“Drop your trousers here:” Avoiding Translation Fiascoes
"When poetry is translated, the result is either not faithful, not poetry, or not English," says Mavis Gallant. Yet translation and interpretation are a necessary evil. Necessary, because the world is multilingual. Evil, because as Gallant implies, all translations lie; the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis even suggests that it's impossible to express an idea in a language other than the one in which it was originally formulated. Last time I reviewed some notorious examples of this principle in action. However, mishaps can be reduced to manageable levels if everyone involved takes the challenge seriously.
Strictly speaking, translation refers to rewriting text in another language; interpretation is facilitating face-to-face interlingual encounters. (Interpretation also refers to rewording a literal translation to reflect the intended meaning, as when the Spanish expression quemarropa ["clothes-burning"] is translated as "point-blank.") But in practice, both are informally lumped together as "translation."
Most translation glitches stem from two fundamental errors. First, though translators are supposed to work exclusively from their second language to their native language, penny-pinching employers frequently sandbag this rule. Unfortunately, truly bidirectional translators are rare,as native- to second-language copy almost invariably proves.
The second fatal flaw is impatience. Adlai Stevenson's famous outburst ("Don't wait for the translation!") personifies the lackadaisical attitude that characterises an appalling number of interlingual endeavours, right up to the highest levels. Ronald Reagan, arguably the most linguistically-insensitive world leader in recent history, regularly erred on the side of haste. A glaring example was his rejection of a Soviet proposal that upcoming treaty talks be interpreted consecutively. Reagan considered this a stall tactic, since consecutive interpretation, where the speaker pauses while the interpreter interprets her remarks, takes about twice as long as simultaneous interpretation. However, the multilingual Soviets knew that it is also a great deal more reliable, an argument that escaped Reagan entirely.
In another instance, an interpreter working for Reagan during trade talks with Japan was ordered to translate "literally;" evidently the president suspected interpreters of ad libbing. To cite just one problem with word-for-word translation, the Japanese often refuse a direct request with the words muzukasi desu ("It is difficult"); "no" is considered rude in their culture. Obviously, accuracy precludes translating this expression literally. How did the interpreter resolve this dilemma? He said, 'Yes, sir!', and went on interpreting exactly the same way he always did. Moral: cultural literacy is as essential to effective communication as grammar and vocabulary.
Latest Articles