1.

Internet and Cultural Concepts from a Translation Perspective 

Source: Translation Directory

By Anca Irinel Teleoaca 

Anca Irinel Teleoaca was born and brought up in Galati, Romania, where she
studied English at the "Lower Danube" University, and where she presently teaches
English for Special Purposes. Ms. Teleoaca is working on her doctoral thesis on
"Disclosing the Metaphorical Essence of an E-language: A Lexico-
SemanticApproachonComputerTerminology". 
mailto:irinet_1@zappmobile.ro?subject=inquiry from TranslationDirectory.com 

In the past 14 years Romania has witnessed a constant technological boom that
has had an impact on a variety of domains, such as industry, economy, education, mass
media, politics and other important systems. A case in point is the personal computer,
which has become an irreplaceable tool involved in almost all activity areas, among
which educational and mass media systems are continuously benefiting. Consequently,
new concepts, such as the well-known multimedia technology, user-friendly
systems, Internet, Web technologies, cyberspace communities and virtual reality, have
been introduced to Romanian culture. Therefore, I will try to develop the first part of the
paper into a contrastive cultural analysis between some of the American behavioral
patterns, beliefs, values and symbols that are encountered when thinking about
the Internet; what this means and how it functions; and the traditional eastern patterns and
their development under the influence of such a powerful technology. Along with the
sharing of a net culture within contemporary world-wide generations, I will also base my
study on a contrastive translation theory, because cultural implications for translation, as
we shall see, point out important and difficult linguistic gaps to overcome. Hence,
translators are permanently faced with the problem of how to treat the cultural aspects
implicit in a source text (ST) and of finding the most appropriate technique for
successfully conveying these aspects in the target language (TL). These problems may
vary in scope depending on the cultural and linguistic gap between the two (or more)
languages concerned.1

mice do not represent The cultural implications for translation may take
anything nice or friendly in several forms, ranging from lexical content and syntax
the [Romanian] culture; they to ideologies and ways of life in a given culture. The
are but tiny, dangerous translator also has to decide on the importance given to
animals that destroy people's certain cultural features and to what extent it is
crops and furniture. necessary or desirable to translate them into the TL. The
aims of the ST, as well as the intended readership for
both the ST and the target text (TT), will also have
implications for the translation.I shall start by considering the cultural implications when
translating computer terminology from the source language (SL) into the TL, recognizing
all of these problems and taking into account several possibilities before deciding on the
solution that appears most appropriate in each specific case.
1. The Concept of Interconnection and the Awareness of Large Spaces

To start with, the Internet was first developed in military bases under its initial
name of ARPANET,2 and, then fully developed as an educational means of
interconnection (1) in universities and research centers. The constant interaction between
students and their teachers represents an outstanding priority for the American
educational system, which was not our case/culture before 1989. This concept of
interconnection implies that each and every computer user can interact through a
medium other than ordinary face-to-face instruction; for instance, by using multimedia
technology, which is considered an enabling teaching method. It presents computer-based
information through various communicative means, such as text, graphics and sound
employed by video and audio technology as it follows: floppies and compact disks,
software utilities (Flash or PowerPoint presentations) or online communication. From my
point of view, the status of being connected online represents an opportunity to learn
about others and get experience from others at a distance. Distance
learning and distance education3 are fairly new concepts, imported by our educational
system under the Romanian acronym IDD or Open Distance Education, and under the
influence of rapid technological change and shifting market conditions. Thus, the
Romanian educational system is challenged with providing increased educational
opportunities with, unfortunately, reduced budgets. Many educational institutions are
answering this challenge by developing distance education programs, such as the well-
known CODECS,4 a program of management education for working managers in the
emerging free-market economy. The key words for such an educational enterprise are
those that describe the way Americans express themselves as a large but insular nation
that needs to be open and accessible to a continent of diverse cultures. Thus,
the Internet is conceived as being open and accessible and—why not—more secure in a
way to every cybernaut, because of the lower costs of accessing the information needed.
It is much cheaper and even safer to get connected via cables, phone lines or satellites
rather than flying over the ocean. More than that, the linguistic repository of the Internet
itself comprises an indication of the way the system works. Terms like go
to, back, forward, search, help, home are easy to understand and give the user confidence
and assurance of not losing him or herself in overwhelming data. The perfect model of
keeping users captive in a constant desire to be connected was an imitation of a spider's
web because it is considered an ideal model of creation. The key word for
the Internet is unlimited information transmitted via telecommunication lines, which for
users signifies 'food for knowledge' as the spider's prey represents its main sustenance.
On the one hand, the expression keep on surfing through the Internet seems
overambitious to the native of a small country like Romania, who would have difficulty
in reaching the top of the Black Sea waves on a surfboard, but on the other hand, it
rightfully connotes a nation's perfect awareness of large spaces (2), symbolizing, in fact,
the vast territory of the USA. But in order to comprehend any new technology, people
regularly describe it in terms already familiar to them. This happens when scientists try to
explain what the Internet is and bring into focus the relation of similarity with an
electronic space controlled by humans.

To consider all these from a translation perspective, say, trying to provide a

suitable translation for the lexical item Internet or Web represents a very difficult task as
both terms are non-lexicalized concepts in the TL, which in my case is Romanian. This
means that the two terms exist and circulate among the users but there are no equivalents
for them in our language. As far as I know, they stay the same in other languages, like
Spanish, German, French and Portuguese, as well.Considering the links and nodes
between computers and users, we may convey the source language meaning
by retea (network). However, Internet and Web are not synonyms, because the former
stands for a huge network of telecommunication lines, while the latter corresponds to
billions of pages created according to a specific protocol, which are accessible at high
speed via the Internet; the key word here is hypertext. Consequently, the target-language
termretea de hipertext or better yet, retea Paianjen (Spider network) are appropriate.
Two processes are involved when translating the term: the blending of the technical
term, retea, which stands for the common name plasa (net), and the conservation of the
source-language proper name in the target language because it no longer symbolizes the
ordinary insect, coming as it does with new connotations, special and vast. Retea
Internet is employed for the second item. We also have to consider that there
exists Intranet5 which is employed as retea interna de calculatoare. However, the fact
that both terms are often used interchangeably represents a cultural mismatch, i.e., the
impossibility of finding the target-language word for both concepts. Hence, for the time
being they should stay as they are in the target language, in spite of the fact that Newmark
strongly suggests that "a technical translator has no right to create neologisms.6Reteaua
de hipertext is my own suggestion for the SL computer term, because ordinary text has
been transformed into a labyrinth of nodes serially connected across an unlimited
space.The fact that not only the Americans but also the Europeans have felt the need to
exchange information rapidly—almost instantly—is attested to by the invention of
the Web by the English inventor Tim Berners Lee in Geneva (Switzerland). As the father
of the Web7 himself puts it best, this technology is not only a powerful attraction full of
meaningful information for users because of its openness, but it is the users' creativity and
contributions to its development that makes the Web so challenging and fascinating. As a
consequence, it was immediately introduced in American universities and largely tapped
by Netscape Navigator and Microsoft's Internet Explorer. To conclude, the Web
represents a new cultural bridge spanning the Atlantic Ocean and the whole world.

2. Mascots, Games and User-friendly Systems

The first term to be analyzed here emphasizes fundamental differences that occur
within people's cultural background and the way cultural concepts, beliefs and ideas and,
especially, preserving them, have more or less impact on other cultures. For instance, no
target-language user ever thought that a small, tiny animal like a mouse or
a gopher8 would become so important in the latest human technological creation, the
computer and the whole world it has generated and interconnected. Whoever thought that
the TL pop?ndau (gopher) would change its semantic equivalence from (+living)
(+animate) (physical) to an upper level of conceptualization, like being virtual? In the
source language, "Gopher is a system that predates the Web for organizing and displaying
files on Internet servers."9 The computer word represents a cultural gap between the
source language and the target language not because it was developed at the University of
Minnesota but because it was named after the school's mascot. Generally
speaking, mascots(3) do not play the same significant role in our culture as they do in the
source-language educational system, whose entertainment activities, like sports events,
festivals and holidays, are mostly based on various cultural symbols that nicely and
elegantly wear their metaphorical veil.The same happens with the computer
term mouse, which I think was invented to remind us of the ordinary mouse, which has
become such a playful and joyful character in the world of Disney. Generally speaking,
computers and their software have been designed to be user-friendly to make it easier for
novices to use them. In the computer world, the term user-friendly represents an
important concept, which is the basis of all graphical user interfaces, on-line help
systems, menu-driven programs, etc. Within this educational context, the concept of user-
friendly (4) has become a cliché in the American way of life.In contrast, mice do not
represent anything nice or friendly in the TL culture; they are but tiny, dangerous animals
that destroy people's crops and furniture. At the time when Americans invented this
device, they had Jerry the mouse, while the target-language culture had mousetraps at
home. Therefore, it would be difficult to presume that, within the near future, Romanian
computer users will refer to the device as soricel—which they now feel constrained to use
—instead of the English word mouse, because the latter would make them think of a
small computer device rather than of a harmful rodent. For that reason, I would say
that mouse is not only culturally-bound, but is at the same time also a non-lexicalized
concept in the TL that has been naturalized, because most Romanian users say 'Foloseste
/mausul/' or 'Clic pe /maus/.' However, a translator's main job is to find, where possible,
appropriate equivalents of source-language words in the target language in order to
convey the meaning of what is to be said, and "never just repeat what is said."10 Probably,
a literal translation would not fit the target-language context because of what I have
demonstrated above. Consequently, I think that an appropriate translation
for mouse would be cursor mecanic (mechanical cursor) as it renders both the function
of the device, which is to point on a screen, and the user's manual activity in handling it.
One might say that during the translation process the cultural coloring and nuances of the
source-language word mouse are lost in the target language. But, as I have demonstrated,
this computer item cannot trigger the same nuances in the deep structure of our culture as
it does in the source language. Hence, it is not considered a lexical item that has suffered
any connotative losses in the target language.

The TL culture needs time to deposit meanings over layers of meanings and their
continuous changing of lexical usage, since the target-language users seem confident and
determined in favor of a single lexical item. To conclude, I want to state that the language
of computers is too new for our culture to immediately come up with the adequate target-
language terminology, say, mouse, browser, site, spider, etc. Ten years from now, target-
language users will be able to maneuver target-language terms for the source-language
concepts that are in use right now; but at the same time, they will be unable to find
appropriate equivalents for other terms that are continuously being created because the
new hyperculture represents a cultural state of perpetual motion.Despite the fact that there
are many theories disputing the existence of any kind of geometry on the Net, I think that
spatial metaphors are very useful in hypertext systems. But if users are concerned with
connectivity and bandwidth constraints rather than with accessibility and land values, and
if Webbers are disembodied and fragmented subjects who exist as mere collections of
pseudonyms and agents, what then can be the use of their interaction within cyberspace?
What then is the use of so many openings, entries, exits and returns to the initial points
like home?! Moreover, these comprehensible features make Web culture consistent and,
as a consequence, make the system more efficient.

3. Semiotics and the Concept of Interactivity

Starting from the fact that a sign is anything that can be interpreted, and must be
physically and mentally perceptible, I may say that an important issue to be analyzed here
is the phatic function of language in relation to cultural aspects of a source language.
And, again, I will exemplify with another important educational aspect of the American
system, that is, the concept of interactivity (5). As related to a computer environment, this
does not only imply a verbal type of communication but a mixture between verbalized
and non-verbalized signs, thus combining two main language functions, the phatic and
the aesthetic. The former refers once again to maintaining friendly contact,
viz., computer-user, and the latter to both the enchanting of the users' senses and the offer
of some fun through the use of different types of icons, emoticons and smileys, which are
used to show various emotions on the Internet.

From a lexical point of view, I should first say that emoticon is a hypernym

for smileys and the like, since its denotative meanings are diverse: for instance, to
indicate one is joking, winking, bored, sad, frowning, etc. Second, smiley was the first
term to be coined among the Webbers, generally denoting positive thinking and feelings.
It has undergone a process of linguistic development, an extension of meaning. As a
result, it has turned into emoticon and acquired diverse sub-meanings included in the
broader classification. This means that it has acquired new connotative meanings—
different from the one it had when initially coined. Nowadays, it
includes icons symbolizing technology, seasons, school, entertainment, etc. The user can
insert them into his or her e-mail or private chat to make a reference to whatever s/he
wants. If we agree that icon has a TL equivalent that can be rendered as pictograma,
semantically marked for (+GUI), and if we agree on the lexical overlap between the two
terms, then, emoticon could be translated pictograma as well, with the semantic marker
(+Internet).

This sequence of events, which implicitly opens an Internet cultural umbrella

over the continental and insular populations of the globe, can only lead the future of
humanity into a new era that has already exceeded the one of Information and reached a
superior level of High-Speed Information and Commerce. This umbrella, shared by all
virtual communities that exchange information and experience over the Internet, will
actually determine the way the wired population perceives, interprets, thinks, judges and
feels about this almost perfectly democratic medium distributed via an apparently lingua
franca and a 'standardized' computer semiotics.

 4. Final remarks

The need for a systematic study of an SPL (Special Purpose Language)

translation arises directly from the problems encountered during the actual translation
process. Hence, it is essential for those working in the field to bring their practical
experience to theoretical discussions. As we have seen so far, the translator's role is to
facilitate the transfer of the message, meaning and cultural elements from one language
into another and to create an equivalent response from the target audience. However, the
study of computer terminology and the process of interpreting and translating it into the
target language is far from having reached an end-point. With regard to the theoretical
analysis submitted above, it becomes evident that several conclusions about the
translator's main aims can be drawn:

1. The translator has to possess adequate language competence and cultural background
in both SL and TL.

2. As a consequence, he can aim at producing an impact on the target audience as close as

possible to that produced on the readers of the original.

3. A variety of different approaches have been examined in relation to the cultural

implications of translation. Assertions have been made in the paper that in order to
preserve specific cultural references, certain additions need to be brought to the TT.
Therefore, the translator has to, if not adopt, then adapt, and even modernize where
possible, the TL cultural background.

4. Much attention has to be paid to neologisms and newly coined computer terms such
as emoticon, because this SPL is growing fast.

5. Unless the translator breaks the rules above, he will meet his target readers'
expectations in terms of clarity and optimal communication, that is, understanding and
truth relevance.

Bibliography

Toury, G., "The Nature and Role of Norms in Translation," The Translation Studies
Reader London, Routledge, 1978.

Nida, E., "Principles of Correspondence," The Translation Studies Reader, London,

Routledge, 1964.

Bassnett, Susan, Translation Studies, London, Routledge, 1999.

Arnold, D., et al., Machine Translation: An Introductory Guide, Manchester & Oxford,

Blackwell.

Shuttleworth, Mark, Dictionary of Translation Studies, Manchester, St. Jerome

Publishing, 1999.

J. Morgan, P. Welton, See What I Mean, Edward Arnold Edition, 1986.

Ionescu, Daniela-Corina, Translation Theory and Practice, Bucuresti, Editura Universal

Dalsi, 2000.

Peter Newmark, A Textbook of Translation, New York, Prentice Hall, 1998.

Dictionar de calculatoare, Teora, Editia a II-a, 2002.

Margolis, Philip E., Computer & Internet Dictionary, Random House Webster,

3rd Edition, 1999.

Macmillan English Dictionary For Advanced Learners, Macmillan Publishers Limited,

2002.

Endre Jodal, Dictionar de Tehnica de Calcul Rom?n—Englez, Editura Albastra, Cluj-

Napoca, 1995.

Philip E. Margolis, Dictionar P.C., Nemira, 1997.

New Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, 2001.

Internet Explorer 5, Bucuresti, Editura Axel Springer, 2001.

 1 E. Nida, E. "Principles of Correspondence," The Translation Studies

Reader, London,1964, Routledge,p.130. 
2
 "Established in 1969, the precursor to the Internet was a large wide-area network created
by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA)." Cited from: Philip E.
Margolis, Computer & Internet Dictionary, Third Edition, New York:Random
House,1999,p.27. 
3
 Following initial contact in 1991 between The Open University (OU) and
representatives of the University of Bucharest, a joint stock company operating in
association with the University of Bucharest was formed in 1993 under the name of The
Centre for Open Distance Education for a Civic Society (CODECS).
(http://www.open.ac.uk/collaborate/pdfs/CODECSpartnership). 
4
 CODECS functions as a private organization delivering Open University Business
School (OUBS) programs to fulfill the requirements of the evolving Romanian economy
for skilled managerial staff. Aside from the partnership with OUBS, CODECS also offers
the Project Management Course in co-operation with The Open University and has
developed a successful collaboration with the University of Westminster to offer the
Master of Arts in Human Resource Management.(ibid.) 
5
 There is the opposite for Intranet, the computer item Extranet. 
6
 Peter Newmark, A Textbook of Translation, Prentice Hall, New York, 1998, p.15. 
7
 "The openness of the Web is a powerful attraction. Everyone can not only read what's
on the Web but contribute to it, and everybody is in a sense equal."
(http://www.rit.edu/project/page3.html). 
8
 It was named GoPher as a pun on "go for" information, but also because it was created
at the University of Minnesota, where the university mascot is a gopher, a grassland
rodent common in central North America. Gophers create large complicated tunnel
systems, which resemble the kind of structure that results in linked information systems.
(gopher://gopher.floodgap.com/). 
9
 Phillip E. Margolis, Computer & Internet Dictionary, Random House, New
York,1999,p.235. 
10
 Peter Newmark, ibid., p.79 

2.Limitations of Computers as Translation Tools

Source:  Translation Directory On line
By Alex Gross

http://language.home.sprynet.com 
alexilen@sprynet.com

As should be more than evident from other contributions to this volume, the field
of computer translation is alive and well—if anything, it is now entering what may prove
to be its truly golden era. But there would be no need to point this out if certain problems
from an earlier time had not raised lingering doubts about the overall feasibility of the
field. Just as other authors have stressed the positive side of various systems and
approaches, this chapter will attempt to deal with some of these doubts and questions,
both as they may apply here and now to those planning to work with computer translation
systems and also in a larger sense as they may be connected to some faulty notions about
language held by the general public and perhaps some system developers as well.
Explaining such doubts and limitations forthrightly can only help all concerned by
making clear what is likely—and what is less likely—to work for each individual user. It
can also clarify what the underlying principles and problems in this field have been and to
some extent remain.To begin with, the notion of computer translation is not new. Shortly
after World War II, at a time when no one dreamt that word processors, spreadsheets, or
drawing programs would be widely available, some of the computer's prime movers,
Turing, Weaver and Booth among them, were already beginning to think about
translation. (1) They saw this application mainly as a natural outgrowth of their wartime
code-breaking work, which had helped to defeat the enemy, and it never occurred to them
to doubt that computer translation was a useful and realizable goal.The growing need
to translate large bodies of technical information, heightened by an apparent shortage of
translators, was one factor in their quest. But perhaps just as influential was a coupling of
linguistic and cultural idealism, the belief that removing `language barriers' was a good
thing, something that would promote international understanding and ensure world peace.
Two related notions were surely that deep down all human beings must be basically
similar and that piercing the superstratum of language divisions could only be beneficial
by helping people to break through their superficial differences. (2) Underlying this
idealism was a further assumption that languages were essentially some kind of code that
could be cracked, that words in one tongue could readily be replaced by words saying the
same thing in another. Just as the key to breaking the Axis code had been found, so some
sort of linguistic key capable of unlocking the mysteries of language would soon be
discovered. All these assumptions would be sorely tested in the decades a
head.

Some Basic TermsSome of the most frequently used terms in this field,
though also defined elsewhere in the book, will help the reader in dealing with our
subject. It will quickly become evident that merely by providing these definitions, we will
also have touched upon some of the field's major problems and limitations, which can
then be explained in greater detail. For example, a distinction is frequently made between
Machine Translation (usually systems that produce rough text for a human translator to
revise) and Computer Assisted Translation devices (usually but not invariably software
designed to help translators do their work in an enhanced manner). These are often
abbreviated as MT and CAT respectively. So far both approaches require the assistance
or active collaboration to one extent or another of a live, human translator. Under
Machine Translation one finds a further distinction between Batch, Interactive, and
Interlingual Approaches. A Batch method has rules and definitions which help it `decide'
on the best translation for each word as it goes along. It prints or displays the entire text
thus created with no help from the translator (who need not even be present but who
nonetheless may often end up revising it). An Interactive system pauses to consult with
the translator on various words or asks for further clarification. This distinction is blurred
by the fact that some systems can operate in either batch or interactive mode. The so-
called Interlingual approach operates on the theory that one can devise an intermediate
`language'—in at least one case a form of Esperanto—that can encode sufficient linguistic
information to serve as a universal intermediate stage—or pivot point—enabling
translation back and forth between numerous pairs of languages, despite linguistic or
cultural differences. Some skepticism has been voiced about this approach, and to date no
viable Interlingual system has been unveiled.
Batch and Interactive systems are sometimes also referred to as Transfer methods to
differentiate them from Interlingual theories, because they concentrate on a trade or
transfer of meaning based on an analysis of one language pair alone. I have tried to make
these distinctions as clear as possible, and they do apply to a fair extent to the emerging
PC-based scene. At the higher end on mini and mainframe computers, there is however a
certain degree of overlap between these categories, frequently making it difficult to say
where CAT ends and MT begins.

Another distinction is between pre-editing (limiting the extent of vocabulary

beforehand so to help the computer) and post-editing (cleaning up its errors afterwards).
Usually only one is necessary, though this will depend on how perfect a translation is
sought by a specific client. "Pre-editing" is also used to mean simply checking the text to
be translated beforehand so as to add new words and expressions to the system's
dictionary. The work devoted to this type of pre-editing can save time in post-editing
later. A more extreme form of pre-editing is known as Controlled Language, whose
severely limited vocabulary is used by a few companies to make MT as foolproof as
possible.Advocates of MT often point out that many texts do not require perfect
translations, which leads us to our next distinction, between output intended for
Information-Only Skimming by experts able to visualize the context and discount errors,
and `Full-Dress' Translations, for those unable to do either. One term that keeps showing
up is FAHQT for Fully Automatic High Quality Translation, which most in the field now
concede is not possible (though the idea keeps creeping in again through the back door in
claims made for some MT products and even some research projects). (3) Closer to
current reality would be such descriptions as FALQT (Fully Automatic Low Quality
Translation) and PAMQT (Partly Automatic Medium Quality Translation). Together,
these three terms cover much of the spectrum offered by these systems.

Also often encountered in the literature are percentage claims purportedly

grading the efficiency of computer translation systems. Thus, one language pair may be
described as `90% accurate' or `95% accurate' or occasionally only `80% accurate.' The
highest claim I have seen so far is `98% accurate.' Such ratings may have more to do with
what one author has termed spreading `innumeracy' than with any meaningful standards
of measurement. (4) On a shallow level of criticism, even if we accepted a claim of 98%
accuracy at face value (and even if it could be substantiated), this would still mean that
every standard double-spaced typed page would contain five errors—potentially deep
substantive errors, since computers, barring a glitch, never make simple mistakes in
spelling or punctuation.It is for the reader to decide whether such an error level is
tolerable in texts that may shape the cars we drive, the medicines and chemicals we take
and use, the peace treaties that bind our nations. As for 95% accuracy, this would mean
one error on every other line of a typical page, while with 90% accuracy we are down to
one error in every line. Translators who have had to post-edit such texts tend to agree that
with percentage claims of 90% or less it is easiest to have a human translator start all over
again from the original text.
On a deeper level, claims of 98% accuracy may be even more misleading—does such a
claim in fact mean that the computer has mastered 98% of perfectly written English or
rather 98% of minimally acceptable English? Is it possible that 98% of the latter could
turn out to be 49% of the former? There is a great difference between the two, and so far
these questions have not been addressed. Thus, we can see how our brief summary of
terms has already given us a bird's eye view of oursubject.

Practical limitations
There are six important variables in any decision to use a computer for translation:
speed, subject matter, desired level of accuracy, consistency of translation, volume, and
expense,. These six determinants can in some cases be merged harmoniously together in a
single task, but they will at least as frequently tend to clash. Let's take a brief look at
each:

1. Speed. This is an area where the computer simply excels—one mainframe system
boasts 700 pages of raw output per night (while translators are sleeping), and other
systems are equally prodigious. How raw the output actually is—and how much post-
editing will be required, another factor of speed—will depend on how well the computer
has been primed to deal with the technical vocabulary of the text being translated. Which
brings us to our second category:

2. Subject matter. Here too the computer has an enormous advantage, provided a great
deal of work has already gone into codifying the vocabulary of the technical field and
entering it into the computer's dictionary. Thus, translations of aeronautical material from
Russian to English can be not only speedy but can perhaps even graze the "98% accurate"
target, because intensive work over several decades has gone into building up this
vocabulary. If you are translating from a field whose computer vocabulary has not yet
been developed, you may have to devote some time to bringing its dictionaries up to a
more advanced level. Closely related to this factor is:

3. Desired level of accuracy. We have already mentioned the former in referring to the
difference between Full-Dress Translations and work needed on an Information-Only
basis. If the latter is sufficient, only slight post-editing—or none at all—may be required,
and considerable cash savings can be the result. If a Full-Dress Translation is required,
however, then much post-editing may be in order and there may turn out to be—
depending once again on the quality of the dictionaries—no appreciable savings.

4. Consistency of vocabulary. Here the computer rules supreme, always assuming that
correct prerequisite dictionary building has been done. Before computer translation was
readily available, large commercial jobs with a deadline would inevitably be farmed out
in pieces to numerous translators with perhaps something resembling a technical glossary
distributed among them. Sometimes the task of "standardizing" the final version could be
placed in the hands of a single person of dubious technical attainments. Even without the
added problem of a highly technical vocabulary, it should be obvious that no two
translators can be absolutely depended upon to translate the same text in precisely the
same way. The computer can fully exorcize this demon and insure that a specific
technical term has only one translation, provided that the correct translation has been
placed in its dictionary (and provided of course that only one term with only one
translation is used for this process or entity).5. Volume. From the foregoing, it should be
obvious that some translation tasks are best left to human beings. Any work of high or
even medium literary value is likely to fall into this category. But volume, along with
subject matter and accuracy, can also play a role. Many years ago a friend of mine
considered moving to Australia, where he heard that sheep farming was quite profitable
on either a very small or a very large scale. Then he learned that a very small scale meant
from 10,000 to 20,000 head of sheep, a very large one meant over 100,000. Anything else
was a poor prospect, and so he ended up staying at home. The numbers are different for
translation, of course, and vary from task to task and system to system, but the principle
is related. In general, there will be—all other factors being almost equal—a point at
which the physical size of a translation will play a role in reaching a decision. Would-be
users should carefully consider how all the factors we have touched upon may affect their
own needs and intentions. Thus, the size and scope of a job can also determine whether or
not you may be better off using a computer alone, some computer-human combination, or
having human translators handle it for you from the start. One author proposes 8,000
pages per year in a single technical specialty with a fairly standardized vocabulary as
minimum requirements for translating text on a mainframe system. (7) Expense.Given the
computer's enormous speed and its virtually foolproof vocabulary safeguards, one would
expect it to be a clear winner in this area. But for all the reasons we have already
mentioned, this is by no means true in all cases. The last word is far from having been
written here, and one of the oldest French companies in this field has just recently gotten
around to ordering exhaustive tests comparing the expenses of computer and human
translation, taking all factors into account.(8)As we can see quite plainly, a number of
complications and limitations are already evident. Speed, wordage, expense, subject
matter, and accuracy/consistency of vocabulary may quickly become mutually clashing
vectors affecting your plans. If you can make allowances for all of them, then computer
translation can be of great use to you. If the decision-making process involved seems
prolonged and tortuous, it perhaps merely reflects the true state of the art not only of
computer translation but of our overall knowledge of how language really works. At least
some of the apparent confusion about this field may be caused by a gap between what
many people believe a computer should be able to do in this area and what it actually can
do at present. What many still believe (and have, as we shall see, continued to believe
over several decades, despite ample evidence to the contrary) is that a computer should
function as a simple black box: you enter a text in Language A on one side, and it slides
out written perfectly in Language B on the other. Or better still you read it aloud, and it
prints or even speaks it aloud in any other language you might desire.

This has not happened and, barring extremely unlikely developments, will not
happen in the near future, assuming our goal is an unerringly correct and fluent
translation. If we are willing to compromise on that goal and accept less than perfect
translations, or wish to translate texts within a very limited subject area or otherwise
restrict the vocabulary we use, then extremely useful results are possible. Some hidden
expenses may also be encountered—these can involve retraining translators to cooperate
with mainframe and mini computers and setting up electronic dictionaries to contain the
precise vocabulary used by a company or institution. Less expensive systems running on
a PC with built-in glossaries also require a considerable degree of customizing to work
most efficiently, since such smaller systems are far more limited in both vocabulary and
semantic resolving power than their mainframe
counterparts.Furthermore, not all translators are at present prepared to make the
adjustments in their work habits needed for such systems to work at their maximum
efficiency. And even those able to handle the transition may not be temperamentally
suited to make such systems function at their most powerful level. All attempts to
introduce computer translation systems into the work routine depend on some degree of
adjustment by all concerned, and in many cases such adjustment is not easy. Savings in
time or money are usually only achieved at the end of such periods. Sometimes everyone
in a company, from executives down to stock clerks, will be obliged to change their
accustomed vocabularies to some extent to accommodate the new system. Such a process
can on occasion actually lead, however, to enhanced communication within a company.

