“The British are so bad at foreign languages that the European commission has had to recruit linguists from Spain and Greece to translate documents into English.”
From The Sunday Times
August 10, 2008
Brussels puts out English mayday
By Marie Woolf, Whitehall Editor
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4493286.ece)
It is a popular belief that one should translate into one’s native language. This belief is so widespread that most translation agencies won’t even consider using non-native translators. This is undoubtedly a valid premise and it does hold true for certain types of translation where authenticity of expression is a must, such as in fiction.
When dealing with other translation material, however, such as legal or engineering documents, it becomes clear that what takes precedence is the ability to grasp the idea being conveyed and render it without distortion or loss of meaning into the target language. In the latter case, proficiency in the specialist area involved, whether in terms of technical expertise or native command of the source language, becomes paramount. A native English speaker translating such a document may well miss a significant point or fail to realize, e.g., that a certain word is misprinted or misused in the context due to the author’s imperfect command of his or her native language (after all, they are just lawyers or engineers, as the case may be, and can hardly be expected to be perfect in this respect) and translate it “as is”, rendering the translated sentence (and maybe even the whole text) nonsensical or, worse, misleading if the translator is clever enough to paper over his or her lapse by doctoring the problem sentence to make it look OK.
On the other hand, a competent non-native translator will certainly succeed in adequately conveying the meaning implied in the source text. There may well be some stylistic faults with his or her translation but these are easily corrected by the customer if the latter is a native speaker of English or by an editor if not.
Naturally enough, one is advised to shop around for a non-native translator whose output would be easy to read for an English-language audience and would not require extensive editing, which might be costly and time consuming.
And last but not least, we have the economical aspect to consider. Outsourcing translation work to non-native translators can save costs - even with the editor’s charges factored in – and this is the bottom line, isn’t it? Why else would they set up call centres in India to serve customers in the US?
From The Sunday Times
August 10, 2008
Brussels puts out English mayday
By Marie Woolf, Whitehall Editor
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4493286.ece)
It is a popular belief that one should translate into one’s native language. This belief is so widespread that most translation agencies won’t even consider using non-native translators. This is undoubtedly a valid premise and it does hold true for certain types of translation where authenticity of expression is a must, such as in fiction.
When dealing with other translation material, however, such as legal or engineering documents, it becomes clear that what takes precedence is the ability to grasp the idea being conveyed and render it without distortion or loss of meaning into the target language. In the latter case, proficiency in the specialist area involved, whether in terms of technical expertise or native command of the source language, becomes paramount. A native English speaker translating such a document may well miss a significant point or fail to realize, e.g., that a certain word is misprinted or misused in the context due to the author’s imperfect command of his or her native language (after all, they are just lawyers or engineers, as the case may be, and can hardly be expected to be perfect in this respect) and translate it “as is”, rendering the translated sentence (and maybe even the whole text) nonsensical or, worse, misleading if the translator is clever enough to paper over his or her lapse by doctoring the problem sentence to make it look OK.
On the other hand, a competent non-native translator will certainly succeed in adequately conveying the meaning implied in the source text. There may well be some stylistic faults with his or her translation but these are easily corrected by the customer if the latter is a native speaker of English or by an editor if not.
Naturally enough, one is advised to shop around for a non-native translator whose output would be easy to read for an English-language audience and would not require extensive editing, which might be costly and time consuming.
And last but not least, we have the economical aspect to consider. Outsourcing translation work to non-native translators can save costs - even with the editor’s charges factored in – and this is the bottom line, isn’t it? Why else would they set up call centres in India to serve customers in the US?
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий