Dialectal Differences

All languages possess dialects, this includes sign language where we have ’standard’ versions such as British Sign Language or American Sign Language as well as off-shoots or mutations of these.

The translation of dialects, however, is not a common enterprise and one which is fraught with countless problems, endless discussion and never-ending controversy. A dialect is a regional variety of a language and is therefore particular to a specific area.

When translating a dialect, the translator is not only transplanting one culture into another but also transplanting the culture of a specific area into the other culture. If the text is translated into the target culture using a dialect of the target language then the translator has made a conscious decision to include the cultural baggage of that dialect - a risky task.

Sometimes, however, regionalisms are not culturally loaded and the lexical variants are simply regional synonyms. An example of such a non-loaded regionalism might be the Polish:

kapcie
papcie
łapcie
chapcie

Would it be enough to translate all of these as slippers? Or should the translate attempt to transfer the fact that this is a regionalism?

All You Need is Love

It is fascinating how equivalents in different languages like to overlap but are never exactly perfect equivalents. They are akin to templates that do not quite fit, like trying to pour two pints of water into a one litre jug.

Research shows that certain languages have a tendency to use particular semantic fields more often than other languages. For example, the German language may employ more words from the arts and crafts semantic field than English. Polish, on the other hand, may use more words connected with love than German.

Corpus evidence shows us that even two texts, one of which is a translation of another do not perfectly share identical semantic fields. Different languages use different lexical and semantic tools to deal with different linguistic problems which creates shifts in the semantic map of a text. Not only do translated texts have different semantic fingerprints but words also.

For example, let us look at different words for love, desire, have, want, need etc in German, French, Polish, English. The differences in these words may hinge on faint nuances between them but that does not change the fact that they are slightly different from one another.

We can talk of Liebe, amour, miłość and love. But do these all mean the same and are they always used in the same context? What about Wunsch, désir, pragnienie and desire? They may be dictionary equivalents but are they contextual equivalents?

Corpus evidence shows us that these words, though seemingly equivalent, are used in fractionally different semantic fields and used with a different frequency in each of the languages.

Cultural Overlap

As we know, language is a reflection of culture and in order to understand the workings of a language we must fully understand its culture. Similarly, languages converge when cultures converge. English has been able to infiltrate the majority of languages in Europe and beyond simply because British and American culture has filtered into foreign societies and cultures and has become a part of these cultures.

This can be noted in the world of advertising and popular culture. Due to the fact that cultures often overlap, especially within the European Union, terminology, political slogans, advertising catchphrases are often borrowed into other cultures and languages in a variety of fields and domains.

A wonderful example is the world’s love of lotto, the lottery, Euro Millions, Powerball, Mega Millions, Takarakuji or whatever it is called in each country. This culture is mimicked throughout the world and the terminology and slogans attached to the lottery are often similar in each country. For example, certain games are known as “spiels” in the Canadian lottery and the slogans in the United Kingdom and Poland are remarkably similar:

“You’ve got to be in it to win it”

“Musisz grać ażeby wygrać”

The conclusion is that the areas that show a particular convergence in culture also display a convergence in language.

Diamond Translation

As we have seen in previous entires, translation theory often uses metaphors to describe translation, the translation process and sometimes even translation quality. An interesting metaphor is comparing translation and translation quality assessment to the analysis of diamonds.

The quality of diamonds is usually assessed according to the system most commonly known as the four Cs:

carat
colour
clarity
cut

Carat refers to the weight of the diamond, colour refers to the diamond’s hue, clarity refers to the number of defects within the diamond, and cut refers to the way in which a polished diamond is created from a rough stone.

These four Cs could easily be superimposed onto a matrix for translation quality assessment where:

carat = information
colour = style
clarity = fluency
cut = accuracy

This gives us a neat guide for quickly analysing the quality of a translation. Thus, a good translation should contain and will be marked by high quality in each of these categories. In other words, the translation will contain:

(1) relevant information
(2) appropriate style/register
(3) fluent language (without errors)
(4) accurate, polished language

Forming Collocations

As we know, collocations are one of the most important elements in our everyday language. Collocations are the ready-made constructions that help us pass on meaning and sense to other speakers of the language. Without collocations it would be difficult to understand one another. Collocations are often seen to be the key to fluency or native-like linguistic competence. A native speaker of English will say knife and fork, it’s raining cats and dogs not fork and knife or dogs and cats.