 Deeper Limitations

NOTE: This section explains how changing standards in the study of linguistics may be
related to the limitations in Machine Translation we see today and perhaps prefigure
certain lines of development in this field. Those only interested in the practical side may
safely skip this section.

Some practical limitations of MT and even of CAT should already be clear

enough. Less evident are the limitations in some of the linguistic theories which have
sired much of the work in this field. On the whole Westerners are not accustomed to
believing that problems may be insoluble, and after four decades of labor, readers might
suppose that more progress had been made in this field than appears to be the case. To
provide several examples at once, I can remember standing for some time by the display
booth of a prominent European computer translation firm during a science conference at
M.I.T. and listening to the comments of passers-by. I found it dismaying to overhear the
same attitudes voiced over and over again by quite sane and reasonable representatives
from government, business and education. Most of what I heard could be summed up as
1) Language can't really be that complex since we all speak it; 2) Language, like nature, is
an alien environment which must be conquered and tamed; 3) There has to be some
simple way to cut through all the nonsense about linguistics, syntax, and semantics and
achieve instant high quality translation; and 4) Why wasn't it all done yesterday?To
understand the reasons behind these comments and why they were phrased in this
particular way—and also to understand the deeper reasons behind the limitations of
computer translation—t may be helpful to go back to the year 1944, when the first
stirrings of current activity were little evident and another school of linguistics ruled all
but supreme. In that year Leonard Bloomfield—one of the three deans of American
Linguistics along with Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf (7)—was struggling to
explain a problem that greatly perturbed him.Bloomfield was concerned with what he
called `Secondary Responses to Language.' By these he meant the things people say and
seem to believe about language, often in an uninformed way. He called such opinions
about language `secondary' to differentiate them from the use of language in
communication, which he saw as `primary.' People delivering such statements, he
observed, are often remarkably alert and enthusiastic: their eyes grow bright, they tend to
repeat these opinions over and over again to anyone who will hear, and they simply will
not listen—even those who, like the ones I met at MIT, are highly trained and familiar
with scientific procedures—to informed points of view differing with their own. They are
overcome by how obvious or interesting their own ideas seem to be. (8)
I would add here that what Bloomfield seems to be describing is a set of symptoms
clinically similar to some forms of hysteria. As he put it:`It is only in recent years that I
have learned to observe these secondary ..... responses in anything like a systematic
manner, and I confess that I cannot explain them—that is, correlate them with anything
else. The explanation will doubtless be a matter of psychology and sociology.' (9)If it is
indeed hysteria, as Bloomfield seems to suggest, I wonder if it might not be triggered
because some people, when their ideas about language are questioned or merely held up
for discussion, feel themselves under attack at the very frontier of their knowledge about
reality. For many people language is so close to what they believe that they are no longer
able to tell the difference between reality and the language they use to describe it. It is an
unsettling experience for them, one they cannot totally handle, somewhat like tottering on
the edge of their recognized universe. The relationship between one's language habits and
one's grasp of reality has not been adequately explored, perhaps because society does not
yet train a sufficient number of bilingual, multilingual or linguistically oriented people
qualified to undertake such investigations. (10)Bloomfield went even further to define
`tertiary responses to language' as innately hostile, angry, or contemptuous comments
from those whose Secondary Responses are questioned in any serious way. They would
be simply rote answers or rote repetitions of people's `secondary' statements whenever
they were challenged on them, as though they were not capable of reasoning any further
about them. Here he seemed to be going even further in identifying these responses with
irrational or quasi-hysterical behavior.What was it that Bloomfield found so worrisome
about such opinions on language? Essentially he—along with Whorf and Sapir—had
spent all his life building what most people regarded as the `science of linguistics.' It was
a study which required extended field work and painstaking analysis of both exotic and
familiar languages before one was permitted to make any large generalizations even
about a single language, much less about languages in general. Closely allied to the
anthropology of Boas and Malinowski, it insisted on careful and thoughtful observations
and a non-judgmental view of different cultures and their languages. It was based on
extremely high standards of training and scholarship and could not immediately be
embraced by society at large. In some ways he and his colleagues had gone off on their
own paths, and not everyone was able to follow them. Whorf and Sapir had in fact both
died only a few years earlier, and Bloomfield himself would be gone five years later.
Here are a few of the `secondary' statements that deeply pained Bloomfield and his
generation of linguists:

Language A is more _____ than language B. (.........`logical,' `profound,' `poetic,'

`efficient,' etc., fill in the blank yourself) The structure of Language C proves that it is a
universal language, and everyone should learn it as a basis for studying other
languages.Language D and Language E are so closely related that all their speakers can
always easily understand each other.Language F is extremely primitive and can only have
a few hundred words in it.Language G is demonstrably `better' than Languages H, J, and
L.The word for `________' (choose almost any word) in Language M proves
scientifically that it is a worse—better, more `primitive' or `evolved,' etc.—language than
Language N.Any language is easy to master, once you learn the basic structure all
languages are built on.

  Summarized from Bloomfield, 1944, pp. 413-21

All of these statements are almost always demonstrably false upon closer
knowledge of language and linguistics, yet such opinions are still quite commonly voiced.
In this same piece Bloomfield also voiced his sadness over continual claims that `pure
Elizabethan English' was spoken in this or that region of the American South (a social
and historical impossibility—at best such dialects contain a few archaic phrases) or boasts
that the Sequoyan Indian language was so perfect and easy to learn that all citizens of the
State of Oklahoma should study it in school. (11) What he found particularly disturbing
was that this sort of linguistic folklore never seemed to die out, never yielded to scientific
knowledge, simply went on and on repropagating itself with a life of its own. Traces of it
could even be found in the work of other scholars writing about language and
linguistics.Bloomfield's views were very much a reflection of his time. They stressed a
relativistic view of language and culture and the notion that languages spoken by small
indigenous groups of people had a significance comparable to that of languages spoken
by much larger populations. They willingly embraced the notion that language, like
reality itself, is a complex matrix of factors and tended to reject simplistic generalizations
of any sort about either language or culture. Moreover, Bloomfield certainly saw his
approach as being a crucial minimum stage for building any kind of true linguistic
science.Less than ten years after his death these ideas were replaced, also in the name of
science, by a set of different notions, which Bloomfield would have almost certainly have
dismissed as `Secondary Responses to Language.' These new observations, which shared
a certain philosophical groundwork with computational linguistics, constitute the credo of
the Chomskian approach, now accepted as the dominant scientific view. They include the
following notions:

All languages are related by a `universal grammar.'

It is possible to delineate the meaning of any sentence in any language through

knowledge of its deep structure and thereby replicate it in another language.A diagram of
any sentence will reveal this deep structure.Any surface level sentence in any language
can easily be related to its deep structure, and this in turn can be related to universal
grammar in a relatively straightforward manner through a set of rules.These and related
statements are sufficient to describe not only the structure of language but the entire
linguistic process of development and acculturation of infants and young children
everywhere and can thus serve as a guide to all aspects of human language, including
speech, foreign language training, and translation.

The similarity of these deep and surface level diagrams to the structure of
computer languages, along with the purported similarity of the human mind to a
computer, may be profoundly significant. (12)These ideas are clearly not ones
Bloomfield could have approved of. They are not relativistic or cautious but universalist
and all-embracing, they do not emphasize the study of individual languages and cultures
but leap ahead into stunning generalizations. As such, he would have considered them
examples of `Secondary Responses' to language. In many ways they reflect the America
of the late 'Fifties, a nation proud of its own new-found dominance and convinced that its
values must be more substantial than those of `lesser' peoples. Such ideas also coincide
nicely with a seemingly perennial need academia feels for theories offering a seemingly
scientific approach, suggestive diagrams, learned jargon, and a grandiose vision.We all
know that science progresses by odd fits and starts and that the supreme doctrines of one
period may become the abandoned follies of a later one. But the turnabout we have
described is surely among the most extreme on record. It should also be stressed that the
outlook of Bloomfield, Whorf and Sapir has never truly been disproved or rejected and
still has followers today. (13) Moreover, there is little viable proof that these newer ideas,
while they may have been useful in describing the way children learn to speak, have ever
helped a single teacher to teach languages better or a single translator to translate more
effectively. Nor has anyone ever succeeded in truly defining `deep structure' or `universal
grammar.'No one can of course place the whole responsibility for machine translation
today on Noam Chomsky's theories about language—certainly his disciples and followers
(14) have also played a role, as has the overall welcome this entire complex of ideas has
received. Furthermore, their advent has certainly also coincided with the re-emergence of
many other `Secondary Responses', including most of the comments I mentioned
overhearing at M.I.T. Much of the literature on Machine Translation has owed—and
continues to owe—a fair amount to this general approach to linguistic theory. Overall
understanding of language has certainly not flourished in recent times, and the old wives'
tale of a single magical language providing the key to the understanding of all other
tongues now flourishes again as a tribute both to Esperanto and the Indian Aymara
language of Peru. (15) Disappointment with computer translation projects has also been
widespread throughout this time, and at one point even Chomsky seemingly washed his
hands of the matter, stating that `as for machine translation and related enterprises, they
seemed to me pointless as well as probably quite hopeless.' (16)Even such lofty notions
as those favored by Turing and Weaver, that removing `language barriers' would
necessarily be a good thing, or that different languages prevent people from realizing that
they are `really all the same deep down,' could turn out to be `Secondary Responses.' It
may also be that language barriers and differences have their uses and virtues, and that
enhanced linguistic skills may better promote world peace than a campaign to destroy
such differences. But popular reseeding of such notions is, as Bloomfield foresaw, quite
insidious, and most of these ideas are still very much with us, right along with the proof
that they may be unattainable. This is scarcely to claim that the end is near for computers
as translation tools, though it may mean that further progress along certain lines of
enquiry is unlikely.

There are probably two compelling sets of reasons why computers can never claim the
upper hand over language in all its complexity, one rooted in the cultural side of
language, the other in considerations related to mathematics. Even if the computer were
suddenly able to communicate meaning flawlessly, it would still fall short of what
humans do with language in a number of ways. This is because linguists have long been
aware that communication of meaning is only one among many functions of language.
Others are:Demonstrating one's class status to the person one is speaking or writing to.
Simply venting one's emotions, with no real communication intended.
Establishing non-hostile intent with strangers, or simply passing time with them.
Telling jokes.Engaging in non-communication by intentional or accidental ambiguity,
sometimes also called `telling lies.'Two or more of the above
(including communication) at once.Under these circumstances it becomes very difficult
to explain how a computer can be programmed merely to recognize and distinguish these
functions in Language A, much less make all the adjustments necessary to translate them
into Language B. As we have seen, computers have problems simply with the
communications side, not to mention all these other undeniable aspects of language. This
would be hard enough with written texts, but with spoken or `live' language, the problems
become all but insurmountable.

Closely related here is a growing awareness among writers and editors that it is
virtually impossible to separate the formulation of even the simplest sentence in any
language from the audience to whom it is addressed. Said another way, when the
audience changes, the sentence changes. Phrased even more extremely, there is no such
thing as a `neutral' or `typical' or `standard' sentence—even the most seemingly
innocuous examples will be seen on closer examination to be directed towards one
audience or another, whether by age, education, class, profession, size of vocabulary, etc.
While those within the target audience for any given sentence will assume its meaning is
obvious to all, those on its fringes must often make a conscious effort to absorb it, and
those outside its bounds may understand nothing at all. This is such an everyday
occurrence that it is easy to forget how common it really is. And this too adds a further
set of perplexities for translators to unravel, for they must duplicate not only the
`meaning' but also the specialized `angling' to an analogous audience in the new
language. Perhaps the most ironic proof of this phenomenon lies in the nature of the
`model' sentences chosen by transformational and computational linguists to prove their
points. Such sentences rarely reflect general usage—they are often simply the kinds of
sentences used by such specialists to impress other specialists in the same field.

Further proof is provided here by those forms of translation often described as

`impossible,' even when performed by humans—stageplays, song lyrics, advertising,
newspaper headlines, titles of books or other original works, and poetry. Here it is
generally conceded that some degree of adaptation may be merged with translation.
Theatre dialogue in particular demands a special level of `fidelity.' Sentences must be
pronounceable by actors as well as literally correct, and the emotional impact of the play
must be recreated as fully as possible. A joke in Language A must also become a joke in
Language B, even if it isn't. A constantly maintained dramatic build-up must seek its
relief or `punch-lines' at the right moments. This may seem far from the concerns of a
publication manager anxious to translate product documentation quickly and correctly.
But in a real sense all use of words is dependent on building towards specific points and
delivering `punch-lines' about how a product or process works. The difference is one of
degree, not of quality. It is difficult to imagine how computers can begin to cope with this
aspect of translation.Cross-cultural concerns add further levels of complexity, and no
miraculous `universal structure' (17) exists for handling them. Languages are simply not
orderly restructurings of each other's ideas and processes, and a story I have told
elsewhere (18) may perhaps best illustrate this. It relates to a real episode in my life when
my wife and I were living in Italy. At that time she did most of the shopping to help her
learn Italian, and she repeatedly came home complaining that she couldn't find certain
cuts of meat at the butcher's. I told her that if she concentrated on speaking better Italian,
she would certainly find them. But she still couldn't locate the cuts of meat she wanted.
Finally, I was forced to abandon my male presumption of bella figura and go with her to
the market place, where I patiently explained in Italian what it was we were looking for to
one butcher after the next. But even together we were still not successful. What we
wanted actually turned out not to exist.

The Italians cut their meat differently than we do. There are not only different
names for the cuts but actually different cuts as well. Their whole system is built around
it—they feed and breed their cattle differently so as to produce these cuts. So one might
argue that the Italian steer itself is different—technically and anatomically, it might just
qualify as a different subspecies.This notion of `cutting the animal differently' or of
`slicing reality differently' can turn out to be a factor in many translation problems. It is
altogether possible for whole sets of distinctions, indeed whole ranges of psychological
—or even tangible—realities to vanish when going from one language to another. Those
which do not vanish may still be mangled beyond recognition. It is this factor which
poses one of the greatest challenges even for experienced translators. It may also place an
insurmountable stumbling block in the path of computer translation projects, which are
based on the assumption that simple conversions of obvious meanings between languages
are readily possible.Another cross-cultural example concerns a well-known wager AI
pioneer Marvin Minsky has made with his M.I.T. students. Minsky has challenged them
to create a program or device that can unfailingly tell the difference, as humans
supposedly can, between a cat and a dog. Minsky has made many intriguing remarks on
the relation between language and reality, (19) but he shows in this instance that he has
unwittingly been manipulated by language-imposed categories. The difference between a
cat and a dog is by no means obvious, and even `scientific' Linnaean taxonomy may not
provide the last word. The Tzeltal Indians of Mexico's Chiapas State in fact classify some
of our `cats' in the `dog' category, rabbits and squirrels as `monkeys,' and a more doglike
tapir as a `cat,' thus proving in this case that whole systems of animals can be sliced
differently. Qualified linguistic anthropologists have concluded that the Tzeltal system of
naming animals—making allowance for the fact that they know only the creatures of their
region—is ultimately just as useful and informative as Linnaean latinisms and even
includes information that the latter may omit. (20) Comparable examples from other
cultures are on record.(21)An especially dramatic cross-cultural
example suggests that at least part of the raging battle as to whether acupuncture and the
several other branches of Chinese Medicine can qualify as `scientific' springs from the
linguistic shortcomings of Western observers. The relationships concerning illness the
Chinese observe and measure are not the ones we observe, their measurements and
distinctions are not the same as ours, their interpretation of such distinctions are quite
different from ours, the diagnosis suggested by these procedures is not the same, and the
treatment and interpretation of a patient's progress can also radically diverge from our
own. Yet the whole process is perfectly logical and consistent in its own terms and is
grounded in an empirical procedure. (18) The vocabulary is fiendishly difficult to explain
to non-specialists in this highly developed branch of the Chinese language. No one knows
how many other such instances of large and small discontinuities between languages and
their meanings may exist, even among more closely related tongues like French and
English, and no one can judge how great an effect such discontinuities may have on
larger relationships between the two societies or even on ordinary conversations between
their all too human representatives.

Just as the idea that the earth might be round went against the grain for the
contemporaries of Columbus, so the notion that whole ranges of knowledge and
experience may be inexpressible as one moves from one language to another seems
equally outrageous to many today. Such a notion, that Language A cannot easily and
perfectly replicate what is said in Language B, simply goes against what most people
regard as `common sense.' But is such insistence truly commonsensical or merely another
instance of Bloomfield's `Secondary Responses?' Something like this question lies at the
root of the long-continuing and never fully resolved debate among linguists concerning
the so-called Whorf-Sapir hypothesis. Mathematical evidence suggesting that computers
can never fully overtake language is quite persuasive. It is also in part fairly simple and
lies in a not terribly intricate consideration of the theory of sets. No subset can be larger
than the set of which it is a part. Yet all of mathematics—and in fact all of science and
technology, as members of a Linguistics school known as Glossematics (22) have argued
—can be satisfactorily identified as a subcategory—and possibly a subset—of language.
According to this reasoning, no set of its components can ever be great enough to serve as
a representation of the superset they belong to, namely language. Allowing for the
difficulties involved in determining the members of such sets, this argument by analogy
alone would tend to place language and translation outside the limits of solvable
problems and consign them to the realm of the intractable and undecidable. (23)The
theory of sets has further light to shed. Let us imagine all the words of Language A as
comprising a single set, within which each word is assigned a number. Now let us
imagine all the words of Language B as comprising a single set, with numbers once again
assigned to each word. We'll call them Set A and Set B. If each numbered word within
Set A meant exactly the same thing as each word with the same number in Set B,
translation would be no problem at all, and no professional translators would be needed.
Absolutely anyone able to read would be able to translate any text between these two
languages by looking up the numbers for the words in the first language and then
substituting the words with the same numbers in the second language. It would not even
be necessary to know either language. And computer translation in such a case would be
incredibly easy, a mere exercise in `search and replace,' immediately putting all the
people searching through books of words and numbers out of
business.But the sad reality of the matter—and the real truth behind Machine
Translation efforts—is that Word # 152 in Language A does not mean exactly what Word
# 152 in Language B means. In fact, you may have to choose between Words 152, 157,
478, and 1,027 to obtain a valid translation. It may further turn out that Word 152 in
Language B can be translated back into Language A not only as 152 but also 149, 462,
and 876. In fact, Word # 152 in Language B may turn out to have no relation to Word #
152 in Language A at all. This is because 47 words with lower numbers in Language B
had meanings that spilled over into further numbered listings. It could still be argued that
all these difficulties could be sorted out by complex trees of search and goto commands.
But such altogether typical examples are only the beginning of the problems faced by
computational linguists, since words are rarely used singly or in a vacuum but are strung
together in thick, clammy strings of beads according to different rules for different
languages. Each bead one uses influences the number, shape, and size of subsequent
beads, so that each new word in a Language A sentence compounds the problems of
translation into Language B by an extremely non-trivial factor, with a possible final total
exceeding by several orders of magnitude the problems confronted by those who program
computers for the game of chess.There are of course some real technical experts, the
linguistic equivalents of Chess Grand Masters, who can easily determine most of the time
what the words mean in Language A and how to render them most correctly in Language
B. These experts are called translators, though thus far no one has attributed to them the
power or standing of Chess Masters. Another large irony: so far the only people who have
proved capable of manipulating the extremely complex systems originally aimed at
replacing translators have been, in fact.....translators.

Translators and MT Developers: Mutual Criticisms

None of the preceding necessarily makes the outlook for Machine Translation or
Computer Aided Translation all that gloomy or unpromising. This is because most
developers in this field long ago accepted the limitations of having to produce systems
that can perform specific tasks under specific conditions. What prospective users must
determine, as I have sought to explain, is whether those conditions are also their
conditions. Though there have been a few complaints of misrepresentation, this is a
situation most MT and CAT developers are prepared to live with. What they are not ready
to deal with (and here let's consider their viewpoint) is the persistence of certain old
wives' tales about the flaws of computer translation.The most famous of these, they will
point out with some ire, are the ones about the expressions `the spirit is willing, but the
flesh is weak' or `out of sight, out of mind' being run through the computer and coming
out `the vodka is good, but the meat is rotten' and `invisible idiot' respectively. There is
no evidence for either anecdote, they will protest, and they may well be right. Similar
stories circulate about `hydraulic rams' becoming `water goats' or the headline `Company
Posts Sizeable Growth' turning into `Guests Mail Large Tumor.' Yet such resentment may
be somewhat misplaced. The point is not whether such and such a specific mistranslation
ever occurred but simply that the general public—the same public equally prepared to
believe that `all languages share a universal structure'—is also ready to believe that such
mistranslations are likely to occur. In any case, these are at worst only slightly edited
versions of fairly typical MT errors—for instance, I recently watched a highly regarded
PC-based system render a `dead key' on a keyboard (touche morte) as `death touch.' I
should stress that there are perfectly valid logical and human reasons why such errors
occur, and that they are at least as often connected to human as to computer error. There
are also perfectly reasonable human ways of dealing with the computer to avoid many of
these errors.

The point is that the public is really quite ambivalent—even fickle—not just
about computer translation but about computers in general, indeed about much of
technology. Lacking Roman gladiators to cheer, they will gladly applaud at the
announcement that computers have now vanquished all translation problems but just as
readily turn thumbs down on hearing tales of blatant mistranslations. This whole
ambivalence is perhaps best demonstrated by a recent popular film where an early model
of a fully robotized policeman is brought into a posh boardroom to be approved by
captains of industry. The Board Chairman instructs an impeccably clad flunky to test the
robot by pointing a pistol towards it. Immediately the robot intones `If you do not drop
your weapon within twenty seconds, I will take punitive measures.' Naturally the flunky
drops his gun, only to hear `If you do not drop your weapon within ten seconds, I will
take punitive measures.' Some minutes later they manage to usher the robot out and clean
up what is left of the flunky. Such attitudes towards all computerized products are
widespread and coexist with the knowledge of how useful computers can be. Developers
of computer translation systems should not feel that they are being singled out for
criticism.These same developers are also quite ready to voice their own criticisms of
human translators, some of them justified. Humans who translate, they will claim, are too
inconsistent, too slow, or too idealistic and perfectionist in their goals. It is of course
perfectly correct that translators are often inconsistent in the words they choose to
translate a given expression. Sometimes this is inadvertent, sometimes it is a matter of
conscious choice. In many Western languages we have been taught not to repeat the same
word too often: thus, if we say the European problem in one sentence, we are encouraged
to say the European question or issue elsewhere. This troubles some MT people, though
computers could be programmed easily enough to emulate this mannerism. We also have
many fairly similar ways of saying quite close to the same thing, and this also impresses
some MT people as a fault, mainly because it is difficult to program for.

This whole question could lead to a prolonged and somewhat technical discussion
of "disambiguation," or how and when to determine which of several meanings a word or
phrase may have—or for that matter of how a computer can determine when several
different ways of saying something may add up to much the same thing. Though the
computer can handle the latter more readily than the former, it is perhaps best to assume
that authors of texts will avoid these two extreme shoals of "polysemy" and "polygraphy"
(or perhaps "polyepeia") and seek out the smoother sailing of more standardized
usage.Perhaps the most impressive experiments on how imperfect translation can become
were carried out by the French several decades ago. A group of competent French and
English translators and writers gathered together and translated various brief literary
passages back and forth between the two languages a number of times. The final results
of such a process bore almost no resemblance to the original, much like the game played
by children sitting in a circle, each one whispering words just heard to the neighbor on
the right. (24) Here too the final result bears little resemblance to the original words.

The criticisms of slowness and perfectionism/idealism are related to some extent.

While the giant computers used by the C.I.A. and N.S.A. can of course spew out raw
translation at a prodigious rate, this is our old friend Fully Automatic Low Quality output
and must be edited to be clear to any but an expert in that specialty. There is at present no
evidence suggesting that a computer can turn out High Quality text at a rate faster than a
human—indeed, humans may in some cases be faster than a computer, if FAHQT is the
goal. The claim is heard in some MT circles than human translators can only handle 200
to 500 words per hour, which is often true, but some fully trained translators can do far
better. I know of many translators who can handle from 800 to 1,000 words per hour
(something I can manage under certain circumstances with certain texts) and have
personally witnessed one such translator use a dictating machine to produce between
3,000 and 4,000 words per hour (which of course then had to be fed to typists).Human
ignorance—not just about computers but about how languages really work—creeps in
here again. Many translators report that their non-translating colleagues believe it should
be perfectly possible for a translator to simply look at a document in Language A and
`just type it out' in flawless Language B as quickly as though it were the first language. If
human beings could do this, then there might be some hope for computers to do it too.
Here again we have an example of Bloomfield's Secondary Responses to Language, the
absolute certainty that any text in one language is exactly the same in another, give or
take some minimal word juggling. There will be no general clarity about computer
translation until there is also a greatly enhanced general clarity about what languages are
and how they work.

In all of this the translator is rarely perceived as a real person with specific
professional problems, as a writer who happens to specialize in foreign languages. When
MT systems are introduced, the impetus is most often to retrain and/or totally reorganize
the work habits of translators or replace them with younger staff whose work habits have
not yet been formed, a practice likely to have mixed results in terms of staff morale and
competence. Another problem, in common with word processing, is that no two
translating systems are entirely alike, and a translator trained on one system cannot fully
apply experience gained on one to another. Furthermore, very little effort is made to
persuade translators to become a factor in their own self-improvement. Of any three
translators trained on a given system, only one at best will work to use the system to its
fullest extent and maximize what it has to offer. Doing so requires a high degree of self-
motivation and a willingness to improvise glossary entries and macros that can speed up
work. Employees clever enough to do such things are also likely to be upwardly mobile,
which may mean soon starting the training process all over again, possibly with someone
less able. Such training also forces translators to recognize that they are virtually wedded
to creating a system that will improve and grow over time. This is a great deal to ask in
either America's fast-food job market or Europe's increasingly mobile work environment.
Some may feel it is a bit like singling out translators and asking them to willingly declare
their life-long serfdom to a machine.And the Future?Computer translation developers
prefer to ignore many of the limitations I have suggested, and they may yet turn out to be
right. What MT proponents never stop emphasizing is the three-fold increase in computer
capacity awaiting us in the not so distant future: increasing computer power, rapidly
dwindling size, and plummeting prices. Here they are undoubtedly correct, and they are
also probably correct in pointing out the vast increase in computer power that advanced
multi-processing and parallel processing can bring. Equally impressive are potential
improvements in the field of Artificial Intelligence, allowing for the construction of far
larger rule-based systems likely to be able to make complicated choices between words
and expressions. (25) Neural Nets (26), along with their Hidden Markov Model cousins
(27), also loom on the horizon with their much publicized ability to improvise decisions
in the face of incomplete or inaccurate data. And beyond that stretches the prospect of
nanotechnology, (28) an approach that will so miniaturize computer pathways as to single
out individual atoms to perform tasks now requiring an entire circuit. All but the last are
already with us, either now in use or under study by computer companies or university
research projects. We also keep hearing early warnings of the imminent Japanese wave,
ready to take over at any moment and overwhelm us with all manner of `voice-writers,'
telephone-translators, and simultaneous computer-interpreters.

How much of this is simply more of the same old computer hype, with a
generous helping of Bloomfield's Secondary Responses thrown in? Perhaps the case of
the `voice-writer' can help us to decide. This device, while not strictly a translation tool,
has always been the audio version of the translator's black box: you say things into the
computer, and it immediately and flawlessly transcribes your words into live on-screen
sentences. In most people's minds, it would take just one small adjustment to turn this
into a translating device as well.In any case, the voice-writer has never materialized (and
perhaps never will), but the quest for it has now produced a new generation of what might
best be described as speaker-assisted speech processing systems. Though no voice-
writers, these systems are quite useful and miraculous enough in their own way. As you
speak into them at a reasonable pace, they place on the screen their best guess for each
word you say, along with a menu showing the next best guesses for that word. If the
system makes a mistake, you can simply tell it to choose another number on the menu. If
none of the words shown is yours, you still have the option of spelling it out or keying it
in. This ingenious but relatively humble device, I predict, will soon take its place as a
useful tool for some translators. This is because it is user-controlled rather than user-
supplanting and can help those translators who already use dictation as their means of
transcribing text. Those who lose jobs because of it will not be translators but typists and
secretaries.

