language

  • Myths about translation

    Steve WoodsLanguage

    Over at the Huffington Post, Nathaly Kelly has been dispelling some translation myths in a piece entitled “Clearing up the Top 10 Myths About Translation”.

    The 10 myths as are:

    1. Translation is a small, niche market;
    2. There is a declining need for translation;
    3. Most translators translate books; most interpreters work at the United Nations;
    4. Any bilingual person can be a translator or an interpreter;
    5. Translators and interpreters do the same thing (posts passim);
    6. Translators and interpreters work in more than two languages;
    7. Translation only matters to “language people”;
    8. Crowdsourcing puts professional translators out of work;
    9. Machine translation is crushing the demand for human translation; and
    10. All translation will someday be free.

    It would be easy to go through each of the above points and comment. However, I would simply make one small remark regarding item 9: I’m so glad machine translation is so bad and likely to remain so for quite some time. I might just make it to state retirement age without having to claim benefits. 🙂

    Anyway, I recommend you read the original Huffington Post article.

  • Gert lush

    Steve WoodsBristol, Language, Tech

    The story that the fair city of Bristol is to see the roll-out of 4G mobile access has not escaped the eagle eyes of The Daily Mash, as the screenshot below shows.

    Screenshot of Daily Mash news piece

    4G is shorthand for the fourth generation of mobile telecommunications standards and the successor to third generation (3G) standards.

    Urban Dictionary defines ‘gert lush’ as: “The highest form of praise that can be given to anything by a Bristolian.”

    Proper job, says I. 😉

  • Contemporary BBC English: “… speaking through a translator”

    Steve WoodsLanguage, Media

    For as long as I can remember, the BBC has always prided itself on the quality of its English.

    However, I seriously doubt whether it deserves its reputation as a guardian of the English language any more.

    My biggest disappointment usually occurs when listening to the news on Radio 4. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve fumed at the use of the phrase “spoken through a translator”. It also annoys my fellow translators (and no doubt our interpreter colleagues too) to an equal extent. Such terminological inaccuracy does not do dear old Auntie any favours.

    We linguists earn our crust on the basis of our precise use of terminology and there’s a real distinction between the work done by translators and that done by interpreters. Indeed one might go as far as to assert that they’re different skills, even though the outcome is the same: enabling communication between people who lack the capability to understand what another is communicating in another language.

    For the benefit of passing BBC staff, here’s a brief explanation of the difference between interpreting and translation: interpreting deals with the spoken word, translation with the written word.

    That’s easy to remember, isn’t it? 🙂

    Needless to say, my heart soars and a smile of relief crosses my face when Auntie gets the terminology right and I hear the words: “(insert name of prominent person), speaking through an interpreter, …”.

    Furthermore, the geek side of me groans inwardly when the likes of Radio 4’s You and Yours and Woman’s Hour regularly ask listeners to email the programmes involved ‘through the website’, but that’s a matter for another post entirely (as are the manifold sins of Auntie’s TV programme sub-titlers). 🙂

Posts navigation