Another (Systemic) Perspective

As the Ox Turns

If translation is an attempt to ‘remove the veil’ from a text then the knowledge translators possess must be the tool needed to reveal what is behind this veil. Our task is to see through the linguistic and cultural veil and interpret what lies beyond. Our ability to visit a text with ‘new eyes’ is as important as our knowledge of the languages concerned. In the ‘West’ we are often so preoccupied with our own languages that we sometimes forget the thousands of other languages that exist ‘out there’. What is more, we are often ignorant of the rich wealth of systems used to represent the written forms of these languages. Even non-Latin alphabets appear alien to us; alphabets like Cyrillic (Кириллица), Greek (Ελληνικό αλφάβητο), Georgian (ქართული დამწერლობა) or Armenian (Հայկական գիր). Abjads (writing systems where each symbol therein generally represents a consonant) appear to Western eyes even more outlandish, for example, Hebrew (עִבְרִית) or Arabic (العربية). Abugidas, segmental writing systems, are even further away from western scriptural sensitivities and include alphasyllabaries such as Ge’ez (ግዕዝ) and Devanagari (देवनागरी). It is also worth mentioning logographic writing systems which include Chinese (漢字).

Why is this significant to the translator? Often the mark of an expert translator is his/her ability to find ingenious approaches to solving linguistic problems. The capacity to see a translational quandary from a different perspective is key to our profession. Sometimes, the power to see a text with ‘another pair of eyes’ is invaluable. This ‘defamiliarisation’ is often nurtured through multilingualism and especially multiculturalism. We can go one step further by suggesting that being sensitive to not only linguistic cues but also ‘visual-linguistic’ cues may help develop this sensitivity and ability to ‘de-focus’ and see a text afresh. Knowledge of different writing systems and typographical methods are but two methods of expanding our minds.

Aside from becoming familiar with the scripts mentioned above (in order to become de-familiar with our own script), another useful method of defamiliarisation is to take our own script and read it differently, or rather write it differently. For this we can make use of Boustrophedon (Gr. as the ox turns) which was an Ancient Greek method of writing where alternate lines of the text were read in opposite directions (see picture above). For example, the first line would be read from left-to-right, the second right-to-left, the third left-to-right and so on and so forth. Interestingly, this method, with practice, is actually a faster way to write and read.

More importantly, this is another weapon in the translator’s arsenal. There is much to be said for expanding one’s mind in as many diverse ways as it is possible. A previous blog entry on Linguistic Intelligence is testament to this. The traditional, tried and tested ways of improving competence are invaulable. However, even in the mundane translation of a legal document, medical journal or technical manual an extra iota of creativity and ‘freshness’ can sometimes be the difference between a good piece of work and a great translation.

In Praise of Grammar-Translation

The teaching of foreign languages has come on leaps and bounds in the period following World War II. Advances in applied linguistics, psychology, education and technology have all combined to make the late twentieth century one of the most exciting times for foreign language teaching (FLT). English teaching and the field of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) benefited most from these new approaches to teaching. The Grammar-Translation Method was the predominant method for a long period of time. It focused on the use of translation as a route into the foreign language as well as the memorisation of grammatical rules.

The Direct Method was developed in opposition to Grammar-Translation. No translation was used here and neither was the mother tongue. Other methods included the Silent Method, the Audio-Lingual Method and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) which has gained ground in recent years and is perhaps one of the most popular approaches nowadays. It was itself a response to the Audio-Lingual Method. In the communicative approach the focus is interaction and the use of authentic texts. This approach led to Task-based Language Learning which has also become extremely popular. In this approach grammar and linguistic elements are not the focus, but rather the task that needs to be realised in the language interaction situation.

With the foundation and strengthening of applied linguistics as a genuine academic discipline and the growth of TEFL as a truly marketable business (including the publication of foreign language learning textbooks), Grammar-Translation became marginalised and forgotten by many. Some of the key terms in FLT now include communication, task realisation and learner autonomy. No place for grammar or translation. Many of the criticisms directed at Grammar-Translation were genuine; there was too great a focus on authenticity (rather than fluency) and the mother tongue (rather than the target language).

However, as with all trends, CLT has perhaps swung too far. Many believe that regimented language learning which is often not highlighted in CLT (but is present in Grammar-Translation) is particularly useful for beginners. Learner autonomy is valuable in language learning but guidance and periodicity is equally important, also present in Grammar-Translation. The early twenty-first century has seen some call for a more hybrid (mix-and-match) approach to foreign language learning where the best ‘bits’ of various approaches are utilised.

