Translation and getting it right

TRANSLATION AND GETTING IT RIGHT: THE TRUTH IS ONLY AS GOOD AS ITS EXPLANATION

For all the contributions that the great Noam Chomsky http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky has made to the field of the study of linguistics, it is a matter of doubt that he ever could have predicted back in his heyday the tools that some people use in translation work today, and how, ultimately, they have shaped the very translation industry. I do not make such a statement lightly: as far as I see it, the only thing that could upset a professional translator more than a claim that they are not literate enough to do their work (as far as their customers’ feedback is concerned) – maybe even more so – is an accusation that they have simply gotten a translation software tool to do a translation for them; essentially having said tool do the work for them while snubbing the importance of their own critique in the translation process. Depending on the situation, it just may be possible that it could happen to anyone, however accomplished they are in both of the languages in question, however creative (verbally and conceptually) they are, and how familiar they (truly) are with the subject matter of the material being translated.

What I’ve just said there is surely the most blatant ever example of me going out on a limb as far as my work and reputation as a professional translator is concerned. And it’s easy for me to claim that I deserve credit for acknowledging the same, but the truth is that it would just amount to nothing if my own capacity for self-assessment as a translator were poor or not as good as what I thought it was.

I don’t usually blow my own horn, but in this case I will go ahead and do so. It has struck me unequivocally that there are a good many occupations which command respect which do so because those who do them have a responsibility to fight for and uphold the truth in some sense – not just however tough it may be, but also however elusive the truth may seem to some. Just look at how prone we really are to depending on teachers to grab the bull by the horns in the education of our children. Just look at how easily people are tempted to fall back on the police for answers when an ugly incident appears to have spun out of control. Many of us can only prostrate ourselves before doctors and scientists for all the advances ever made in the medical field, which let us be healthier and live longer, nothing less, as if we were programmed or possessed. In the case of the professional translator, the only way success could even be regarded as possible is through an extensive knowledge of two languages – the language being translated out of and the language being translated into – while having the courage to confront the fickle inconsistencies of message interpretation and representation head on. It’s just common sense.

The logic behind it all is simple enough for me to explain. A frequent element in translation work is that of conjecture, a term which Google defines as “a conclusion or supposition about something on the basis of incomplete information”, and being able to accept it. You see, deep down, even the most unlearned of us know that there is just no substitute for human imagination – it’s important that “imagination” be properly defined here: it can be essentially making things up which would just never be expected to happen in real life (grounded in purely fictional paraphernalia or otherwise), but it can also be imagining things which just could happen if all the elements were in place, however absurd they may seem on the surface. After all, conditioned imagination is something that the authors of great works of art and jokes that are anything fatuous, have learned to become very familiar and comfortable with. It all gives a very different meaning to the phrase “that’s life” from the one that is to be understood in the Frank Sinatra song of the same name.

And you can be sure that conjecture is often a prelude to non sequitur statements, statements which are not self-corroborative and all the rest of it. Thus, the practice of translation is susceptible to being regarded as a platform where a person can explain their logic without actually explaining themselves, and that can prove very inconvenient to the party that the translation piece that they are writing is supposed to be for.

If you have a job which falls under the category I discussed in the third paragraph of this comment, you will likely agree that you’re more likely to encounter paradoxes than those who don’t do so such jobs, as all kinds of people so eagerly assail you with not-always-tested ideas about what you should be doing and what you shouldn’t be doing, about what information related to what you do is correct and which is just myths, and so on and so forth. It is a situation where, depending on the particulars, it just might be the case where everybody’s right and everybody’s wrong and, while there will always be a certain portion of the whole that actually matters – it may be small or large, but no less importantly, it may or may not be meant to be understood as small or large – it will only ultimately be valid if it is asserted. Like I said earlier, there’s no substitute for your own judgement and for showing it; and who would argue that applies not just in what I do (translation) but life in general? And that’s precisely why I write these comments; which brings us to the next paragraph.

Whenever someone is doing translation work, the irresponsible use of translation tools should be discouraged at every turn. That should be obvious to anyone. And yet, people encourage professional translators to buy CAT (Computer Assisted Translation) tools like Trados or MemoQ. Now that’s what I call a paradox in what I do for a living. That said, while no professional translator wants to be accused of using Google Translate or Babelfish or whatever: suppose someone was expected to translate something from one language (language A) to another (language B); while they do speak language A, it’s just not at the sophisticated level that the original material is written in, but what if they turned to a translation tool for… ideas? There’s one thing in particular I think of right here: I’ve been doing these French-to-English translations of event marketing press releases recently; the title for one of these in the original was “Scènes d’été”. It’s oh so easy to think that this is one of those occasions where a literal translation – “Summer Scenes” – would have been OK in this context. But “Scènes” could have meant, say, “theatre scenes” – so you see, “Scènes d’été” might have meant more like “Summer theatre displays” or whatever. I’m proud that I considered that (even though, having considered the rest of the article in question, the best translation of “Scènes d’été” was actually “Summer Scenes”). But a translation tool would be deaf to any of this, you know?

Of course, there will be limitations and exceptions to all manner of willingly established rules, and everyone knows it. There is literally all kinds of information, with often highly varying registers and terminology, and everyone knows it. But who knows how many different things I have translated as a professional translator. But I do keep a record of past successful projects for reference, which includes press releases, textbook articles, contracts, technical manual content and God knows what else. (My most recent business video provides other examples.)

I remember how, way back on 2nd July 2013, I compared my own French translation of the English version of the angry kid Greenpeace video

with the ready-made French version that they made and which he actually read

There are definitely expressions in French and German used by the majority of people whose mother tongue is French or German, which I would just never have thought of even though my own command of French and German is sound – it’s just that I can’t help feeling that I’m out of touch with such expressions in my own language (English) sometimes. I don’t like the idea of my imagination being supposedly limited / inhibited in this way… but when I say I’ll find a way, I’ll find a way.

Mind you, having said that: when I mentioned “my own capacity for self-assessment as a translator” in paragraph 2, this included what I state to be my very objective as a professional and how I can be sure of living up to it. I have always said “Communication needs the right words” is my motto. But things change; nothing is set in stone. At any rate, when I accept a new translation project my foremost concern is to write a translation formed of expressions which people can confide in – perhaps to the point where they feel comfortable about presenting its content as if it were their own work. But I do wonder if I really could succeed as a journalist. Sometimes translation clients expect a translation which reflects an actual level of subjective attachment to / involvement with the subject matter; one which indicates what could be described as a passion for it which is indeed undescribed, but what matters is that it’s indisputably genuine. It’s not just translation either; think about it: a person may be a very good singer but may never get their big break if the lyrics of their songs are just plain and… well, with no style. (Seriously, based on my personal experience, I find that many singers, however good their voice is, would rather pay someone to write their lyrics – thus compromising who they are and who they would have people know them as – than write their lyrics themselves. How sad is that?) How else to put it?

But – refer back to the first paragraph if you have to – this comment is about knowing the truth about being a professional translator, dealing with it and not being afraid to assert it (and it sure isn’t the only one). There is every reason to believe that never is the requirement for this more evident than when it comes to translation assistance software tools that weren’t always around. I’m not saying never use computer-based translation aids when you do a translation task, but remember this: as an extension to the often-made claim that machines don’t think for themselves, a computer-based translation aid has no sense of direction or principle. It can’t be taught one, and you can never afford to act in a way that may, hypothetically, suggest the opposite. Don’t delude yourself. With all due respect, stupidity kills, you know.