Whenever one discovers such a remarkable breakthrough as these voice systems, one is
forced to wonder if just such a breakthrough may be in store for translation itself, whether
all one's reasons to the contrary may not be simply so much rationalization against the
inevitable. After due consideration, however, it still seems to me that such a breakthrough
is unlikely for two further reasons beyond those already given. First, the very nature of
this voice device shows that translators cannot be replaced, simply because it is the
speaker who must constantly be on hand to determine if the computer has chosen the
correct word, in this case in the speaker's native language.
How much more necessary does it then become to have someone authoritative nearby, in
this case a translator, to ensure that the computer chooses correctly amidst all the
additional choices imposed where two languages are concerned? And second, really a
more generalized way of expressing my first point, whenever the suspicion arises that a
translation of a word, paragraph, or book may be substandard, there is only one arbiter
who can decide whether this is or is not the case: another translator. There are no data
bases, no foreign language matching programs, no knowledge-engineered expert systems
sufficiently supple and grounded in real world knowledge to take on this job. Writers who
have tried out any of the so-called "style-checking" and "grammar-checking" programs
for their own languages have some idea of how much useless wheel-spinning such
programs can generate for a single tongue and so can perhaps imagine what an equivalent
program for "translation-checking" would be like.
Perhaps such a program could work with a severely limited vocabulary, but there would
be little point to it, since it would only be measuring the accuracy of those texts
computers could already translate. Based on current standards, such programs would at
best produce verbose quantities of speculations which might exonerate a translation from
error but could not be trusted to separate good from bad translators except in the most
extreme cases. It could end up proclaiming as many false negatives as false positives and
become enshrined as the linguistic equivalent of the lie detector. And if a computer
cannot reliably check the fidelity of an existing translation, how can it create a faithful
translation in the first place?Which brings me almost to my final point: no matter what
gargantuan stores of raw computer power may lie before us, no matter how many
memory chips or AI rules or neural nets or Hidden Markov Models or self-programming
atoms we may lay end to end in vast arrays or stack up in whatever conceivable
architecture the human mind may devise, our ultimate problem remains 1) to represent,
adequately and accurately, the vast interconnections between the words of a single
language on the one hand and reality on the other, 2) to perform the equivalent task with a
second language, and 3) to completely and correctly map out all the interconnections
between them. This is ultimately a linguistic problem and not an electronic one at all, and
most people who take linguistics seriously have been racking their brains over it for years
without coming anywhere near a solution.Computers with limitless power will be able to
do many things today's computers cannot do. They can provide terminologists with
virtually complete lists of all possible terms to use, they can branch out into an
encyclopedia of all related terms, they can provide spot logic checking of their own
reasoning processes, they can even list the rules which guide them and cite the names of
those who devised the rules and the full text of the rules themselves, along with extended
scholarly citations proving why they are good rules. But they cannot reliably make the
correct choice between competing terms in the great majority of cases. In programming
terms, there is no shortage of ways to input various aspects of language nor of theories on
how this should be done—what is lacking is a coherent notion of what must be output and
to whom, of what should be the ideal `front-end' for a computer translation system.
Phrased more impressionistically, all these looming new approaches to computing may
promise endless universes of artificial spider's webs in which to embed knowledge about
language, but will the real live spiders of language—words, meaning, trust, conflict,
emotion—actually be willing to come and live in them?And yet Bloomfieldian responses
are heard again: there must be some way around all these difficulties. Throughout the
world, industry must go on producing and selling—no sooner is one model of a machine
on the market than its successor is on the way, urgently requiring translations of owners'
manuals, repair manuals, factory manuals into a growing number of languages. This is the
driving engine behind computer translation that will not stop, the belief that there must be
a way to bypass, accelerate or outwit the translation stage. If only enough studies were
made, enough money spent, perhaps a full-scale program like those intended to conquer
space, to conquer the electron, DNA, cancer, the oceans, volcanoes and earthquakes.
Surely the conquest of something as seemingly puny as language cannot be beyond us.
But at least one computational linguist has taken a radically opposite stance:

A Manhattan project could produce an atomic bomb, and the heroic efforts of the
'Sixties could put a man on the moon, but even an all-out effort on the scale of these
would probably not solve the translation problem.

—Kay, 1982, p. 74

He goes on to argue that its solution will have to be reached incrementally if at all
and specifies his own reasons for thinking this can perhaps one day happen in at least
some sense:

The only hope for a thoroughgoing solution seems to lie with technology. But
this is not to say that there is only one solution, namely machine translation, in the classic
sense of a fully automatic procedure that carries a text from one language to another with
human intervention only in the final revision. There is in fact a continuum of ways in
which technology could be brought to bear, with fully automatic translation at one
extreme, and word-processing equipment and dictating machines at the other.

—Ibid.

The real truth may be far more sobering. As Bloomfield and his contemporaries
foresaw, language may be no puny afterthought of culture, no mere envelope of
experience but a major functioning part of knowledge, culture and reality, their processes
so interpenetrating and mutually generating as to be inseparable. In a sense humans may
live in not one but two jungles, the first being the tangible and allegedly real one with all
its trials and travails. But the second jungle is language itself, perhaps just as difficult to
deal with in its way as the first.At this point I would like to make it abundantly clear that I
am no enemy either of computers or computer translation. I spend endless hours at the
keyboard, am addicted to downloading all manner of strange software from bulletin
boards, and have even ventured into producing some software of my own. Since I also
love translation, it is natural that one of my main interests would lie at the intersection of
these two fields. Perhaps I risk hyperbole, but it seems to me that computer translation
ought to rank as one of the noblest of human undertakings, since in its broadest aspects it
attempts to understand, systematize, and predict not just one aspect of life but all of
human understanding itself. Measured against such a goal, even its shortcomings have a
great deal to tell us. Perhaps one day it will succeed in such a quest and lead us all out of
the jungle of language and into some better place. Until that day comes, I will be more
than happy to witness what advances will next be made.

Despite having expressed a certain pessimism, I foresee in fact a very optimistic

future for those computer projects which respect some of the reservations I have
mentioned and seek limited, reasonable goals in the service of translation. These will
include computer-aided systems with genuinely user-friendly interfaces, batch systems
which best deal with the problem of making corrections, and—for those translators who
dictate their work—the new voice processing systems I have mentioned. There also
seems to be considerable scope for using AI to resolve ambiguities in technical
translation with a relatively limited vocabulary. Beyond this, I am naturally describing
my reactions based on a specific moment in the development of computers and could of
course turn out to be quite mistaken. In a field where so many developments move with
such remarkable speed, no one can lay claim to any real omniscience, and so I will settle
at present for guarded optimism over specific improvements, which will not be long in
overtaking us.

Alex Gross served as a literary advisor to the Royal Shakespeare Company

during the 1960's, and his translations of Dürrenmatt and Peter Weiss have been
produced in London and elsewhere. He was awarded a two-year fellowship as writer-in-
residence by the Berliner Künstler-Programm, and one of his plays has been produced in
several German cities. He has spent twelve years in Europe and is fluent in French,
German, Italian and Spanish. He has published works related to the translation of
traditional Chinese medicine and is planning further work in this field. Two more recent
play translations were commissioned and produced by UBU Repertory Company in New
York, one of them as part of the official American celebration of the French
Revolutionary Bicentennial in 1989. Published play translations are The Investigation
(Peter Weiss, London, 1966, Calder & Boyars) and Enough Is Enough (Protais Asseng,
NYC, 1985, Ubu Repertory Co.). His experience with translation has also encompassed
journalistic, diplomatic and commercial texts, and he has taught translation as part of
NYU's Translation Certificate Program. In the last few years a number of his articles on
computers, translation, and linguistics have appeared in The United Kingdom, Holland,
and the US. He is the Chairperson of the Machine Translation Committee of the New
York Circle of Translators, is also an active member of the American Translators
Association, and has been involved in the presentatations and publications of both
groups. 

NOTES:

(1) In 1947 Alan Turing began work on his paper Intelligent Machinery, published
the following year. Based on his wartime experience in decoding German Naval
and General Staff messages, this work foresaw the use of `television cameras,
microphones, loudspeakers. wheels and "handling servo-mechanisms" as well as
some sort of "electric brain."' It would be capable of:
(i) Various games...
`(ii) The learning of languages
`(iii) Translation of languages (my emphasis)
`(iv) Cryptography
`(v) Mathematics'

(2) See especially Weaver.Further details on Turing's role are found in Hodges. The best
overview of this entire period, as well as of the entire history of translating computers, is
of course provided by Hutchins.
(3)Typical among these have been advertisements for Netherlands-based Distributed
Language Technology, which read in part: `DLT represents the safe route to truly
automatic translation: without assistance from bilinguals, polyglots, or post-editors. But
meeting the quality standards of professional translators—no less.....The aim is a
translation machine that understands, that knows how to tell sense from nonsense....In
this way, DLT will surpass the limitations of formal grammar or man-made
dictionaries.....' At various times during its long development, this system has boasted the
use of pre-editing, gigantic bilingual knowledge banks, an Esperanto Interlingual
architecture, Artificial Intelligence, and the ability to handle `a vast range of texts on
general and special subjects.' (Source: ads in Language Technology/Electric Word, in
most 1989 issues) On the research side, Jaime G. Carbonell and Masaru Tomita
announced in 1987 that Carnegie-Mellon University `has begun a project for the
development of a new generation of MT systems whose capabilities range far beyond the
current technology.' They further specified that with these systems, `.....unlike current MT
systems, no human translator should be required to check and correct the translated text.'
(Carbonell & Tomita) This treatment is found in Sergei Nirenburg's excellent though
somewhat technical anthology (Nirenburg).(4) According to an influential book
in the United States, `innumeracy' is as great a threat to human understanding as illiteracy
(Paulos).(5) `In the testing phase, some 5000 pages of documentation, in three types of
text, will be processed, and the results compared with human translation of the same text
in terms of quantity, time taken, deadlines met, and cost.' (Kingscott) This piece describes
the B'Vital/Ariane method now being used by the French documentation giant SITE. To
my knowledge, this is the first reasonably thorough test proposed comparing human and
machine translation. Yet it is limited to one system in one country under conditions
which, after the fact, will most probably be challenged by one party or another. Human
translators will certainly demand to know if full setup costs, on-the-job training courses,
and software maintenance expenses have been fully amortized. For their part, machine
translation advocates might conceivably ask how human translators were chosen for the
test and/or what level of training was provided. These are all questions which merit
further consideration if a fair discussion comparing computer and human translation is to
take place.(6)Newman, as included in Vasconcellos 1988a. In addition to this excellent
piece, those obtaining this volume will also want to read Jean Datta's candid advice on
why computer translation techniques should be introduced into a business or institution
slowly and carefully (Datta), Muriel Vasconcellos' own practical thoughts on where the
field is headed (Vasconcellos, 1988b), and Fred Klein's dose of healthy skepticism
(Klein).(7)Both Sapir and Whorf carried out extensive study of American Indian
languages and together evolved what has come to be called the Whorf-Sapir Hypothesis.
Briefly stated, this theory states that what humans see, do and know is to a greater or
lesser extent based on the structure of their language and the categories of thought it
encourages or excludes. The prolonged and spirited debate around this hypothesis has
largely centered on the meaning of the phrase to a greater or lesser extent. Even the
theory's most outright opponents concede it may have validity in some cases, though they
see something resembling strict determinism in applying it too broadly and point out that
translation between languages would not be possible if the Whorf-Sapir Hypothesis were
true. Defenders of the theory charge that its critics may not have learned any one
language thoroughly enough to become fully aware of how it can hobble and limit human
thinking and further reply that some translation tasks are far more difficult than others,
sometimes bordering on the impossible.(8) Bloomfield, Secondary and Tertiary
Responses to Language, in Hockett 1970 , pp: 412-29. This piece originally appeared in
Language 20.45-55 and was reprinted in Hockett 1970 and elsewhere. The author's major
work in the field of linguistics was Bloomfield 1933/1984.(9) Bloomfield, in Hockett
1970, page 420.(10)Since so many people in so many countries speak two or more
languages, it might be imagined that there is a broad, widely-shared body of accurate
knowledge about such people. In point of fact there is not, and the first reasonably
accessible book-length account of this subject is Grosjean. Some of this book's major
points, still poorly appreciated by society at large:

Relatively few bilingual people are able to translate between their two languages
with ease. Some who try complain of headaches, many cannot do it at all, many others do
it badly but are not aware of this. Thus, bilingualism and translation skills are two quite
different abilities, perhaps related to different neurological processes.No bilinguals
possess perfectly equal skills in both their languages. All favor the one or the other at
least slightly, whether in reading, writing, or speaking. Thus, the notion of being brought
up perfectly bilingual is a myth—much of bilingualism must be actively achieved in both
languages..One does not have to be born bilingual to qualify as such. Those who learn a
second language later, even as adults, can be considered bilingual to some extent,
provided they actively or passively use a second language in some area of their lives.(11)
Bloomfield, in Hockett 1970, pp. 414-16.(12)Though presented here in summarized form,
these ideas all form part of the well-known Chomskian process and can be found
elaborated in various stages of complexity in many works by Chomsky and his followers.
See Chomsky, 1957, 1965, & 1975.(13)The bloodied battlefields of past scholarly
warfare waged over these issues are easily enough uncovered. In 1968 Charles Hockett, a
noted follower of Bloomfield, launched a full-scale attack on Chomsky (Hockett, 1968)
Those who wish to follow this line of debate further can use his bibliography as a starting
point. Hostilities even spilled over into a New Yorker piece and a book of the same name
(Mehta). Other starting points are the works of Chomsky's teacher (Harris) or a unique
point of view related to computer translation by Lehmann. Throughout this debate, there
have been those who questioned why these transformational linguists, who claim so much
knowledge of language, should write such dense and unclear English. When questioned
on this, Mehta relates Chomsky's reply as follows: `"I assume that the writing in
linguistics is no worse than the writing in any other academic field" Chomsky says. "The
ability to use language well is very different from the ability to study it. Once the Slavic
Department at Harvard was thinking of offering Vladimir Nabokov an appointment.
Roman Jakobson, the linguist, who was in the department then, said that he didn't have
anything against elephants but he wouldn't appoint one a professor of zoology." Chomsky
laughs.'(14) See for example Fodor or Chisholm.(15)See Note 5 for reference to
Esperanto. The South American Indian language Aymara has been proposed and partially
implemented as a basis for multilingual Machine Translation by the Bolivian
mathematician Ivan Guzman de Rojas, who claims that its special syntactic and logical
structures make it an idea vehicle for such a purpose. On a surface analysis, such a notion
sounds remarkably close to Bloomfieldian secondary responses about the ideal
characteristics of the Sequoyan language, long before computers entered the picture.
(Guzman de Rojas)(16) See Chomsky, 1975, p. 40.(17) The principal work encouraging a
search for `universal' aspects of language is Greenberg. Its findings are suggestive but
inconclusive.(18) This section first appeared in a different form as a discussion between
Sandra Celt and the author (Celt & Gross).(19)Most of Marvin Minsky's thoughts on
language follow a strictly Chomskian framework—thus, we can perhaps refer to the
overall outlook of his school as a Minksian-Chomskian one. For further details see
Sections 19-26 of Minsky.(20) See Hunn for a considerably expanded treatment.(21) A
rich literature expanding on this theme can be found in the bibliography of the book
mentioned in the preceding note.(22)Glossematics is in the U.S. a relatively obscure
school of linguistics, founded by two Danes, Louis Hjelmslev and Hans Jørgen Uldall,
earlier in the century. Its basic thesis has much in common with thinking about computers
and their possible architectures. It starts from the premise that any theory about language
must take into account all possible languages that have ever existed or can exist, that this
is the absolute minimum requirement for creating a science of linguistics. To objections
that this is unknowable and impossible, its proponents reply that mathematicians
regularly deal with comparable unknowables and are still able to make meaningful
generalizations about them. From this foundation emerges the interesting speculation that
linguistics as a whole may be even larger than mathematics as a whole, and that
`Linguistics' may not be that science which deals with language but that the various so-
called sciences with their imperfect boundaries and distinctions may in fact be those
branches of linguistics that deal for the time being with various domains of linguistics.
Out of this emerges the corollary that taxonomy is the primary science, and that only by
naming things correctly can one hope to understand them more fully. Concomitant with
these notions also arises an idea that ought to have attracted computer translation
researchers, that a glossematic approach could lay down the down the basis for creating
culture-independent maps of words and realities through various languages, assigning
precise addresses for each `word' and `meaning,' though it would require a truly vast
system for its completion and even then would probably only provide lists of possible
translations rather than final translated versions. The major theoretical text of
Glossematics, somewhat difficult to follow like many linguistic source books, is
Hjelmslev. One excellent brief summary in English is Whitfield, another available only in
Spanish or Swedish is Malmberg.(23) Different strands of this argument may be pursued
in Nagel and Newman, Harel, and Goedel(24) Vinay & Darbelnet, pp. 195-96.(25)In
correct academic terms, Artificial Intelligence is not some lesser topic related to Machine
Translation, rather Machine Translation is a branch of Artificial Intelligence. Some other
branches are natural language understanding, voice recognition, machine vision, and
robotics. The successes and failures of AI constitute a very different story and a well-
publicized one at that—it can be followed in the bibliography provided by Minsky. On AI
and translation, see Wilks.(26)Neural Nets are once again being promoted as a means of
capturing knowledge in electronic form, especially where language is concerned. The
source book most often cited is Rumelhart and McClelland.(27) Hidden Markov Models,
considered by some merely a different form of Neural Nets but by others as a new
technology in its own right, are also being mentioned as having possibilities for Machine
Translation. They have as noted proved quite effective in facilitating computer-assisted
voice transcription techniques.(28)The theory of nanotechnology visualizes a further
miniaturization in computers, similar to what took place during the movement from tubes
to chips, but in this case actually using internal parts of molecules and even atoms to store
and process information. Regarded with skepticism by some, this theory also has its
fervent advocates (Drexler).

NOTE OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

I wish to express my gratitude to the following individuals, who read this piece
in an earlier version and assisted me with their comments and criticisms: John Baez,
Professor of Mathematics, Wellesley College; Alan Brody, computer consultant and
journalist; Sandra Celt, translator and editor; Andre Chassigneux, translator and Maitre de
Conferences at the Sorbonne's Ecole Superieure des Interpretes et des Traducteurs
(L'ESIT); Harald Hille, English Terminologist, United Nations; Joseph Murphy, Director,
Bergen Language Institute; Lisa Raphals, computer consultant and linguist; Laurie
Treuhaft, English Translation Department, United Nations; Vieri Tucci, computer
consultant and translator; Peter Wheeler, Director, Antler Translation Services; Apollo
Wu, Revisor, Chinese Department, United Nations. I would also like to extend my
warmest thanks to John Newton, the editor of this volume, for his many helpful
comments.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY:
As noted above, this bibliography has not gone through the comprehensive checking of
the published edition, which the reader may also wish to consult.

Bloomfield, Leonard (1933) Language, New York, , (reprinted in great part in 1984,

University of Chicago).

Bloomfield, Leonard (1944) Secondary and Tertiary Responses to Language. This piece

originally appeared in Language 20.45-55, and has been reprinted in Hockett 1970 and
elsewhere. This particular citation appears on page 420 of the 1970 reprint.

Booth, Andrew Donald, editor (1967) Machine Translation, Amsterdam.

Brower, R.A. editor (1959) On Translation, Harvard University Press.

Carbonell, Jaime G. & Tomita, Masaru (1987) Knowledge-Based Machine Translation,

and the CMU Approach, found in Sergei Nirenburg's excellent though somewhat
technical anthology (Nirenburg).

Celt, Sandra & Gross, Alex (1987) The Challenge of Translating Chinese Medicine,

Language Monthly, April. .

Chisholm, William S., Jr. (1981) Elements of English Linguistics, Longman.

Chomsky, Noam(1957) Syntactic Structures, Mouton, The Hague.

Chomsky, Noam (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT Press.

Chomsky, Noam (1975) The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, p. 40, University of

Chicago Press.

Coughlin, Josette (1988) Artificial Intelligence and Machine Translation, Present

Developments and Future Prospects, in Babel 34:1. 3-9 , pp. 1-9.

Datta, Jean(1988) MT in Large Organizations, Revolution in the Workplace, in

Vasconcellos 1988a.

Drexler, Eric K. (1986) Engines of Creation, Forward by Marvin Minsky, Anchor Press,

New York.

Fodor, Jerry A & Katz, Jerrold J. (1964) The Structure of Language, Prentice-Hall, N.Y.

Goedel, Kurt (1931) Ueber formal unentscheidbare Saetze der Principia Mathematica

und verwandte Systeme I, Monatshefte fuer Mathematik und Physik, vol. 38, pp. 173-198.

Greenberg, Joseph (1963) Universals of Language, M.I.T.Press.

Grosjean, Francois (1982) Life With Two Languages: An Introduction

to Bilingualism, Harvard University Press.
Guzman der Rojas, Ivan (1985) Logical and Linguistic Problems of
Social Communication with the Aymara People, International Development Research
Center, Ottawa.

Harel, David (1987) Algorithmics: The Spirit of Computing, Addison-Wesley.

Harris, Zellig (1951) Structural Linguistics, Univ. of Chicago Press.

Hjelmslev, Louis (1961) Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, translated by Francis

Whitfield, University of Wisconsin Press, (Danish title: Omkring sprogteoriens
grundlaeggelse, Copenhagen, 1943)

Hockett, Charles F. (1968) The State of the Art, Mouton, The Hague.

Hockett, Charles F. (1970) A Leonard Bloomfield Anthology, Bloomington, [(contains

Bloomfield 1944)].

Hodges, Andrew (1983) Alan Turing: The Enigma,Simon & Schuster, New York.

Hunn, Eugene S. (1977) Tzeltal Folk Zoology: The Classification of Discontinuities in

Nature, Academic Press, New York.

Hutchins, W.J. (1986) Machine Translation: Past, Present, Future, John Wiley & Sons.

Jakobson, Roman (1959) On Linguistic Aspects of Translation, in Brower.

Kay, Martin (1982) Machine Translation, from American Journal of Computational

Linguistics, April-June, pp. 74-78.

Kingscott, Geoffrey (1990) SITE Buys B'Vital, Relaunch of French National MT

Project, Language International, April.

Klein, Fred (1988) Factors in the Evaluation of MT: A Pragmatic Approach, in

Vasconcellos 1988a.

Lehmann, Winfred P. (1987) The Context of Machine Translation, Computers and

Translation 2.

Malmberg, Bertil (1967) Los Nuevos Caminos der la Linguistica, Siglo Veintiuno,

Mexico, , pp. 154-74 (in Swedish: Nya Vagar inom Sprakforskningen, 1959)

Mehta, Ved (1971) John is Easy to Please, Ferrar, Straus & Giroux, New York,
(originally a New Yorker article, reprinted in abridged form in Fremantle, Anne (1974) A
Primer of Linguistics, St. Martin's Press, New York.

Minsky, Marvin (1986) The Society of Mind, Simon & Schuster, New York, especially
Sections 19-26.
Nagel, Ernest and Newman, James R. (1989) Goedel's Proof, New York University
Press.

Newman, Pat (1988) Information-Only Machine Translation: A Feasibility Study, in

Vasconcellos 1988a.

Nirenburg, Sergei (1987) Machine Translation, Theoretical and Methodological Issues,

Cambridge University Press.

Paulos, John A. (1989) Innumeracy, Mathematical Illiteracy and its Consequences, Hill

& Wang, New York.

Rumelhart, David E. and McClelland, James L. (1987) Parallel

Distributed Processing, M.I.T. Press.

Sapir, Edward (1921) Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech, Harcourt and

Brace.

Saussure, Fernand de (1913) Cours der Linguistique Generale, Paris (translated by W.

Baskin as Course in General Linguistics, 1959, New York).

Slocum, Jonathan, editor (1988) Machine Translation Systems, Cambridge University

Press.

Vasconcellos, Muriel, (editor) (1988a) (1988) Technology as Translation

Strategy, American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series, Vol. II, SUNY
at Binghampton.

Vasconcellos, Muriel (1988b) Factors in the Evaluation of MT, Formal vs. Functional

Approaches, in Vasconcellos 1988a.

Vinay, J.-P. and Darbelnet, J. (1963) Stylistique Comparee du Francais et de l'Anglais,

Methode der Traduction, Didier, Paris.

Weaver, Warren (1955) Translation, in Locke, William N. & Booth, Albert D.: Machine

Translation of Languages, pp. 15-23, Wiley, New York.

Whitfield Francis (1969) Glossematics, Chapter 23 of Linguistics, edited by Archibald A.

Hill, Voice of America Forum Lectures.

Whorf, Benjamin Lee (1956) Language, Thought and Reality, (collected papers) M.I.T.

Press.

Wilks, Yorick (1984?) Machine Translation and the Artificial Intelligence Paradigm of

Language Processes, in Computers in Language Research 2.

3.Style and Stylistic Accommodation in Translation

By Aiwei Shi
M.A. in English Linguistics and Literature
Xinzhou Teachers University
Shanxi, China
shi_aiwei@hotmail.com

 Source: Translation Directory

Abstract: Accommodation in translation emerges in perspectives such as cultural

accommodation, collocation accommodation, ideological accommodation and aesthetic
accommodation. (see for reference my article entitled Accommodation in
Translation at www.accurapid.com ) This article focuses specifically on stylistic
accommodation in translation, proposing that accommodation should be oriented to style
which includes writer’s style, genre style and historical style.

Style

Style means all kinds o' things. Encarta English dictionary lists 11 definitions for
it. Its third definition says: way of writing or performing: the way in which something is
written or performed as distinct from the content of the writing or performance. This is
where we commence our discussion. Lynch provides us with more or less what  is
generally understood of style in our school days. He says that at its broadest, it means
everything about your way of presenting yourself in words, including grace, clarity, and a
thousand undefinable qualities that separate good writing from bad. (Lynch, 2001) I also
remember huge amount of stress from my teachers is placed on economy, precision and
so on, plus clarity as stated by above. In a word, style is used as a term distinguished
from content in writing and it stresses form or format. In other words, style means ‘how’
whereas content refers to ‘what’.

If style comes only second in priority, it certainly stands very high in importance.
It is only natural that good form conveys the content in more sufficient and adequate way.
In translation discussion faithfulness in content has always been emphasized and treated
seriously, but faithfulness in style seems to pose more difficulties. In literature, style is
the novelist’s choice of words and phrases, and how the novelist arranges these words
and phrases in sentences and paragraphs. Style allows the author to shape how the reader
experiences the work. For example, one writer may use simple words and straightforward
sentences, while another may use difficult vocabulary and elaborate sentence structures.
Even if the themes of both works are similar, the differences in the authors’ styles make
the experiences of reading the two works distinct. Without extensive reading the capture
of the so-called style is really a tough challenge.

Translation

E.Nida(1984) difines translation as “ Translation consists in reproducing in the

receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source language massage, first in
terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.” How is style transferred in the receptor
language becomes a problem and challenge for every translator or interpreter.  As
translators and interpreters we are mediators. The ancient Chinese referred to the
translator as a “match-maker” or “go-between”(mei) and translation as a medium through
which both parties finally understand each other, though it was not considered a highly-
valued profession. Obviously, the translator should not only have a bilingual ability but
also a bi-cultural vision. Translators mediate between cultures (including ideologies,
moral systems and socio-political structures), seeking to overcome those incompatibilities
which stand in the way of transfer of meaning. What has value as a sign in one cultural
community may be devoid of significance in another and it is the translator who is
uniquely placed to identify the disparity and seek to resolve it.

But there is another sense in which translators are mediators; in a way, they are
‘privilege readers’ of the SL text. Unlike the ordinary ST or TT reader, the translator
reads in order to produce, decodes in order to re-encode. In other words, the translator
uses as input to the translation process information which would normally be the output,
and therefore the end of, the reading process. Consequently, processing is likely to be
more thorough, more deliberate than that the ordinary reader; and interpretation of one
portion of text will benefit from evidence forthcoming from the processing of later
sections of text. Now, each reading of a text is a unique act, a process subject to the
particular contextual constraints of the occasion, just as much as the production of the
text is. Inevitably, a translated text reflects the translator’s reading and this is yet another
factor which defines the translator as a non-ordinary reader: whereas the ordinary reader
can involve his or her own beliefs and values in the creative reading process, the
translator has to be more guarded. (cited from Wilss,2001) It is widely-acknowledged
nowadays that translation is interaction. The key concept here is interaction. I suggest that
interaction is a process which takes place not only between participants (the traditional
‘trinity’ in the translation process: author, translator and target reader), but also between
the signs which constitute texts and between the participants and those signs.Armed with
this complex structural outline, the translator makes choices at the level of texture in such
a way as to guide the target reader along routes envisaged by the ST producer towards a
communicative goal. That is, items selected from the lexico-grammatical resources of the
TL will have to reflect the overall rhetorical purpose and discoursal values which have
been identified at any particular juncture in the text.Ideological nuances, cultural
predispositions and so on in the source text have to be relayed as closely as possible. To
achieve that end, accommodation must, more often than not, be adopted. In this case, it is
accommodation in writing style, more accurately, in rewriting style.

Stylistic Accommodation

Philosophically arguing, I believe content and style formulate a whole that can
not be neatly separated. Any content is expressed in a specific style. Yet when
comparison and contrast is carried out, certain nuances are found to exit  uniquely among
a group of writers, between different genres and within a certain historical period.Here in
this article I would like to concentrate on these three aspects: writer’s style, genre style
and historical style.

Writer's Style

Writer’s style is the most-discussed topic in our literary course. Lecturers

encourage us to read extensively about a certain author and compare between authors so
we could formulate in our mind ‘style’ of a specific author. For instance, Hemingway's
economical writing style often seems simple and almost childlike, but his method is
calculated and used to complex effect. In his writing Hemingway provided detached
descriptions of action, using simple nouns and verbs to capture scenes precisely. By
doing so he avoided describing his characters' emotions and thoughts directly. Instead, in
providing the reader with the raw material of an experience and eliminating the authorial
viewpoint, Hemingway made the reading of a text approximate the actual experience as
closely as possible. Hemingway was also deeply concerned with authenticity in writing.
He believed that a writer could treat a subject honestly only if the writer had participated
in or observed the subject closely. Without such knowledge the writer's work would be
flawed because the reader would sense the author's lack of expertise. In addition,
Hemingway believed that an author writing about a familiar subject is able to write
sparingly and eliminate a great deal of superfluous detail from the piece without
sacrificing the voice of authority. The success of his plain style in expressing basic, yet
deeply felt, emotions contributed to the decline of the elaborate Victorian-era prose that
characterized a great deal of American writing in the early 20th century.  (Encyclopedia
article from Encarta of Ernest Miller Hemingway,2004) In contrast, A complex style uses
long, elaborate sentences that contain many ideas and descriptions. The writer uses lyrical
passages to create the desired mood in the reader, whether it be one of joy, sadness,
confusion, or any other emotion. American author Henry James uses a complex style to
great effect in novels such as The Wings of the Dove (1902): 
The two ladies who, in advance of the Swiss season, had been warned that their design
was unconsidered, that the passes would not be clear, nor the air mild, nor the inns open
—the two ladies who, characteristically had braved a good deal of possibly interested
remonstrance were finding themselves, as their adventure turned out, wonderfully
sustained.

