Translation is an activity comprising the Interpretation of the Meaning of a text in one Language - the source text - and the production of a new, equivalent text in another language - called the target text, or the translation.
Traditionally, translation has been a human activity, although attempts have been made to automate and computerise the translation of natural language texts - Machine translation - or to use computers as an aid to translation - Computer-assisted translation.
The goal of translation is to establish a relationship of equivalence and intent between the source and the target texts (that is to say to ensure that both texts communicate the same message), while taking into account a number of constraints. These constraints include Context, the rules of Grammar of the source language, its writing conventions, its idioms and the like.
To decode the meaning of a text the translator must first identify its component "translation units", that is to say the segments of the text to be treated as a cognitive unit. A translation unit may be a Word, a Phrase or even one or more sentences.
Behind this seemingly simple procedure lies a complex cognitive operation. To decode the complete meaning of the source text, the translator must consciously and methodically interpret and analyse all its features. This process requires thorough knowledge of the grammar, Semantics, Syntax, idioms and the like of the source language, as well as the Culture of its speakers.
The translator needs the same in-depth knowledge to re-encode the meaning in the target language. In fact, often translators' knowledge of the target language is more important, and needs to be deeper, than their knowledge of the source language. For this reason, most translators translate into a language of which they are native speakers.
In addition, knowledge of the subject matter being discussed is essential.
In recent years studies in Cognitive linguistics have been able to provide valuable insights into the cognitive process of translation.
A translation meeting the first criterion is said to be a "faithful translation"; a translation meeting the second criterion is said to be an "idiomatic translation". The two are not necessarily exclusive.
The criteria used to judge the faithfulness of a translation vary according to the subject, the precision of the original contents, the type, function and use of the text, its literary qualities, its social or historical context, and so forth.
The criteria for judging the transparency of a translation would appear more straightforward: an unidiomatic translation "sounds" wrong, and in the extreme case of word-for-word translations generated by many Machine translation systems, often result in patent nonsense.
Nevertheless, in certain contexts a translator may knowingly strive to produce a literal translation. For example, literary translators and translators of religious works often adhere to the source text as much as possible. To do this they deliberately "stretch" the boundaries of the target language to produce an unidiomatic text. Likewise, a literary translator may wish to adopt words or expressions from the source language to provide "local colour" in the translation.
The concepts of fidelity and transparency are looked at differently in recent translation theories. The idea that acceptable translations can be as creative and original as their source text is gaining momentum in some quarters.
In recent decades, the most prominent advocates of non-transparent translation modes include the Franco-Canadian translation scholar Antoine Berman who identified twelve deforming tendencies inherent in most prose translations (L’épreuve de l’étranger, 1984), and the American theorist Lawrence Venuti who called upon translators to apply "foreignizing" translation strategies instead of domesticating ones (see, for example, his 'Call to Action' in The Translator’s Invisibility, 1994).
Many non-transparent translation theories draw on concepts of German Romanticism, with the most obvious influence on latter-day theories of foreignization being the German theologian and philosopher Friedrich Schleiermacher. In his seminal lecture "On the Different Methods of Translation" (1813) he distinguished between translation methods that move "the writer toward [the reader]", i.e. transparency, and those that move the "reader toward [the author] ", i.e. respecting the foreignness of the source text. Schleiermacher clearly favoured the latter. It is worth pointing out, however, that his preference was motivated not so much by a desire to embrace the Foreign but was rather intended as a nationalist practice to oppose France's cultural domination and to promote German literature.
The concepts of fidelity and transparency remain strong in Western traditions, however. They are not necessarily as prevalent in non-Western traditions. For example, the Indian epic Ramayana has numerous versions in many Indian languages and the stories in each are different from one another. If one looks into the words used for translation in Indian (either Aryan or Dravidian) languages, the freedom given to the translators is evident.
The question of whether particular words are untranslatable is often debated, with lists of "untranslatable" words being produced from time to time.
These lists often include words such as saudade, a Portuguese word (also used in Spanish) as an example of an "untranslatable". It translates quite neatly however as "sorrowful longing", but does have some nuances that are hard to include in a translation; for instance, it is a positive-valued concept, a subtlety which is not clear in this basic translation.
Some words are hard to translate only if one wishes to remain in the same grammatical category. For example, it is hard to find a Noun corresponding to the Russian почемучка (pochemuchka) or the Yiddish לזמילש (shlimazl), but the English adjectives "inquisitive" and "jinxed" correspond just fine.
Journalists are naturally enthusiastic when linguists document obscure words with local flavour, and are wont to declare them "untranslatable", but in reality these incredibly culture-laden terms are the easiest of all to translate, even more so than universal concepts such as "mother". This is because it is standard practice to translate these words by the same word in the other language, borrowing it for the first time if necessary. For example, an English version of a menu in a French restaurant would rarely translate pâté de foie gras as "fat liver paste", although this is a good description. Instead, the accepted translation is simply pâté de foie gras, or, at most, foie gras pâté. In some cases, only Transcription is required: Japanese 山葵 translates into English as Wasabi. A short description or parallel with a familiar concept is also often acceptable: わさび may also be translated as "Japanese Horseradish" or "Japanese Mustard".
