| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] | Do you translate solely into your native language? Thread poster: AnneMarieG
|
|---|
Taija Hyvönen
Finland
Local time: 02:35
Member (2008)
English to Finnish
+ ...
| What she actually said... | Apr 17, 2009 |
Lawyer-Linguist wrote:
... generalising is exactly what Liz didn't do -- she made it quite clear she was talking about herself and herself only. Read her further postings too.
... was "I still believe one should translate into one's native language only".
Doesn't "one" refer to everybody or anybody?
What if you were charged and facing a court hearing... you needed documents translated to read the charges and present your case... but there are no native translators in the language pair (either don't exist or are too few and far between to be available)... would you rather go to jail or accept a translation in which the terminology and the meaning of the text are correct, but sentence structures are not fluent and idiomatic and all the prepositions are not correct?
Sorry, slow day, I really have nothing better to do
| | | | Paul Cohen 
Greenland
Local time: 22:35
German to English
+ ...
| An endless uphill battle | Apr 17, 2009 |
I see translating into a foreign language as an endless uphill battle with a ball and chain attached to your foot. There is no way that I could attain my usual level of quality if I were to translate into a foreign language, despite the fact that I've been working in this business professionally for nearly 20 years. Personally, I always translate into my mother tongue -- English.
I correspond with clients in German quite often, and I know from experience, having shown many e-mails t... See more I see translating into a foreign language as an endless uphill battle with a ball and chain attached to your foot. There is no way that I could attain my usual level of quality if I were to translate into a foreign language, despite the fact that I've been working in this business professionally for nearly 20 years. Personally, I always translate into my mother tongue -- English.
I correspond with clients in German quite often, and I know from experience, having shown many e-mails to my German wife before I send them off, that my word order and choice of words in German are occasionally non-native or non-idiomatic, despite the fact that my German is excellent. I simply cannot imagine translating challenging English texts into German. Period.
People are often under the mistaken impression that just because you are a translator you can translate into any language. It never ceases to amaze me, for example, when someone hears my fairly rudimentary Danish, yet asks me if I could translate a brochure or a website or even a novel from English into Danish. There's a widespread myth out there that what we do is somehow mechanical, a mere juggling of adjectives and prepositions using a computer program and a stack of dictionaries. I've been asked dozens of times: "You're a translator? Oh, do you also translate into Kalaallisut (Greenlandic)?" -- (one of the most difficult languages in the world, I might add.)
KudoZ is one thing, but the real world of full-scale translations is another kettle of fish. I highly appreciate the input of many (but certainly not all) non-native speakers here on this site. However, I have to say from personal experience that I have yet to see the work of a non-native speaker of English who can convincingly translate the kind of texts that I regularly do (marketing & journalism). Let me add that when I say a non-native speaker, I mean someone who had to learn English "the hard way," building on nothing more than a few lessons back in high school.
As far as ethics and professional guidelines go, I'd also say let the client decide. Having said that, we need to be perfectly clear and honest with our clients. If you are translating into a foreign language, I would highly recommend that you mention this to your clients and that you have your texts proofread by another translator who is a native speaker of the target language. Having your text proofread by the neighbor next door who happens to be from Iowa, but speaks no foreign languages, does not constitute adequate proofreading, in my opinion. The proofreader needs to have a high level of understanding of both the source and the target text.
By the way, English is an endless uphill battle for me, too -- only without the added burden of the ball and chain. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | What I meant | Apr 17, 2009 |
Lawyer-Linguist wrote: ViktoriaG wrote: liz askew wrote:
I have been working with French and Spanish for 40+ years, but am I qualified/competent enough to translate into those languages. No!!
The fact that you judge that you are not qualified/competent to translate into French and Spanish doesn't give you the right to judge whether others are qualified/competent to translate into languages other than their native ones. Please, don't generalize. ... generalising is exactly what Liz didn't do -- she made it quite clear she was talking about herself and herself only. Read her further postings too.
It is because I read her other posts, in this thread as well as in another one with a similar topic, that I believe she is generalizing. What Liz says in the quote above sounds to me as though she was saying that she is doing the right thing, as though it was some kind of a standard, and that anybody doing something different is wrong. It is what I understand from all her posts taken together.
Liz says that she wouldn't translate into French or Spanish, even after having "worked with" those languages for 40+ years. Maybe 40+ years of working with a language isn't sufficient for her to translate into that language, but each person is different, and while she may judge that, in her case, 40+ years of working with a language isn't enough to translate into it, others may be proficient at native level in the same language after only half as much time. There.
