Did a bad translation put horns on Moses’ head?

Posted On December 13, 2012By TranspanishIn Did you know?, Languages, Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

Many translators are familiar with the controversy surrounding the horned Moses and his sometimes-amiss translator. Although that translator, commonly known as Saint Jerome, concerned himself with biblical analysis, theological debate, history, correspondence and translation, he earned his place in history mainly through his translations and revisions of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible.

Jerome translated these texts from the original Hebrew into Latin, and was humble enough to admit ignorance when warranted and to revisit parts of his translations when it became apparent that he had made a mistake. Nonetheless, his Latin translation of the Bible was later recognized by the Council of Trent as the official version, and to this day he remains a widely respected and studied biblical translator.

The controversy in question concerns part of the text in Exodus 34. The original Hebrew version can be read idiomatically as stating that Moses had “rays of light” coming from his head when he descended from Mt. Sinai. However, the same word for ray of light also meant “horns” depending on the context. And in what some may consider a classic case of mistranslation, Jerome chose the latter meaning.

The result of his possible mistake was a horned Moses appearing in the official Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible. And as a lesson to students of translation and art alike, Michelangelo secured that image in our collective consciousness by basing his 1515 sculpture of Moses on Jerome’s translation—along with a list of other contemporary and subsequent artists.

More recently, scholars have attempted to justify this transgression by citing the metaphorical relevance of horns to “glorification, strength and authority”, in an attempt to align them with the meaning of light emanating from Moses’s face. Similarly, some artists such as José de Ribera in his 1638 interpretation, have tried to visually combine the light rays and horns to be essentially the same. Students of translation, however, will likely take from this a reminder to always look into the meaning behind the words and their historical context.

Michelangelo’s Moses with horns

José de Ribera’s Moses with rays of light

Language Proficiency Testing Among Doctors and Hospital Staff

Posted On December 11, 2012By TranspanishIn Languages, Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

An EU directive allowing doctors from member countries to work anywhere in the European Economic Area has come under fire recently. Following the case of a 70 year old British patient who was killed by an incompetent German doctor, critics of the directive have begun pushing for competency tests as well as language proficiency tests as essential measures to protect patients.

The attention has focused on doctors working in the UK without ever having undergone tests to prove that they know enough English to communicate effectively with their patients. Currently, such testing is prohibited under a directive issued from Brussels which considers such measures to be an impediment to the free movement of labor across EU-member country borders. The result, critics say, potentially puts patients at risk of encountering doctors without the basic English skills necessary to work in Britain.

While issues such as this are not new to the EU, which combines so many languages with borders open to travel and commerce, it highlights a concern that can be seen in any area where multiple languages come into frequent contact. If it is not the doctors, for example, who speak different languages, it may be the patients. And that raises the question: at what point is it necessary for hospitals to employ multilingual staff to meet the needs of their patients? Or, as in the case of the EU, at what point should staff be tested for proficiency in one language?

Certain areas of the United States have had their own contact with this issue, particularly in southern states with high and increasing Hispanic populations such as Florida, Texas and Arizona. In some areas, mostly close to the border with Mexico, street signs can be read in Spanish, and even the occasional advertisement in a movie theater will be in Spanish before a movie in English begins. The issue of Spanish-speaking doctors working in hospitals and clinics, of course, goes beyond the question of convenience or marketing to a particular group. As the example in Britain illustrates, the results can be fatal.

At what point, then, does proficiency in Spanish become “necessary” for doctors in the U.S.? How large does the Hispanic population need to get before requirements are put into place? These are questions which face a very complex political environment, particularly in border states. The answers may not come easily, but given the existing population of Spanish-speaking individuals, the discussion is certainly worth having.

Translation: It’s History and Trends

Posted On December 10, 2012By TranspanishIn Did you know?, Languages, Spanish Translation, Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

The term “translation” hails from the mid-fourteenth century with an etymological base in the Latin word translationem, a noun of action from the stem of transferre. It also shares roots with the word from Old French meaning “the rendering of a text from one language to another.” The verb form in English, translate, is from the Latin translatus, literally “carried over.” Interestingly, the word translate replaced an earlier word in Old English which carried a similar though not exact meaning, awendan, literally “to turn, direct.”

Beyond the etymology of the word, the act of translating texts has a long history that is intricately connected with human religious, artistic and scientific expression. From the Bible to the travels of Marco Polo along the silk road and beyond, the diffusion of knowledge and cultural heritage—and, indeed, cross-cultural interaction itself—owes a great debt to history’s translators. As many would expect, the bible still holds the title of the most-translated book. But according to the Guinness Book of World Records, another book holds the title of most-translated for a living author—O Alquimista, or The Alchemist, by the Brazilian Paulo Coelho.

