For years I have read through long, heartfelt, and even angry threads with native speakers of a certain language defending why they make better translators than non-native speakers. They sustain there is a sort of naturalness to their native language that non-native speakers never completely acquire, no matter how much they read and study. They point out that languages have peculiarities and nuances that can only be mastered when one is completely embedded in the language, and this cannot be done overseas or even after some years of living in a certain country. Many also state that languages are living organisms that grow and evolve, and one can only keep up with their changes when living at the heart of those changes: deep within the culture that speaks the language.
When one respects language, these strong, well founded arguments tend to tip the scale over to the “native speakers only” side. We’ve all read “funny” sounding translations before and known immediately that the translator was a non-native speaker. I’ve come across so many “off- sounding” translations while travelling through non-English speaking countries that I’ve lost count, everything from signs reading Stop--Drive sideways to Our wines leave you nothing to hope for. However, when one comes across these odd phrases there’s always one thing that comes to mind, “the person who translated that is probably not a professional translator.” Self-respecting professional translators may render a translation that comes across slightly “off” to a native speaker, but their language level is not likely to be low enough for a completely silly translation. As language professionals, I think it’s time we start giving each other a little more credit.
These “off-sounding” phrases for which non-native speakers get blamed are real, and we can find them in menus, brochures, articles, and manuals all over the world. But with something as complex and ever changing as language, can you really blame non-native speakers, especially those living overseas, for not always catching the gist of idioms, prepositional phrases, phrasal verbs, and other complexities with which even native speakers sometimes struggle? Does not always finding the most natural sounding way of expressing an idea automatically imply that the person is not a good translator? I think the answer is no. If you take English as an example, the revised Oxford English Dictionary has over 600,000 words, and in the United States an average college graduate only accurately uses about twenty-five thousand of those words. If even educated native speakers only master a portion of their own language, why are we so hard on non-native speakers?
When accused of being inaccurate and unnatural sounding, non-native speakers often counterargue that, though they don’t always speak the target language perfectly, their understanding of the source language renders a more accurate translation of the source text. I find this to be their strongest argument; the reason why can be inferred by truthfully answering the following question in your head: as a native speaker of the target language, haven’t you ever had to ask a non-native speaker (of the target text) to explain the source text to you? I believe even fully bilingual translators, with multilingual and multicultural upbringings, cannot honestly answer “no” to that question. We’ve all struggled with source texts at some point, which takes me right back to the main argument of native speakers: languages have peculiarities and nuances that can only be mastered when one is completely embedded in the language, and this cannot be done overseas or even after some years of living in a certain country. So if we assume non-native speakers are doomed to sound a little “off” when translating into their non-native language, can’t we assume, for the same reasons, that a native speaker’s comprehension of the source language might be subject to the same flaws?
In the native vs. non-native speaker debate we’ve been focusing so much on the trees that we’re failing to see the forest. Yes, native speakers are likely to come up with a more natural sounding translation that is easier on the eyes of the client’s readership. This is one of the perks of having a mother tongue: you get to speak it better than those who have a different mother tongue. However, non-native speakers get the flip side of the coin: they understand their mother tongue (i.e. your source language) better than you.
This is why I strongly believe we need to set our differences aside and team-up. Clients are paying for accurate, natural sounding work. And although native speakers hold the winning hand in naturalness, non-native speakers can greatly contribute to accuracy when translators work together. An ideal translation team should consist, at least, of a native speaker for the translation work and a non-native speaker for editing. Needless to say, once the non-native speaker has helped improve the quality of the deliverable by shedding light on the source text, it’s once again up to the native speaker to find the proper way to phrase it in the target language.
I’m sure anyone who has read this far is probably asking him or herself how feasible this solution is financially. The answer is up to us. Our industry, like all other industries, is experiencing a sharp downfall. We all read postings and see the ridiculously low offers some companies are making. What is even scarier is how many bids they get at these prices! My solution is probably not the best way to go if your motto is “cheap, cheap, cheap.” However, if you’re a quality-oriented language professional and are charging reasonable prices for your work, teaming up with another language professional that does the same thing and fairly splitting your projects and profits will automatically increase both your incomes. In today’s demanding market, there is really no reason to work alone anymore. When teaming up with other linguists we are not only able to provide better quality work, but we are also able to handle larger workloads and manage tighter deadlines. This trend, though far from ideal, is the reality of today’s translation market. Clients need it accurate, fast, and at competitive rates. Meanwhile we are only human and there’s only so much we can do on our own. Personally, I will continue to pair up with and learn from my non native colleagues. Hopefully, the more we work together, the better off everyone will be, including our clients!
To learn more about the author visit her professional profile on LinkedIn or Proz, and if you like what you read visit the author’s blog on Law and Language Law and Language.
+Dark+Backd.jpg)
2 comments:
I do agree with you. I'm a student at UCSD Extension trying to get my certification in Translation and Interpretation English-Spanish and sometimes I feel the hostility of some native speakers who are bilingual. They think people like me who love languages and try to learn and master a language cannot become good translators. Even though I know I will sound more natural in my own language, my goal is to master English and become a good translator and interpreter for both English and Spanish.
There's a poll on this topic today at ProZ.com.
At the time of writing, 644 people have voted, and only 53% agree completely that "The best translator is the one who translates into his/her mother tongue".
I say "only 53%" because I would have expected a higher figure, since native speakers have been pushing their so-called "advantages" for years now. On the other hand, the numbers who only partially agree or who disagree may well have been boosted by people who think they can translate into a language just because their mother-in-law knows someone who speaks it.
The ProZ quick polls usually only stay on the home page there for a day or so, but you can find previous polls by clicking on "Community" in the menu bar there, and then on "Quick polls".
Post a Comment