Don't you just love it...
Aug. 18th, 2000 04:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alexpgpWhen it comes to languages, everyone's an expert, it seems.
We got a note today from one of our clients objecting to the way a couple of phrases had been translated in an ops training plan, and that was enough to set off some members of the staff. "Where does she get off," was the common refrain, "telling us our business?" It took a little while to calm everyone down, and anyway, the offending party was out of the country, so a "necktie party" was out of the question.
Indeed, one of the most frustrating aspects of the translation profession is when when someone who's only half-literate in English (and who ought to know better in any event) tells you that your translation is wrong, and is not only wrong in that assessment, but also offers an alternative that is riddled with mistakes. It also just so happens that in one case, we are taken to task for not being "literal" enough (tell me, what's the difference between "to minimize flow" and "to reduce flow to the greatest extent possible"?), while in the other, the suggested "correction" bears no resemblance to the original text, so we're being dinged for being too "literal."
One thing is for sure. The suggested revisions are, with all due respect to Rudyard Kipling, not among the "nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays." Because for sure, they're not right.
Cheers...
P.S. One of the staff offered to start critiquing the quality of documents received for translation on their engineering merits, but I don't think we'll pursue that avenue. At least not yet. :^)
We got a note today from one of our clients objecting to the way a couple of phrases had been translated in an ops training plan, and that was enough to set off some members of the staff. "Where does she get off," was the common refrain, "telling us our business?" It took a little while to calm everyone down, and anyway, the offending party was out of the country, so a "necktie party" was out of the question.
Indeed, one of the most frustrating aspects of the translation profession is when when someone who's only half-literate in English (and who ought to know better in any event) tells you that your translation is wrong, and is not only wrong in that assessment, but also offers an alternative that is riddled with mistakes. It also just so happens that in one case, we are taken to task for not being "literal" enough (tell me, what's the difference between "to minimize flow" and "to reduce flow to the greatest extent possible"?), while in the other, the suggested "correction" bears no resemblance to the original text, so we're being dinged for being too "literal."
One thing is for sure. The suggested revisions are, with all due respect to Rudyard Kipling, not among the "nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays." Because for sure, they're not right.
Cheers...
P.S. One of the staff offered to start critiquing the quality of documents received for translation on their engineering merits, but I don't think we'll pursue that avenue. At least not yet. :^)
