I’ve been doing a fair amount of research on translation theory recently, and it’s really a fascinating field. There are as many facets and complexities as colors in a sunset, but at its core, it does have any number of interesting and easily understandable aspects. Since I’ve been looking around at different sorts of translation, I think it’s time to discuss one of the more basic choices that translators make (and one of the ones that most affects the readers): source and target language bias.
So, let’s say that I wanted to translate a modern Spanish novel into English. For the purposes of this article, I’ll be using the terms “source text/language” to refer to the Spanish version, and using “target language/text” to refer to the English translation.
Translation would be far more simple if all languages were identical, abstract sets of words, used identically by everybody. If this were the case, every word construction, tense, or framing would have an exact duplicate in every other language in the world. The English word ‘Table’ would be exactly the same as the Spanish ‘Mesa’, and every time you saw ‘Table’, you could just switch it out with ‘mesa’. So, ideally, I would sit down with my dictionary and my reference grammar and start replacing English words, sentences, and paragraphs with their Spanish “equivalents”. Once this substitution was complete, I would have a perfectly accurate copy of the original text which was completely understandable to a speaker of the target language.
As convenient as that would be, it’s not remotely true. Even in our quick example, ‘Table’ in English has a number of different meanings, and not all are covered by the Spanish ‘mesa’ (ranging from a Data Table, to “tabling” a resolutions). No two languages are exactly equivalent, and although some words might have quick and easy equivalents in both the source and target language, the vast majority of words and constructions will require the translator to make some decisions.
When these decisions start being made, there’s an opportunity for bias. Let’s say I come across the Spanish phrase “Mas vale pajaro en mano que ciento volando” in the novel. I need to make a choice here, as to how to translate it. Literally, it means “A bird in the hand is worth more than a hundred flying.” However, English does have a very, very similar expression, “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”. So, I can translate literally, and favor the Source Language (Spanish) phrasing, or I can translate using the English idiom, and favor the Target Language.
In this case, the main difference will be in terms of native target language speaker’s perception. Using the literal Spanish would be what translators often refer to as a “difference” preference or “favoring the source language “, the choice to use different phrasing and, even through the translation, emphasize that the source language and the author’s words are different than how an English speaker might have written things. On the other side, using the English idiom might be referred to as “identity” preference (or “favoring the target language”), where the translator tries to make the target language text as accessible, understandable, and familiar as possible to target language readers.
This example is fairly simple, in that really, a native English speaker will understand what the phrase means even if it’s translated literally. However, imagine you’re given an idiom like “Estar como perro en barrio ajeno”, literally, “to be like a dog in a neighbor’s yard”. If one were to translate that literally, the target language readers might understand the words, but miss the meaning entirely. However, Ii one translated it (more accurately) as “to be like a fish out of water”, the target language reader would have a much easier grasp on the meaning behind it.
There are always other factors at play in the decision of translating certain phrases. I’ve been learning about translation theory with one of the professors in my department, and he recently made a very interesting comment about the translation of Native American stories and literatures. We were going through one of his translations of an Arapaho speech, and we stumbled across a particularly colorful phrase (along the lines of “walking into the other group’s camp”). He translated it literally for me, but he put it into the English version as a single English word, “assimilation”. When I asked why, he explained that he didn’t want to make it sound like the stereotypical, disney-style Native American speech. He said that although the Arapaho often do use metaphors related to the Old Ways, hunting and nature, he often chooses not to translate them literally, because he feels it really just reinforces the stereotype of how their language sounds, rather than the actual message of the story or speech.
So, every translation has a bit of bias. However, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. This is a choice, and a tool in the hands of a skilled translator, and very seldom is a translation done favoring ONLY the target or source languages. Although translation theorists will likely argue this point, I suspect that the most accurate translation will likely fall somewhere in the middle, with a mix of difference and identity.
Sometimes, you need to favor the target language, to make the book clear, understandable, and readable to the readers, but sometimes you need to favor the source language, if for no other reason, just to remind the reader that the original work wasn’t written two weeks ago in Des Moines.
Suggested Readings:
Introducing Translation Studies by Jeremy Munday : A good primer on translation theory and many of the issues discussed here (albeit with a generalized target language bias)
The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Pevear and Volokhonsky translation: A great book, and a more Target language biased translation.
The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Constance Garnett translation: The same great book, but this is a more source language favoring translation.
Tagged with Conventional Linguistics, High Precision Language, Language Usage, Language in Fiction, Translation and Translation Theory | 3 Comments
Comments
Leave a Comment
If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.
Site Information
Search all posts
Tags
- Computers and Software (12)
- Conventional Linguistics (95)
- Computational Linguistics (4)
- Dialects and Idiolects (6)
- Etymology (2)
- Language Acquisition (4)
- Language Change (8)
- Linguistic Anthropology (4)
- Phonetic Phriends (3)
- Phonetics and Phonology (20)
- Psycholinguistics (4)
- Sociolinguistics (22)
- Translation and Translation Theory (10)
- Words, Phrases, and Idioms (27)
- Language and Thought (10)
- Language Censorship (3)
- Language Creation (6)
- Language Humor (25)
- Language Usage (76)
- Linguistic Mysticism (10)
- Notes (47)
- Reader Questions (2)
- Recommended Links (1)
Language Sites and Blogs
Linguistics and Language Resources
Links for Corrections
Unrelated-yet-awesome
Archives
- June 2010
- March 2010
- September 2009
- March 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
Site features
- Entries RSS
- Comments RSS
- Powered by Wordpress
- Theme based on Vertigo Squared.
- Hosting by Joyent
I just wanted to point out that Walter Benjamin writes a very philosphical, somewhat rambling, but still enjoyable essay on the balance between fidelity and freedom in translation.
I linked the essay in my comment, but in case you don’t see it it’s called “The Task of the Translator.”
Personshaped:
Thanks for the link. For those interested, there’s a copy of this essay at:
http://social.chass.ncsu.edu/wyrick/debclass/benja.htm
Also, I’ve linked to your site as one of my random sites of the moment. I like it, and it’s good to see some other linguist bloggers :)