The First Translation of the Bible Into English – Ford Madox Brown (1847)

And if you’re interested to know what the most-translated languages are, UNESCO actually keeps a running tally in its Index Translationum. According to the index, the most-translated source language in the world (through 2011) is English, followed by a distant French. It lists German as the language most translated into, or target language, followed more closely this time by French.

You can also find a list of the most-translated authors within the index, with a few surprises. Despite being the author of the most-translated book by a living author, Coelho actually didn’t make the list of the top-50 translated authors. Coming in first on that list is Agatha Christie, followed by Jules Verne, William Shakespeare, Enid Blyton, and Vladimir Lenin filling out the top five spots. Indeed, the former USSR block makes a good showing on this list, with the region contributing a total of seven authors.

The meaning of ‘Cana’

Posted On December 6, 2012By TranspanishIn Did you know?, Lunfardo, Spanish Language, Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

Argentine Spanish is strewn with words and colorful phrases from Lunfardo, a rich vocabulary born on the streets of Buenos Aires in the second half of the 19th century. Now considered a fixture of the Spanish language in Argentina (especially in and around Buenos Aires) and Uruguay, linguists cite the use of Lunfardo as a defining characteristic of the Rioplatense dialect. Add a dash of Argentine flavor to your Spanish vocabulary with the Transpanish blog’s ongoing feature highlighting some of the most frequently used terms in Lunfardo.

Of all the slang terms that languages use, it seems every language has plenty of words for police. One of these within the Spanish language is the Lunfardo word “cana”. Although it is decidedly a Lunfardo word that made its way into Argentinian Spanish, its etymology is still disputed.

Free image courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net
It has a long history, to be sure. The word “cana” actually appeared in the work of Cervantes to mean a police informer. But if it was not originally from the Spanish language, it may well have made its way to Spain from France, as some believe. The word has a striking resemblance to the French word “canne”, which means a reed or cane. This etymology would make sense in the context of its current usage, since police officers historically have carried batons which are very cane-like.

Of course the explanation may be more simple—the word could just be an abbreviation of the Spanish word for canary, “canario”, which has been used in Spain since the sixteenth century. Staying with that region as the word’s source, another option is Spain’s neighbor Portugal. Similar to the Portuguese word “encanado”, literally meaning prisoner in a cage made of reeds, the word could have made it’s way over to Latin America via Brazil.

There’s a more humorous usage relating to being a prisoner, with a possible etymological history in reference to someone who has had a setback of some kind, and who may consequently find himself languishing in jail. Or it could have been a reference to re-hired police officers who had already retired, whom thieves used to call “canosos” for their grey hair.

But however the word made its way into Argentinian Spanish, it has managed to become entrenched in the culture. With frequent appearances in the lyrics of tango songs, and common usage in the general population, the Lunfardo word cana is a well-understood synonym for policia.

Aesthetics and Meaning: The Balancing Act of Literary Translation

Posted On December 5, 2012By TranspanishIn Languages, Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

Words carry more than just their meaning. They also possess an aesthetic quality that can derive from their meaning, their sound when being pronounced, or even the appearance of the word if it contains symmetry. While these are purely subjective and personal preferences, translators can find themselves faced with the task of trying to decipher and properly transfer that aesthetic quality into another language. As if this alone wasn’t tricky enough, it must also be balanced with the accurate translation of meaning and sense.

Literary translations, by their very nature, offer plenty of opportunities for a translator to use his or her personal judgement when deciding how to translate a text. Indeed, if machine translators ever reach the level of accuracy that a human translator can possess, literary translations may be the final frontier where machines cannot compete. Only a true and complete understanding of techniques being used, such as implied references, understatement, irony, parallelism, rhyme and rhythm in all their manifestations, etc. can produce a correct translation of a particular literary text. The degree of subjectivity in literary texts, and the interpretation that it requires, means that a machine or less-than-apt translator could hardly do justice to the original when translating the meaning into another language. The degree of subjectivity in literary texts, and the interpretation that it requires, means that a machine or less-than-apt translator could hardly do justice to the original when translating the meaning into another language.

Yet when translating a work of poetry or prose, for example, the translator must be sure to remove his or her self and personal expression from their understanding of the text. They must interpret the work on the level intended by the author. It requires walking a thin line of interpretation without interference, with a balancing pole that carries stated meaning and accuracy on one end, implied sense and aesthetics on the other. When done correctly, translating literature of any kind is the ultimate balancing act.

