Critical reading implies pondering, comparing and expressing an opinion about the text you have just read- among other cognitive activities.
Along the course you will be reading quotes on the subject of translating and leaving your comments.
FIRST QUOTE
"The translator should be invisible and the best translations have always been those that read as if they were originals in the target language."
From Dahlgren, M. & Sitwell, J. (2010) Teaching English through Translation
I have always said that the best translation is the idea everybody gets about the expression we want to say, read, speak or write. All of us have common words and different words that refer to the same thing, so people use translation in their own way. If they figure out what they are saying , good for all of them.
ReplyDeleteHi Mr. F
DeleteThanks very much for being the first to post your comment. I am not sure if your comment refers to translation or interpretation. I think what you mean is that if there is communication, translation plays a secondary role?
What is it meant with “the translator should be invisible”? Why should the best translations be read as if they were originals in the target language? If the former question refers to the competence of the translator, I will say a translator should have both knowledge of the source and the target language, and knowledge of how to use the languages in specific situations of interaction. Translators should also be proficient at the topic to be translated. The latter question deals with the product, with the translation of text A into text B. “…read as if they were originals in target language.” Then, I wonder: What is an original text like? Are all original texts well written? Do all original texts communicate their purpose clearly? What if that was not the case? Should the translation be as misleading as the original? In that situation, what should a translator do? I think a good translator would use their linguistic and communicative skills in both languages (source and target language), and may be their cultural background to overcome such a nuisance. Would the translator then be invisible? Would the translation be read as the original? - I don’t think so. –
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting point of view. I think you claim that since there is no guarantee that the Source Text is well written, it is responsibility of the translator that the Target Text is well produced- even at the expense of changing the style and the intention of the writer??
DeleteWhen we talk about translation into any L2 language, I understand that it is a written text (taken from authentic material)and should be as close as possible to the original. What is important for me is the meaning, do I understand what has been translated? has it been well expressed? or so. I kind of disagree with the quote written by Dahigren that says "...it reads as if they were originals.." because translation is simply different. We use in spanish different expressions, grammar rules, idiomatic expressions that would make it impossible to be smooth as an orignal translated texts.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post Thelma. I think that what you are explaining matches the textlinguistic model which takes into consideration the conventions of each language but also the communicative value of the text.
DeleteWhen it comes to traslation we have to be very conscientious due to the differences between languages. For instance,there is a controversy among religious people on the right translation of Luke 23:43 which in Spanish is translated as: "De cierto, de cierto te digo, hoy estaras conmigo en el paraiso". Some say that this implies that very same day Jesus and the criminal will be in paradise, however, not all agree on that, why? because the book Luke was written in old Greek and this language lacks of punctuation, so commas do not exist in this original verse. In other words, the meaning of the verse changes if a translator places a comma in two ways. For instance, if he writes "De cierto, de cierto te digo hoy, estaras conmigo en el paraiso", placing the comma after "hoy" we understand a completely different message than when he writes, "De cierto, de cieto te digo, hoy estaras conmigo en el paraiso", placing the comma before "hoy". In the first we assume that Jesus tried to assure "that day" that "in the future" Him and the criminal would be in paradise, whereas in the second, Jesus is telling the criminal "that very same day" they would be in paradise.I mean, how can we assure that this or that translation reads as if it were original in the target language especially in languages like Greek? We might be changing the real intention of the writer, the real message with a simple thing like a comma. So, I think that translations will never give exactly the same message as the original, unless it is spoken, because when it is spoken you can ask for clarification and confirmation.
ReplyDeleteDear Lourdes
DeleteAs it is stated in the linguistic model, the ambiguity at sentence level can be disambiguated by the context which is the way the translator would find the text and so, in theory, the text stops being ambiguous. In the example you mention for historical, cultural or religious reasons, the ambiguity may have stayed since in the days when the text and the translation occurred there were political reasons for an intended tampering with the contents to bring about certain behaviours in the readers.
Dear all
ReplyDeleteShould the best translation be the one that reads as if it were the original in the target language, then it is evident that the role of the translator cannot be that "invisible" due to any thing to be translated into the target language should keep the same signifier of the original language and to make it possible, the translator intervention in the language decoding process would be inevitable. In this process, the translator would have to make use of all his linguistic knowledge to look for the right words - and then discriminate from all possible synonyms - that match as closely as possible the intended message to convey in the desired language.Moreover, the translator would first make sure he understands the original message (in L1)in order to decode it correctly (into L2) and taking into account the cultural context of the receptor. Considering all the aforesaid, it is clear that if we want a message to read as original, then the translator cannot have a neutral or "invisible" role.
Thanks Jessi
DeleteSo what you are saying is that the translator has an important role since what is demanded from him or her goes even beyond the semantics of each word. However, the decodification you mention may be done at such extent that the message reads as the original passing on the intentions the writer of the source text had into the target text?
The role of a translator is to work with the written word, meaningfully re-assembling the fragments of communication from the source language to the target language. The translator provides their own view of the meaning of the original text.It is important to see the translation as more than a simple operation of swapping one word for another into the target language because the finished article needs to be meaningful to the reader.
ReplyDeleteFor most people, a good translation is one that looks nothing like a translation. In other words, the translator should be invisible, their work limited to conveying the original’s meaning in a fluent and natural style. However, let me tell you that is much more complex, demanding and interchange of meanings. If it were an easy operation, automatic translation programs would be able to perform the task, but since it is necessary to exchange and change meanings, especially in order to achieve the much coveted fluency in the target language, nothing matches human thought and the human being’s capacity for abstraction. We can not be invisibles because our task is to transmit the text’s meaning, bearing in mind that it is not always possible to find exact equivalents.
Our goal as translators is to make our translations as faithful as the target language respecting all the time the context and the fidelity of a translation vary according to the subject, type and use of the text, its literary qualities, its social or historical context, etc.
Thanks Kei
DeleteInteresting to know your opinion, being a translator yourself. I particularly like the last paragraph where you mention the goal of translators.