When translating Hemingway into Chinese, it is advisable for the translator to

stick to the above-mentioned style, though the conventional Chinese criterion for a good
piece of writing thinks highly of a flourish style with a little too much superfluity. Those
who translate Chinese into English will agree with me readily here. This stylistic
distinction calls for accommodation, by which writer’s style is well-preserved. And this is
especially good for Chinese literary scholars for one of their focal points of study lies in
the nuances between different writers’ style. If the translator, for the sake of the
readership, wants to make his/her version more acceptable and appealing, I suggest that
they must always bear in mind the central principle---style. There are several translated
versions of Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea in China and apparently all versions
seek to reproduce the simple and economic style. If I were asked to judge which is a
better version, I would unhesitatingly pick the one that best reflects such a style. And
when translating Henry James, the translator must be conscious of his complex sentence
structure and make accommodation accordingly.

Genre Style

Encarta English dictionary defines genre as “category of artistic works: one of the

categories that artistic works of all kinds can be divided into on the basis of form, style,
or subject matter.” From this definition we can see genre is also closely associated with
style. Literary genres cover the following: biographies and autobiographies, children’s
literature, history writing, science writing, poetry, short stories and so forth. For example,
as history is concerned the totality of all past events, historiography should try to be the
authentic written record of what is known of human lives and societies in the past, though
inevitably how historians have attempted to understand them is also included. Of all the
fields of serious study and literary effort, history may be the hardest to define precisely,
because the attempt to uncover past events and formulate an intelligible account of them
necessarily involves the use and influence of many auxiliary disciplines and literary
forms. The concern of all serious historians has been to collect and record facts about the
human past and often to discover new facts. They have known that the information they
have is incomplete, partly incorrect, or biased and requires careful attention. But the
foremost characteristic of history writing is the historian’s effort to write in a true-to-life
way. In the translation of this genre, the translator has to accommodate to the target
language style. For instance, the Chinese refers to history writing as shibi (literally,
historical pen), which defines a style of truthfulness in stating a fact and trying to avoid
personal bias. The historian only lets his/her voice heard at the end of each chapter by
clearly stating “the historian says”(zhuzhe yue) When dealing with historical materials
from English into Chinese, accommodation should be made according to the traditional
Chinese style in order to clarify what is the so-called historical facts and what is the
historian opinion on the subject or topic.

Another genre is letter writing which has its own stylistic features. Letter writing
may be broadly divided into business and personal letters. The following example, I hope,
will demonstrate how accommodation is made to keep the style. Here is the translation of
a letter of refusal of contribution.

I received your letter yesterday. Your article is very good, but I am sorry that owing to
pressure of space, I find it too long to be published. (Ge, 1980) Without much
accommodation, the translation might be read: I received your valuable letter yesterday
and I have paid my respective reading. Your article is excellent but owing to its excessive
length it is not suitable for publication in our journal because our journal has limited
space. We feel very sorry for that. I guess a native English speaker will not regard this as
a good letter, or simply, good English due to its redundant elements and too much
politeness.

Historical Style

In the English literature history, there were two important movements, classic and
romantic movement, which formed their own specific styles.Classicism, when applied
generally, means clearness, elegance, symmetry, and repose produced by attention to
traditional forms. It is sometimes synonymous with excellence or artistic quality of high
distinction. More precisely, the term refers to the admiration and imitation of Greek and
Roman literature, art, and architecture. Because the principles of classicism were derived
from the rules and practices of the ancients, the term came to mean the adherence to
specific academic canons.In translating this style, the translator will have to equip
him/herself with wide knowledge about Greek and Roman literature, art, and other
cultural aspects so as to preserve the archaism in the target language and to make such
stylistic accommodation easy to carry out.Although in literature romantic elements were
known much earlier, as in the Elizabethan dramas, many critics now date English literary
romanticism from the publication of Wordsworth and Coleridge’s Lyrical Ballads (1798).
In the preface to the second edition of that influential work (1800), Wordsworth stated his
belief that poetry results from “the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings,” and
pressed for the use of natural everyday diction in literary works. Coleridge emphasized
the importance of the poet's imagination and discounted adherence to arbitrary literary
rules. Such English romantic poets as Byron, Shelley, Robert Burns, Keats and some
others often focused on the individual self, on the poet's personal reaction to
life.Resulting in part from the libertarian and egalitarian ideals of the French Revolution,
the romantic movements had in common only a revolt against the prescribed rules
of classicism. The basic aims of romanticism were various: a return to nature and to belief
in the goodness of humanity; the rediscovery of the artist as a supremely individual
creator; the development of nationalistic pride; and the exaltation of the senses and
emotions over reason and intellect. (cited from the Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia)
Chinese literature history did not have a romantic movement or anything similar to that in
the western sense until modern times. Even the modern romantic style is but a simulation
of the west, or at least influenced by the western ideas. Probably that is because realism
has always been the overwhelming mainstream. There were indeed some romantic
literary figures occasionally but they were never as popularly accepted. This is where
accommodation is needed urgently in translation of this group of authors. Translators are
faced with a dilemma---too much accommodation to meet the readers’ reading tradition
means traitors of the original whereas inadequate accommodation simply drives the
readers away. It is the job or responsibility of the translator to find the appropriate place
between these two ends. Yet such stylistic accommodation must always occupy an
important position in the translator’s mind.

Epilouge

It is my hope that my article on style and stylistic translation could bring about more
similar research and study so its importance in translation should be fully realized.

References

1. Lynch, Jack: 2001. Guide to Style and Grammar.  www.andromeda.rutgers.edu

2. Nida,E: 1984. On Translation. Translation Publishing Corp. Beijing, China.

3. Wilss, Wolfram: 2001. The Science of Translation- Problems and Methods. Shanghai

Foreign Education Publishing House.

4. “Hardy, Thomas," Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia

2004. http://encarta.msn.com © 1997-2004 Microsoft Corporation.

5. “Hemingway, Ernest Miller”, Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia

2004. http://encarta.msn.com © 1997-2004 Microsoft Corporation.

6. James, Henry: 1902. The Wings of the Dove. The Foreign Language Teaching and
Research Press. 1992.

7. “ Romanticism” and “classicism”. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed.

Copyright © 2004, Columbia University Press.

4.Testing and Evaluation in the Translation Classroom

By Carol Ann Goff-Kfouri, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor in 
the Department of English and Education 
at Notre Dame University.
Academic Advisor 
to Translation and Interpretership students.
nccjk@inco.com.lb

 Source: Translation Directory

 It is not at all uncommon today for professional translators to be invited to teach
a course at a university. Many translators, though flattered at being invited to teach, are
hesitant to accept the position due to their lack of pedagogical knowledge. One particular
problematic area is that of marking translations and making decisions on student
competence. This paper presents the basic information professional translators need to
know before they enter the classroom, and outlines possible testing strategies they might
use to make their teaching experience enriching and valuable for themselves as well as
their students.One of the most challenging terms for professional educators is 'test.' Even
seasoned instructors may not always feel at ease with putting a grade or a mark on a
student's final paper. If an entire class does well, the instructor feels proud that work has
been accomplished; however, if a large number of students do not perform well,
instructors are disappointed and sometimes need to reevaluate the objectives of the entire
course. Certainly, students show signs of stress and anxiety before exam periods. Most of
us may recall the hollow feeling in our own stomachs the minute just before a test was
distributed as well as the silence in the classroom when instructors handed back the
corrected papers.

Instructors and curriculum designers today seem to be convinced that a more

learner-centered, creative and flexible teaching system motivates students. They also see
the necessity to adapt testing methods to the revised curricula and methodologies. Peer
correction, self- and portfolio evaluation are becoming common in even the most
traditional university settings. Instructors who emphasize a communicative type of testing
may promote a more efficient learning environment. They certainly contribute to making
tests less traumatic. Nevertheless, it seems that the instructor's testing methods do have a
lasting effect on the learning experience, the students' attitude as well as the teacher's
enthusiasm (Schmidt & McCutcheon, 1994:118.) Traditional testing is still a critical
aspect of education; research in North America has shown that students who take
frequent instructor-developed assessments scored higher on national tests (Linking
Effective Teaching to Test Scores, 2001). This may be the case not only because of the
value of testing, but because the tests are well thought out and allow students to apply the
process of what was learned in class as well as the content of the instruction. Instructors
must not overlook the importance of student motivation to do well as one important factor
in the success of testing. In one survey, students themselves requested numerous quizzes
and tests--testimony to the critical role testing plays in a university setting (Kfouri,
2003).According to Maier and Warren (2000: 131), in university education, there are
"various stakeholders" who hold a vested interest in making the system work.

Testing methods affect more than the simple student-instructor relationship in a

translation classroom. The instructor's choice of testing strategies first of all sends a
message to the individual student regarding competence in a particular skill or knowledge
base. The individual student can then compare his or her result with those of the rest of
the class. The department of translation will evaluate the level of the tests given in each
of the courses and will likely make recommendations concerning the students'
performance, the instructors' efficiency and the need to alter the syllabus. The companies,
or clients that hire the students will make a favorable or unfavorable judgment of the
graduate translator when they compare the quality of the translation to their expectations.
If the quality is high, the translation program can take some of the credit; if the quality is
low, the education of the student will be questioned. In the end, instructors who prepare
quality tests and demand the highest quality from the students will raise the standards of
the profession in general.

The figure below shows the various effects of an instructor's testing choices. The
instructor is at the center of this quadrangle.

Companies hiring

University Students (individuals

Syllabus, Admin. and class)

Standards of the
Translation Profession

Instructors of translation need to become competent in test writing, but they must keep in
mind that there is no perfect test and no foolproof grading or marking system.

Some universities request that instructors submit a copy of the midterm and final
exams with the course syllabus. Though surprising to a novice instructor, this is actually
quite logical, since instructors cannot test without having planned their course objectives
or learning outcomes carefully. A midterm or a final exam should test whether or not
students have reached the objectives. Before an instructor actually begins writing exams
or makes decisions on how to evaluate a student's progress, it is helpful to have an
overview of the basic terminology.

Key Terms

Measurement is a process that attempts to obtain a quantitative representation of

the degree to which a student shows competence in a particular skill or area of knowledge
(Ahmann & Glock, 1981:16.) In order to measure, instructors must have an instrument.
The instrument an instructor uses to measure a student's competence has traditionally
been the test. A test (oral or written) is made up of items. A student responds correctly or
incorrectly to each item. The corrector may mark the test by counting or by judging.
Counting correct answers is practical for evaluating receptive skills such as reading or
listening. Judging requires that the examination answer key allow for a large number of
responses. Instructors are relieved when students respond to the test items correctly.
However, if the student does not answer an item correctly, the instructor must analyze
further and investigate whether the incorrect answer is a mistake or an error. Even though
many people use both terms interchangeably, scientifically speaking, a mistake is
generally considered as a fault in performance; it does not occur systematically. An error,
on the other hand, reflects a gap in the student's knowledge; it is systematic. An error is
therefore more serious than a mistake because it indicates a lack of knowledge; both
student and instructor must address the problem when the test is returned (Heaton,
1990).Evaluation is also a process; it is the systematic process of determining the extent
to which students reach the educational objectives set by the institution or standard-
setting body that issues their diploma. Evaluation is part of a decision-making process
through which the instructor collects information systematically through a test, analyzes
that information and relates the results of each student or of the class in general to
objectives in the course. Reflective evaluation necessitates the following
procedure:Instructor® prepares learning activities ® carries out instruction ® prepares
testing instrument ® administers test ®judges students test performance ® evaluates
methodology and questions students ® alters or retains methods or objectives.Evaluation
as shown above depends on the reliability of the test instrument.

Reliability refers to the test's consistency. If the same test were administered a
second time under equivalent conditions, the same results should occur (Gage & Berliner,
1998: 519). If the test is not machine corrected, its degree of reliability may depend in a
certain sense on the corrector. If the corrector has just read a stellar paper, and the one
following is not of the same level even though it is above average, the student may not
receive a completely fair mark (Heaton, 1990). Reliability in translation studies is an
essential issue. A test of technical translation ability may render more reliable results than
a literary translation test. For example, one word in a literary translation may have five to
six different almost equivalent synonyms in the target language, each with a different
connotation. Moreover, the student translator has to take a number of factors into
consideration while taking a literary test. What were the cultural implications, for whom
did the author intend the text? How well and how similarly the student and the corrector
answer those and other questions will influence the reliability of the translated document
and its correction.Validity, on the other hand, reflects whether the test measures what it
was supposed to measure (Ornstein & Lasley, 2000: 392). If, for example, students are
asked to write an essay in a language class on the latest methods of imputting data into a
database, and those students are not knowledgeable on that particular subject, that test
will not be a valid judge of their language abilities. There is also some discussion as to
the validity of oral exams since it is not sure how much a student's pleasant or not so
pleasant personality impacts on the examiner (Heaton, 1990: 7).

Types of Assessment

Translation students will take a number of tests during their time in university.
The tests they take in the university setting will also prepare them for the tests they take
as part of their professional lives. Translators are regularly asked to prove their abilities
by taking a test before they are hired.

A placement test is generally the first test a student translator will sit for at
university. The purpose of the placement test is to classify the level of incoming
candidates to a translation or any other skill-based program. A placement test can also be
instrumental in the reorganization of a curriculum. According to the results, the
department may have to implement remedial or intensive courses. On the other hand,
more advanced classes may need to be set up if the student level is higher than preceding
years. Placement tests are a practical way to assess the evolution in incoming students'
talents from one year to the next. However, university placement tests do necessitate a
large amount of research to be effective. The test writers must be aware of the curriculum
from which the students are coming; they should also know the curriculum demands of
the university. Placement tests must situate the entry level of the student. For example, if
you are placing students in an Editing and Revision class sequence, the placement test
must measure how well versed the students are already in copyediting, idioms, syntax, so
as to assign them to the correct class level.

Diagnostic tests are tests designed to pick out student problems before it is too
late in the year or the semester to do so. Their objective is different from placement tests;
a diagnostic test is given so as to facilitate the student's learning, to encourage students to
correct areas of weakness. For example, if a student was diagnosed with problems in
Spanish grammar at the beginning of the semester, and still exhibits the same problems at
the midpoint, a solution must be found. Some progress tests may also serve a diagnostic
function (Heaton, 1990).Progress tests are the most frequent tests instructors give. The
objective of a progress test is to determine if the students have mastered material that has
already been taught. In theory, if the teaching has been sufficient, if the syllabus is
organized efficiently, if the test is well written and of course, if the students have been
attentive, marks on a progress test should be high. If the marks are not all above 75 out of
100, then the instructor will have to determine why and alter the weekly course
distribution (Heaton, 1990).In a translation classroom, where rote learning is not
emphasized, progress tests apply the principles of translation. Progress tests are most
often "open book" in translation classes. Students have access to notes, databases,
dictionaries, etc. Open book tests are suitable in testing situations where the instructor is
determining how competent students are in applying knowledge, not recalling it. Quizzes,
graded homework, short projects, weekly or bi-weekly tests are all types of progress
tests.Achievement tests are meant to determine if the student has met the course
objectives. If students were placed in the correct course level, benefited from the results
of diagnostic tests and progress tests, the achievement test should reaffirm their
acquisition of skills necessary to advance to a further level of study. Achievement tests
are usually all-inclusive and occur at the end of the course. Their results should be
examined closely so as to evaluate the program's strengths and weaknesses (Bahous,
1998; 39).

The types of tests above fall into two further traditional categories: formative and
summative.

Formative assessment is the most common form of assessment in higher

education and constitutes the bulk of instructors' efforts to evaluate students. Formative
assessment takes place during the instruction period and is designed to guide instructors
to adjust their teaching, if need be (Gage & Berliner, 1998:529). Progress tests also fall
into this category, as do diagnostic tests. Feedback from formative assessment must be
communicated to the student as soon as possible. Students react more positively to
formative assessment if the results are analyzed by the instructor and the teaching style or
class content is altered if need be. This is called the washback effect (Heaton, 1990: 16).
In order to gain the students' trust in the value of evaluation in their overall education or
the course itself, formative assessment should not be used as the only means to determine
the final grade. Ideally, formative assessment is the ongoing process instructors and
students use to gauge the success of the syllabus and to prepare for the second type of
assessment, the summative.Summative assessment contrasts with formative assessment
first of all by its purpose. The purpose of summative assessment is to attribute value, and
for that reason it is oftentimes more quantitative than the qualitative formative
assessment. It also occurs at the midpoint and/or end of instruction so as to determine the
extent to which syllabus objectives have been met. Achievement tests, final exams, oral
or written, and research projects are examples of summative assessment. Grades or marks
from summative assessment often provide a basis for passing a student or for repeating a
class. The weight of summative assessment in the student's final grade or mark is
oftentimes quite high; in some universities as high as 60%. Both types of assessment are
necessary and complementary. However, if summative evaluation shows that the majority
of the class is not at the level the instructor had targeted, then it has come too late and the
formative assessment was also not sufficiently well planned (Heaton, 1990). It is for this
reason that diagnostic tests must not take place too late in the semester; otherwise it will
be too late to lift constraints to learning.

Process assessment is a relatively new assessment technique that is more

formative than summative. It works most efficiently with long-term projects and is
particularly applicable to higher-level translation studies. An instructor sets process
assessment in place by first setting benchmarks the student must attain (Types of A&E,
2002, MIT). For example, in a translation practicum whose objective is to emulate the
workplace, the instructor would begin by distributing the brief. A timetable for
documentation, translation and revision would be set. Students would form teams and
distribute tasks. In order to further simulate the workplace, a timetable for the final
project would be assigned as well as an estimate of the projected costs to be incurred
during the project itself. The assessment would take into consideration if the deliverables
were produced and delivered on time and within the cost estimates. Success of the project
is determined by the difference between the blueprint of the original project and the final
product. Already used in business schools where case studies form the basis of the
curriculum, it is easily adapted to translation classroom or internship work. (Types of
Assessment and Evaluation, 2002, MIT).Portfolio assessment is also a relatively new
technique to aid students in tracking their progress. Not only do the students track their
own level but also the instructor is able to judge the student's work in reference to past
assignments. A portfolio is a file that students compile throughout the semester or course
and in which they choose the work they have done and want to be marked for a final
grade. Instructors can determine the minimum number of assignments per week, or each
two weeks, to be included in the portfolio. The portfolio method is time consuming for
instructors who have large classes, but the advantage is that instructors can gauge the
progress of the student by actually consulting the work done by the student at the
beginning of the course or in the middle rather than only consulting the marks in their
book.

Test Items
 Translation instructors need not depend only on a text as a basic test item.In order
to assess in a formative or summative manner, instructors have a wide range of item
formats to choose from. The basic types of item format are objective and subjective. In a
simple format objective test, the items may be supply, true-false or alternative response,
or matching. Multiple-choice and interpretive items are more complex forms of objective
tests. Essay tests and their derivatives form the basis of subjective exams. Although
translation instructors may not use all these types of items on a regular basis, it is useful
to experiment with various means of determining how well your students apply the
information you present. From the examples below, you may find some new ideas.

Supply or free-response items

Unstructured short answer and fill in items are the main types of free response
test questions. They are used primarily in informal testing. The great advantage to these
items is their ease of preparation and correction even if students do sometimes present
answers that were not originally in your key.

Ex: Unstructured short answer:

1. What is the main function of the human liver?

2. What is the medical specialty which deals with cancer patients?

Ex: Fill in

The following groups of words are not full sentences. In the space provided add whatever
is necessary to make them complete.

1. He was in such _______he forgot his suitcase.

2. The deeper the roots are, ____________to pull the trees out.

 The Two-Alternative Items

More commonly known as yes/no, true/false, such items measure how well
students know facts and definitions, and if they can distinguish between fact and opinion.
They are however difficult to write clearly and should not include terms such as never
and always.

Ex: True/False

Place T or F in the space provided. If the statement is false, provide the correct answer on
the line below the statement.

1. Consumers and producers share the burden of a sales tax. (T)

2. The seller of the product levies sales taxes. (F)

The government levies the tax; the seller collects the tax for the government.
Multiple Choice Items

Multiple choice items can be used to measure a variety of learning objectives

such as vocabulary acquisition, analysis, application of principles, cause and effect
association or the ability to interpret data (Ebel & Frisbie 1991:183). Early research in
testing and measurement has shown that a multiple choice test with a given number of
items can be expected to show as much reliability in the scores as a true/false test with
twice that number of items (Ebel 1979:74). It is challenging to write valid multiple-choice
test items. Professional test writers are expected to produce ten such items in an eight-
hour day (Gage & Berliner 1979: 732). Whether to test through multiple-choice items or
not is quite a controversial issue. Some instructors do not see the necessity of offering
four alternatives; some instructors believe they encourage an unnecessarily passive
attitude in the student. Actually, multiple-choice tests have more advantages than
disadvantages. First, an instructor can build an item bank and alter particularly effective
questions and use them more than once. Also, multiple-choice statements offer the
instructor one means of being creative in the testing of translation skills.

Ex: Multiple Choice

Read the text below and answer the questions.

We are intensely competitive. If we think that we have any chance at all to move
beyond bare survival, we are almost all ambitious. We worry about winning our honor,
our pride, our integrity, our desire to be heard, our need to be right, who recognizes us,
whether we are achieving enough, rich enough, good-looking, well-dressed, influential-
the list is endless. We are easily jealous and « stupid » people call us arrogant when all
we are is competent. We worry about status, position and whether we have clout. We are
constantly trying to avoid those who would coerce us, manipulate us or use us. That we
have often been wronged and seek revenge is much on the minds of many of us. Do
people put us down or avoid us when we offer « constructive » criticism of how they live
their lives ? If what I have written here-and I could go on and on-does not pertain to the
way you live your life, then it may be that you are not driven by this need. But then
maybe you are not of our species : Among us, even the humble compete for who can be
humblest of all.

Taken from : Glasser, William, M.D. Control theory in the classroom. 1986 Harper
Collins.

1. According to the author:

a. everyone has basically the same needs even if we do not all admit them

b. some people around us are not human

c. it is absolutely not normal to be jealous

d. it is abnormal to be ambitious

2. When the author uses the term "stupid" he really means that
 a. arrogance is a positive characteristic

b. in reality, we all think we are among the best

c. there are many stupid people around us

d. very few people are actually competent

If you want to experiment with constructing multiple- choice questions, the following
guidelines are valuable: (Gronlund 1985: 182)

1. The stem of the question should be meaningful in itself.Not: WinZip: a. b. c. d.

But, WinZip is a computer tool which: a. b. c. d.

2. State the stem of the question in positive terms.Not: Which one of these
translation memory tools is not useful?But: Which one of these translation
memory tools is most useful for free-lance translators?

3. Write all alternate answers in parallel form.Not: The one disadvantage of the
Excel program is:

a. The speed in processing large files

b. The installation problem

c. The fact that it is not compatible with other programs

d. The high price at the outset

But: a. The processing speed

a. The installation procedure

b. The compatibility issue

c. The financial question

1. Give only one correct answer

Not: Lake Michigan is found in:

a. Canada

b. United States

c. Indiana

d. Ohio
 But: Lake Michigan borders on:

a. Ontario and Michigan

b. Indiana and Michigan

c. Ohio and Michigan

d. Quebec and Michigan

Dictation and Dicto-Comp

Dictation is quite useful in a translation classroom to test the receptive skills of

listening and recognition and use of terminology. It is definitely not only a method of
checking a student's spelling. After students have documented a text to be translated, or
read parallel texts, they can benefit from dictation taken from one or more of the texts.
The benefit of dictation after reading is that students practice putting into words what
they have read perhaps passively. Students of interpreting skills benefit from dictations
because the instructor can vary the speed of delivery, and can ask colleagues to deliver a
dictation so students become accustomed to various accents. The following is a simple
methodology for a classroom dictation that should not exceed 6 minutes. A student's
attention span and focus fades after that.

1. Ask students to listen to the entire text once with pens down

2. Read the text again in logical segments. Start slowly so that student get used to
the rhythm of the reading.

3. Pause between segments to give students time to write.

4. Read the text again at the end of the dictation so students can correct any errors.

As a means of creative dictation, you may use a small portion of the text students are
to translate and dictate one section as you see it in the target language. If students need
practice in one particular area of difficulty, such as numbers, choose a text that
emphasizes this aspect, or create a text yourself.Marking a dictation is very
straightforward. Inform students in advance of the criteria you are using. For example,
insertion of incorrect terms or incorrect verb agreement is a more serious error than
simple spelling. Beginning with 10 points or 20 if the text is longer, take off one mark for
every error.Language instructors have been using Dicto-comp as a means to test student
ability to remember main ideas of a text in chronological or logical order and as a test of
comprehension. As a type of formative assessment, an instructor can gauge how much of
the original text the students have understood by how well they are able to rewrite it in a
logical order. Translation and interpreting instructors can use dicto-comp in both the L1
and the L2 of the student. It can be used after the students have prepared documentation
for their translation but have not yet written the translation. The following is a simple
methodology to try dicto-comp.
 1. Read the text to the students several times. Students listen with pens down.

2. Then ask the students to write what they remember in a logical order staying as
close to the original as possible. To correct the dicto-comp, provide students with
the 5, 10, or 15 main ideas in the order of the original.

What is practical about this test is that translation students are initiated into the idea
of translation units and can then move on to consecutive interpreting with greater ease.
This type of test is particularly appropriate for instructors of consecutive interpreting.

 Example dicto-comp text and its correction.

Directions to students. Listen to this text and write down the three main ideas in the order
in which they are presented in the text.

If academic learning is not just about acquiring knowledge, is it really different

from the acquisition of everyday knowledge? We learn a great deal about the world very
successfully outside academic institutions, with no help from any didactic process. The
tradition of pedagogy that stretches back to Dewey's rejection of the classical tradition of
passing on knowledge in the form of unchangeable ideas, has always argued for the
active engagement of the learner in the formation of their ideas. More recent exponents of
the latter tradition are Vygotsky, Piaget, Bruner, all of who argue for the active
engagement of the learner rather than the passive reception of given knowledge. These
psychologists have had an effect in schools, especially at primary level, but in
universities, with their continued reliance on lectures and textbooks, the classical tradition
of 'imparting knowledge' still flourishes.

(Text taken from: Laurillard, Diana. Rethinking university teaching. 1993.

Routledge.

Dewey rejected the classical tradition of passing on knowledge in the form of

unchangeable ideas.He and others such as Vygotsky, Piaget, etc. argue in favor of active
engagement of the learner rather than passive reception.Schools have adopted the
thinking of these psychologists, but the classical tradition of imparting knowledge still
flourishes in universities.

Subjective/Essay Testing

Essay type questions do not often apply to the testing of translation skills as such.
Students of translation do not write about translation unless they have a particular reason
to comment on a particular theory or critique a translation. Before you ask students to
write a critique of a text, provide a format for them to follow. A common critique format
is the following:

Paragraph One: Introduction (title, author, when and where is was published, intended
audience)

Paragraph Two: Elements with which the student agrees and concrete proof why.
Paragraph Three: Elements of disagreement and proof why.

Paragraph Four: Conclusion (comments, suggestions)

Some instructors may need to ask short essay questions in a test for a course on Legal
Terminology. A sample question may be:

Differentiate between 'tax law' and 'real estate law'. Give two examples of where
laypersons may be confused.

Assessment and Grading/Marking

When instructors mark exams they usually do so based on one of two traditional
options available. Norm-referencing assessment judges one student's performance based
on the rest of the students in their group. The group is the norm. Students will be
informed if they fall in the top or bottom third of the class, for example. In competitive
testing situations, a norm-referencing assessment is used. When an institution wants to
compare the test results of all the candidates and only take the top 10%, for example, they
will use norm referencing. The candidates are competing against each other. If there are
many high quality students, an average level student may not be admitted; if there are few
high quality students, the average student will certainly have a higher probability of
passing the test. Very often, universities may also restrict the number of students received
in order retain an aura of "quality." (Maier & Warren, 2000: 132.Criteria-referenced
assessment involves evaluating whether the student can perform a task or not; instructors
are not concerned with the comparison among students. In translation classes, criteria-
referenced tests are more frequent. Criterion referencing may be fairer from a student's
point of view since it compares the students' results with fixed criteria. Students are
judged on how well they alone can perform a task (Heaton, 1990). For example, can they
complete a technical translation within a fixed time period? In theory, all of the students
may be able to do so.Ipsative referencing compares a student's present performance with
a previous one. Generally considered effective in special needs education and
performance coaching, it may be beneficial in translation classes as it enables students to
judge how much they have progressed within a fixed period of time (De Montfort
University, 2003).

Instructor Assessment

There have been many suggestions made as to how to mark a translation.

Certainly the type of translation whether technical or literary plays a crucial role in the
type of correction you choose. The corrector also plays an important role. Some
emphasize certain criteria above others. Students in a classroom must be informed of the
criteria you are judging.

There are basically three options an instructor can choose from when correcting a
translation.