The more obscure and specific to a culture the term is, the simpler it is to translate. For example, the name of an insignificant settlement such as Euroa in Australia is automatically just "Euroa" in every language in the world that uses the Roman alphabet, whilst it takes some knowledge to be aware that Saragossa is Zaragoza, Saragosse, etc. or that China is 中国, Cina, Chine, and so forth.
Cultural aspects can complicate translation. Consider the example of a word like "bread". At first glance, it is a very simple word, referring in everyday use to just one thing, with obvious translations in other languages. But ask people from England, France or China to describe or draw "bread", du pain or 包 (bāo), and they will describe different things, based on their individual cultures.
Differing levels of precision inherent in a language also play a role. What does "there" mean? Even discounting idiomatic uses such as "there, there, don't cry", we can be confronted by several possibilities. If something is "there" but not very far away, a Spaniard will say ahí; if it is further away he or she will say allí, unless there are connotations of "near there", "over yonder" or "on that side", in which case the word is likely to be allá. Conversely, in colloquial French, all three "there" concepts plus the concept of "here" all tend to be expressed with the word là.
A language may contain expressions which refer to concepts that do not exist in another language. For example, the French "tutoyer"' and "vouvoyer" would both be translated into English as "to address as 'you'", since the singular informal second person pronoun is archaic in English. Yet this simplistic translation completely destroys the meaning of the verbs: "vouvoyer" means to address using the formal "you" form ("vous"), whereas "tutoyer" means to use the informal form ("tu"). Indeed, when English was using the "thou" pronoun, "thou" as a verb would have been a translation for "tutoyer"; today, it is difficult to give a concise translation that captures the nuances of "tu" vs. "vous".
The problem often lies in failure to distinguish between translation and glossing. Glossing is what a Glossarydoes: give a short (usually one-word) equivalent for each term. Translation, as explained above, is decoding meaning and intent at the text level (not the word level or even sentence level) and then re-encoding them in a target language. Words like saudade and לזמילש are hard to "gloss" into a single other word, but given two or more words they can be perfectly adequately "translated". Similarly, depending on the context, the meaning of the French word "tutoyer", or Spanish "tutear", could be translated as "to be on first name terms with". "Bread" has perhaps a better claim to being untranslatable, since even if we resort to saying "French bread", "Chinese bread", "Algerian bread", etc. we are relying on our audience knowing what these are like.
The notion of localisation, that is the adaptation of the translation to the target language and culture, is gaining prevalence in this area of specialisation.
(Note that the term "computer translation" is sometimes used to refer to the practice of Machine translation, using computers to automatically translate texts.)
The translation of legal documents (laws, contracts, treaties, etc.).
A skilled legal translator is normally as adept at the law (often with in-depth legal training) as with translation, since inaccuracies in legal translations can have serious results.
(One example of problematic translation is the Treaty of Waitangi, where the English and Maori versions differ in certain important areas.)
Sometimes, to prevent such problems, one language will be declared authoritative, with the translations not being considered legally binding, although in many cases this is not possible, as one party does not want to be seen as subservient to the other.
If the translation of non-literary works is regarded as a skill, the translation of fiction and poetry is much more of an art. In multilingual countries such as Canada, translation is often considered a literary pursuit in its own right. Figures such as Sheila Fischman, Robert Dickson and Linda Gaboriau are notable in Canadian literature specifically as translators, and the Governor General's Awards present prizes for the year's best English-to-French and French-to-English literary translations with the same standing as more conventional literary awards.
Writers such as Vladimir Nabokov have also made a name for themselves as literary translators.
Many consider poetry the most difficult Genre to translate, given the difficulty in rendering both the form and the content in the target language. In 1959 in his influential paper "On Linguistic Aspects of Translation", the Russian-born linguist and semiotician Roman Jakobson even went as far as to declare that "poetry by definition [was] untranslatable". In 1974 the American poet James Merrill wrote a poem, "Lost in Translation," which in part explores this subject. This question was also explored in Douglas Hofstadter's 1997 book, Le Ton beau de Marot.
Translation of sung texts is generally much more restrictive than translation of poetry, because in the former there is little or no freedom to choose between a versified translation and a translation that dispenses with verse structure. One might modify or omit rhyme in a singing translation, but the assignment of syllables to specific notes in the original musical setting places great challenges on the translator. There is the option in prose, less so in verse, of adding or deleting a syllable here and there by subdividing or combining notes, respectively, but even with prose the process is nevertheless almost like strict verse translation because of the need to stick as close as possible to the original prosody. Other considerations in writing a singing translation include repetition of words and phrases, the placement of rests and/or punctuation, the quality of vowels sung on high notes, and rhythmic features of the vocal line that may be more natural to the original language than to the target language.
As with other kinds of literary translation, some singing translations are better than others; some fall out of favour due to datedness or inaccuracy.
Whereas the singing of translated texts has been common for centuries, it is less necessary when a written translation is provided in some form to the listener, for instance, as inserts in concert programs or as projected titles in performance halls or visual media.