It is not because her experience with French and Spanish is insufficient for translation into those languages that others with a similar experience should refrain from translating.
Not one of us is a perfect example to follow.
| | | | | I could recommend a couple of excellent Danish State Authorised translators... | Apr 17, 2009 |
Taija Salo wrote: What if you were charged and facing a court hearing... you needed documents translated to read the charges and present your case... but there are no native translators in the language pair (either don't exist or are too few and far between to be available)... would you rather go to jail or accept a translation in which the terminology and the meaning of the text are correct, but sentence structures are not fluent and idiomatic and all the prepositions are not correct? Sorry, slow day, I really have nothing better to do
Well, to answer your question, I don't know about accepting a translation where "all the prepositions are not correct". That could be confusing and you might end up in jail anyway...
But if it was a complex case, and you needed a Danish to English translator, I could recommend at least one Danish State Authorised translator, probably more, who would do the job better than a lot of English natives. Possibly better than I would myself, although on paper I have done a lot of the same training. In practice I have not as much experience of legal translation, so it would depend on the case.
The point is that these translators have studied law and worked with it for years.
One also lives in England and really does write English fluently, lucidly and correctly - I wish all natives wrote English as well.
I would not let just anyone loose on your case with a high-school dictionary, but I would not mind if the language was a little 'stiff' as long as it was unambiguous.
As I said earlier, a translation must first and foremost be accurate and here I mean the translator must understand the source and produce an unambiguous rendering in the target language.
Of course it is better if it reads fluently and idiomatically, but this is not the be-all and end-all of translation. The content - or meaning - is what translation is all about. Some people can translate both clearly and fluently into acquired languages. I know plenty. Which is lucky, because in the more unusual pairs, native speakers of the target language are simply not available a lot of the time. They cannot afford to pretend that only natives can produce 'quality', whatever that is.
Again, it is a matter of knowing one's limitations and/or doing something about them. But it is quite impossible to lay down a single rule for everyone.
Happy translating and have a nice weekend!
| | |
|
|
|
Christine Andersen wrote:
Of course it is better if it reads fluently and idiomatically, but this is not the be-all and end-all of translation.
What you say makes a lot of sense. I am the first to admit that I would not touch literature or poetry with a 39.5-foot pole. Not that I wouldn't enjoy it, I am sure I would. But I am better at clarity and accuracy than at prose.
Let's face it, as long as the translator can get the terminology right and is able to write in an unambiguous manner, being native in the target language or not makes no difference if the translator is only required to translate official documents like birth certificates, or product labels, etc., that is, documents that are pretty much devoid of prose.
As for documents that require a lot of creativity and that need to "taste good", I agree that they are best translated by native speakers of the target language. However, in such cases, even many native speakers wouldn't be able to pull it off... Hats off to those who translate novels and poetry, whether they be native or not.
| | | | Taija Hyvönen
Finland
Local time: 02:35
Member (2008)
English to Finnish
+ ...
Christine Andersen wrote:
Well, to answer your question, I don't know about accepting a translation where "all the prepositions are not correct". That could be confusing and you might end up in jail anyway...
And that is why I specifically said that in my hypothetical example the meaning of the text corresponds to the original.
There have been many threads around this theme here lately - non-native translators invading native translators' territory in translating, answering KudoZ and claiming to be native in English (obviously because many outsourcers require native translators).
If they are as bad you say, are they really threatening to take the jobs from competent native translators?
| | | | | Let's pretend it is the case | Apr 18, 2009 |
Taija Salo wrote:
If they are as bad you say, are they really threatening to take the jobs from competent native translators?
At that point, I think that clients who care about quality are able to separate the weed from the chaff. That is, if a client realizes that the translator offered a mediocre translation, they can filter them out at the individual level, just like they do with native translators who produce mediocre work.
I have countless examples of agencies telling me they will stop working with such and such translator (who is native in the target language) because the quality was bad, and I also have a few examples of non-native translators doing an excellent job leading to a fruitful long-term relationship with the client. In the latter case, I probably have only a few examples because translators generally refrain from translating into a language that is not their native language.