General Impression
 Although some experienced instructors are able to differentiate between a paper
that is a 62/100 rather than a 67, for example, a general impression mark is not very
beneficial to the student for it does not, in general, provide the reasons for the
missing marks.

Error Count

A simple error count is not recommended as a method of marking a student's

translation since it rarely gives points for content and does not take into consideration the
seriousness of the errors.

Analytical Grid

Heaton (1990: 110) proposed an analytical grill for language courses. However, it
can be easily adopted for a translation correction. An analytical grid allows the instructor
to set clear criteria for correction based on simple arithmetic.

Correction 5 4 3 2 1

Criteria

Fluency /Flow          

Grammar          

Terminology          

General          
Content

Mechanics X X      

In this particular case the translation would be marked over 23 since the instructor
chose to weight mechanics less than the other areas. When students are provided with a
grid assessment, they are able to see where their weaknesses and strengths lie. Some
instructors provide their students with a complete description of each number used on the
grid. For example, a student who receives a 5 on the Fluency category would know that
the instructor considers this quality work to be an almost native style of writing with
varied sentence structure. Coupled with descriptive comments such as the examples
below, a student will be able to rewrite the translation with a clear focus. Descriptive
comments are similar to the "I" messages suggested by both communication and
education specialists. (Cangelosi, 2000)

1. Your use of prepositions is incorrect almost 3/4 of the time; review before you
write again.
 2. You take an inappropriate amount of license in translating this technical text.

3. Consider your target audience before you translate.

4. There are too many examples of basic grammatical errors for me to evaluate this
text. Begin again.

5. I feel that you have really gotten the feel of what the original author wanted to
say.

Self-Assessment

Translation students are adults who have chosen to pursue a career in language
services. The majority knows that competition is quite stiff and in order to succeed they
must excel. Asking students to assess their own progress is one way of initiating them to
see their work objectively. Below is an example of a translation student self-assessment
paper that can be given to the students at the beginning of the semester or course. A
simple Likert Scale is used for facility.

Translation Student Self-Assessment

Directions: Respond to the following statements truthfully using the scale given to you.

Statements Never Often Sometimes Always

I understand all that I
1.        
read in my L1.
I understand all that I
2.        
read in my L2.
I am confident that I will
3.        
be an effective translator.
I make serious
4. comprehension errors        
when I translate.
I make grammar mistakes
5.        
when I translate.
I feel comfortable
6. working on a computer        
when I translate.

An instructor may add statements that are appropriate for the particular course or the
maturity of the student translator.

Some students may show surprise at the mark they receive. A self-evaluation
sheet filled out directly after an assignment may provide the student with helpful clues to
their weaknesses. The example below can be modified to fit both the instructors and
students' needs.

Assignment Evaluation Yes No

1. I understood the text the first time I read it.

2. I had to consult resources minimally. ______ ______

3. I devoted a lot of time to documentation. ______ ______
4. I felt that I was linking the major parts
______ ______
of the text in a logical manner..
5. I felt at ease translating this subject. ______ ______

Peer Assessment

Students are effective revisers and evaluators of each other's work. They are even
more effective when they help decide on the criteria for the assignment undertaken. For
example, students can agree that errors easily corrected by Spell-Check would not be
considered as serious, but that a "contresens" would be. They may not be asked to put a
mark to the work, but they can find areas in the translation that are not clear or which
they themselves translated differently. In fact peer assessment is an extremely useful
learning experience. Here are some hints for peer assessment.

1. Have students work with one student with whom they feel comfortable and
secure.

2. Once students have evaluated one partner's work several times, they should work
with another student's work so as not to become used to their partner's errors.

3. Students should have completed the translation that they are evaluating.

4. A specific time limit and correction symbols are important to ensure consistency.

5. Ask students to evaluate the work in another color pen than you yourself use so
as not to confuse the student.

6. Give students time to explain their reactions to the work orally as well as written.

Testing and Evaluation in a Academic Atmosphere

Some instructors feel that their prime role is to test their students' progress. They seem to
test more than they actually provide opportunities to learn.

Remember that testing your class is as much a reflection of your own teaching as
it is of the students' knowledge. A test may evaluate the effectiveness of your instruction.
Do not be tempted to coach for a test, or teaching for the test as it is sometimes called.
Teach in a way that prepares students to apply what they have learned in any situation,
test or normal class work.If, as in the case of many university courses presently, you are
teaching with a team of teachers in what is called a "multi-section" course and are called
upon to write a common exam for your students as well as the other instructors' students,
remember the following:

1. Contribute items that have not been covered on your own class quizzes; this is
not a fair evaluation of your students in comparison to the others.

2. Consult with the other instructors in advance as to what is to be covered on the

exam.

3. Set up a common grading scale as well as the common exam.

4. Meet and exchange papers to make sure grading is consistent. For example, ask
that all your colleagues bring three papers for discussion: the highest, the average
and the lowest grades. Exchange the papers and discuss objectively.

5. You may even experiment with exchanging entire class sets of papers for truly
objective grading.

Conducting an Exam

It is possible to have prepared a very valid exam and be dissatisfied by how the exam
was conducted. Simple preparation can help you avoid any difficulties and keep the
students calm and focused.

1. Arrive in class early on the days on which you give tests. Make sure that the
furniture is set in an appropriate manner, that is, there is ample space between the
students.

2. Make sure that your test has an explicit cover page on which your directions are
clear. Do you allow scratch paper? Do you allow dictionaries? How much time is
given for the test?

3. Distribute the test in a professional manner. If the class is large, and the rows are
long, give one pile to the first person and have them take one and pass the rest
back. Or give half and distribute from the half of the hall back.

4. Once the test has been distributed, ask the students to look through the test. If
they have any questions at all, allow them one minute to ask. After that, no
questions will be answered. If you do not allow for a question period, and make it
clear that this is the only time, you will be bothered during proctoring.

5. Be very clear about your policy on cheating. Announce it before the test and be
consistent. Most instructors use the following:

a. Cheating is not tolerated.

 b. If cheating is suspected, your paper will be taken away and you will be
asked to leave the exam room.

c. One of the best ways to avoid cheating is to never use the same exam
twice. Some students are collectors of old exams and you are just inviting
problems.

6. When you proctor, although it is among the worst jobs you will be asked to do at
a university, do not be tempted to read the newspaper or chat with other proctors.
Walk around the exam hall and show that you are taking this test seriously. When
you do, the students will also.

7. Correct your exams quickly, within 48 hours if possible and post the grades,
marks on your office door. Allow students the right to see their final exams
during specified office hours. Make sure that you have double-checked your math
and that there are no mistakes in your calculations. In any case, mistakes can
occur. Invite the students to recount when you distribute the corrected exam.

Case Studies of Tests for Translation Courses.

It is tempting to give a text and simply request that it be translated. If the

objective in testing is to evaluate the overall ability of the student then this is an
appropriate method. However, instructors may wish to test specific skills.

The hardest part of writing a test is deciding how much material can be tested
within a certain time frame. Many instructors have a tendency to write tests that are too
long for the two-hour test period, for example. In order to circumvent this problem,
observe your class as they work in a class situation. When you carry out activities in
class, gauge the amount of time your class needs to complete the work.

Examples of Translation Tests and Quizzes

Timed Matching

Even though students are not required to memorize terminology, you may have
requested that they have a basic knowledge of the terms used in a particular theme. One
way to test basic knowledge on a theme is to give students terminology in the source and
their equivalents in the disorder. Students are then allowed 4 minutes, or more (or less)
depending on the length of the list to find the correct match.

Example:

Directions: Match the terms in Column A with the correct translation in Column B. Write
your answer in the blank in Column B.

Column A Column B

Cosmetics
1. External use only ______ a. la peau grasse
2. Sun block ______ b. le teint
3. All skin types ______ c. l'usage externe
4. Complexion ______ d. écran solaire
5. Oily skin ______ d. toutes types de peaux

In order to test the student's ability to apply the terminology, you may give the students
sentences that must be translated within a certain time limit.

Example:

Directions: Translate these sentences in two minutes; then ask for Part Two.

1. Rinse off with warm water and follow with a cream of your choice.

2. Apply generously to the neck and face.

3. This cream will ensure you the softest skin ever.

Directions: You have two hours for this exam.

You may not use lexicons or dictionaries for Part One.

When you have finished part one, turn it in, and start Part Two.

You may use your documentation for Parts Two and Three.

Example:

Part One. 5 pts.

Read the following statements, and their translations. Correct the errors. Errors may be of
language or of sentence formulation and meaning.

1. Saudis split over possible freeze of their US assets. (original)Il est possible que
les Etats Unis gelent les avoirs Saudiens.

2. Le droit à l'alimentation est aussi un formidable enjeu de démocratie.

(original)The right of food is also an enormous challenge for democracies
everywhere.

3. Le comité chargé de la lutte contre le blanchiment a publié hier un avertissement

pour mettre en garde les libanais contre des operations frauduleuses.
(original)The anti-money washing committee published an advertisement
yesterday which told the Lebanese public that they better not participate in illegal
money transactions.
 4. There has been no dramatic shift in terms of getting out of the US. (original)

(Note: with reference to getting money out of the US)Personne ne veut quitter les
Etats-Unis avec son argent de poche.

5. En realité, ces accords n'ont pas profité aux pays en développement.

(original)Actually, these agreements did not profit to the developing countries.

Example: Translate the following extract into Arabic. /70 pts.

Comment on five difficulties you encountered. 20 pts.

Do the cultural elements here make the text difficult to translate? Why or why not? 10
pts.

"But there is something I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which
leads into he palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not
be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking
from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high
plain of dignity and discipline...When we allow freedom to ring, when we le it ring from
every village and every helmet, form every state and every city, we will be able to speed
up that day when all God's children, black men and white men, Jews and gentiles,
Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old
Negro spiritual: Free at last. Free at last. Thank God Almighty, we are free at last."
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Example:

For a higher-level course, provide two translations of the same text, or part of one, and
ask students to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each.Testing will probably never
be the high point of a teaching experience, but we can try to make our tests as creative as
possible so that students learn both from their time in our classes and our testing sessions.

 
 References

Ahmann, J.S. & Glock, M. (1981). Evaluating student progress: principles of tests and
Measurements, 6th ed. Allyn and Bacon, Inc., Boston.

Assessment. ( 2003). De Montfort University. Online

Bahous, J. (1998). The reliability of supply items. Unpublished doctoral thesis.

Cangelosi, J. (2000). Classroom management strategies, gaining and maintaining

Students'cooperation, 4th ed. John Wiley and Sons. USA.

Ebel, R. (1979). Essentials of educational measurement, 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood

Cliffs.

Ebel, R. & Frisbie, D., (1991). Essentials of educational measurement, 5th ed. Prentice

Hall of India, New Delhi.

Gage, N.L. & Berliner, D.C. (1998). Educational psychology 6th ed. Houghton Mifflin.

Boston.

Gronlund, N.E. (1981). Measurement and evaluation in teaching. Macmillan New York.

Heaton, J.B. (1990). Classroom testing. Longman, New York.

Kfouri, C. (2003). "Classroom management in the university classroom" The Near and

Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education. under press.

- "Learning and Teaching Assessment." www.dmu.ac.uk/~james/teaching/assessment.

- "Linking Effective Teaching to Test Scores." Gifted Child Today. Winter 2001. V 24.
Infotrac. Online. ASAP.

Maier, P., Warren, A. (2000). Integrating technology in learning and teaching. Kogan

Page, London.

Ornstein, A. C., & Lasley, T., J. II. (2000). Strategies for effective teaching. 3rd edition.
McGraw Hill, Boston.

Schmidt, C. & McCutcheon, J. (1994). "Verbal versus nonverbal cues in evaluations of

teaching." The journal of research and development in education. vol.27, n.2, pp. 118-
125.

 
Types of assessment and evaluation. Assessment and evaluation.
web.mit.edu/tll/assessment/types.htm

This article was originally published at Translation Journal

(http://accurapid.com/journal).
 5.The History of Translation History

ATA Chronicle, September, 1996

By Alex Gross

http://language.home.sprynet.com 
alexilen@sprynet.com

Source:  Translation Directory

By my count, nine useful books about translation history, specialized works

aside, have been published over the last thirty years. It must say something about where
this field is going that six of them have come out during the last seven years (and four
since 1992). The latest such work, Translators through History, edited and directed by
Jean Delisle and Judith Woodsworth, appears under the very highest auspices, being co-
published by John Benjamins and Unesco. The combined effort of fifty scholars from
twenty different nations, this volume has been five years in the making and is now
published simultaneously in French and English with assistance from several Canadian
sponsors and the F.I.T. The editors have set out to create "a selective and thematic
overview" rather than "an exhaustive study of the history of translation,...without
compromising ...standards of scholarship...they have sought to make the book readable
and accessible to as wide an audience as possible." The volume is divided into nine
chapters, each covering one of the roles played by translators over the ages: inventors of
alphabets, developers of national languages, creators of national literatures, disseminators
of knowledge, accessories to power, religious proselytizers, transmitters of cultural
values, authors of dictionaries, and interpreters as the middlemen of history.To their
outstanding credit, the editors and their collaborators make a truly impressive showing in
each of these fields, no small achievement within the limitations of a few hundred pages.
The work is supplemented by 24 illustrations, two appendices, a bibliography, and an
index. Perhaps most important, this is the first general work on translation history to
abandon a purely Eurocentric perspective (though a pending ATA exhibit proposal also
favors this approach).

This work is almost overwhelming in the sheer number and richness of strands,
episodes, and anecdotes it embraces, moving with seeming effortlessness from the
Seventh Century Chinese monk Xuanzang to modern Cameroon to the creation of the
Cree syllabary in the early Nineteenth Century. As we visit Baghdad, we learn that the
master translator Hunayn ibn Ishaq was paid in gold for his work according to its weight
(and hence tended to use thick paper!), that Gerard of Cremona wandered from Italy to
Toledo in 1157 simply because he wanted to find a copy of Ptolemy's Almagest for
himself, that Doña Marina's ghost still lurks along the edge of Mexico City's zócalo, that
French Canadian translators protested in vain against politicians, who insisted "Dominion
of Canada" must be translated "Puissance de Canada."This book is certainly an
indispensable tool for anyone interested in translation history. But it should perhaps also
be admitted at the same time that no single book in this field can be considered a model
of clarity or accessibility. Of these works (see bibliography at end), perhaps Rener's and
Kelly's should receive the lowest grades for their overall meaning-to-verbiage ratio,
though both certainly have useful insights to offer. Even for someone familiar with the
material, the current work also leaves something to be desired. Parts of it read even more
drably than most history texts, and sentences like the following are all too common:

"In the twentieth century, as in the nineteenth, the United States was divided by
conflicting ideological tendencies, some of them conservative and others more
liberal.""In fact, religion was only one of several motives for the many expeditions from
the Old World to the New; missions were also carried out for the purposes of commerce,
power and territorial expansion."Wooden language abounds, and the chapter on
dictionaries reads remarkably like a laundry list of such works through the ages, though
such a list will surely be valuable to specialists. And many other passages, both in the
chapter on evolving world literatures and elsewhere, resemble what Jir¡ Levy called mere
"literary chitchat" and/or the all too predictable harumphings of Gregory Rabassa's
"Professor Horrendo."Perhaps most unfortunately, given the book's theme, parts of it
actually read "like a translation." From internal evidence it would appear that at some
point during the bilingual publishing process, the entire text of the book was converted
into French for a "final" proofreading and then reconverted into English with little further
checking, leaving behind such French spellings as Marchak (Marshak), Guatemoc
(Cuauhtémoc), and La Coruna (La Coruña). Equally distracting are countless text-
embedded footnotes stuffed with sources, dates, or titles, greatly reducing the work's
readability—these could have been assigned lettered footnotes (to distinguish them from
endnotes) and placed at the bottom of the page.

Despite the number of scholars involved, there are still some glaring errors,
among them the Western invention of printing in the fourteenth century (p.102), the
assertion that Greek and Roman medicine were "of Indian origin" (p. 108—over time
their cross-fertilization was far more complex), the strange use in English of the French
term "Americanist" (p. 149), and a misleading explanation of the differences between
Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism (p. 125). Two major oversights: the book almost
totally ignores Japan and Korea and also fails to mention that the great Baghdad
renaissance actually began in the Persian town of Jundishapur.Given its UNESCO
auspices, Translators through History certainly does its best to avoid any statement that
could ruffle international feathers—in the Nuremberg trial section it even contains an
endnote for the young detailing the nationalities of the "Allies" and the "war criminals."
And yet the editors' well-meant attempt at even-handedness finally ends in failure. In the
material they have chosen, they have been unable to resist the persistent quirk of extreme
francophilia, a failing that finally leads almost to comedy. Not only do they insist that the
entire twelfth century "Toledo School" of translation was under "French" direction, via
monks from the Cluny monastery at in central France (and this at a time when Cathar,
Bogomil, and diehard Arabist influences ran rampant throughout the South, when neither
France nor the French language was in an advanced state of formation), not only is an
attempt made to exonerate French church fathers for burning translator-martyr Étienne
Dolet at the stake (see next selection on Translation Menu), but an even more amazing
claim is made for French Calvinist missionaries in the jungles of Brazil.While both the
English and Spanish had a very poor record of training interpreters during their early
explorations, according to our co-editors the French were far more fortunate:"It is
believed that Norman navigators anchored at the mouth of the Amazon even before
Columbus reached the shores of the New World. Some Frenchmen, referred to in the
French accounts as truchements de Normandieor 'Norman interpreters'...had moved into
the villages, learned the language, cohabited with the women, had children by them and
allegedly adopted all their practices, even cannibalism. While these truchements were an
embarrassment to the French missionaries, they were immensely valuable to them as
liaison agents."

This episode allegedly took place in 1555, which means that these truchements—
or their grandchildren—would have needed to retain their French for at least 65 years,
assuming they had arrived no earlier than two years before Columbus. But this story,
which adds up to nothing less than the claim that the French discovered America, was
inspired by a typical Sixteenth Century "traveler's tale" and deserves no logical analysis
at all. Even histories of translation must still obey historiographical rules, and today's
historians are united in dismissing most claims of successful new world colonization prior
to Columbus—whether by Normans, Welsh, Irish, Vikings, Phoenicians, Egyptians, or
Israelites—as poppycock, and this tale does not belong in a serious history. Another
recognizably French feature—as Mary McCarthy pointed out long ago—is an inadequate
index, containing a mere fraction of the text's many names of persons and places. So
French does the book become that it even quotes from that great Frenchman and former
ATA President Henri Fischbach. [he is of course better known to ATA members as
"Henry"] Greater clarity would also have been served by listing the authors of each
chapter at its beginning rather than grouping them in italics at the end.

Despite these objections, books like Translators through History are still of

enormous value: they offer a rich harvest for those prepared to cut their way through their
burgeoning undergrowth. But some of the greatest figures and movements throughout this
history upheld a different vision for translation, even for communication itself, than the
one presented by our scholars. Martin Luther demanded language for "the common man
in the marketplace," King Alfred the Great insisted on "language that we all can
understand," Alfonso X of Castile called out for texts that were llanos de entender ("easy
to understand"), while Hunayn ibn Ishaq wanted his medical texts to be understood by
someone "who was not a medical specialist, or who was unacquainted with philosophy."
During both the French Revolution and nineteenth-century political unrest in India,
voices cried out insistently for precisely these goals. All of these examples can be found
in the current volume. Against this background, it seems supremely ironic—and may well
explain many of the problems facing our profession—that we have still not evolved a
style for explaining the history and principles of translation to our fellow citizens in a
clear and simple way. As advanced as this book undoubtedly is, the field of translation
history may still be in its infancy.

Translators through History, edited by Jean Delisle and Judith Woodsworth, 346 pp.,
Cloth: $85.00 (1-55619-694-6), Paper: $31.95 (1-55619-697-0), is available from John
Benjamins Publishing Company, Philadelphia, TEL: (800) 562-5666.

 
Bibliographical Supplement:

MAJOR WORKS ABOUT TRANSLATION HISTORY

Ballard, Michel. De Cicéron à Benjamin: Traducteurs, Traductions, Réflexions. Lille:

Presses Universitaires de Lille, 1992.

Delisle, Jean & Woodsworth, Judith. Translators through History. Amsterdam &

Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995. (Co-published by UNESCO).

Kelly, Louis G. The True Interpreter: A History of Translation Theory and Practice in
the West. Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1979.

Lefevere, André‚ (editor). Translation—History, Culture: A Sourcebook. London:

Routledge, 1992.

Mounin, Georges. Teoria e storia della traduzione. S. Morganti, translator. Turin:

Einaudi, 1965. (no French version has been found).

Rener, Frederick M. Interpretatio: Language and Translation from Cicero to

Tytler. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1989.

Steiner, George. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1975.

Van Hoof, Henri. Histoire de la traduction en Occident. Paris /Louvain-la-Neuve:

Éditions Ducolot, 1991.

Vermeer, Hans J. Skizzen zu einer Geschichte der Translation. (2 vols., from

Mesopotamia to Old English and early German) Frankfurt/M: Verlag für interkulturelle
Kommunikation, 1992.

Alex Gross is the Chair of the ATA Special Projects Committee. He wishes to thank John
Bukacek, Loië Feuerle, Maria Galetta, Harald Hille, Alex Schwartz, and Marilyn Stone
for suggesting corrections and proofreading the text.
 6.The Interpretive Model and Machine Translation

By Mathieu Guidere
Master in Arabic language and literature and Ph.D in Translation Studies and Applied
Linguistics from the University of Paris-Sorbonne, 
Lyon 2 University - France Saint-Cyr Research Centre, France
mathieu.guidere@univ-lyon2.fr
http://perso.univ-lyon2.fr/~mguidere

Source:  Translation Directory

 For a long time, translation formed part of linguistic studies (see G. MOUNIN’s
works). However, during the last few decades, it has been institutionally associated with
“Language Sciences”, which represent a vast and very dynamic field in which
interdisciplinarity plays a key role.This association has led to the burgeoning of a
translation science (traductology or translation studies) within the field of Language
Sciences which does not deal specifically with “translation” but with “translation
operations and process”, thus reflecting the change in perspective adopted to approach the
study object.Our aim is to put forward an epistemological analytical grid of the field in
question i.e. the works related to the analytical study of translation and its natural
processing as a prelude to machine translation or computer-assisted translation. However,
delimiting a field requires one or several perspectives in order to define its axes, issues,
methods and aims.

Therefore, a broad outline of the theoretical conflict between the issues of

meaning and translation will first be laid down. We will then explain how this conflict
transcends logical formalization. The aim of devising a theory is to set the translation
pedagogy free from the “interpretive model”. Finally, these issues will be reexamined in
order to reuse the data for natural language processing (machine translation and
computer-assisted translation).To set up the analytical grid, we will have recourse to three
basic fields related to scientific methodology: the observation field, the hypothesizing
field and the validation field (see Auroux’s works). The purpose here is not to compare
the observed approaches or to express any value judgment concerning them; but to tackle
them from the natural language processing perspective as a step prior to translation,
because this perspective as well as its implementation are part of an “objective” process,
meaning that they merely draw up assessments about specific data. In other words, we are
first and foremost concerned with the observation, well sustained by descriptions and
validated data, so as to put these works into perspective and to draw up a specialization
field in the light of the principles introduced below. 

The Methodological Choices

The methodological choices concern the perspectives selected to analyze works

on translation in this study. These choices put the discipline at the crossroads of
theoretical linguistics and scientific empiricism, on the basis that the effects of a theory
are commensurate with the resulting application. For this reason, the study object,
translation, will be tackled in a descriptive way, i.e. as it is practiced and evolves
professionally. But this object must be defined by new analytical protocols and
imperatively has to move away from the prevailing interpretive models.By taking these
postulates into consideration, we will only describe attested works (the corpora of
translated and published texts) and use what are regarded, in these works, as empirical
elements which can be subject to a “corroborative” or validation test. But this aim does
not rule out the possibility of making observations of a different type using information
not contained in our corpora and works.

The data for analysis can be divided into three main categories. First of all,
electronic texts associated with observations. Secondly, a computerized system of
hypotheses and indications. Finally, validation applications relating hypotheses and
linguistic data arising from observation.Our work is essentially based on three tools:
electronic texts grouped into machine-readable corpora, work tools for observing and
classifying linguistic data and corroborative tools to validate the observation
results.Corpora used in this study had to match Sinclair’s terms. The observation of
linguistic data should lead to the constitution of a study object in accordance with a
specific and sustained extraction protocol. Results arising from the observation must be
“remarkable”, meaning that they should reveal high frequency usages and occurrences in
the reference corpus.

Consequently, our attention was turned to real final works (texts, sentences,
expressions, terms) and not to practices relevant to language usage (speaking, writing,
memorizing). The idea was that these speech practices cannot be subject to the rigorous
imperatives of data examination and that only observed works allow the application of
objective procedures. But this does not mean at all that what is observed does not reveal
what is happening in the speaker’s mind[1].This separation between “data” and
“practices” finds its counterpart in the field of computer science, in the separation
between the “declarative” and the “procedural[2]”. For the moment, we have to decide
which type of data must be observed and, specifically, which phrases and terms are
potential subjects for a systematic study of translation.Until now, our approach has been
based on the empirically verified postulate that the corpus texts used for examining data
represent well-formed and subsequent phrases respecting specific constraints, therefore
allowing us to distinguish a discourse construction from an anarchic set of phrases
lacking coherence and consistency.

This starting point is important because it puts a great deal of emphasis, in the
observation and analysis, on the significance of textual linguistics in comparison with
theoretical and general linguistics. This means that we are pursuing several objectives:
first, recognizing a text from a series of phrases with no logical or semantic link between
them, secondly, tagging the content of the text from a typological point of view
(technical, journalistic, etc.) and finally, classifying the information extracted according
to a previously defined protocol and linguistic criteria.To achieve these objectives, not
only must an observation methodology be adopted but results should also be expressed in
appropriate language. Therefore, in a text, we must learn to observe, on the one hand,
phrases according to the three levels of analysis (morphological, semantic, syntactic) and,
on the other, relationships between phrases according to the discourse type
(argumentative model or textual anaphora).Once the methodology has been adopted,
some work hypotheses can be made while referring to three main axes: firstly, the type of
formalism used, secondly, the linguistic extension or portability[3] and finally the aim or
objectives of the analysis.Concerning the first axis, the choice was made to make the
results more explicit while setting up hypotheses in a form which could be
computerized, i.e. likely to be represented by an algorithm and read by a machine. This is
the peculiarity of “formalization”[4] that we wanted to be specific to the constraints of the
translation process.In this respect, there are two ways of “formalizing” linguistic data:
one is totally independent from the computerized tool which processes data afterwards
and uses explicit instructions in the form of standard rules; the other is based on the
formal possibilities of machine-readable algorithms to represent the linguistic
information. However, both ways are often so complementary that we should start with
the first way before tackling the second. In both cases, machine-readable linguistic
formalisms are obtained at the end of the procedure.Concerning the second axis, we
decided to choose, as a starting point, a source text (ST) and, as a finishing point, a target
text (TT) in order to examine, in a contrastive way, their interactions through a range of
structures of varying complexity which needed to be described and extracted. Once the
structure is applied to the ST, in accordance with a specific protocol, it is simply searched
for and validated in the TT. Hence, this is a “source-oriented” point of view of the
linguistic extension.It should be mentioned at this point that translation studies
distinguish two points of view in the practice and analysis of translations: the “source-
oriented” point of view which favors the specificities and requirements peculiar to the
source text (faithfulness, literality) and the “target-oriented” point of view which favors
the target text (rewording, adaptation).

Concerning the third axis (the aim of the analysis), it should be noted that we
already have the “inputs” and the “outputs”, i.e. we already know the results of the
operation before even starting the formalization and implementation of the program
because we are working on text corpora which have previously been translated and
synchronized. The goal of this application is to show that the program runs in accordance
with given specifications. In other words, the program implementation is mainly a
validating procedure for the observation results[5].In the light of these elements, it ought
to be mentioned that in the field of machine translation (MT), the issue of “linguistic
extension” is essential and requires that we dwell upon it. It can be stated as such: in a
linguistic A system, the information associated with a subgroup of translation units
(sentences and expressions) shows a certain regularity and coherence likely to be
systematized and computerized. The question is to know whether the properties of the A
system, while maintaining the same underlying coherence, can be extended to a B system
in such a way that the source units of translation have adequate equivalents in the target
language. If this is possible and the modifications to be introduced do not affect the
internal coherence of the B system, we may then say that the A system and its subgroup
of units are linguistically extensible, meaning that they are transferable by a computerized
translation.

Let us take an example likely to be described adequately by a grammar in spite of

its complexity and semantic ambiguity. The sentence “The Minister of Education met his
Interior counterpart” can easily be translated by a human in any language. However, to be
translated by a machine, its linguistic properties must be extensible to the system which
will receive it. In this particular case, for example, the “the possessive phrase” (the
genitive construction in Arabic) should be transferable and the ellipsis in the recurrent
phrases (the minister of something) should be acceptable in both cases without major
modifications. Moreover, the issue of “predication” poses thorny problems concerning
“portability” in two different linguistic systems like English and Arabic.To avoid making
problems of correspondence between languages insurmountable, very detailed linguistic
indications must be provided to reach the next level of formalization as a prelude to
computerization. A machine-readable system of equivalences is thus a set of linguistic
formulae in which every formula specifies at least one pair of phrases (see the holistic
perspective of translation).