Like pharmaceutical translation, medical translation is specialisation where a mistranslation can have grave consequences.
Pedagogical translation is used to enrich (and to assess) the student's Vocabulary in the second language, to help assimilate new syntactic structures and to verify the student's understanding. Unlike other types of translation, pedagogical translation takes place in the student's native (or dominant) language as well as the second language. That is to say that the student will translate both to and from the second language. Another difference between this mode of translation and other modes is that the goal is often literal translation of phrases taken out of Context, and of text fragments, which may be completed fabricated for the purposes of the exercise.
Pedagogical translation should not be confused with scholarly translation.
Like medical translation, pharmaceutical translation is specialisation where a mistranslation can have grave consequences.
Scholarly translation should not be confused with pedagogical translation.
More specifically, texts that contain a high amount of terminology, that is, words or expressions that are used (almost) only within a specific field, or that describe that field in a great deal of detail.
One of the first instances of recorded translation activity in the West was the rendition of the Old Testament into Greek in the third century B.C.E.; this translation is known as the Septuagint, alluding to the seventy translators (seventy-two in some versions) that were commissioned to translate the Bible on the island of Paphos, with each translator working in solitary confinement in a separate cell. Legend has it that all seventy versions were exactly identical. The Septuagint became the source text for later translations into many other languages including Latin, Coptic, Armenian, and Georgian.
St. Jerome, the Patron saint of translation, is still considered one of the greatest translators in history for his work on translating the Bible into Latin. The Catholic Church used this translation (known as the Vulgate) for centuries, but even his translation met much controversy when it was released.
The Protestant Reformation saw the translation of the Bible into the local languages of Europe, an act condemned by the Catholic Church and one that had a great impact on the split between Protestantism and Catholicism.
Martin Luther's Bible in German and the King James Bible in English had lasting effects on the religion, culture, and language of those countries.
See also: Bible translations
Machine translation (MT) is a form of translation where a computer program analyses the source text and produces a target text without human intervention.
In recent years machine translation, a major goal of Natural language processing, has met with limited success. Most machine translation involves some sort of human intervention, as it requires a pre-editing and a post-editing phase. Note that in machine translation, the translator supports the machine.
Tools available on the Internet, such as AltaVista's Babel Fish, and low-cost translation programs, have brought machine translation technologies to a large public. These tools produce what is called a "gisting translation" - a rough translation that gives the "gist" of the source text, but is not otherwise usable.
However, in fields with highly limited ranges of vocabulary and simple sentence structure, for example weather reports, machine translation can deliver useful results.
Engineer and futurist Raymond Kurzweil has predicted that by 2012, machine translation will be powerful enough to dominate the translation field. MIT's Technology Review also listed universal translation and interpretation as likely "within a decade" in its 2004 list. Such claims, however, have been made since the first serious forays into machine translation in the 1950s.
Computer-assisted translation (CAT), also called computer-aided translation, is a form of translation where a human translator creates a target text with the assistance of a computer program. Note that in computer-assisted translation, the machine supports the translator.
Computer-assisted translation can be seen to include standard dictionary and grammar software; however, the term is normally used to refer to a range of specialised programs available for the translator.
For example, Translation memory (TM) programs store and align previously translated source texts and their equivalent target texts in a database.
They split the source text into manageable units known as "segments." Typically, each source-text sentence or sentence-like unit (headings, titles or elements in a list) is considered a segment, although texts are sometimes segmented into paragraphs instead of sentences. As the translator works through a document, the translation memory displays a source segment and a previous translation for re-use, if such a previous translation exists, or prompts the translator to enter a new translation. After the translation for a segment is completed, the program stores the new translation and moves onto the next segment. The translation memory, in principle, is a simple database with a pair of entries for each segment: an entry for the source segment and the corresponding entry for the segment translation provided by the translator.
This criticism can be rebutted in several ways. First, this kind of situation arises rarely in real-world translations. When it does, the translator can use techniques to avoid the problem by, for example, translating "Do you speak English?" by "Do you speak my language?" or "Do you understand what I say?" Another point is that a French-speaking reader who is reading a book written by, say, Agatha Christie describing a Murder in an English Stately home, most likely realises that the characters were speaking English in the original.
Another criticism is of a more philosophical nature. It claims that translation can be described as writing what you have read in another language. The question arises whether the reader can know whether the translator understands the original author perfectly. While this is the translator's job, it is the author who is praised for the work; but can a translation of Asimov be considered as Asimov's work? According to this criticism, translation could even be seen as "legal Plagiarism". Translations can be quite different from the original: for instance, the name of Zaphod Beeblebrox in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams was translated into French by Jean Bonnefoy as Zapi Bibici. While this is not a huge difference, it is there. Adams may not have been completely happy with this change, and it is by a series of such small changes that a translation becomes an adaptation, according to this criticism.
This is a long-time complaint of translation, that is expressed in the Italian expression Traduttore, traditore - every translation is a Betrayal. On the other hand, rarely is a work of fiction translated without a negotiation as to rights, and many an author will be happy to put aside reservations about the names of characters for the opportunity to increase his readership.