THE WORDS OF A TRANSLATOR GOING FOR GOLD

I believe that, if I’m serious about climbing high as a professional translator, I would do well to consider and discuss precisely how I would aim to reach ever higher heights in the field (although I am concerned that I might be giving too much succour to my business competitors here). I suppose it’s easy to define it as “a step up from getting good in another language” (to say nothing of the fact that a proper level of literacy in your own language is expected).

So, what to aim for if I specifically want to “raise my game” as a professional translator (whether I’m coerced into it by those manically fond of me or if I felt pressured into it by unsatisfied customers)? Should I be more committed to a euphuistic writing style or just anything articulate enough which is simple enough for a small child to follow? Either way, I am, I believe, far more eager to address and classify all aspects of language than most. Personally, I can remember how, in my language studies, there were times when the obvious correct solution was not “obvious” in absolute terms in that it required familiarity with some sort of prevailing social situation or something similar (like a consensus) – like, that kind of skill in knowing what is “obvious” is necessary for things like making up or even understanding e.g. political satire jokes, but there is no need to be familiar with anything like a social situation or consensus to know what the “obvious” correct choice is when you’re translating something simple (like a menu)… then I start to realise – not “realise” as the verb on its own, but the whole phrase “start to realise” – what is meant by cultural aspects having an impact on what is correct in expressions in any given language and what isn’t.

Whatever my choices, though, getting it right is the bottom line. When you consider the possibilities of how you can inadvertently misrepresent what you write, or not quite understand the original material or the subject matter – one might say that there are plenty of times when translation is not so much “an exercise in thinking” as it is “an exercise in trying to think.” I can still find entertainment in reading poor translations of things, just like everyone else – with some of them it is easy enough to see the message meant while some are just bewildering. And some, while fully correct in grammatical aspects and whatnot, might not have been so silly and therefore memorable but for an unfortunate choice of otherwise valid words. For example, in a Norwegian bar: “Ladies are requested not to have children in the bar.” Of course, no-one expects a woman to give birth in the middle of a bar, but why just ladies? Not men as well, then? But of course not! In a Chinese hotel: “It is forbidden to play the recorder in the guest rooms.” From Lost in Translation (Charlie Croker: “Do they really mean ‘recorder’? If so, why?”… they probably meant tape recorder – like a radio system, do you know what I mean?

Does everyone think that their own mother tongue is easy simply because of how well they happen to speak it? I’ve heard that “the hardest ones” include Chinese, Hungarian, Arabic and Basque for various reasons. But look at English! Like its range of tenses, or how notorious it is for its inconsistent spelling / pronunciation rules – these can be understood through tough thorough thought, though.

I suppose it’s too easy for me to say things like “languages don’t all work the same way” and “it depends on the language being translated from and the language being translated to.” And of course I understand how ridiculously and unhelpfully vague such comments are. At any rate, I can agree that, however lucid I would be in any points I make about the subject, there are certain things which I couldn’t hope to be clear about with ready, clear examples; but my optimism would be assured by my own familiarity with certain linguistic devices, such as figures of speech.

What is mentioned in the second paragraph is one example. Furthermore, I believe that there is an as yet unnamed category of words and sayings that one can read only to become enlightened straight away. “Can’t see the wood for the trees” is an example of this – I believe that it’s not at all that unlikely that someone, if the meaning of this phrase were explained to them, could practically feel themselves becoming brighter for a second: it may well draw their attention back to something in their own personal experience and make them realise something that they just never understood about the matter until now – “the penny drops”, as they say (oops, there I go again).

Or maybe you remember one or more times you’ve seen an expression that could be enough to convince that it is purposefully abstruse – like certain areas of slang, really – but it just isn’t. For example, what does it mean if a motor vehicle has been “sorned”? Anybody? Well, in the UK, you can be excused from paying road tax for your car if you declare your vehicle as off the road in a Statutory Off-Road Notification (SORN) statement.

But aren’t foreign languages commonly regarded as something that’s popular, like an “in thing”? I remember the time I wrote about Tim Doner, who’s popular on Youtube, in my article “There’s no rejection of platitudes like a translator’s rejection of platitudes.” There’s a good case for arguing that Sara Forsberg, another Youtube star, has similar linguistic talent (or at least potential), although it should be mentioned that her Wikipedia article states that she’s more well-known for mimicking the accents of all these foreign languages and… using made-up words in them. Myself, while I – a professional translator – don’t speak so many languages with such confidence by a long shot at 32, I would be more interested in considering one’s ability to identify, say, intentionally ironic or sarcastic statements in a foreign language. Haven’t we all seen plenty of those in our own language?

It’s a shame that Sara’s video “Girl speaks 20 languages”) doesn’t include subtitles of what she’s saying – or what she thinks she’s saying – like Tim’s does (that is, if she’s actually trying to say anything in particular like Tim). And that’s another thing: when it comes to earning the trust of translation customers, the question of what you know (what you KNOW, not what you think you know) always takes precedence over the question of what you think… whatever you have realised from nothing but your own thinking and whatever your capacity for liberation with your thinking under whatever circumstances. And this is me referring to my readiness to discuss situational context as much as purely linguistic elements; which is only to be expected from anyone who calls themselves a good professional translator, right?