As an example, let us take a set of expressions (SES) in a source text (TEX) so

that every expression (EXP) can be associated with one or several indications (IND)
similar for all expressions (EXP) of the set (SES) in the text (TEX). This gives the
following formula: SES = {IND, EXP,TEX}.On the basis of this formula, an equivalent
formula, valid for the target text, can be obtained: SES1 = {IND1, EXP1, TEX1}. This
formula is justified with regard to a set of expressions with relevant linguistic features in
common in the target text without necessarily being equivalent to those of the source text
on the structural level. There is no systematic projection of the properties of one system
onto another. If there is projection, it must inevitably be done in accordance with a
grammatical principle whose formulation is subject to the calculation (formal or
algorithmic) which underlies all expressions in the text. In this way, a linguistic property
can or cannot be projected, in the same way as a system can or cannot be portable,
regarding the possibility or not of translating sequences from one language to another.By
adopting this “formalist” point of view in translation, explicit criteria for the comparison
of texts are laid down, each dissected and expressed in the form of adequate equations.
According to this method of analyzing translation, there is no “equivalence” between
languages but only “correspondence” of structures and linguistic features. As opposed to
“equivalents” which can be analyzed according to the similarity criterion,
“correspondents” are pairs of objects different on the form level but comparable on the
function level.The featuring of these “correspondents”, which include semantic
imprecision, mainly derives from the choices made during the observation stage. Which
comparison elements should be adopted? Of course, we exclude from our criteria any
subjective consideration concerning the “beauty” or the “elegance” of the translation to
be used for machine translation.

An Outline of the Adopted Approach

Our approach can be associated, from a theoretical point of view, with textual
linguistics with significant recourse to the principle of contrastivity and formalization.In
the framework of this approach, texts taken as a study backup are classified according to
the sources which have produced and distributed them (for instance a paper or an official
body) and according to their denotative field based on explicit semantic considerations
(for instance, texts about law or health issues).Once the field and the type of the text have
been well defined, observations focus, on the one hand, on its segmentation and on the
constituents of its syntax (the “chunks”), and on the other, on the links between those
constituents from a morphological and semantic point of view.Underlying calculations
ensure the validation of this approach from a theoretical and practical point of view.
Thus, the choice of textual units to be analyzed and formalized must be made according
to specific concepts such as those of “recurrence”, “coverage” and “precision”. Statistics
is used to detect the most frequent linguistic and translational usages of a structure in a
study corpus and to form the description which must tell us about the most relevant
elements.Hence, observation deals with what is immediately accessible in the phrases
under study, while semantics is not tackled at this point. The use of training corpora and
the induction of descriptions are at the heart of the textual approach. The main stages of
analysis are the following (reasoning from particular facts to a general conclusion):
 1)        Segmentation and morphological analysis;

2)        Disambiguation of morphological categories;

3)        Local and textual syntactic analysis;

4)        Analysis of functional syntactic relations.

The main difficulty of the analysis before translation is still the disambiguation of the
original textual context. This difficulty is essentially related to the problem of sentence
delimitation in order to eliminate the potential syntactic relations for a given type of rules
(i.e. the morphosyntactic rules or “chunking rules”). This problem becomes much more
salient during machine analysis of texts because difficulties resulting from the
ambiguities of morphosyntactic tagging combine with those of segmentation). With
current formalisms, it is difficult to automatically reduce the generation of “intrusive
analyses” which will inevitably be a problem during translation (see Chanod’s
works).Nevertheless, research into textual linguistics is opening the way to an inductive
process of translation. It is becoming possible to formulate inductive generalizations like
those of linguistic “correspondences” which are actually observed. However, to advance
research, it is imperative to implement systematically corroborative tests able to measure
the validity of adopted rules.

Limits of Interpretation in Machine Translation

One of the fundamental issues regarding the translation approach is still that of
principles allowing the interpretation of the meaning to be translated. The perspective
adopted here for analyzing translations deems there to be a specific translation
mechanism which intervenes in the interpretation of phrases and general principles
associated with interpretation to be insufficient. However, this mechanism should be
amended to take into consideration linguistics marks (tense, mood, linking word, verbal
and nominal lexicon) contributing to the interpretation of phrases and speeches to be
translated. We lay out here a general framework of the formal representation, the theory
of translational formalisms, and an interpretive translation model, the model of contextual
deductions, to specifically examine the question of translational equivalences. We will
demonstrate how this approach could be applied to natural language processing as a
prelude to translation (CAT and MT).In fact, a few years ago, new directions in
linguistics and semiotics began redefining interpretation in translation and regarded it as
an act of cognition passing through a comparative process of possible equivalences. The
idea of setting the record straight about interpretation in translation meets the need to
adjust practical observations to these new theoretical directions.To establish the elements
of the debate, we must start with texts from Umberto Eco’s book Les Limites de
l’interprétation. The author notes, in his introduction, that “some pushed too far the
interpreter’s initiative that the problem today is to avoid falling in a misinterpretation”.
And he later adds in his book: “All in all, to say that a text has no end does not mean that
{every} act of interpretation has a happy ending”. This is why the author strives to restore
a certain dialectic between the rights of the reader-translator and the rights of the
translated-to-be text.

Using the message “Dear friend, in this basket brought by my slave, there are
thirty figs I send you as a gift”, Umberto Eco gives a range of significations and referents,
but he asserts that we do not have the right to say that the message could mean anything.
It could mean a lot of things but it would be hazardous to suggest any meanings.
Asserting this fact means admitting phrases have a literal meaning: “I know how heated
is the controversy in this respect, but I still maintain that, within the limits of a given
language, there is a literal meaning for the lexical items, the one dictionaries mention
first”. Eco says we must set out to define a kind of swinging, an unstable balance,
between the interpret initiative and faithfulness to the text. The functioning of a text can
be understood by taking into consideration the part played by the addressee in the process
of its comprehension, realization and interpretation as well as the way the text itself
projects the participation of the reader.The debate on interpretation in translation is based
on two approaches: on the one hand,  searching for what the author meant to say in the
text[6]; on the other, searching for what the author says in the text, regardless of his
intentions, either by relying on textual coherence or on the signification systems of the
addressee. However, in all cases, one must use the literal meaning to develop a
translation.Translation criticism tries to explain the reasons why the text gives the former
meaning or the latter. The number of versions a translator can come up with is potentially
unlimited but, at the end of this process, each one of them should be tested with respect to
the textual and linguistic coherence, thus rejecting precarious or approximate translations.
Therefore, a text lends itself to numerous readings without allowing all possible
translations. If we cannot tell which translation is the best for a text, we can, however, tell
which are incorrect. Every act of translation is a difficult transaction between the
translator’s competence and the type of competence a given text needs to be translated in
a rigorous and coherent way. Within the unreachable author’s intention, what he meant to
say, and the arguable intention of the reader-translator, his interpretation, there is the
transparent meaning of the text which refutes any inadequate or unacceptable
translation.It is difficult to determine what is wrong and what is authentic in a translation,
because definitions depend on the issue in question. Nevertheless, in all cases, the
condition sufficient to have an incorrect meaning is the assertion that phrases from the
source text have many equivalents in the target text. Thus, translation is not erroneous
because of its internal properties but due to a pretended multiple identity between the
source and the target.Therefore, the sentence “All translators love foreign languages”, for
example, does not have many parallel meanings but it accepts in practice several possible
translations[7]. On the other hand, it is impossible to reasonably conclude that all these
equivalences are identical, structurally speaking, and regardless of the subjective
perception of individuals who have produced them.These different translations are not
only different wording of the same idea. Each structure stylistically expresses a different
meaning. Consequently, we cannot say that a nominal sentence and a verbal sentence
convey the same idea and express the same meaning, even if the words used are identical
in the two structures. We know predication is not the same in both cases because the
nominal sentence emphasizes the noun whereas the verbal sentence focuses on the
process or the action. To declare that two structurally different translations are equivalent
to a third original structure is to simply ignore the specificities of the linguistic structures
in expressing nuances and meaning subtleties.To be convinced of the validity of these
observations, “retro-translation” could be used as a discriminating criterion between
translations. “Retro-translation” means, in fact, retranslating to the source language,
without resorting to the original the version already translated into the target language.
Translating the version translated backwards and “blindly” often allows us to notice that
the equivalent structure was not the one taken as a starting point for translation,
demonstrating the inaccuracy of the aforementioned translation.The notion of “possible
equivalence” is useful for a translation theory because it helps to decide which meaning
interests the translator in his work and what he wants to convey through language. But we
must be aware of the fact that, among possible translations, there
are inevitable translations, improbable translations, and inadmissible translations.In a
sentence such as: “All translators love foreign languages”, the translator must think of the
best way of rendering it in the target language. He will first think in relation to the three
levels of language: morphological, semantic, and syntactic. The inevitable translation will
take into consideration these levels while being linguistically correct and culturally
appropriate. The improbable translation will move away from literal accuracy in an over-
translation of the original or create a certain stylistic effect. Finally,
the inadmissible translation will give a semantically different version of the original while
being linguistically accurate.

In this regard, a distinction should be made between “semantic translation” and

“critical translation”. The first is the result of the technique adopted by the translator,
when faced with the linear progression of a text, of giving a certain meaning in
accordance with the lexicon of its phrases, whereas the second is a metalinguistic activity
aimed at describing and explaining, on the formal level, why a given text gives a given
translation, with the exception of all others, however sensible they are.An exemplary
translator is not only required to be precise and meticulous but also to pay great attention
to the stylistic subtleties of both his work languages according to the principle that every
wording has its own meaning and aim in the linguistic system using it (the “economy of
language” principle). If the exemplary translator acts as such, he will produce a
consensual translation without any subjective value judgment. Otherwise, he will be
compelled to search in vain for possible meanings and potential ways of rendering
them.Some translators may wonder: “why be so rigorous if the meaning is understood
and conveyed?” However, such translators, indulgent or careless depending on each case,
will not be exemplary translators, because they seek the exact meaning and the inevitable
translation, the one likely to be taken and modeled for language natural processing. But
how can we achieve this goal when faced with so many readings and interpretations?
According to the semiotician Peirce, the meaning interpretation is an action involving the
cooperation of three subjects: the sign (ex.: the word rose), its object (the real tangible
flower) and its interpretant (the concept of the red flower). What is important in the
definition of Peirce is that it does not take into consideration an interpreter or conscious
subject. Hence, it should be remembered, in accordance with the analyses of Peirce and
Eco, how important the distinction between the meaning system (the sign system) and the
process of communication is (requiring the presence of an interpreter).

The meaning system is a series of elements with a combinatory rule governing

the disposition of elements between them (its syntax). The acceptable sequences of a
syntactic system associated with another system can be transferable from one language to
another (ex.: w+a+t+e+r = water = “drinkable transparent liquid” is transferable in any
language in the world without recourse to human interpretation).In a semiotic system, any
content could become a new expression likely to be interpreted or translated by another
expression in another language. Abduction is a form of inference which tries to accurately
interpret the meaning of a phrase and to establish a rule using a word and its context.
Recognizing a series of words as a coherent sequence (i.e. as a text) means finding a
textual theme able to create a coherent connection between different data with no link
between them. The identification of a textual theme is an example of an abduction. Every
translator makes abductions to choose between numerous possible readings of a text. The
economy of language criteria compel us to always choose the easiest option in the
absence of any other selection tool.The method adopted is the method of formal
linguistics but the approach suggested here[8] is based on three postulates of For a
Corpus-based Translation Methodology.

corpus linguistics:

Firstly, all translation solutions already exist in translated texts.

Secondly, all translational equivalences are subject to analysis and formalization.

Thirdly, all formalizations are systematized and computerized.

This approach is primarily applied to specialized texts (with a controlled or

closed vocabulary) and secondarily to general texts (with a connoted and polysemous
vocabulary). The first category comprises the vast majority of literature translated
nowadays, whereas literary (or poetic) language represents a tiny part of the discursive
usage in textual corpora.This approach is aimed at determining translations likely to be
formalized. To identify the most relevant translation solutions, we have recourse to the
calculation of occurrence frequency: the more an equivalent is frequent in translated texts,
the more it is regarded as an inevitable solution; the less frequent it is in translation, the
more it is regarded as marginal.We can mention, for example, for the sentence “All
translators love foreign languages”, five different ways of translating it into Arabic. The
most frequent wording would be considered as inevitable, regardless of its intrinsic
quality because we deem its recurrence to be proof of its validity, not to mention its
legitimacy. The goal is not really to evaluate the quality of translations but rather to take
note of the translational usage.

Thus, corpus-based translation is based on three principles or main presuppositions:

1)       The immanence principle: each pair of texts forms the same composite element
of signification; the analysis examines both texts but only as translations of each
other; it does not rely on external data such as dictionary information or
grammars.

2)        The composition principle: The only true meaning is through and in the

relationship between the two texts, especially the correspondence relationship
between translation units; the analysis of “bitexts” consists, therefore, of
establishing the correspondence network between different elements, a network
which will be the basis for the text translation.

3)        The structuring principle: every translation respects a discursive logic and a

grammar, i.e. a certain number of linguistic rules and basic structures. In a set of
units named “translations” there are different levels of correspondence, each with
their own grammar.
Therefore, the global content of a translation can be analyzed on three different levels:

1)        The translation level: in a translation, we study the changes which convey the
meaning of the source text to the target text. At the end of a translation process, the
analysis seeks to redraw the various stages, logically related to one another, which
mark the transformation of a sentence into its equivalent. In each stage, we specify
the links between the functions of some of the phrasal elements which determine the
meaning and produce the transformations.

2)        The discursive level: the analysis involves three operations: (a) identifying and
classifying sequences i.e. significant elements in a text; (b) establishing equivalents
to each element in the text in order to determine how this element was translated in
the text; (c) finding why elements, in a given text, are translated in such and such a
way.

3)        The logic-semantic level: it is the most abstract level of analysis. It works on the
postulate that logic and meaningful forms underlie translations of any speech. At this
level, analysis means specifying the logic which manages fundamental articulations
of translation units. To do so, we must have recourse to formalization and
representation of relations within and between sentences.

The thinking in translation studies currently seems limited to two correlative

paradoxes. On the one hand, the pragmatism of the “interpretive model” which obviously
tends to over-reduce the method and sacrifice precision for the sake of communication,
and accuracy for the sake of rapidity. On the other, the opposition between the logic
paradigm and the hermeneutic paradigm reduces translation pedagogy to a kind of
sophisticated mnemonics without any real applicable or metalinguistic dimension.In this
tense field, our translation theory evolves between the two paradigms (the requirement
for interpretation and the necessity for formalization). It questions interpretive practices
in the process of translation. In fact, the interpretation issue seems today to be the linking
point between text theories and translation theories. In our discipline, this issue is
nowadays the main controversial element for establishing a new applicable translation
methodology.We suggest below a preliminary draft of the translation work which could
be requested from novice translators.

1) Alignment and Criticism of translated corpora

Aligning corpora means matching every “translation unit” of the source corpus to
an equivalent unit of the target corpus. In this case, the term “translation unit” covers long
sequences like chapters or paragraphs as well as shorter sequences such as sentences,
phrases or simply words.The translation unit selected depends on the point of view
chosen for the linguistic analysis and on the type of corpus used as a database. If the
translated corpus is very faithful to the original, we will proceed with a close alignment of
the two corpora with the sentence or even the word, as the basic unit, whereas if the
corpus used is an adaptation rather than a literal translation, we will align larger units
such as paragraphs or even chapters.
 It is obvious that the initial postulate, which allows an educational use of such
corpora, is to establish correspondence between the content of examined units and their
interconnections. So-called “free” translations must lead to well-sustained thinking on
missing sequences, changes in the text order, content modification, meaning adaptation,
etc. All these operations are common in everyday translation practice but their frequency
varies according to the fields of study.

Furthermore, there are important structural differences between English and

Arabic which prevent rigorous sequential processing. Due to the huge linguistic
difference between the two systems, we often notice that the sentence order has been
modified and sometimes omissions or additions occur between two texts which are
nonetheless a translation of each other. These aspects must be examined from a stylistic
point of view and, if possible, systematized.All these observations lead us to consider
parallel corpora not so much as a set of equivalent sequences but rather
as corresponding text databases. At any level (text, paragraph, sentence, phrase or word),
the examined corpus should be regarded as a lexical and translation database. In other
words, we suggest submitting it to a search technique similar to the one used in
information searching systems.Thus, the main goal will be to highlight structural
equivalences between the two languages, and, more pragmatically, to search for the
closest T2 (the target text) unit to the “request” represented by a T1 (the source text) unit.

 2) The Linguistic and Stylistic Analysis of the Corpus

The different levels of linguistic analysis serve as a basis to study translation examples:

-    Firstly, morphological analysis identifies equivalent words or morphemes in the

corpus.

-    Secondly, syntactic analysis identifies corresponding phrases and structures in

both texts.

-    Finally, semantic analysis identifies the meaning of units and eventual ambiguities
in every text.

The usefulness of such a corpus goes beyond the limited framework of translation.
While the main goal is translation criticism, other useful applications may also be
considered such as generating bilingual terminology lists, extracting examples for
pedagogic purposes, enhancing current dictionaries or even for the induction of grammar
rules.The suggested approach allows us to optimize thinking in translation studies
regarding bilingual texts.The general idea of this approach is to associate equivalent
“translation units” (words, sentences, syntactic structures) when the corpus sequences are
identified.

The main goal of such an approach is to allow the pairing mechanism to be divided into
two different parts:

1)        Identifying the potentially associable “units” in the two corpora.

 2)        Calculating the probability of suggested units by submitting them to the
bilingual corpus data.

By dividing the procedure into two phases, relatively easy translation models can be
put in place in order to identify units likely to correlate the theoretical analysis with actual
translations observed in the corpus.One of the possible ways of devising operational
systems is to develop analysis methods based on the data stored in training corpora. But
such methods, based on model training, depend on the amount of a priori available
information.In this respect, a distinction can be made between two types of situations:

Situation 1: A parallel corpus of analyzed and annotated translation units is available a
priori, i.e. a corpus for which a syntactic scheme representing the structure of a unit has
been selected for each unit, given its meaning.

This first situation, in which a significant amount of information is available to evaluate

parameters of the equivalence model, will be referred to as a training situation and will or
will not be used, depending on its occurrence frequency in the annotated corpus.

Situation 2: Relatively little information is available, meaning it is a raw corpus. In this

case, hypotheses should be made on the basis of iterative re-estimation of corpus
data.  For example, all units starting with the sequence “except that” will be grouped in
order to compare their translations.

It is interesting to know in this respect that one of the advantages of the statistical
model, compared to more theoretical approaches of contrastive linguistics, is that it
considerably reduces the number of possibilities of approximate translations while
evaluating the quality of available corpora.Hence, an examination of translation
possibilities available in our corpus leads to the following observations concerning the
nature of equivalences: 

- cases of strong equivalence in which the number of words, their order and their
meanings in the (bilingual) dictionary are the same.

Example:

P1: “The rise in unemployment in March worries officials”.

T1: “izdiyâd al-bitâla fî mâris yuqliq al-mas’ûlîn”

Literally: “(The) rise (in) the unemployment in March worries the officials”.

- cases of approximate equivalence in which the number of words and their meanings are
the same but their order is different.

Example:

P1: “The President of the Republic received his Syrian counterpart”

T1: “istaqbala ra’îs al-jumhûriyya nazîrahu al-sûrî”

Literally: “received (the) President of the Republic his counterpart Syrian.

- cases of weak equivalence in which the order and number of words are different but
their meanings in the dictionary are the same.

Example:

P1: “Rains are expected in the North of the country”.

T1: “yutawaqqa‘u an tumtira fi al-shamâl”

Literally: “It is expected that it rains in the North”

In our bilingual corpus, this last case accounts for the majority of translation
equivalences.

A decreasing alignment of the bilingual corpus is used to ensure the greatest

possible reliability for the searching operation, from the largest translation units (chapters
and paragraphs) to the smallest ones (sentences followed by phrases and words). Thus,
the field of analysis is tightened by performing a “shrinking” alignment of the corpus
units and by focusing the search on gradually smaller units.

Conclusion

From a methodological point of view, combining a linguistic approach with a

stylistic approach makes it possible to fine-tune alignment and enhance translation
criticism.However, some aspects deserve particular attention in order to ensure training
efficiency.On the one hand, the type of data used, i.e. the bilingual parallel texts, may
pose a problem if the quality of the corpus is poor or if its translation quality has not been
subject to strict control.On the other hand, the sharpness of criticism and the precision of
extracted information concerning translation depend on the volume of available training
data.For all the aforementioned reasons, there will be a need for a long training period
with a great amount of diverse textual data. Once this stage is completed, the mechanisms
observed by the trainee on corpus can be reactivated to infer different kinds of already
tested translation solutions.

 
Indicative Bibliography

Chanod, J.-P., 1993, « Problèmes de robustesse en analyse syntaxique », in Actes de la

conférence « Informatique et langue naturelle ». IRIN, Université de Nantes.

Cori, M., Marandin J.-M., 2001, « La linguistique au contact de l’informatique : de la

construction des grammaires aux grammaires de construction », Histoire, Epistémologie,

Langage, 23 (1), pp. 49-79.

Eco, U., 1992, Les Limites de l’interprétation, Paris, Grasset.

Gazdar, G., & Mellish Ch., 1989, Natural language processing in LISP, an introduction

to computational linguistics, Addison-Wesley.

Guidère, M., 2002, Manuel de traduction français-arabe, Paris, Ellipses

Guidère, M, 2000, Publicité et traduction, Paris, L’Harmattan.

Guidère, M. 2001, “Toward Corpus-Based Machine Translation for Standard Arabic”,

in Translation Journal, n°1, vol. 6, http://accurapid.com/journal/19mt.htm

Kamp H., & Reyle U., 1993, From discourse to logic, introduction to model theoretic
semantics of natural language, formal logic and discourse representation theory,
Dordrecht, Boston : Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Lederer, M., 1994, La traduction aujourd’hui : le modèle interprétatif, Paris, Hachette.

Mounin G., 1978, Linguistique et traduction, Bruxelles, Mardaga.

Peirce, Ch.-S., 1978, Ecrits sur le signe, Paris, Editions du Seuil.

Seleskovitch, D., Lederer, M., 2001 (4è éd.), Interpréter pour traduire, Paris, Didier
Erudition.

Sinclair, J.M., Payne, J., Perez Hernandez, C. (eds.), 1996, Corpus to Corpus : a Study of
Translation Equivalence, IJCL 9.3.

Tognini-Bonelli, E. 2001, Corpus Linguistics at Work, Amsterdam / Philadelphia, John

Benjamins Publishing.

Wichmann, A., Fligelstone, S., Knowels, G., Eds. 1997, Teaching and Language
Corpora, London / New York, Longma.

[1] Regarding the psycholinguistic and cognitive aspects, we subscribe to the

position of Kamp and Reyle (1993, p.10-11): “the only access which the theorist
seems to have to the language of thought is via the languages we speak. Looking
into people’s heads [...] is an option that is simply not available.”

[2] To justify this separation on the formal level, we refer to Cori and Marandin
(2001, p.61-63).

[3] The concept of “linguistic extension or portability” concerns the possibility of

using the same calculation, either formal or algorithmic, to process different
languages or different aspects of the same language. It is interesting to mention in
this respect that one of the main arguments for justifying the transformational
generative option is related to the non-portability of grammars out of context to
deal with a range of constructions.

[4] Formalization consists of using a pool of explicit linguistic data to infer a set

of logic formulae through a calculation formalism implemented by software in
order to obtain inferred equivalences.

[5] To illustrate this, the best example in our field would be the use of ATN
(Augmented Transitions Networks). In fact, writing an ATN is practically writing
a program, because ATN is a procedural formalism which favours an exploration
of the input from left to right and a strategy from top to bottom (see Gazdar and
Mellish 1989, p. 96). 

[6] In the classical rhetoric tradition, this “vouloir-dire” can be divided into three
intentions: intentio auctoris, the author’s intention; intentio operis, the work
intention; and intentio lectoris, the reader’s intention.

[7] “kull / jamî‘ al-mutarjimîn yuhibbûn al-lughât al-ajnabiyya ; Al-mutarjimûn

jamî‘uhum yuhibbûn al-lughât al-ajnabiyya ; Yuhibbu jamî‘u al-mutarjimîn al-
lughât al-ajnabiyya ; etc.”

[8] By “method” we mean a set of scientific procedures implemented to explain

translations. We call “approach” a research oriented according to a specific point
of view.
 7.The Invisible in Translation: The Role of Text Structure

By Abdolmehdi Riazi, Ph.D. 

Associate professor, Department of Foreign Languages & Linguistics 
Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
E-mail: mailto:ariazi@shirazu.ac.ir?subject=inquiry from TranslationDirectory.com

This Paper was Presented at The First International Conference on Language, Literature,
and Translation in the Third Millennium, Bahrain University, March 16-18, 2002

 Source: Translation Directory

Abstract

It is conventionally believed that familiarity with the source and target languages,
as well as the subject matter on the part of the translator is enough for a good translation.
However, due to the findings in the field of text analysis, the role of text structure in
translation now seems crucial. Therefore, the present paper sets out with an introduction
on different types of translation followed by some historical reviews on text analysis, and
will then describe different approaches to text analysis. As a case in point, a text analysis
of the rhetorical structure of newspaper editorials in English and Persian and its
contribution to the translation of this specific genre will be discussed. It will be indicated
that newspaper editorials in these two languages follow a tripartite structure including
"Lead," "Follow," and "Valuate" making translation of this specific genre possible and
more accurate between the two languages. The paper will be concluded with the idea that
text analysis can contribute and lead to more accurate and communicative translations.

Introduction

Conventionally, it is suggested that translators should meet three requirements,

namely: 1) Familiarity with the source language, 2) Familiarity with the target language,
and 3) Familiarity with the subject matter to perform their job successfully. Based on this
premise, the translator discovers the meaning behind the forms in the source language
(SL) and does his best to produce the same meaning in the target language (TL) using the
TL forms and structures. Naturally and supposedly what changes is the form and the code
and what should remain unchanged is the meaning and the message (Larson,
1984).Therefore, one may discern the most common definition of translation, i.e., the
selection of the nearest equivalent for a language unit in the SL in a target language.
Depending on whether we consider the language unit, to be translated, at the level of
word, sentence, or a general concept, translation experts have recognized three
approaches to translation:

- translation at the level of word (word for word translation)

- translation at the level of sentence, and

- conceptual translation

In the first approach, for each word in the SL an equivalent word is selected in
the TL. This type of translation is effective, especially in translating phrases and proper
names such as United Nations, Ministry of Education, Deep Structure, and so on.
However, it is problematic at the level of sentence due to the differences in the syntax of
source and target languages. Translated texts as a product of this approach are not usually
lucid or communicative, and readers will get through the text slowly and uneasily.When
translating at the sentence level, the problem of word for word translation and, therefore,
lack of lucidity will be remedied by observing the grammatical rules and word order in
the TL while preserving the meaning of individual words. So, sentences such as "I like to
swim," "I think he is clever," and "We were all tired" can easily be translated into a target
language according to the grammatical rules of that language. Translation at the sentence
level may thus be considered the same as the translation at the word level except that the
grammatical rules and word order in the TL are observed. Texts produced following this
approach will communicate better compared to word for word translation.

In conceptual translation, the unit of translation is neither the word nor is it the
sentence; rather it is the concept. The best example is the translation of idioms and
proverbs such as the following.

"He gave me a nasty look" "Carrying coal to Newcastle"

"Do as Romans do while in Rome" "He kicked the bucket"

Such idioms and proverbs cannot be translated word for word; rather they should be
translated into equivalent concepts in the TL to convey the same meaning and produce
the same effect on the readers.

In addition to word-for-word, sentence-to-sentence, and conceptual translations,

other scholars have suggested other approaches and methods of translation. Newmark
(1988), for example, has suggested communicative and semantic approaches to
translation. By definition, communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers
an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the source language.
Semantic translation, on the other hand, attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and
syntactic structures of the TL allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original.
Semantic translation is accurate, but may not communicate well; whereas communicative
translation communicates well, but may not be very precise.Another aspect of translation
experts have attended to is the translation processes. For instance, Newmark (1988: 144)
contends that there are three basic translation processes:

a. the interpretation and analysis of the SL text; 

b.the translation procedure (choosing equivalents for words and sentences in the TL), and
 c. the reformulation of the text according to the writer's intention, the reader's
expectation, the appropriate norms of the TL, etc.
 The processes, as Newmark states, are to a small degree paralleled by translation
as a science, a skill, and an art.This paper is concerned with some aspects of the first
process. It will be suggested that a major procedure in the interpretation and analysis of
the SL text should be text analysis at the macro-level with the goal of unfolding rhetorical
macro-structures. By macro-structures we mean patterns of expression beyond sentence
level. In the next parts of the paper, first a brief history of text analysis will be presented
followed by approaches to text analysis. The paper will then continue by indicating how
two specific genres; namely, newspaper editorials and poetry, lend themselves to
macroanalysis of texts and how this analysis will help translators.