Another point is the teaching of translation proper. Is is possible to use a purely communicative approach in translation training? Task-based Language Learning certainly can be used to teach translation but can we use it exclusively? Many teachers are lauding these new hybrid approaches which combine Task-based Language Learning with short ‘doses’ of Grammar-Translation which not only present authentic foreign language texts to students and trainees but also highlight the differences between languages and cultures. Thankfully, the old Grammar-Translation Method has left us. Perhaps it is time for a new one.

Out with the old, in with the new…?

Linguistic Intelligence

In 1983 Howard Gardner put forward his theory of multiple intelligences which sent shock waves through the educational system in the 1980s and 1990s. The repercussions of Gardner’s theory are still being felt today. What was this theory? In short, Howard Gardner believed that there was more to an individual’s intelligence than one single ability or skill. In his Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences he put forward several different types of intelligence. He refined his ideas over the years concluding that there are seven forms of intelligence.

These include:
bodily-kinaesthetic,
interpersonal
intrapersonal,
logical-mathematical,
musical,
spatial,
linguistic.

An individual with heightened bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence might be well coordinated, have a keen sense of balance, be strong, flexible and sporty. People with high bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence may become sports-people, dancers, actors, doctors or soldiers.

Someone who has interpersonal intelligence is typically able to interpret other people’s moods and intentions, they are sensitive to other people and are often natural leaders, successful speakers, sales people, managers and teachers.

Intrapersonal intelligence is marked by introspection. Individuals with this types of intelligence are self-reflective and are able to understand their own emotions, desires and limitations. Such people make good philosophers, psychologists, and scientists.

Logical-mathematical intelligence, as the name suggests, can be defined as the ability to understand numbers and logical concepts, be able to reason, and think abstractly. Mathematicians, scientists, economists and programmers fall into this category.

Individuals who possess musical intelligence can understand and express musical forms, they are sensitive to rhythm and have a keen sense of hearing. Those with musical intelligence may be most suited to careers as musicians, singers, DJs, composers and even writers.

People who have heightened spatial intelligence are extremely sensitive to shapes and colours and are able to easily visualise objects. People gifted with spatial intelligence often make good architects, artists, map-makers and engineers.

Last but not least comes linguistic intelligence; a key factor, one would think, for linguists, translators and language specialists. Interestingly, actors, lawyers, philosophers, teachers and politicians are also thought to have this form of intelligence in abundance. People with linguistic intelligence are often said to notice grammatical mistakes, they enjoy word games, puns, learning foreign languages and often have large collections of books.

Is this really the case? Do all linguists and translators share a common level of linguistic intelligence? Is there a level of linguistic intelligence above which one will always be regarded as linguistically skilled? Must one posses this level to become a linguist and/or translators? More importantly, can the other intelligences be important to the work of a translator?

.

Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences

Bilingualism – Blessing or Curse?

There are a thousand and one ‘myths’ about what needs to be undertaken to become a good translator. One of these is the opinion that the ideal translator needs to be bilingual. But is this really the case? Is the mark of a great translator the fact that he or she is bilingual (or even multilingual)? In order to answer this question it is first necessary to try and understand what is meant by the term bilingual (or multilingual).

Generally speaking, a bilingual can refer to someone who fluently speaks two languages. This definition itself poses certain problems. Firstly, how do we define fluency, and secondly, does speaking also include writing? We can assume that fluency is the ability to speak (and write) effectively, skilfully, articulately with smoothness and ease. Obviously, knowing two languages fluently is most certainly a key element in becoming a translator. But is it enough?

Translation is by some seen as a gift, by others it is seen as a craft which can be understood, learnt and perfected. What relation does bilingualism have to these approaches to translation? Should the ideal translator be a ‘native’ bilingual who has learnt both languages since childhood? Or does it matter if one language is learnt later in life, as a second language? Some believe that only childhood bilingualism is the only real way forward, although experience tells us this is not always the case.

This seems to be the main sticking point in discussions of bilingualism vis-à-vis translation. Those who believe translation to be a gift often see bilingualism as a ticket to translational competence and, as such, bilingualism is equated with a ‘gift for translation’. However, it is naive to think there is a one-to-one relationship between bilingualism and translational competence. Although being bilingual is certainly vitally important for the translator, being bilingual does not mean that one will become a translator.

