Translation ... Use of chengyu ...

[skylee]

My work requires me to vet the translation (E -> C) of different reports, and I am currently vetting one. Our translators are very professional, and they turn out quality works. But my observation has been that, sometimes, although it seems that the translation is accurate, the tone does not feel right. This is especially obvious when chengyus are used.

Just now I came across a sentence which says that some organisation should not drive a proliferation of largely similar things. The translator used 大同小異 for “largely similar”, which seemed perfect at first. But somehow this description makes me feel that the tone is too strict (well we are commenting that people should not do something, but we are just observers). So I changed the term to “相似”, which feels (to me) much more neutral.

Another example is that when we say that people have “varying ideas” of something, the translators used 意見紛紜, which IMO implies a great degree of difference. So I’ve changed it to 意見不一, which seems much more neutral.

Well I think I want a neutral tone. If I want a more dramatic or severe tone perhaps these descriptions would be suitable.

Thoughts? About translation? About the use of chengyus in translation?

BTW, I am about to reach the 10000-post level.

[Kenny同志]

Why not post the sentences in question here? It would be better if you could provide necessary context.

[skylee]

I can't. The report is confidential, and the sentences are long and complex.

[Kenny同志]

That's okay Skylee.

[imron]

I think it depends a lot on the context. I've had to translate/proof stuff that has gone the other way e.g. from a chengyu or relatively desciptive language that when translated to English comes across as overly flowery. Often I would tone this down in the translation, even if technically it was accurate to the Chinese, because people don't write that way in English (at least not for the type of documents I was dealing with).

P.S. 5 more to go. Should be able to reach it today

[skylee]

overly flowery

Yes this is what I feel. The four characters of a chengyu carry plenty of emotion and implication which the English text (the original text in my case) does not. I think what I am doing now is also to try to tone things down.

PS - according to my profile, this is my 10000th post. According to the column on the left, there are four more posts to go. Any idea why there is a discrepancy?

[imron]

I think in general there are two schools of thought with translation. The first one is that translations should be as literally accurate to the source text as possible with little leeway given for interpretation by the translator. The second one is that the translation should be rendered in language that matches the way the target language is used, even if that means discarding or embellishing details from the source text. In general I'm a fan of the second approach, as the way I see it, the whole point of the translation is to make it something that can be read easily by speakers of the other language.

If you think the target language is not suited for the type of document you are dealing with, then I see no problem with changing it, as long as the overall meaning is preserved.

PS - according to my profile, this is my 10000th post. According to the column on the left, there are four more posts to go. Any idea why there is a discrepancy?

It's such a special occasion that it should be celebrated twice?

[skylee]

OK here is an example. The original text is "Quality assurance and enhancement is built on an ongoing cycle." The translation is "質素保證和提升，周而復始，循環不斷。" Look at the last eight words! It is good, but I want it plainer.

[Kenny同志]

deleted

[skylee]

My version is 質素保證和提升建基於循環的周期.

[Kenny同志]

I deleted my post above because I think it missed the meaning of the original. can't figure out a better version though.

Frankly, your version doesn't read well to me.：）

[skylee]

This is probably due to the lack of context, which I can't provide.

PS - voila, 10000th post.

[Kenny同志]

I understand.

Congratulations on your new milestone.

[Lu]

I think generally Chinese tends to be more flowery than English, so sometimes translators can be right to add a little more flower to a text. Perhaps what happens here is that they took it a bit too far. Or it could be that they are so happy to have found the perfect chengyu/eager to show how well-read they are and that makes them put it in. (It can be very tempting sometimes. I especially got that with names, once I read a book in which a minor character was named 德华, had I translated it I wouldn't have called him 'Andy' but I would have wanted to.)

What imron says about translation is very true, but that fine line between too literal and too loose moves with the occasion. An official letter should be as literal as possible, for promotional material the translation should be as loose as necessary, and for literature there is a wide range, what works and what doesn't can vary by translator (although too literal a translation generally doesn't work).

[skylee]

Thanks, Lu.

I finished vetting that report today (Friday). And there was only one sentence wrongly translated. The translators were not to be blamed, as they did not know the whole context, and the writer had sometimes intentionally (or unintentionally) written quite vaguely. The sentence was in passive voice "it was recognised ..." and the translators got the subject wrong. But this is not the same problem as chengyus.

Such work turns my hair grey.

[skylee]

[Deleted.  And then re-posted.]

 

I am vetting another document and the vetting work has been going on for a while.  This time the problem is not that the translation is overly flowerly.  The translator has misunderstood certain terms, which I find hard to believe and it makes me doubt my own understanding.

 

Currently I am having doubt about the word "scholarship".  It appears in the document three times, and all of them have been translated to 獎學金.  But I think they don't mean that. I think they mean learning and study and research.  I find it difficult to revise the translation.  In the translation, "the extent to which teaching is informed by scholarship" has become 獎學金對教學有何幫助 ... and "scholarship and research in pedagogy" has become 有關教學法的獎學金及研究 ...

 

I have basically changed all the "scholarship" to 學術研究/成就.  Views?  How would you translate "scholarship research" and "scholarship and research"?

[realmayo]

From the brief snippets in English you give, I'm sure you're right that scholarship here does not mean 獎學金

[skylee]

Yeah.  I PM'ed kenny and he has suggested 學術研究 and 學術與研究, and I find them OK.

 

I feel quite stressed vetting such documents as I am not a translator.  And when I come across mistakes in translation prepared by professional translators I usually feel disappointed. 

[realmayo]

(To he honest I find "scholarship research" an odd phrasing in English although it might have some specialised academic use I'm unfamiliar with.)

[Lu]

I think you're right about the meaning of 'scholarship' here.

 

Even professional translators make mistakes, which is of course why you are asked to check their work. They (we) are only human. How disappointed you can be by a professional translator not getting what 'scholarship' means here depends on how high quality you were lead to expect. If this is, say, UN-level, it's a bit stupid, but if it's just a translator or bureau that works for regular companies and generally does good work, well everyone has their blind spots and small things they don't know.  I hope the rest of the document was mostly good and that you don't have to do too much of this. Can't you delegate it to someone who enjoys it more than you do?