Historical Perspectives on Text Analysis

It is a major concern of linguists to find out and depict clearly how human beings
use language to communicate, and, in particular, how addressers construct linguistic
messages for addressees and how addressees work on linguistic messages in order to
interpret and understand them.Accordingly, two main approaches have been developed in
linguistics to deal with the transmission and reception of the utterances and messages.
The first is "discourse analysis," which mainly focuses on the structure of naturally
occurring spoken language, as found in such "discourses" as conversations,
commentaries, and speeches. The second approach is "text analysis," which focuses on
the structure of written language, as found in such "texts" as essays and articles, notices,
book chapters, and so on. It is worth mentioning, however, that the distinction between
"discourse" and "text" is not clear-cut. Both "discourse" and "text" can be used in a much
broader sense to include all language units with a communicative function, whether
spoken or written. Some scholars (see, e.g., Van Dijk, 1983; Grabe and Kaplan, 1989;
Freedman, 1989) talk about "spoken and written discourses"; others (see, e.g.,
Widdowson, 1977; Halliday, 1978; Kress, 1985; Leckie-Tarry, 1993) talk about "spoken
and written text." In this paper, we stick to "text analysis" with a focus on the structure of
written language at micro- and macro-levels.

According to Connor (1994), text analysis dates back to the Prague School of
Linguistics, initiated by Vilem Mathesius in the 1920s. Later on it was elaborated by Jan
Firbas and Frantisek Dane in the 1950s and 1960s. Connor (1994) believes that The
Prague School's major contribution to text analysis was the notion of theme and rheme,
which describes the pattern of information flow in sentences and its relation to text
coherenceOn the other hand, Stubbs (1995) states that the notion of text analysis was
developed in British linguistics from the 1930s to the 1990s. In this regard, the tradition,
as Stubbs (1995) continues, is visible mainly in the work of Firth, Halliday, and Sinclair
(See, e.g., Firth 1935, 1957a, 1957b; Halliday 1985, 1992; Sinclair 1987, 1990). The
principles underlying these works, as stated by Stubbs, demand studying the use of real
language in written and spoken discourse and performing textual analysis of naturally
occurring language.As (Connor 1994: 682) states, "systemic linguistics, a related
approach to text analysis and semiotics, emerged in the 1960s with the work of linguists
such as Halliday, whose theories emphasize the ideational or content-bearing functions of
discourse as well as the choices people make when they use language to structure their
interpersonal communications (see, e.g., Halliday, 1978)." Halliday's systemic linguistics
has influenced text analysis tremendously as well as curriculum models for language
education (see, e.g., Mohan 1986). Following Halliday and Hasan's (1976) taxonomy, the
notion of cohesion has been one of the popular issues in text analysis.
 According to Connor (1994), in the 1970s and 1980s, many linguists,
psychologists, and composition specialists around the world embraced text and discourse
analysis. Connor believes that this New School of Text Analysis is characterized by an
eclectic, interdisciplinary emphasis, placing psychological and educational theories on an
equal status with linguistic theories (whereas the Prague and systemic approaches
primarily orient themselves to linguistics). Examples of text analysis from this new
approach include studies of macro-level text structures such as Swales's (1990) studies of
the organization of introductions in scientific research articles; and Biber's (1988)
multidimensional computerized analysis of diverse features in spoken and written
texts.Bloor and Bloor (1995) contend that by the process of analysis, linguists build up
descriptions of the language, and gradually discover more about how people use language
in social communication. The same thing can be considered with the dynamic process of
translation in that the discourse and rhetorical structures encoded in the source language
can be reconstructed in the target language, and then the translator goes for the
appropriate syntax and lexicon. One of the indexes of a "good" translation would,
therefore, be to see to what extent a translator has been able to reconstruct the rhetorical
structures of the source text in the target language through text analysis.

Approaches to Text Analysis

We may roughly divide the available literature on text analysis into two groups.
First, those aiming at providing a detailed linguistic analysis of texts in terms of lexis and
syntax. This approach has mostly referred to as analysis at micro-structure. Second, those
related to the analysis and description of the rhetorical organization of various texts. This
approach has been labeled as macro-structure analysis of texts. In this paper, we are
concerned with macro-analysis and its implication in translation. First, the macro-
structure of newspaper editorials in two languages, English, and Persian, will be
presented. Then, the macro-structure of the poems of a famous Persian Poet, Hakim
O'mar Khayam, and the English translation of these poems by a well-known English
translator, Fitzgerald, will be presented as two cases in point. It would, of course, be
naïve to generalize these cases to all languages and all types of genres without adequate
research and empirical evidence. However, the point of discovering and unfolding macro-
structures in a SL with the goal of reconstructing nearly the same patterns in the TL in the
process of translation deserves theoretical and practical attention.

The Case of Newspaper Editorials

Bolivar (1994) studied editorials of The Guardian. She selected 23 editorials

from The Guardian during the first three months of 1981. Based on the analysis of these
editorials, she found out that a tripartite structure called "triad" organizes the macro
structure of the editorials. Bolivar explains that the function of the triad is to negotiate the
transmission and evaluation in written text and that it consists of three turns or elements,
namely, Lead, Follow, and Valuate, serving distinctive functions of initiation, follow-up,
and evaluation of the two. It shares similarities with the "exchange," as the minimal unit
of spoken discourse. The following excerpt taken from The Gardian, "Behind closed Irish
doors." March 3, 1981, cited in Bolivar (1994: 280-1) is an example of a triad.

 
L Britain and Ireland are now trying, at long last, to work out a less artificial link
between them than that which binds two foreign states.
 

F This is the most hopeful departure of the past decade because it opens for
inspection what had lain concealed for half a century and goes to the root of the
anguish in Northern Ireland. 
 

V The two countries now recognize that though they are independent of one another
they cannot be foreign.

According to Bolivar, not all triads have three turns. Triads can exhibit more than
three turns provided that the sequence LF is repeated and V is the final turn. Thus, triads
such as LFLFV or LFLFLFV can be found when the V turn is delayed by the writer.The
study of editorials from other British newspapers conducted by Bolivar confirmed the
existence of three-part structures in those newspapers.Parallel to Bolivar's study, Riazi
and Assar (2001) conducted a similar study on Persian newspaper editorials to see if the
same macro-structures are detectable in this particular genre. The editorials of six
currently published Persian newspapers were examined. A sample of 60 editorials, 10 for
each newspaper, was randomly selected to be analyzed.The editorials were analyzed at
two levels 1) at a rhetorical macro-structure level, and 2) at a micro syntactic level. Each
text (editorial) was segmented by sentence units and was codified according to its
function; lead, follow, or valuate. The inter-coder reliability indices of the segmentation
and codification of the editorials were then determined. An inter-coder reliability index
above .80 was obtained. The following excerpt from Iran (June 27, 1997), one of the
newspapers, is an example of a triad in Persian newspaper editorials.

L The motivating command of the Late Imam in May 1979 was the beginning of a
revolutionary era for the popular movement to construct and develop the villages
through the establishment of an organization called Jihad-e-Sazandegy.
 

F It was a revolutionary institution whose fundamental duty was the improvement

of economic and social conditions of villagers in Iran. 
 

V The marvelous achievements of Jihad-e-Sazandegy and the fruitful actions of this

public institution proved the Imam's correctness of recognition and depth of
revolutionary perception.

Results of the analysis performed on the editorials indicated that the most
frequent pattern pertaining to all the studied newspapers was LFV. In other words, we can
say that the general macro-structure of Persian newspaper editorials is LFV. This finding
is in line with that of Bolivar's (1994) as related to The Guardian newspaper. This
common pattern between the two languages enhances the translatability of the newspaper
editorials. The task of translators would be to look for the triads and go for the
appropriate syntax and lexicon. It is interesting to point out that in both Bolivar's and our
study, it was found that each turn is characterized by specific sentence types. For
example, it was found that "Leads" were mostly expressed in interrogatives; "Follows"
mostly used passive structures; and "Valuates" used conditional and copulas. The usage
of special syntactic structures for specific turns can be justified partly in light of the
discoursal function, attributed to each structure and reported in previous studies.
Interrogative sentences, for example, are used with the goal of eliciting information or
presenting some new topic for discussion. Since the main function of L turn is to
introduce the aboutness of the triad and a subject, therefore, it seems quite reasonable to
have interrogatives mostly in L turns. On the other hand, the correspondence of passive
structures and F turns might be due to the fact that passives provide development and
elaboration of the events. Reid (1990: 201) points out that "the passive voice is indicative
of the formal interactional character of ...[a] prose as opposed to the more personal,
interactive prose of narrative." As for V turns, we can say that the function of
conditionals is to produce or suggest some kind of solution or desirable action on some
conditions (Bolivar 1994), thus, the association between V turns and conditionals.
Becoming aware of these macro- and micro-features of texts, we can make our
translations of particular texts and genres more accurate, meaningful, and communicative.

The Case of Khayam's Robaiyat (Quatrains)

Omar Khayam was one of the most famous and beloved Persian poets of middle
ages. The Robaiyat of Omar Khayam is among the few Persion masterpieces that have
been translated into most languages, including English, French, German, Italian, Russian,
Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, and Urdu. The most famous translation of the Robaiyat from
Persian into English was undertaken in 1859 by Edward J. Fitzgerald. He has tried his
utmost to adhere to the spirit of the original poetry.Yarmohammadi (1995) studied the
rhetorical organization of Khayam's Robaiyat (quatrains) and compared it with its English
translation by Fitzgerald. His study revealed that the macro-structure of all Khayam's
Robaiyat included three components, namely, "description," "recommendation," and
"reasoning" which can be used as a criterion to distinguish between the real Khayam's
Robaiyat and those erroneously attributed to him. Based on his analysis, Yarmohammadi
came to the conclusion that the reason for Fitzgerald's successful translation of Khayam's
Robaiyat is that he was able to reconstruct the same macro-structures in English and then
apply appropriate sentence structures and lexis. The following is an example of one of the
Khayam's quatrains as translated by Fitzgerald.
 Fitzgerald:

And this delightful Herb whose tender Green

Fledges the River's Lip on which we lean—
Ah, lean upon it lightly! for who knows
From what once lovely Lip it springs unseen!

Literal:

The grass that grows by every stream

Like angelic smiles faintly gleam
Step gently, cause it not to scream
For it has grown from a lover's dream.

Conclusion

As Hatim and Mason (1997) state, a translator typically operates on the verbal
record of an act of communication between source language speaker/writer and
hearers/readers and seeks to relay perceived meaning values to a group of target language
receiver(s) as an separate act of communication. However, according to Hatim and
Mason (1990), we know little about what patterns there are and how equivalence could be
achieved between them. One thing of which we can be confident, nevertheless, is that the
patterns are always employed in the service of an overriding rhetorical purpose. This is an
aspect of texture which is of crucial importance to the translator. The structure of the
source text becomes an important guide to decisions regarding what should or should not
appear in the derived text. The point that the present paper tried to make is the benefit
translators may derive from text analysis in translation by determining the micro- and
macro-indices of the texts to support them in their difficult task.

Text analysis is, thus, becoming a promising tool in performing more reliable
translations. There are numerous studies done on text analysis, which can have interesting
messages for translators. For example, the kind of structure frequently reported for
argumentative genres include "introduction, explanation of the case under discussion,
outline of the argument, proof, refutation and conclusion" (Hatch 1992: 185). As a final
word, we may say that in translation we should first try to reconstruct the macro-structure
and rhetorical structure of the source text in the target language and then look for the
appropriate words and structures; this is a procedure that skillful translators perform in
the process of translation consciously or unconsciously.
References

Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. New York: Cambridge University

Press.

, Bloor, T. & Bloor, M. (1995). The functional analysis of English: A Hallidayan

approach. London: Arnold.

Connor, U. (1994). Text analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 682-685.

Firth, J.R. (1935). The technique of semantics. Transactions of the philological society,

36-72.

Firth, J.R. (1957a). Papers in linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.

Firth, J.R. (1957b). A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930-1955. Studies in Linguistic

Analysis, Special Vol., Philological Society, 1-32.

Halliday, M. (1978). Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Halliday, M. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. (1992). Language as system and language as instance: The corpus as a

theoretical construct. In J. Svartvik (Ed.), Directions in corpus linguistics (pp. 61-
77). Berlin: Mouton.

Hatim, B. & Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the translator. London: Longman.

Hatim, B. & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. New York: Routledge.

Hartmann, R. (1980). Contrastive textology. Heildberg: Julius Groos Verlag.

Hinds, J. (1980). Organizational patterns in discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and

semantics: Vol. 12: Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press.

Reid, J.M. (1990). Responding to different topic types: A quantitative analysis from a
contrastive rhetoric perspective. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Riazi, A. M., & Assar, F. (2001). A Text Analysis of Persian Newspapers

Editorials. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities of Shiraz University, Vols. 31 &
32.

Sinclair, J. (1987). Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary. London: Happer

Collins.
Sinclair, J. (1990). Collins Cobuild English Grammar. London: Happer Collins.

Stubbs, M. (1995). Text and corpus analysis. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research

Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yarmohammadi, L. (1995).The discoursal and textual structure of Khayam's poetry in

Fitzgerald's English versification. In L.Yarmohammadi (Ed.), Fifteen Articles in
Contrastive Linguistics and the Structure of Persian: Grammar, Text and
Discourse. Tehran: Rahnama Publications.

This article was originally published at Translation Journal

(http://accurapid.com/journal).
 8.Translation Theory and Practice

(Source:  http://www.sil.org/)

Good theory is based on information gained from practice. Good practice is based
on carefully worked-out theory. The two are interdependent. (Larson l991, p. 1)

The ideal translation will be accurate as to meaning and natural as to the receptor
language forms used. An intended audience who is unfamiliar with the source text will
readily understand it. The success of a translation is measured by how closely it measures
up to these ideals.

The ideal translation should be…

 Accurate: reproducing as exactly as possible the meaning of the source text.

 Natural: using natural forms of the receptor language in a way that is appropriate
to the kind of text being translated.
 Communicative: expressing all aspects of the meaning in a way that is readily
understandable to the intended audience.

Translation is a process based on the theory that it is possible to abstract the meaning
of a text from its forms and reproduce that meaning with the very different forms of a
second language.Translation, then, consists of studying the lexicon, grammatical
structure, communication situation, and cultural context of the source language text,
analyzing it in order to determine its meaning, and then reconstructing this same meaning
using the lexicon and grammatical structure which are appropriate in the receptor
language and its cultural context. (Larson l998, p. 3)

Diagram from Larson l998, p. 4

In practice, there is considerable variation in the types of translations produced by

translators. Some translators work only in two languages and are competent in both.
Others work from their first language to their second language, and still others from their
second language to their first language. Depending on these matters of language
proficiency, the procedures used will vary from project to project. In most projects in
which SIL is involved, a translation team carries on the project. Team roles are worked
out according to the individual skills of team members. There is also some variation
depending on the purpose of a given translation and the type of translation that will be
accepted by the intended audiences.

Books by SIL authors that present translation theory and practice include the
following which are available on line at the International Academic Bookstore. There are
also many articles on translation theory and practice listed in the SIL bibliography.

Of interest to all professional translators:

Callow, Kathleen, l999, Man and Message 
Gutt, Ernst-August, l992, Relevance Theory 
Larson, Mildred L., Meaning-based Translation (Also in Indonesian, Spanish, and
Russian.)

Of special interest to Bible Translators:

Barnwell, Katharine, l986, Bible Translation (Also in French and Russian)

Beekman and Callow, l974, Translating the Word of God (Also in Spanish)
Larson, Mildred L., with Ellis E. Deibler and Marjorie Crofts, l998, Meaning-Based
Translation Workbook: Biblical Exercises

Larson, Mildred L., editor. 1991. Translation: theory and practice, tension and
interdependence. American Translators Association scholarly monographs, 5.
Binghampton, NY: State University of New York. 270 p.

Larson, Mildred L. 1998. Meaning-based translation: A guide to cross-language

equivalence. Lanham, MD: University Press of America and Summer Institute of
Linguistics. x, 586 p.

 
 9.Types of Translations
(Source:  http://www.sil.org/)

Two translators may be translating from the same source text and into the same
receptor language and yet the results may be very different. There is not one "correct"
translation of a given text. Reasons for this variation include:

 the purpose of the translation,

 the translation team itself,
 the receptor language audience for whom the translation is intended.

The results are translations that fall someplace on a continuum from literal
translations to idiomatic translations. Literal translations follow very closely the
grammatical and lexical forms of the source text language, whereas idiomatic
translations are concerned with communicating the meaning of the source text using the
natural grammatical and lexical items of the receptor language. Translations that add to
the source text or change certain information for a specific affect are called unduly free.

SIL members are trained for, and committed to, the production of idiomatic

translations. However, since the projects they are involved in are found in a wide variety
of communication situations, and with team members with different training and skills,
the results may vary.

Choosing a translation type

There are various aspects of the communication situation that may determine the
choice of type of translation produced. One of the goals of the translation team is to
produce a translation that will be acceptable to the receptor language audience.

 The actual receptor language forms (grammar and lexicon) are chosen with the
educational level of the audience in mind, as well as their previous knowledge of
the subject matter.
 A newly literate audience will find it hard to read a translation intended for a
highly literate readership.
 Some audiences have a strong opinion as to the type of translation that is
acceptable. They may expect a close formal equivalence and will not accept a
more idiomatic translation.

The ideal of accurate, natural, and communicative is still the goal. But, in practice, this
goal may be carried out with differing result by different translation teams.
 10.Russian Website Translation - A True Professional′s Job

Russian is the most sought after language on the internet after English. However,
French and Spanish are also highly searched languages among all, but Russian still stands
better in results. The reason behind the fact is that Russians have long been isolated from
rest of the world and they do not find themselves comfortable with English.

People normally browse the internet in English but, for Russians, it is a bit
different. English is not their first language and most of the people Russian people hardly
get an experience of English in their whole life-span. This language limitation doesn′t
expel them from surfing internet. Russians surf the internet for Russian content only. This
fact about the Russians is no more a secret and more and more webmasters are working
hard to encash it. They are now opting for Russian website translation services to capture
this huge Russian-speaking market.

In the wide world of web, translating a language to another is not at all difficult.
Unquestionably, there are number of translation tools which have been developing
constantly. Your search for translations services can easily be accomplished through a
basic search on the internet. These instant translations are enough to convey your
message most of the time, but, as they are done through a machine (computer) not a
person, their results sometimes are little clumsy.

A language comprises various things such as grammar, vocabulary, some local

context and so on. Machine translation cannot follow every minute aspect of Russian
language and usually swaps an English word for its Russian counterpart. The outcomes
are often dismal and surprise the Russian native speakers with grammatically strange
sentences. This easy translation by machines, serves the purpose sometimes, but when it
comes to a website translation, one always desires to get the final result as accurate as
possible.

Rephrasing words in Russian by machine are simply not going to provide you the
results you are expecting. To get better translations, you can try other available options
also. The wide world of web is full of translation tools and software but, at the same time
it also directs you to thousand of websites offering professional translation service for a
document or a website. You can hire any of these website translation services. These
services comprise of a team of expert Russian translators. These translators know it well
how to translate a website dealing with the trickiest aspect of the Russian language.
About the author:

Dima Garan
2003-2008 Kharkov National University of Economics,
Dept. of International economic relations ,
Master′s degree in "Management of foreign-economic activity".
For a long period of time I was working as a sales manager in big corporation. My duties
in that corporation included work with translators who later offered me position of
Executive Director in a new-coming project. The project was organization and marketing
promotion of a group of linguists later named as Technical Translation Group.
Now the specialized English Russian technical translation group offers its services for
technical document translation, website or software translation and proofreading services
to the client who wish to expand their business globally and my work is to keep those
clients satisfied with our service.
Technical Translation Group
http://proftranslation.co.uk
Back to Article Index
 11.Starting a Career in Translation

To get started as a translator, you have to master a second language, so that is

your first priority. For the intelligence community, a common interest for many would-be
translators, the best language choices are Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, and Korean (in that
order of importance). Overall, Chinese is the best long-term choice, though arguably also
the hardest.
Mastering any language will require considerable classroom time, plus time spent
living in a country where it's spoken. You should also take all the classes available on the
history, culture, etc. of the country/ies where the language is used (you need to know all
this stuff). And (not to make this sound too time-consuming), you should also get
yourself up to speed on science and technology in general (this is what most translation
work ends up being about).
For training in translation itself (this is usually done at the graduate level), you
only have a couple choices in the U.S. right now: the Monterey Institute of International
Studies and Kent State University. So for undergraduate/college, any school with a strong
program in the language you want to study will suffice. You'll also want a school that has,
if possible, an organized exchange program for you to spend a semester, ideally a year,
abroad studying (the so-called JYA: junior year abroad).
Graduate-level training is not required, though often preferred by employers. This
is something to investigate once you have finished your B.A. and are deciding how to
enter the profession. The costs of such training are high, and not all languages are
available. In other words, practical considerations may decide this for you.
You also need some time, ideally years, living and working in a country where
your language is used. This is a vital step, often overlooked, and of the utmost
importance. For most people it's the only way to master all the details of a language.
With all this done, you should be able to find a position as a translator, though as always
in any field, you start at the bottom and work your way up.
 12.Unauthorized Harry

The eagerness of fans around the world for Harry Potter and the Deathly
Hallows combined with the greed of organized pirates has led to a predictable
phenomenon: unauthorized translations of the final Harry Potter book.Two days after the
release of the English language edition on July 21, a Chinese translation appeared in
China. A French version made its way onto the Internet on or before August 9, the
product of a 16-year-old boy from Aix-en-Provence, who has since been arrested for his
misdeed.
Meanwhile, J.K. Rowling and her French publisher Gallimard expressed concern
not about enthusiastic fans producing partial or complete translations in their spare time,
though that has happened, but rather about organized syndicates parceling out pages or
chapters to individuals to translate, and then cobbling together a foreign-language version
of the book ahead of the official release.
Considering the 335 million copies of the seven books that have sold worldwide,
there is clearly money to be made. Many countries, China in particular, are notorious for
not respecting copyrights on printed material. And once something is put on the Web, it is
essentially impossible to remove it.
A measure of the interest in France in the seventh book is found in the brisk sales
of the English-language edition. Since France has one of the lowest rates of English
ability in Europe, this is more than a little surprising. However, my talk with a bookseller
regarding the Harry Potter effect confirmed that these books have spurred interest in
English worldwide among children, and J.K. Rowling likely has had more influence on
literacy and English as a second language than any other person in history.
So here is the big question: are these unauthorized translations any good? If a
schoolboy can produce a translation of the seventh book in three weeks, why are the
French waiting until October 26 for Gallimard to publish the official translation? And if
the Chinese can produce a translation in two days, why has anyone had to wait at all for
the book in any language?

First, a few fact s about literary translation in particular, and language translation
in general, are in order. An experienced, competent translator can produce two to three
thousand words per day on average. Even the most highly gifted translators rarely
produce more than 5,000 words per day. So the numbers simply do not add up. This
French lad likely had help, possibly from friends or even teachers, all eager to have a
French version, though of course the boy himself clearly did not need it since he was able
to read the English original.
Also important is that translation is a form of writing, and most people do not
become good writers until they have had a decade or more of practice at it. Literary
translators may be born, as is the view of Gregory Rabassa, arguably the world’s most
famous literary translator and the man behind the English versions of the works of
Gabriel Garcia Marquez, but they also require considerable training and experience
before they can ply their craft.
I hope to be able to review the unauthorized French translation of Deathly
Hallows to see how it compares to the work of professionals. The Chinese version has
already been roundly criticized as sloppy, incomplete, and inaccurate, a poor rendition
hacked together by too many people working too quickly on a project they were
unqualified for.
That said, it would not take much effort to assemble a team of experienced
translators for a given language pair, and have them work through a book in a week or
two. Why then are books not produced this way?Some books in fact are. The many
political and ideological books that appeared after the September 11 attacks and during
the 2004 U.S. election cycle were likely produced by teams of ghost writers. A similar
approach is taken with the translation of magazines and newspapers, as well as books
whose content is informational and time-sensitive. Strike while the iron is hot, or don’t
bother.
A novel is an entirely different matter; it is a work of art. We will set aside the
question of whether Harry Potter is literature, art, fiction, or what and just accept that it is
closer to a work of art than a work of journalism or pulp fiction/non-fiction. As such, it
deserves the careful attention of one person who can maintain the style, tone, and
consistency of the original, who can select the right names and terms for the wizarding
world, and who has access to the author and publisher so that any questions can be
answered, problems clarified, and choices, such as how to translate a person’s name or an
ambiguous idiom, can be made accurately and appropriately.
So the wait will be worthwhile, if frustrating, for the people around the world
who do not read English. If you find this hard to believe, imagine this scenario: an
archaeologist finds a manuscript in the Middle East, written in Latin by one of the
apostles of Jesus. Unauthorized translations would likely appear very quickly, as would
lots of speculation and sound bytes about its content. But until the translators finish the
job, you wouldn’t want to draw any conclusions about the manuscript. Harry Potter and
the Deathly Hallows may not quite compare to such a manuscript, but it is still an
important book and deserves a proper translation.
 13. 8 Misconceptions About Translation and Communication
by Sean Hopwood
The translation industry is huge but not many people know about it or pay it that
much attention unless they have something to do with language services. People who are
employed in the field are typically asked what kind of work they actually do or if they
speak several languages. Industry terms are likely to be met with a blank expression and
even the most common term like translate may require a long explanation.Given such a
scenario, it's no wonder that several misconceptions about translation and consequently,
communication, abound.If your knowledge of translation is hazy, you want to clarify
what is involved in translation and you hope to understand the misconceptions that plague
the industry, here are some of them.
1. English is commonly spoken so there is no need to translate

A number of clients still believe that they do not need translation services
because many people around the world understand and speak English. English may be the
language of business, but it is important to understand that in the global business arena,
most of the English-speaking business people are those who are in top-level positions.
When dealing with new customer bases, communicating with foreign contacts and setting
up business partnerships, it is critical to talk to them in the language they commonly use.
One thing that helps guarantee your success in the international market is ensuring that
your business partners and target customers fully understand your company and the
products or services you are offering them.
2. A bilingual person can be a translator

It's a misconception among many people that if a person is bilingual, he or she

can automatically be a translator (or interpreter). Interestingly, many business executives
would not assign the preparation of text for technical and marketing documents to any
team member, yet they think that a bilingual employee would be able to handle the
translation of their documents.
You have to bear in mind that translation is a complex process and requires training and
expertise. A professional translator not only needs to be a skilled and creative writer but
must be a native speaker of the target language and fluent in the source language. These
qualities ensure that the translation is accurate, grammatically correct and very easy to
understand.The required qualities may be present in one of your employees but if you are
going to add translation to your staff's many tasks, it will put more burden to him or her.
Further, as translation takes time, it will take your employee away from his or her original
tasks. The translation will take more time as well, since he or she will have to set aside
time to concentrate on the special task. Are you willing to wait for the translation to be
completed? Would you allow your staff to reduce his/her job performance?
3. Translation is just word substitution from one language to another

Technically, it is true that translation is partly word substitution. Translators

exchange the words from the original language into appropriate words into the chosen
(target) language.
However, translation is a complex process that requires a translator not only to be fluent
in the original (source) language but also in the target language. It is not a literal word-
for-word exchange. Translation requires the translator to understand the context of the
document in order to convey the intended message properly. The work needs the
experience and expertise of a trained translator to understand the nuances of both
languages, the grammatical issues and choose the right words and idioms that will fit the
end user of the translation.
Each translation project is different and the requirements vary. The way the
document is written varies as well. Content for healthcare is different from a legal
document and a literary piece is different from a manufacturing manual. Therefore, the
translation has to adapt to the preferences of the persons who would be reading the
translation. If the translation is intended for high-level professionals such as doctors,
engineers, scientists, teachers and others, the language and terminologies must fit their
profession. General information, product descriptions, instructions and manuals for public
use should use words and terms that are simple and easy to understand.Within a
translation company, several people are involved in a translation project, such as a project
manager, the translator, an editor and a proofreader. They typically use dictionaries,
references, databases, special terminology and computer-aided tools to ensure the proper
and accurate translation of a document.
4. A translator can be an interpreter or vice versa

This is another misconception that should be clearly addressed. Both are

language services, but the two jobs, although often interchanged, are different from one
another. In simple terms, a translator handles written content. An interpreter works with
the spoken word.A translator reads and extracts the context from the document to be
translated. He or she has more time to fully digest the content and use references and
other tools to render accurate translation. An interpreter has a higher level of proficiency
in the source and target languages.
There are two main types of interpreting services.
1. Simultaneous interpreting. This means the interpreter renders what is being
said in the target language as a person speaks. The interpreter has to listen very
carefully to what the speaker is saying, as there is no time to paraphrase the lines.
Simultaneous interpreting is typical in trade shows, big conferences and large
multinational meetings.
2. Consecutive interpreting. Hre the interpreter repeats what the speaker said in
the target language when the speaker pauses or stops, typically after one to five
minutes. The interpreter usually takes notes in consecutive interpreting, as it
would be very difficult to memorize everything that has been said before the
speaker stops speaking. Consecutive interpreting is applicable to court hearings
and small business meetings.
5. Translators only know languages

Fluency in at least one language pair (source and target languages) is required in
a translator. But the work demands much more. A translator has to understand the culture
of the people where the source document came from and a deeper knowledge of the target
culture. This knowledge is essential in order to make communication easier. The
translator not only renders the content into another language but has to understand the
level of understanding of the target audience, their cultural preferences and how they
consume and use the information.
6. You do not need a course in translation to be a translator

Many people believe that if you can speak other languages you can be a translator
even without studying it. You might be surprised to know that there are many colleges
offering programs in translation studies. Those who are interested in the profession are
interested in linguistics as well. Typically, you need a bachelor's degree, but if you want
to advance in your chosen career, there are schools that offer Master's and Ph.D. degree
courses in translation. Aside from learning the theory and practice of translation, there
will be several other programs included in the course, aside from the foreign language
programs.Some schools offer specialized translation courses to train students for
positions in specific fields such as legal, business, education, mental health and medicine.
7. The saying "customer is always right" applies to translation

