TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Translation topic From:Robert Bononno <bononno -at- ACF2 -dot- NYU -dot- EDU> Date:Tue, 8 Feb 1994 23:37:35 -0500
This approach is bound to lead to disaster. I'm a professional translator
and I teach technical translation in NY. Non-native speakers do very
poorly translating into a language that is not their mother tongue. The
problems are immediately apparent. And it's not simply a question of
terminology. It's a question of grammar, usage, and the natural flow of
language. All that is missing. Translations--if they're well done--should
not sound like they were cobbled together by someone with a glancing
knowledge of the language. They should sound like any other
target-language text. If the translation involves technical
material/documentation, that's what it should sound like. As technical
writers I think you know the difference between good and bad writing. Why
accept anything less in a translation?
Non-native speakers (and few of them have native-level proficiency, but
some do) are rarely able to capture the feel of a language, even if much
of what they write is technicaly correct. I think this is a very
short-sighted approach to the issue of translation.
On Tue, 8 Feb 1994, Karen Kay wrote:
> JACK P. SHAW said:
> > On the other hand, a non-native translator to German seems
> > more likely (again, in my experience) to prefer simpler,
> > more direct structures and be more aware of subtleties--maybe
> But if those simpler structures are not what a native speaker
> would prefer, isn't there a problem then w/ the "naturalness"
> of the language thus produced?