These may seem like minor differences but they make the native speaker sound native. Previous posts (click here and here) have shown the importance of collocations and the intrinsic link between culture and language.

A noteworthy fact visible within the world of politics is the ability to turn common collocations (or set phrases) into new phrases (calling them collocations would be an injustice). A good example of this are the two Polish phrases przerażające fakty, porażające fakty which in loose translation might be understood as frightening facts and paralysing facts.

Both phrases are extremely similar but show how politicians or other language users have the creative ability to take meanings a ‘notch up’ and ‘crank up’ the force of certain collocations. What is even more fascinating is the way in which these linguistic changes are understood by the audience. A scan of these two collocations phrases shows that language users believe them to be synonymous regardless of the intentions of the original user.

The conclusion therefore is that linguistic forces have the ability to ‘level off’ and ’smooth out’ rough edges which are simply unnecessary. In the same way that erosion allows rivers to find the ideal route across a plain, so too language finds the ideal form through which communication is most effective.

Language of Advertising

As we have seen in a previous post (click here), within the language of advertising the translator is often bound by more factors than when translating other texts. We are constantly attacked by and completely surrounded by the language of advertising so much so that it filters into our respective cultures and seeps into the language of the average speaker.

The language of advertising has become an important element in the creation of new words, phrases and cultural references. It is noteworthy to mention Umberto Eco here and his last work of fiction The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana in which he shows the influence of both high and low culture on our social (and linguistic) make-up.

Advertising is intrinsically linked to a throw-away linguistic culture where words and phrases enter the language at great velocity, are used with great propensity and then disappear never to be heard again. Most people can remember the advertising slogans of their childhood, although these phrases often do not have the same function today as they once had.

Two common phrases in Polish advertising have been noted. The first is lubię chłodek. The second is mały głodek. Both are amusing phrases aimed at children or aiming to mimic the language of children through the use of diminutives: chłód (’chill’, ‘the cold’) –> chłodek and głód (’hunger’) –> głodek. The translation of these two phrases might prove difficult.

Lubię chłodek can be found on drinks and yoghurts that should be ‘kept refrigerated’. However, keep refrigerated is too formal a phrase for this context, thus constructions such as I like the cold or I prefer it chilly might be more appropriate, although in the second suggestion the key word has become an adjective.

Mały głodek is a slogan used as part of an advertising campaign for a well-known yoghurt-like product. The product is the enemy of ‘hunger’ which is personified as a small yellow creature. Here we have the additional problem of having to deal with a character/persona. A possible equivalent might be hunger pang which retains the noun quality of the original and adds an element of devilishness with the word pang.

Perfect equivalents they are not but they help shed light on the cultural, grammatical and semantic processes taking places in both languages.

Word Mobbing/Borrowing

A delightful phenomenon in translation is the transfer of words from and into other languages. As we all know languages are remarkably flexible systems and it is an enjoyable sight when we see a word break free of one language and migrate into another system and then take on a new life. Making the break from one system and moving to another is the simple part. Putting roots down in another system is a little more complicated.

The hegemony of English has meant that other languages readily steal or are sometimes compelled to borrow from English. New dictionaries that use English, be they Polish-English, German-English, French-English or otherwise often contain false friend sections where we can learn how we should avoid certain words and constructions. Countless lists of such false friends can be easily found on the internet.

An interesting transfer that has occurred relatively recently is the term mobbing. The verb to mob means ‘to jostle, hustle’; ‘to crowd into’ or ‘to attack in large numbers’. However, the word mobbing has decided to burrow into the rich, fertile ground of several other languages including German and Polish wherein it has come to mean something different.

In these two languages, mobbing can refer to mental and physical attacks and generally intimidation found in the workplace. This has led to a situation where German and Polish translators often translate the word mobbing straight into English without considering its context whereas a more appropriate English equivalent for this English loanword would be bullying, intimidation or harassment.