Although it is generally accepted that you should cater to what the customer
wants, in the case of translation, there are some minor issues with this generally accepted
behavior. The translation project manager must fully understand the scope of the
translation project. A client may say that they need English to Spanish translation for
documents they are sending to Latin America.
This is a general request. In the industry, the request should be specific. The
translation company has to know the exact location in Latin America because different
Spanish dialects are spoken in the region. Moreover, French and Portuguese are also
spoken in many countries in Latin America. If the client does not know, the translation
company can help determine which specific Spanish dialect is spoken in their target
locations, or they may have to translate into Portuguese rather than Spanish. Moreover, if
the content is for a specific industry, the translation company will have to locate a subject
matter expert to handle the translation work.
8. Online translation tools are good enough
You would be surprised to know that many companies still believe that they can
use the free online translation tools for their communication. The online translation tools
do not understand context and other grammatical and cultural requirements. They
typically perform word-for-word translation and provide translation outputs that are
inaccurate and difficult to understand. For effective communication and to preserve your
company's reputation, work with professional translators so you can reach your
international business partners and consumers in their own language.
In conclusion
Forget the misconceptions about translation because language services benefit
individuals, groups, organizations and almost every industry. With the opening of new
markets around the world and you wanting to explore and conquer these markets, you
should understand the benefits of translation for you and your company.
About the writer
Sean Hopwood is the President and CEO of  Day Translations, Inc., a human-powered
translation company. Sean has a deep love for languages, soccer and new technologies.
He spends whatever time is left from his busy schedule to write about business
management.
 14.The Role of Legal Translations in the Digital Era
by Ronnie Avelino
The Internet and globalization have started an increased need for translation
services. More companies today have to deal with the global community, which results in
the creation of additional digital documents in various languages. Most of these
documents are legal in nature. Corporate documents and company websites contain
privacy rules, service contracts, terms of use and licenses. All of them use legal
phraseology that should be translated in many languages to ensure the complete
comprehension of target audiences.
A legal document is complex and intricate and even if it is in one's own language,
it can still be incomprehensible and obscure. The role of the legal translator or a legal
translation company is to ensure that the source document is accurately rendered in the
target language. The translator should make sure that the legal document is
comprehensible in the new language.The complexity and burden of legal translation is
huge. The legal translator has to contend with two different languages, two different
cultures and two different legal systems.
Consistency in work processes

Globalization means that effective communication is necessary and it is vital that

the language barrier is overcome. Legal translations are not confined to legal cases. Many
industries and services require legal translation in the same manner that technology
touches these same services and industries.Specific terminology is used in different legal
translation projects. Aside from creating a terminology database, digital technology can
make the database accessible to clients, authorized users and the translation company to
ensure the consistent use of the particular terminology across different platforms.
No replacement for human translators

While computer-aided tools help facilitate the execution of some translation

processes, the actual processes of translating a legal document from the source language
to the target language can only be done by a human translator.Legal documents are
complex and intricate and their translation requires care and precision. With legalese
being what it is, a subject matter expert is needed for legal translation because the legal
language is different from standard language. And since most people are comfortable
reading information in their own language, the more essential it is for the nuances of the
language and the proper legal language suitable to the situation and circumstances are
used, which is something that machine translation cannot do.
Working together
Digital technology and legal translation benefit from working together. Digital
technology created translation memory tools, online databases and corpora, cloud-based
workspaces and machine translation tools. Technology makes their work more time-
efficient and effective and the use of these modern technologies helps developers create
better and more responsive translation tools.The work of legal translators is not going to
go away but it's going to change for the better, ensuring that they can deliver more
consistent work because of digital technology.
About the writer
Ronnie Avelino is the Alliance Manager of Day Translations, Inc. a legal translation
company.
 15.Google headphones: The new era of translation
by Cathy Baylis
New technologies made our world a genuine global village. Today, we have more
than 1.5 billion people worldwide who can speak English, with less than 25% of them
actually being native speakers. However, it doesn’t mean that we don’t need other
languages and translation services anymore.
Google realized this a long time ago when it launched the Google Translate app.
But now they went one step forward and presented their state-of-the-art product: Google
Pixel Buds. These are the new type of headphones which should be able to translate
foreign languages in real time.In this article, we are going to analyze the product based on
information and impressions that we collected at the Google’s event in San Francisco.
What we know about Google Pixel Buds so far

the smartphone, Google Pixel Buds provide users with the possibility to listen
and understand foreign languages live. When you listen to a person speaking the language
you don’t understand, you can hold down the earbud and it will simultaneously conduct
the translation into the language of your choice.At the same time, headphones also give
you the chance to speak foreign languages in a way. Namely, this tool uses Google
Translate to make real-time audio translations. All you need to do is to press the earbud
and tell “let me speak Spanish”. Once you do that, you can continue speaking in English
(or any other language you want) and your smartphone will generate an audio translation
of your sentences in Spanish.
Last year, Google Translate celebrated its 10th birthday and stated that their goal
was to break language barriers and to make the world more accessible. However, they
emphasized that there was still a lot of work to be done in that regard. Now it seems that
they were talking about Google Pixel Buds.This new version of Google Translate service
is able to reproduce speech in 40 different languages at the moment. The release date is
November 22nd, while the UK price should be around £159. According to literature
experts at assignment writing services, this is definitely not too much for the first ever
real-time language translator.
Concerns about Google headphones

Although presented in big style at the pompous ceremony, Google headphones

still raise concerns among some part of IT public. Bearing in mind a long history of
mistakes made by Google Translate, many professional translators wonder how the new
live service is going to handle such a difficult task.However, Google representatives
claim that there is no reason to worry about it because now they use a completely new
translation algorithm. The main difference is that Google Pixel Buds don’t translate each
word individually. Instead, this device translates entire sentences and paragraphs as a
whole.This system drastically improves the process and generates more accurate
translations in unprecedented speed. Additionally, the new system is able to learn and
detect mistakes, which makes it smarter over time. It adds to the overall credibility and
makes Google headphones by far the best audio translation device on the market
currently available.
Conclusion

Every once in a while Google surprises us with new inventions and

groundbreaking products. This time, they did it with Google Pixel Buds – wireless
headphones which can translate around 40 languages in real time.Though there are
concerns about the ability of new headphones to produce correct simultaneous
translations, initial testing showed some nice results, but we need to wait until November
to try them out first-hand. Until then, kindly tell us your first impressions about this
product in comments.
About the writer

Having spent many years in professional environments, Cathy Baylis now works
with students, giving advice and assignment help in the academic area of business studies
and related topics and also helps with career development and career potential.
 16.How to find the efficient translator for error-free translation
by Lucy Justina

Translation is a process that makes the content available in different languages

for global access. Product brochures, legal documents, books, manuals, financial reports,
and websites are usually translated in different languages to make the content readable to
the people from different origins. The process of translation sounds as simple as
converting the text from one language to another, but there is a need for lot of precision
as wrongly framed sentences can sometimes change whole meaning of the document,
especially legal documents. Big organizations therefore hire professional translators to
get the error-free translation.
Knowledge of two languages is in fact the bare minimum you may look for in a
translator. However, here are the skills that make any translator a good translator!
Profound knowledge of both the languages

It’s quite apparent that translation requires knowledge of both the languages, but
just working knowledge may not help. It has been observed that one of the two languages
involved in translation assignment is the native language of the translator. The comfort of
translating any other language into the native language usually becomes the reason for
mistakes. One should not go easy with the language even if it is his first language as there
is lot of difference in written and spoken versions of the language. The professional
translator would be the one who would acquire the profound knowledge of both the
languages before undertaking translation job.
Ready to carry out detailed research of the subject

Thorough research of the subject would become key to find proper words. Some
legal documents and product brochures may lose the entire meaning if the correct word is
not used during translation. Detailed research would make the translator find the right
words that would depict the correct meaning.
Professional certifications
There are institutes offering professional certifications that are globally
recognized. Depending on the type of project, one should look for the certifications. It is
not necessary that all experienced and skilled translators may be the certified ones, hence
ensure that selection of translator should be based on the project and not just on the
experience or certification of translator. Sometimes the experience of working for
relevant projects may overweigh the certifications. Finding the right blend of experience
and certification based on the translation project would ensure effective and error-free
translation.
Professional ethics

Most of the translation projects are confidential and the documents involved may
require high level of confidentiality. Translator should be ready to undergo necessary
confidentiality contract to maintain the secrecy. Discipline on the translator’s part is also
required as all these projects are time bound and come with fixed deadlines. In order to
ascertain these qualities, one can look for the past records and client testimonials for the
translator. His past project will speak about his work.
Mechanical translation of the document from one language to another can also be
carried out by the computer, but the reason to hire the professional translator lies in the
human touch involved. Effective translation is the one that is done after understanding the
context of what is written, and that calls for all of the above qualities in the translator!
 17.What Free Online Translation Means to Translation Companies
by Luciano Oliveira, @TTCLuciano

Not long ago, any piece of content to be translated would mean new business for
translation companies. Today, the share of content to be translated that actually goes to a
translation company has been substantially reduced. A few ideas on why and how this
happened, and what this means to the translation companies.
Google Translate Has Killed FIPO Translations

FIPO stands for “For Information Purpose Only”. This term was created to
differentiate content that was “just for information” (like the name says) from “for
publishing” translation. While it is obvious that anything being published (be it on paper
or online) should have a perfect quality, this is not necessarily true for FIPO. When
someone just needs to know the meaning of a certain content in a different language, they
are more tolerant to inaccuracies.
FIPO translation represented a large chunk of the translation business in the past. Not
many years ago, companies doing global business would translate lots of documents and
content “just for information”. Examples:
 A quote request received from a client overseas
 A price list from a supplier abroad
 News from foreign competitors in other languages
The Translation Company Group LLC, also known as TTC, estimates that back in 2007
almost 50% of all translations were FIPO translations. 2007 is exactly the year when
Google made available their machine translation service. Google Translate, a proprietary
algorithm, based on statistical models, provides automated machine translation for free
(more about Google translate history on Wikipedia).
As of January 2016, Google Translate supports 90 languages (some languages
better than others) and serves over 200 million people daily. One may assume that the
vast majority of these translations are “FIPO”. People are now getting cost-free
translation for content they would be paying big bucks to translate 10 years ago. The
quality of these translations is far from professional, but they work very well when you
are willing to exchange quality for free cost. So, in our three examples above, instead of
going to a translation company, translation clients are now going straight to Google
Translate.
For TTC and other language companies alike, Google Translate meant a drastic reduction
in FIPO translation business.
Two Things Going For Translation Companies: MT Challenges and Growing
Global Demand
MT Challenges

Machine translation has become great for FIPO translations, but it is decades
away from offering a reliable translation for publishing purpose. For instance, there are
hundreds of cases of mistranslations from Google Translate in the news. A recent
example:

The reasons for mistranslations are multiple. There are still technical
limitations in the field of machine translation, and human error or manipulation may
also cause serious errors in the translations provided by free translation services. As
Google Translate, for instance, relies on feedback (‘edits’) from translators using its
platform, an orchestrated effort by a large number of translators may indeed lead Google
Translate to assume a mistranslation is actually right.
In the “Russian Federation” case above, Google replied to The Guardian with a
statement saying that “its translator tool works without the intervention of human
translators”, which is obviously not true when you remember that “In the (Google
Translate) web interface, users can suggest alternate translations, such as for technical
terms, or correct mistakes” (source: Wikipedia). Google themselves ask users for help on
their website:

And, we should remember that to get to this current state of quality (or “lack of quality”),
decades of R&D were required. Automated translation of texts became a research subject
for the first time at MIT in 1951 – meaning 65 years of investments in such technology.
Even considering that the evolution of technology may be exponential instead of linear,
most experts in the language industry don’t see a pure MT translation being used for
publishing anytime soon.
Growing Demand for Translation Services

Despite downturn in China and other problems worldwide, translation services

business in general is actually posed to keep growing steadily. “As nonnative English
speakers came to the United States and companies took products overseas, demand for
translation services was driven upward. Though industry clients will continue to be
price-, service- and quality- conscious, globalization and an increase in immigration
will boost demand for industry services over the five years to 2020” (IbisWorld).
So, if “FIPO” translation is gone, demand for technical translation has increased as
it has been the case for any translation “to be published”.

Curiously, even machine translation has created a new market for translation
companies. Now, they offer the so-called “human edited machine translation”, which
means a text pre-translated by a machine translation engine for a human editor to finalize
it. This machine translation used by translation companies is not the same as Google
Translate. They have more complex (and costlier) options, which may render a better
result at the end.
These hybrid applications are ideal for large projects to be completed in short
turnarounds. And, they are now representing an entirely new business line for translation
companies.
The End Result for Translation Companies

The end result for translation companies is an actual increase of translation

business along deep changes in the state of the art in the industry.
there are more translation dollars in the market available to language companies.
However, not all companies may be getting the same access to this growth. Larger
translation companies are better equipped to leverage on technology and highly
specialized professionals (e.g.: localization engineers) to handle translation projects that
are more complex by the day (e.g.: the human-edited machine translation projects).
Our prediction is that small to mid-size translation companies will suffer and
struggle to adapt, while larger ones will get the most from these changes. Small
monolanguage agencies along freelance translators, where most of the hands-on
translation actually occurs, will continue to enjoy an increasing demand even if
translation eventually becomes an “editing job”.
About the writer

Luciano Oliveira is the CEO of The Translation Company Group LLC, a

translation company with offices in New York City and San Francisco. He lives in New
York City along his wife and four kids.
 18.Online Context-Specific Translation Programs and Courses
by Angelita Williams

Translation is an extraordinarily difficult task, perhaps even more difficult than

learning a second language in the first place, because translation is involved in the
transmission of meaning between two languages that do not have one-to-one
correspondence in meaning.
For example, if someone were to say to you in Spanish, "Tengo hambre," and you
had an amateur translator explain what she meant, you might end up with something like,
"I have hunger," which is the literal translation from one language to another."Tengo
hambre," however, merely means, "I am hungry." The difficulty is that Spanish does not
have an equivalent phrase or syntactical mechanism to directly correlate in meaning to
the English phrase. Thus, translators are tasked with understanding the subtleties in both
the source and the target language, and bridging the gap in meaning between the two.
Being able to bridge that gap usually requires fluency in both languages, a feat
that takes many years and often immersion in another country to fully absorb
idiosyncratic and regional turns of phrase or informal slang to be able to convert one
language into another.There are certain situations, though, in which complete fluency is
not absolutely necessary, such as business situations, where members of both parties tend
to speak very formally anyway, or in the case of literature, where again authors tend to
write formally.
For these situations there are online courses and programs that students and other
interested people can enroll in to gain a working knowledge of another language and the
specific kinds of phrases they will need to be familiar with to transmit meaning from on
language to another.Of these programs, New York University's School of Continuing and
Professional Studies probably offers the most well known. These courses include: Arabic
to English Medical Translation, English to French: Translating the News, English to
Portuguese: Translating for International Organizations, French to English Translation for
Marketing and Advertising, among others.
As you can see, these courses are highly situation-specific. Translating a work of
literature, or even just a simple exchange between an enamored couple would probably
pose a much greater challenge than translating a news headline, both because you are
unlikely to find very much slang in the headlines, and because the subtle nuances of
language are not as important (though they do play an important role).Still, as advanced
as the internet is, you couldn't rely on translation sites for an accurate representation of
meaning. There really is no substitute for interacting with a native speaker or a thorough
education in another language from an accredited online course.
So if you are interested in becoming a translator, start trying to talk with native speakers
and look for a program that can put you in context-specific language situations that will
hone your ability to transmit meaning accurately and clearly.
About the writer
Angelita Williams writes on the topics of online courses. She welcomes your comments
at: angelita.williams7@gmail.com
 19.Lost in translation: traps for translators
By Tereza Kaplanova

As the postmodernists never tire of telling us, language is slippery. The precise

meaning of words can slip and slide rather than remain fixed. Consider the sign that reads
'Dogs must be carried on an escalator' - on the surface it seems clear enough that if you
have a dog you should pick it up before riding the escalator. But spare a thought for the
poor obedient people frantically trying to borrow a dog so they can get to the upper level.
If the slippery nature of meaning is a problem in the use of just one language, the
issues are multiplied for professional translators or those translating while
pursuing language studies abroad or learning a new language at home. When working
across several languages, maintaining the meaning of slippery words can become a
veritable ice rink. Here are some areas that can easily get lost in translation:
Idiotic idioms

Automatic translators, such as Google Translate, will often struggle with

idiomatic phrases. Generally speaking, idioms are expressions that cannot be completely
understood from the meanings of their individual components.
Source: http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5182/5613377261_6f849b292d.jpg
Phrases such as 'a heavy smoker' require not just knowledge of the individual
words but an understanding and appreciation of how the language is actually used in
everyday speech. The phrase refers to someone who smokes a lot rather than an
overweight nicotine addict. During a recent German course in Freiburg a student
encountered a similar problem translating the idiomatic German phrase 'ein blaues auge',
referring to someone who was 'blue-eyed' rather than someone with a 'black eye' from
being hit.
While some idiomatic expressions carry over very well from one language to
another, others simply do not. 'He's getting on my nerves' and 'Er geht mir auf die Nerven'
are almost identical. But more often, the German and the English versions are nothing
alike: 'He had the nerve to say that' and 'Er hatte die Stirn, das zu sagen' (which literally
translates as 'he had the forehead ... ') can cause issues, but the cunning translator may
substitute another body part for an English equivalent: 'He had the cheek to say that.'
Acrimonious acronyms

Acronyms are often a headache for translators. Do you keep the original acronym
or do you create a new one from your translation of the organisation's name? From one
point of view, it depends on how well known the organisation is. For example, the WTO's
acronym in French (OMC) is as well known as the English one. However, it is a different
matter for lesser-known bodies. If you translate the name of an organisation, it would
make sense to also translate the acronym. But then you run the risk of making the
organisation completely unrecognisable. One safe way to deal with this issue is to leave
the original name and acronym - 'Summer Camp Switzerland' and SSC, for example - but
include a translation of the name in brackets when it first appears.

Other troubling translations

 There are many other potential problem areas for translators, including: the
proper names of people, organisations and places; the use of slang; and handling
punctuation conventions. While the solution you come up with is one of personal choice,
you should look carefully at how others have handled the issues and choose what appears
to be the most elegant and effective solution. It is also important to be consistent - choose
a way to treat something and stick with it throughout. Hopefully your meaning will not
get too lost in translation.
 20.How Eastern Europe fits into the European Translation Market
by Kevin Fountoukidis
As the American CEO of one of the fastest growing localization companies in
Eastern Europe, and having lived in the region for more than 13 years, you might expect a
unique perspective. However, my observations will probably seem quite standard and
actually apply to translation/localization companies all over the world. The arguments I
present here are typical of discussions related to offshoring and basing production
operations in low cost versus high cost countries. This article aims to address the state of
the translation industry in Eastern Europe, so from here on in by high cost countries I
mean those in Western Europe and the by low cost countries I mean those in Eastern
Europe.
One disclaimer before I get rolling: There is a big market out there. Even if I suggest
that some companies need to change if they are to survive, every well run company, no
matter where they are based, can not just survive, but thrive.
Old Europe is Changing

Before we look at "New Europe" we need to see what's been going on in the so
called "Old Europe". I often hear complaints from Western European companies like,
"Prices are coming down...", "Our clients are squeezing us all the time...", or "Turnaround
times are dropping...it's tougher than it used to be..." Most good Western European
translation companies are comfortable businesses. They are excellent companies
providing very high quality services into a growing market. They have had a good 10-15
years of relatively high margins in high cost countries doing predominantly French,
Italian, German, Spanish, as well as a handful of other languages. I think a change that is
occurring though is that the market has become more competitive, there are more
companies out there and many West European translation companies are not geared
toward more aggressive sales and marketing. Added to this, due to the phenomena of
offshoring translation work, prices are coming down and it's harder to offer competitive
pricing in high cost countries. Here, the issue of sales becomes important.
It must be rocket science

Sales is relatively simple in theory, but doing it is hard work. It's not (and never
was) just about putting an advertisement in a trade magazine or setting up a stand at an
industry event and waiting for things to happen. It's grunt work, it's cold calling people
systematically by the thousand, it's doing niche market trade shows (well and
thoroughly), it's making lots of personal visits and tracking everything meticulously. It's
educating the market about why localization matters and not just selling to the converted.
There has been a tendency in the translation industry for companies to rely too heavily on
fat cats (big, rich localizers). Many companies get one or two such clients, lock them in
by deeply understanding their business and documentation processes and over time come
to expect that they can live happily ever after off of such stable high price clients. Well
folks, times have changed. The "New Europe" has arrived (and not only the New Europe,
but the New China, the New and Improved Argentina, and developing countries
everywhere). A more mature market with more competition is developing. The big
localizers are the most mature purchasers of translation services, and often have global
sales and need to localize into developing countries' languages. They are among the first
to move their business to low cost countries (it's already happening) when they realize
they can get the same quality as in more developed countries. Often the sales/marketing
angle among translation/localization companies is about how hard our job is, how very
complicated and dif.cult it is. As much as everyone in our industry wants to make what
we do look like rocket science, unfortunately it's not. Sure it's hard, but every business is
hard these days. We need (like everyone else) to have the right processes in place and to
ADD VALUE. This is where the real problem lies with Old Europe.
Being a good translator used to be enough!

Every business needs to ask itself whether or not it is adding value through its
processes. A business shouldn't exist if it doesn't add value. The value added in a
translation business is first and foremost a proven business process to handle the complex
task of multilingual translation or software localization. This translates into a need for
excellent project management, top quality resource recruitment, and the technical skills of
localization engineers and DTP experts who can work under pressure and excel at
troubleshooting problems that occur in the process. The differentiator here is operational
efficiency. The translation company that provides the well organized, efficient processes
and the experienced resources at the lowest possible cost will prevail. The main problem
that many Western European translation companies have to face now is the ability to
offer their clients cost savings. The business process of providing high quality
translation/localization services is quite simple (there are a lot more complicated business
processes out there). This is not to say that it's easy. And yes, there are many, many
companies out there that have bad processes in BOTH high cost and low cost countries.
The bad news for high cost service providers is that an increasing number of companies
do this well or very well in low cost countries and this number will grow. This is where
the problem really lies for Western European translation/localization service providers
and an important question arises from this diffculty.
What do I do when my clients keep asking for cost savings?

Well here are some obvious choices for Western European translation companies:
 Reduce costs. Cut what I pay my vendors, hire cheaper employees and lower my
infrastructure costs, but all this really does is lower quality. This is a recipe for
disaster.
 Scream at my clients about the importance of quality, how much money it costs
to guarantee it and the risk they are putting their businesses in when outsourcing
their work to cheaper countries. This might work for a while, but sooner or later
clients will wise up to the fact that cheaper does not necessarily mean lower
quality.
 Shut down my Western European office and set up a new office in Eastern
Europe. Why hire cheap labor in London when you can hire the top flight labor in
Moscow? This is clearly the best of the 3 options. It's logical, it isn't easy, but it
isn't impossible either. It will take a lot of work, which nobody really wants, and
the truth for most translation owners is very simply, "I don't want to spend half
my life in Moscow."
What can Western European companies do?

In my opinion the only production facilities in Western Europe that can survive
are the ones that process very high volumes of work. But even the larger players will
have their production facilities in China and other low cost countries. Nobody needs to
see the so-called back office and the major players can keep sales offices in all the
strategic locations.
I believe there will always be room for smaller "boutiques" that specialize in
niche sectors. Smaller projects in niche sectors can be less price sensitive and these local
companies should thrive by offering high quality local customer service. This is exactly
what I would do if I were running a translation company in Western Europe. I'd make
sure I am not doing everything, I'd become highly specialized in a certain field, and focus
all my sales and marketing energy on that. In addition I would try to service the smaller
and medium size companies in my local market that are just starting to think about going
global. Stick with local markets, where no one can talk to your neighbors as well as you
can.
Doesn't quality matter at all?

This may sound like I am arguing that all that matters is price, but that is not what
I think. Quality is a default element that every company needs to provide in order to
succeed. I am not even thinking about companies that do not offer a high quality
translation service, on time and on budget. They are doomed. I am talking about a more
troubling phenomena where really good companies, with excellent processes are having
trouble competing due to their location and their cost structure.
So what's so great about Eastern Europe?

Many of these arguments apply just as well for China and Argentina as they do for
any country here in Eastern Europe. So what are the main advantages of having your
production facility in Eastern Europe, apart from price? Here are three important factors:
1. People. Eastern Europe is a hotbed of young talent. These countries boast a
highly quali.ed and well educated workforce that is both ambitious and fluent in
foreign languages. We are in Europe and are used to dealing with European
cultures. It is much easier to do business and create productive work
environments when you don't have to tackle the issue of major cultural
differences.
2. Location. With the advent of low cost airlines ($100 roundtrip to most major
European cities), Eastern Europe is 1-2 hours away from a vast number of very
attractive markets. The compactness of Europe (in comparison to the US) makes
the client acquisition process much more efficient. We operate out of the same
time zone as most of Europe and we can be there tomorrow (if not today). With
the right organization in place a company can have a low cost production facility
teamed with a Western European sales force. It's compelling, isn't it?
3. Technology. Many people don't realize how technically advanced Eastern
European countries are. Many Eastern European companies are more technically
advanced than their Western European counterparts. Eastern European countries
 leapfrogged with regards to technology, from having nothing to having the most
modern IT infrastructure available. A big part of this is also psychological. The
massive changes that have taken place in these countries may have some negative
consequences from a sociological point of view, but the fact that people are
generally willing to accept change is key when implementing new technology.
What are the challenges?

If I have made it sound like operating out of Eastern Europe is just plain wonderful,
with only bene.ts, and no drawbacks. Here are some of the poison pills you'll have to
swallow with your cake:
 No local clients. This is one of the main disadvantages to operating out of
Eastern Europe. The local market for translation and localization services is just
plain terrible. There is no culture of being ready to pay for high quality
translation. Translation is looked upon as a secretarial task that anyone can do
and the key is to choose the cheapest. I have been to many meetings with the
Eastern European management of Global 100 companies and have felt about as
important to their business as a garbage man (ooops, politically correct, "waste
disposal specialist"). This means that we have to sell abroad to make a living.
 Some turnover of staff is inevitable. It is just part of the game and you have to
deal with it. The truth is there has been and will continue to be a large "brain
drain" exodus of skilled workers to the West. We've lost some good people, but
fortunately thanks to the job market we have had relatively little problem with
staf.ng.
 Try competing against Euro 0.03 per source word. Think price competition is
stiff in Western Europe. Check out what it's like here in Eastern Europe. You
can't get quality for that price, but it is a market reality which means more money
and effort to educate the local market if that is what you go after any local
business.
 Bureaucracy is a nightmare. People all over the world complain about
bureaucracy, but I can't imagine it gets much worse than Eastern Europe (maybe
China, but I can't even imagine that). There are so many crazy rules to run a
company according to regulations. I can't speak for all Eastern European
countries, but I can speak for Poland and say that the commercial code was
written for manufacturing facilities, not office work. Can you imagine that we
have to pay to have people train us on office safety and if we don't we can be
fined or closed down. We are a translation company, not a factory and this is only
one small example.
How about some cold hard facts?

Ok, I understand that what this article clearly needs is a table or something really
juicy and of enormous value. How much do things really cost in Eastern Europe?The
table below provides an estimate of the costs for a translation company in Eastern
Europe. Please take this as no more than a very rough indicator; costs change from
country to country, e.g., Slovene is far more expensive than Bulgarian. It is useful as a
point of reference though. Most serious Eastern European service providers would
probably agree with these figures.
If we look at these figures in Western European terms, Euro 0.05-0.06 for infrastructure
and fixed costs is quite a bargain. It is important to be aware that some costs are the same
in Western and Eastern Europe. You can't get legal Trados or SDLX licenses any cheaper
in Poland or the Czech Republic than in Western Europe. Every computer has to have an
operating system and other basic software as well. Also linguistic costs tend to be the
same for everyone. We may be able to negotiate a bit better being based in Eastern
Europe, but the figure to focus on here is the cost of infrastructure per word.

Cost per
  word in
EURO

Medium sized translation company infrastructure with a turnover of 16

million words annually (staff salaries, PMs, engineers, legal software 0.05-0.06
licenses, IT infrastructure, rent, etc.)

Linguistic Costs (Translation + Review + QA, professional translators Total cost

with TM experience). Price varies depending on language. 0.05-0.11 0.10-0.17

A Bold Prediction

The next big player will come from Eastern Europe and it will be Moravia in the
Czech Republic. They are currently ranked 15th according to Common Sense Advisory's
ranking of the top 20 translation companies in the world. I'd be willing to bet that
Moravia moves into the top 5 within the next 5 years (providing they don't get bought
out) and then who knows... Look out Lionbridge and SDL! I like their strategy and I like
their approach to sales. Why would I be promoting a competitor? Well first of all I think
it's good for Argos to draw attention to other successful organizations from our region of
the world. Also, as I have already mentioned there is plenty of market out there for all of
us to share. I don't see anyone cornering the market in the translation industry, I just have
a feeling that a much larger share of it will be located in Eastern Europe five years from
now.
This article is also availble in PDF format (513K).
About the author
Kevin Fountoukidis is the CEO of the Argos Company Ltd. based in Krakow, Poland.
He can be reached at kf@argostranslations.com