The other side to the story is the common belief that someone who is bilingual is automatically a translator. Bilingual (non-translators) are perplexed by questions from monolinguals who ask them to translate a word, phrase or text. “But I’m not a translator,” is the most common reply, often followed by the retort, “But you speak two languages fluently…” In these situations, blingualism can often be seen as more of a curse than a blessing…

Translating in the Silly Season

For many freelance translators there is a time for sowing and a time for reaping. There is also a time for waiting; the doldrums; a lull in work where little happens and offers of work are few and far between. What should translators do in this time of stagnation? If we treat this period as a ‘time for sowing’ rather than a lull in work then we can turn a potentially deadening and depressing time into a productive and industrious period. We can use this ‘window of opportunity’ to search for new clients, new contacts and, of course, new contracts. We can also use this time to brush up on cultural and linguistic areas that have heretofore been neglected by us. The silly season need not necessarily be ’silly’.

From a translational point of view, silly season is a fascinating phrase. In British English the silly season refers to that time of year characterised by exaggerated (silly) media news stories because of the lack of serious news due to the fact that politicians and celebrities are usually on holiday. In the United Kingdom this is usually late summer. Other European languages have their own equivalent phrases. French uses the term la morte-saison (the dead season), German has two terms: das Sommerloch (the summer hole) and Sauregurkenzeit (pickled gherkin time), the second being a common motif across Europe.

Gherkins and cucumbers seem to be a recurrent theme in many languages. Dutch uses komkommertijd, Norwegian agurktid, Danish agurketid (cucumber time). Norwegian refers to agurknytt (cucumber news). The non Indo-European Hungarian uses uborkaszezon (cucumber season) which is mirrored also in Czech and Polish. These Slavonic languages respectively use: okurková sezóna and sezon ogórkowy (cucumber season). Another term referring to the summer period which occurs in Polish is kanikuła, fascinating from an etymological point of view.

Kanikuła comes from the Latin canicula referring to the time of year between 22 June and 23 August when the sun (used to) rise at the same time as Sirius (the Dog Star, Latin Canicula). It also refers to the hottest days of the year. What makes this Polish phrase fascinating is the fact that etymologically it is equivalent to the English phrase dog days referring to that time of year which is hot or stagnant or when there is a period of inactivity. Therefore, when we refer to this seasonal lull in English we can use silly season or dog days and in Polish sezon ogórkowy or kanikuła.

Shadows of Ideal Translations

Many of us have had professional schooling, undertaken some form of linguistic training or scholarly preparation to become translators. Some of us have become translators by accident, through our love of languages or downright (non-academic) hard work. Whatever the path towards becoming a translator has been, we all have strong views about what translation is or rather should be.

When we sit down to translate all of us have some sort of concept in our heads, some sort of idea. What is interesting is finding the connection between this idea, this form, and the reality of the translation act, the matter. We can use this terminology (in the Platonic sense) and talk about an ideal translation that exists somewhere perhaps beyond our reach and the material translation that is the result of our work.

If this is the case then in each translation situation, for each translation event, there should be an ideal form where there are universals which we can somehow trace and attempt to reach. But are there such universals? Can we, in fact, talk of an ideal translation? Experience shows that ambiguity exists even at the word level, so what possibility is there for postulating the concept of an ideal translation?

The answer, perhaps, lies again with Plato and his allegory of the cave. If the translations that we produce are shadows, poor reflections of some sort of ideal, then, in a sense, the search for a better version is a worthwhile endeavour in itself. Woe betide the translator who is satisfied! We should always be attempting to produce a better text, a more polished translation, a clearer document.

The translation that we produce is a constantly-flickering shadow of nether-text, always moving, always bending. Our aim is to pin it down, flesh it out, make it whole. What could be more rewarding? The knowledge that our final text is simply a twisted shadow is the first step in the search for the ultimate signified which can be found (perhaps) at the end of a long and shadowy chain of signifiers.

Vote for transubstantiation

Transubstantiation has the honour of announcing that we have been nominated for the prestigious, international Lexiophiles Top 100 Language Blogs competition. Transubstantiation has the chance to be inducted into the language blog hall of fame if it makes the Top 100. If you are interested in helping Transubstantiation become one of the Top 100 language blogs on the internet (or even help us win the competition), please click on the link below and then find the appropriate radio button – the list is alphabetical so you’ll find Transubstantiation under ‘T’, towards the bottom of the list in the Language Professionals category.
Many thanks!

Which Standards Apply?

One of the most confounding issues for translators, editors and proof-readers is not knowing which standards to use when working on a particular document. To highlight this quandary, we can make use of the simple, yet irksome problem of monetary units in various countries. Let us take, for example, the British pound, American dollar, Japanese yen, European euro and, last but not least, the Polish złoty.