Hard Nut to Crack

The world of the translator is rife with mismatches, bizarre phrases and uncomfortable equivalents. We have already looked at the concept of collocational transference in a previous blog entry (click here). However, the linguistic world is awash with strange constructions that provide the translator with hours of laborious strain, hair-wrenching frustration, but sometimes gleeful linguistic sport.

An interesting phrase is the Polish mieszanka studencka which is the well-known and popular mix of peanuts, hazelnuts, cashews, almonds and raisins. A logical equivalent would be student mix, however, this term does not exist in English.

The Polish mieszanka studencka probably stems from the German Studentenfutter or, perhaps even from the authentic English equivalent student food (also brain food) which in the British version of the ‘recipe’ may also contain brazil nuts and walnuts. However, there is a slight problem as student food also has a rather negative connotation implying cheap and/or microwaveable/canned food typically eaten by British university students.

Another possible equivalent is what is sometimes known as a trail mix which hikers, walkers and backpackers take along with them on their trails. An innovative linguistic concoction is the word gorp which is a backronym of the words Good Old Raisins and Peanuts which would probably be a rather favourable translation of mieszanka studencka.

Thus, we could use student food, trail mix or the innovative gorp.

Meaning Transfer

Different languages use different ways to describe the same object. This is one of the fundamentals posited by Ferdinand de Saussure. What Poles call grzyb, English speakers call mushroom. Two different sounds for the same object.

The process of translation becomes interesting when there is more to the object than a simple word. Let us take, for example, the English word capital to mean the ‘head city of a country’. The word derives from the Latin capitalis (of the head) from caput (head). In Polish, however, we have stolica. We can also talk about capital punishment in English (i.e. off with the head) which in Polish is simply kara śmierci.

The more knowledge the translator has about a word, the more accurate the translation. In the above example, we have a metaphorical extension of the Latin word caput which has then been borrowed into English whereas in Polish we do not. The reverse could also be true where a word has metaphorical roots in Polish but not in English. A wonderful example is the Polish (słone) paluszki which might roughly be translated as salty sticks (never fingers!).

Body parts commonly lend themselves to metaphorical use, but again, it is not the simplest words that make for the more interesting work for the translator but rather the more complicated. Metaphors and tranferrals of meaning are not straightforward and require a little more thought. For instance, in English we speak of a plastic sleeve used in the office. The inexperienced translator may render this as plastikowy rękaw. The correct equivalent would, of course, be plastikowa koszulka which, in turn, could not be translated into English as plastic shirt.

Neologisms

The creation of new words is one of the most natural things in the (linguistic) world. It is what keeps the linguistic organism fresh and full of vitality. As presented in a previous post on New Words the renewal of linguistic tissue is a wonderful phenomenon.

With a change in the political system and entry into the European Union, Poland is experiencing major political, economic, social and psychological upheavals and it comes as no surprise that new lexcial items are forcing themselves into the vacuum left by the fall of social-realism and other now defunct social and political phenomena.

Of great interest are words like Gadu-Gadu (the internet messenger) or Spychologia (an attitude among people who constantly ‘pass the buck’). Obviously, proper nouns and company names are not translated, but ideas such as Walkie-Talkie and pass-buck-ability come to mind.

The politician Janusz Palikot in an effort to promote his weblog has embarked on an advertising campaign that makes use of some fascinating neologisms. These include: pyskusja (= ‘pyskować’ + ‘dyskusja’), odwkurzacz (= ‘odkurzacz’ + ‘wkurzać’), paplament (= ‘paplać’ + ‘parlament’), cudzogłupstwo (= ‘cudzołóstwo’ + ‘głupstwo’) and nielękarka (= ‘pielęgniarka’ + ‘nie lękać’). The neologisms reflect a particular approach to life and in an effort to understand this approach a translation of these words may be revealing:

pyskusja ~ disgussion
odwkurzacz ~ dumb-downer; zone-outer
paplament ~ howliament; growliament; borliament; papliament
cudzogłupstwo ~ adultawry; stupidility
nielękarka ~ nofearlette