I haven't so far come across a client ending a relationship with a translator because their non-nativeness caused them to produce mediocre work, although this is only my personal experience.
| | | | PRen (X)
Canada
Local time: 20:35
French to English
+ ...
| They can separate | Apr 18, 2009 |
the wheat from the chaff too.
| | |
|
|
|
| Oops! Sorry for the slip! | Apr 18, 2009 |
I meant wheat, of course!
I just finished the first round of weeding on my front lawn, maybe that's why. Too much weed for me today. I didn't smoke any of it, I swear!
| | | | PRen (X)
Canada
Local time: 20:35
French to English
+ ...
| weed and wheaties | Apr 18, 2009 |
ViktoriaG wrote: I meant wheat, of course! I just finished the first round of weeding on my front lawn, maybe that's why. Too much weed for me today. I didn't smoke any of it, I swear!
Yes, that wacky tabacky can get the best of us! (I better get weeding too - how do you know it's spring in Canada? - time to weed). At least it's warm where you are.
| | | | PRen (X)
Canada
Local time: 20:35
French to English
+ ...
| there's an old saying | Apr 18, 2009 |
Taija Salo wrote: Lawyer-Linguist wrote:
... generalising is exactly what Liz didn't do -- she made it quite clear she was talking about herself and herself only. Read her further postings too. ... was "I still believe one should translate into one's native language only". Doesn't "one" refer to everybody or anybody? What if you were charged and facing a court hearing... you needed documents translated to read the charges and present your case... but there are no native translators in the language pair (either don't exist or are too few and far between to be available)... would you rather go to jail or accept a translation in which the terminology and the meaning of the text are correct, but sentence structures are not fluent and idiomatic and all the prepositions are not correct? Sorry, slow day, I really have nothing better to do
There's an old saying: Hard cases make bad law. Yes, there are and always will be exceptions, but they should not be the rule. In my language combination, we have absolutely no need of Francophones translating into English, nor, for that matter, Anglophones translating into French. There are plenty of excellent, qualified, native-speaking translators in each combination.
And to follow up on Viktoria's comment, I must disagree - clients, particularly unilingual ones, cannot always separate out the wheat from the chaff - that's why we need to act with integrity. I for one have encountered more than a few translators translating into their second language, with results ranging from unacceptable to terrible, and always doing a disservice to the client.
| | | | conejo
United States
Local time: 18:35
Japanese to English
+ ...
| If at all possible, into your native language only. But if not.... | May 20, 2009 |
I only translate into English, my native language. One reason for this is because I don't have any native Japanese to proofread it for me if I translated into Japanese, and also because confidentiality agreements often prohibit that anyway.
I only translate into my native language because no matter how good you are in your non-native language, or how many years you have lived in the country that speaks your non-native language, there are going to be times when you write something in... See more I only translate into English, my native language. One reason for this is because I don't have any native Japanese to proofread it for me if I translated into Japanese, and also because confidentiality agreements often prohibit that anyway.
I only translate into my native language because no matter how good you are in your non-native language, or how many years you have lived in the country that speaks your non-native language, there are going to be times when you write something in your non-native language and it sounds funny. And no matter how many times you edit it or review it or check it, you won't be able to know that it sounds funny. Some people can truly claim to be natives of more than one language, and this wouldn't apply to them.
So my opinion is that anytime something is translated into a translator's non-native language, it needs to be reviewed by someone who is a native speaker of the target language and is qualified in the source language as well. If this is not possible (due to rare language combinations, etc.), at the minimum a native speaker of the target language who is familiar with the field that the translation discusses needs to review the translation and make sure there aren't any obvious errors or anything that looks odd to native speakers.
If possible it's always best to translate into your native language. But sometimes that's not possible, because no translators exist in that pair, or because the native language is so rare that there would not be any work out there (as someone mentioned already). So in those cases, reviewing by a native speaker would be very important. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| What's the big deal? | May 21, 2009 |
This debate about translating into one's non-native language will probably never end; it's been discussed on ProZ and elsewhere so often that a mere survey of the archives would be a daunting task.
I prefer to look at the matter practically and share Christine's attitude in many cases. In the end the answer as to what direction to translate in comes down to a few key points for me:
- Am I willing to take the responsibility for the results? This may include ensuring revi... See more This debate about translating into one's non-native language will probably never end; it's been discussed on ProZ and elsewhere so often that a mere survey of the archives would be a daunting task.
I prefer to look at the matter practically and share Christine's attitude in many cases. In the end the answer as to what direction to translate in comes down to a few key points for me:
- Am I willing to take the responsibility for the results? This may include ensuring revision by a qualified native speaker of the target language. Even with that I consider the business risks to be higher.