To begin with, the use of the word ‘Polish’ before the word ‘złoty’ often provokes linguistic unrest. In most economic texts, we speak of the ‘dollar’, ‘pound’, ‘euro’ or ‘yen’ However, ‘Polish’ often precedes the word ‘złoty’ to make clear the country of origin of this currency. However, for consistency’s sake, one could argue that it should not be used.

This is only the start of our problems. The second concerns the Polish diacritic ‘ł’. Often, the word ‘złoty’ loses the diacritic, becoming ‘zloty’ for legibility’s sake so that non-Polish speakers will not be confused by the spelling. In an increasingly multi-cultural world, however, this is a needless orthographic change.

Our next problem concerns the abbreviation of the word ‘złoty’. Several forms currently exit: zł (or zl) and PLN. The pound, dollar, euro and yen are all fortunate enough to have their own symbols, respectively, £, $, € and ¥. Different institutions and publishing houses use different standards for the Polish currency giving us, for example:
zł100 (preceding with diacritic, no space)
zl. 100 (preceding with full stop, space and without diacritic)
100zł (succeeding with diacritic, no space)
100 zl (succeeding with space and without diacritic)
PLN 100 (preceding)
100 PLN (succeeding).

All of the above can be seen in magazines and newspapers throughout Poland on a daily basis. If we assume that zł/zl/PLN is the Polish equivalent of the symbol used for the pound (£), dollar ($), euro (€) and yen (¥) then for consistency’s sake the symbol, i.e. zł/zl/PLN, should precede the number at all times. Interestingly, according to official sources (ISO 4217) the code for the Polish złoty is PLN; however, the symbol, used internally in Poland, is zł.

Knowledge of these ‘official’ standards still does not prevent the linguistic cacophony which is the reality faced by most editors and proof-readers. Institutions and publishing houses have their own ‘internal’ standards which often have little regard to what is official or what is used by the majority. It helps when standards in translation (compare the above-mentioned problem) are nurtured and protected, if only to help us in this oft-complicated process.

Vote for transubstantiation

Transubstantiation has the honour of announcing that we have been nominated for the prestigious, international Lexiophiles Top 100 Language Blogs competition. Transubstantiation has the chance to be inducted into the language blog hall of fame if it makes the Top 100. If you are interested in helping Transubstantiation become one of the Top 100 language blogs on the internet (or even help us win the competition), please click on the link below and then find the appropriate radio button – the list is alphabetical so you’ll find Transubstantiation under ‘T’, towards the bottom of the list in the Language Professionals category.
Many thanks!

Language Purity

Linguists and translators in Europe are perplexed at the news that Slovakia is implementing a controversial new Language Act which will change the attitude of the authorities to the freedom of language use in this small Central European country which has a population of just over 5 million. Such legislation may not mean a great deal in Slovakia’s comparatively ethnically homogeneous neighbours such as Austria, the Czech Republic or Poland but for a country with large Hungarian and Roma minorities this ‘Act of Language Purity’ could be the start of what many believe to be Slovakia’s turn towards language ‘fascism’.

The new Language Act will come into force on the 1st August 2009 and stipulates that all official names in foreign languages will have to be translated into Slovakian or the institutions and companies responsible for these foreign affectations will face fines of approximately €5,000. The fines can be meted out to public offices, companies, advertising agencies, police officers and court judges alike. All are equal in the eyes of the (language) law. The Slovakian Ministry of Culture has already laid out the official procedure for meting out fines which will use a ‘three-strikes-and-you’re-out’ policy. Two official warnings will precede the ‘language’ fine.

However, observers outside of Slovakia and the sizeable Hungarian minority within Slovakia (almost 10% of the population) has labelled this linguistic legislation an act of language imperialism and an attempt to assimilate the Hungarian population into the Slovakian one. The Roma population stands at almost 2% with other linguistic minorities amounting to approximately 3% which means that 15% of the population of Slovakia will be adversely affected by this new legislation, not including of course various other institutions and companies that use other languages in their work.

Questions are being asked about the real reasons behind this move to ‘purify’ the linguistic landscape of Slovakia. Is it indeed cultural and linguistic? A need to nurture the Slovakian language and free it from the all-encompassing grasp of English (“I’m loving it” ; “Connecting People” ; “Just Do It”) or is it a political move that panders to conservatism and language imperialism? Either way, the future of translation in Slovakia and Slovakian translation will most certainly be influenced by this move.