Should Translators Proofread Documents Translated by a Machine?

Posted On November 29, 2012By TranspanishIn Spanish Translation, Tips for Translators/ No Comments

It is becoming more common for agencies and freelance translators to get requests for proofreading translations done with a machine translation tool. As we’ve discussed before, these are tools such as Google Translate—the most widely used machine translation tool available—which use algorithms to translate text that you put into them. These tools have many shortcomings, some of which we have discussed in this blog, which can be problematic for anyone seeking a professional and accurate translation service.

Because there are some very common and obvious mistakes which these tools tend to make when producing the output, you can easily spot text that has been translated by a machine. Moreover, anyone can verify whether one of these tools has been used by simply copying a paragraph of the source text and translating it to the target language in Google Translate. But in the event that someone does decide to use a machine translation tool, they’ll have to be prepared for extensive editing prior to submitting the work.

And for those who have tried this method, thinking it would save some time, it quickly becomes clear that editing machine-translated text actually uses significantly more time than just translating the document from scratch. With the lure of a potentially time-saving aid, it might just be a process that each person needs to go through, and an option that understandably would tempt a client. But in the end, a professionally-done translation is just a much better option.

Are you a translator? Click on the image below and tell us if you would accept to be paid a proofreading or editing fee to correct this translation made with Google Translator.

The Fallibility of the ‘100% Match’ and How it Affects Agency Rates

Posted On November 28, 2012By TranspanishIn Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

Continuing with the topic of Trados, or translation memory software, the ‘100% matches’ moniker warrants a closer look. The term can be both deceptive and misapplied, for reasons including the true accuracy of the matches and the way they affect translation rates, respectively. The term applies to any segment of source text that is an exact match with an already-translated segment stored in the software’s database. Different memory systems can achieve the 100% match to different degrees, but even the most effective ones can still suffer misapplication.

Take, for instance, the source text segment “cozy and modern.” If the software’s first encounter with this phrase involves the description of an apartment, it would be stored in the memory as “acogedor, moderno.” The problem arises when this is applied to the same phrase in reference to, say, a kitchen or some other feminine noun. The source language would appear exactly the same, as English does not use gender, but the exact match application would obviously be incorrect in Spanish.

And this is only one example. There are other instances in which software programs cannot necessarily account for the intricacies of language in their “exact” translations. Other examples include verbs that change depending on plural/singular or wider context differences that the software may not pick up on in the words immediately surrounding the segment. All together, these imperfect applications complicate the way agencies incorporate the ‘100% match’ moniker into their rates.

Since exact matches are technically translated by the software and not the human translator, some agencies will not pay for these segments. But the examples detailed above illustrate how even these segments must be proofread for accuracy and are far from fool-proof despite being ‘100% matches’. Even when agencies choose not to pay for these, they should at least have someone on hand to go through and proofread exact match segments. And if it’s the client who doesn’t want to pay for these translated segments, a brief explanation about the software’s imperfect output might be enough to justify a separate editing fee at a minimum.

Should translators be paid by the hour or per word?

Posted On November 26, 2012By TranspanishIn Spanish Translation, Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

It is far more common for translators to quote a per-word rate to their clients than an hourly rate. Yet hourly rates still persist in some particular cases. There are many reasons why per-word pricing is the norm and preferred by both clients as well as translators and translation agencies. Chief among these is that clients can better calculate costs. It’s much more difficult to get an idea of how much a translation will cost when all you know is an hourly rate, and not necessarily how long it will take to finish. And it’s particularly helpful when comparing the rates of one translator to another, when it can be difficult to accurately gauge how quickly each would complete projects relative to their rates.

Per-word rates also provide an incentive for translators to work quickly and efficiently, which is also better for the client. But it benefits the translator, too, as they can ultimately be more productive and earn more with their work. It may also encourage the use of tools to help increase efficiency. Yet despite the benefits, there is still another side to the coin for translators. Some documents may take much longer to complete, due to legibility issues or a higher difficulty level of the content. Charging by the word, in these cases, can benefit the translator less as their per-word rate undoubtedly would have taken into account how quickly they can translate. In these cases, some people choose to include a rate specifically for editing which is per-hour rather than per-word.

One thing that newbie translators, or those branching out to do independent work, should remember is that there is a difference between source word and target word rates. The former refers to a rate based on the number of words in the original document, while the latter refers to the number of translated words upon completion. Different agencies and freelancers may choose to go with one or the other. But it is ultimately more convenient for the client to be quoted a per-source word rate. Why? It lets them know exactly what the cost will be before you even get started.

