bottom of the list in the Language Professionals category.
Many thanks!

One of the most confounding issues for translators, editors and proof-readers is not knowing which standards to use when working on a particular document. To highlight this quandary, we can make use of the simple, yet irksome problem of monetary units in various countries. Let us take, for example, the British pound, American dollar, Japanese yen, European euro and, last but not least, the Polish złoty.

To begin with, the use of the word ‘Polish’ before the word ‘złoty’ often provokes linguistic unrest. In most economic texts, we speak of the ‘dollar’, ‘pound’, ‘euro’ or ‘yen’ However, ‘Polish’ often precedes the word ‘złoty’ to make clear the country of origin of this currency. However, for consistency’s sake, one could argue that it should not be used.

This is only the start of our problems. The second concerns the Polish diacritic ‘ł’. Often, the word ‘złoty’ loses the diacritic, becoming ‘zloty’ for legibility’s sake so that non-Polish speakers will not be confused by the spelling. In an increasingly multi-cultural world, however, this is a needless orthographic change.

Our next problem concerns the abbreviation of the word ‘złoty’. Several forms currently exit: zł (or zl) and PLN. The pound, dollar, euro and yen are all fortunate enough to have their own symbols, respectively, £, $, € and ¥. Different institutions and publishing houses use different standards for the Polish currency giving us, for example:
zł100 (preceding with diacritic, no space)
zl. 100 (preceding with full stop, space and without diacritic)
100zł (succeeding with diacritic, no space)
100 zl (succeeding with space and without diacritic)
PLN 100 (preceding)
100 PLN (succeeding).

All of the above can be seen in magazines and newspapers throughout Poland on a daily basis. If we assume that zł/zl/PLN is the Polish equivalent of the symbol used for the pound (£), dollar ($), euro (€) and yen (¥) then for consistency’s sake the symbol, i.e. zł/zl/PLN, should precede the number at all times. Interestingly, according to official sources (ISO 4217) the code for the Polish złoty is PLN; however, the symbol, used internally in Poland, is zł.

Knowledge of these ‘official’ standards still does not prevent the linguistic cacophony which is the reality faced by most editors and proof-readers. Institutions and publishing houses have their own ‘internal’ standards which often have little regard to what is official or what is used by the majority. It helps when standards in translation (compare the above-mentioned problem) are nurtured and protected, if only to help us in this oft-complicated process.