![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Ephiphany, class 4...
Nov. 1st, 2010 09:33 amI attended two of Grant Hamilton's presentations during the ATA conference, one titled "Spot the Gallicism!" and another on the proper use of punctuation in French and English.
In both presentations, Hamilton put forth the idea that translators ought not be in the vanguard of the forces that change language, but ought instead to follow those changes. I can appreciate his caution, but reserve the right to take it with a grain of salt, ceteris paribus.
One item that struck me in the punctuation presentation was Hamilton's observation that translators must also translate the punctuation. It was not as if this was any great news to me—I routinely modify Russian punctuation to make sure the target text conforms to American English usage—but it clarified for me why I often experience frustration when editing translations written using "parallel punctuation" that looks (and sounds) just awful in English.
If memory serves, in both presentations, the subject under discussion was the increasing prevalence of ellipsis (...) as a replacement for the em-dash (—). When Hamilton ventured to explain the popularity of the former, I came away thinking it was because most people don't know what an em-dash is or what it's used for, and thus three dots are a convenient way to punctuate a pause.
In writing my Idol 7.0 introduction, I essayed the use of the em-dash in place of my customary three dots, and it occurred to me there is likely another reason: There really is no convenient way to keyboard an em-dash in a Web context (heck, Word's default keychord is Ctrl+Alt+NumMinusSign).
The only reliable method I've found is to type out the HTML code for an em-dash (—), which is certainly not as convenient as mashing down the period three times (and so again, convenience—generally speaking—wins the day!).
Cheers...
In both presentations, Hamilton put forth the idea that translators ought not be in the vanguard of the forces that change language, but ought instead to follow those changes. I can appreciate his caution, but reserve the right to take it with a grain of salt, ceteris paribus.
One item that struck me in the punctuation presentation was Hamilton's observation that translators must also translate the punctuation. It was not as if this was any great news to me—I routinely modify Russian punctuation to make sure the target text conforms to American English usage—but it clarified for me why I often experience frustration when editing translations written using "parallel punctuation" that looks (and sounds) just awful in English.
If memory serves, in both presentations, the subject under discussion was the increasing prevalence of ellipsis (...) as a replacement for the em-dash (—). When Hamilton ventured to explain the popularity of the former, I came away thinking it was because most people don't know what an em-dash is or what it's used for, and thus three dots are a convenient way to punctuate a pause.
In writing my Idol 7.0 introduction, I essayed the use of the em-dash in place of my customary three dots, and it occurred to me there is likely another reason: There really is no convenient way to keyboard an em-dash in a Web context (heck, Word's default keychord is Ctrl+Alt+NumMinusSign).
The only reliable method I've found is to type out the HTML code for an em-dash (—), which is certainly not as convenient as mashing down the period three times (and so again, convenience—generally speaking—wins the day!).
Cheers...