- Am I willing to earn less for the effort if I work more slowly into the non-native target language? That may not be an issue for a translator with time on his/her hands, but in my office it's often like a high-pressure assembly line, and some days every minute literally counts. Even the "quiet" days are rather full. Nonetheless I do things that are time-consuming to relax or learn new things, and I might just as well translate into German as write another data migration procedure to give away. In a sense, though, this point might as well go under "responsibility", so in the end I suppose you could say that I view translation as a matter of personal responsibility, and each person must decide how to exercise that responsibility.
Responsibility also includes honesty. Unless my life literally depends on it as it might have once I make no effort to conceal my origins and what language I speak as a native. (Well, that's almost true. I remember playing a prank on a couple of American girls by traveling with them for several days, speaking only German and enjoying their horrible attempts at the language, but professionally I don't do such things.) Too often on ProZ and elsewhere I encounter clients and colleagues who claim to be "natives" of my language. I'll be generous and simply conclude that their English isn't good enough to know the meaning of the word "native". We'll forget the cases of individuals caught between two linguistic worlds for the sake of simplicity. (What's my daughter's "native" language? I have no idea to be honest.)
I think some of the dishonesty in this regard on ProZ might be solved by technical means. I recall the objections of some of my German colleagues (and surely there are parallels in other language pairs) to their lack of access to job postings in the DE>EN direction, which has far more volume than EN>DE. Right now the "solution" is a dishonest indication of "native" status. To their credit, many of these translators clearly state on their profiles that they are natives of German or some other language. However, a different symbol beside the [N] and modified search options might be a useful way of dealing with this. I can also imagine specific scenarios where an outsourcer might want a German native translating into English. I've seen that often enough in the US in fact, though that could have something to do with the primitive awareness of the profession in my native country ▲ Collapse
| | | | juvera
Local time: 00:35
English to Hungarian
+ ...
| Well, well... | May 21, 2009 |
PRen wrote:
I for one have encountered more than a few translators translating into their second language, with results ranging from unacceptable to terrible, and always doing a disservice to the client.
I for one have encountered more than a few translators translating into their first language, with results ranging from well composed sentences to wonderfully flowing, faultless text, but they had one thing in common: they did not correspond to the original text. Not only they did not correspond, they actually demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding of the original. I call that a disservice to the client!
I share Christine's view, and I stress that in certain language combinations, with few translators in a particular direction, a proficient non-native language translator who knows the subject well, or expert in the subject, can be a valuable asset.
Much more valuable than the native language translator, who hasn't got a clue.
| | | | | It all depends on the nature of what you are willing to translate | Jul 22, 2009 |
This topic seems endless ; this thread is the latest in a sequence of countless arguments about what idiots can really claim to translate into a language they only know well, and if they should face corporal punishments for doing so.
Here is my own contribution to the discussion :
My native language is French, and I know English well (just how well is a very subjective issue).
I have always refrained from adding French to English as a language pair, for all the very vali... See more This topic seems endless ; this thread is the latest in a sequence of countless arguments about what idiots can really claim to translate into a language they only know well, and if they should face corporal punishments for doing so.
Here is my own contribution to the discussion :
My native language is French, and I know English well (just how well is a very subjective issue).
I have always refrained from adding French to English as a language pair, for all the very valid reasons that hundreds of people have already given here.
BUT
I have recently decided to add Turkish->English to my language pairs. It wasn't there before, and I might remove it in the future.
The rationale behind this decision is that I think that I am able to write correctly in SCIENTIFIC English, which is my advertised expertise. Scientific English does not mean incorrect English, mind you. Correct, factual English that you can find in international peer-reviewed publications as written by English or American researchers.
I do not claim to be able to translate a novel, or a law textbook, or even a letter, into English - not up to the standard that a native translator can deliver.
But I claim to be able to write in scientific English at least as well as most native Turkish speakers in my field. The sample size (absolute number of such translators) is small, so I don't take a big risk in saying this.
On the contrary, I am not advertising French to English, and will probably never do it (even though I regularly do unpaid translations in this pair as part of my work in the lab).
Now if anyone thinks that there are serious ethical issues associated with such a choice, please let me know, I will be happy to listen to criticism, and take it into account
[Edited at 2009-07-22 21:54 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Do you translate solely into your native language? | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