The final thing to take into consideration when deciding how to charge your clients is whether to go with a per-page rate. It is not uncommon to receive a fax (even these days) or a scanned version of a document that cannot be easily converted into text. This kind of rate is less common than the more popular per-word rates or hourly rate. Which rate works for you will depend on the type of work that you typically receive.

However, charging per page is different than the page rate that some agencies and freelancers quote, which often is a way of referring to a set amount of words (for example, 200 words per page.) So it’s always important to be clear what you mean by “per page” (physical page or predetermined number or words) and “per word” (source word or target word) when negotiating rates.

Machine Translation vs. Translation Memory Software: Different Methods, Different Results

Posted On November 21, 2012By TranspanishIn Tips for Translators, Translation Buyers/ No Comments

Most people are familiar with machine translation tools such a Google Translator and Babelfish, for example. They seek to replace the human translator by taking rules that were previously established and put into the software and applying them to new phrases. These rules cover everything from syntax to grammar and individual vocabulary units.

But these tools are not alone in challenging the traditional human translator. There is also a group of tools called Translation Memory Software or Computer-Assisted Translation. These differ from machine translators in a number of ways. One primary difference is that they do not try to replace human translators, but rather to automate part of the process—a process that ultimately is finished by an individual person. And although machine translators usually require human editing—sometimes extensive editing—this is rather the result of imperfect algorithms and the development-in-process of a relatively new technology.

Translation memory software works by taking words and phrases that the human translator has encountered and translated, and saves them in a database for future use. When the same or similar phrases are encountered again, the translation memory software applies the previously logged translation. It may be an exact match, a “fuzzy” match or, in the case of new words and phrases, no match. The human translator would then go through and review the translation as a final edit.

The benefit of this type of tool is that the more you use it, the larger its database of translated words and phrases gets—essentially a sort of reference built and used by the translator him/herself. This can decrease the time used on translations while increasing consistency. Traditional machine translation tools, on the other hand, rely on developers to gradually increase and improve their algorithms and references, somewhat less reliable than a database saved from a professional translator’s previous work.

So while both types of translation tools can help increase time and cost efficiency, they both function in different ways and, naturally, can produce very different results. The question of whether each tool adds to or detracts from the translation industry as a whole should take into consideration the respective role that each plays.

Do children really learn languages faster than adults?

Posted On November 19, 2012By TranspanishIn Languages/ No Comments

Traditional knowledge has been that children are better at learning languages than adults, along with a whole host of other abilities like playing a musical instrument. Heavyweights like Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, have supported this assumption with theories regarding the critical period of human maturation, among others. Essentially, the argument states that there is a particular period that is prime for learning skills such as language acquisition, and any time before or after that is less than prime, even much less so.

For some of us, it’s nearly enough to discourage lifelong learning. There are several explanations which support this argument, among them that very young children may learn a language by forming associations rather than by mental translations, and that young brains are just more impressionable than older ones—a sort of version of the blank slate idea.

But it turns out that this may only be part of the story. Children indeed do learn more naturally through word associations, in particular if they learn two or even three languages simultaneously without the option of translating one into another. But it can be argued that adults simply possess a different set of skills that may be no less useful in picking up a new language, albeit skills which utilize different methods.

Free image courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net

For example, a string of experiments presented groups of children, 12 and 13-year olds, and adults noun-verb pairs that were pronounced and spelled differently according to whether they corresponded to animate or inanimate objects. While none of the groups were given a description of the rule or guidance on how to use it, the adults fared much better in identifying the rule and applying their knowledge. The group of 12 and 13-year olds was nearly as good at identifying the rule and applying it, while the group of children struggled with it. These particular experiments highlighted the theory that adults may be better at identifying patterns and applying their knowledge than young children—something which supports the argument that children do not learn better than adults, but that they simply possess different strengths.

Proficiency often comes down to just how frequently or how long an individual is able to practice their new language, as well as whether they receive guidance via timely corrections of their mistakes. While children who continue to learn a new language face ample opportunity to practice it over many years, generally with teachers all too willing to correct them, adults can’t necessarily replicate that learning environment. Even with full immersion in a new place where only the new language is spoken, people are often hesitant to correct an adult. Ultimately, it comes down to just finding an effective learning method according to how the individual learns—whatever their age may be—and ensuring that there is sufficient opportunity to continue refining the skill. That last factor can make all the difference between a good command of a language and proficiency.

Author: Transpanish