| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Interpreter error in the Behring Breivik Trial used in headlines around the world (source in Norwegian)
|
|---|
| | | There is no dichotomy in TRANSlation. Ten in, ten (theorically) out | Apr 24, 2012 |
To avoid any doubt, Robert's phrase is exactly what any reviewer in any language would say in most cases about non-native translation, and the usage of adjective "decent" (=+- "standard, acceptable, etc.") became trivial not only in English, in these situations.
Now, a question: if a native educated (I guess, highly educated) person in the N country fails to differentiate between two relatively commonly used words in the N language, how a non-native interpreter from the B country would man... See more To avoid any doubt, Robert's phrase is exactly what any reviewer in any language would say in most cases about non-native translation, and the usage of adjective "decent" (=+- "standard, acceptable, etc.") became trivial not only in English, in these situations.
Now, a question: if a native educated (I guess, highly educated) person in the N country fails to differentiate between two relatively commonly used words in the N language, how a non-native interpreter from the B country would manage to do that? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | They are not particularly common words | Apr 24, 2012 |
How often do you use expressions like 'law of necessity' in everyday life?
The right described in Norwegian is the right to perform an act that would normally be illegal, if it will prevent a disaster. Both words begin with the word for emergency - they are lexically close in Norwegian (Nødrett/nødverge).
They are not intended to be an everyday occurrence, and the law explains that these rights are only intended to be invoked in very extreme situations, when there is ... See more How often do you use expressions like 'law of necessity' in everyday life?
The right described in Norwegian is the right to perform an act that would normally be illegal, if it will prevent a disaster. Both words begin with the word for emergency - they are lexically close in Norwegian (Nødrett/nødverge).
They are not intended to be an everyday occurrence, and the law explains that these rights are only intended to be invoked in very extreme situations, when there is no alternative.
The need for extreme (self) defence from attacks or accidents is not an everyday event or anything people regularly chat about.
I count myself as highly educated and as famililar with the concepts in Danish as most natives - I have lived here as an adult for over 30 years, and I had to think twice and then look up what was actually involved. Only because I am a linguist did I wonder why the expressions were mixed up in the press and used as synonyms.
The Norwegian lawyer observes that it is the kind of slip that is unfortunately made in the courts. I cannot promise that after a long and emotionally harrowing day in court, I would not have mixed up the two concepts if I had been thinking in Danish, and I count myself as fairly highly educated.
Breivik is reported to have said a lot of incredible things along the way, and this was just one more.
This does not excuse everyone for not checking, but I can understand how the mistake was made.
I personally think the discussion about native or non-native English is irrelevant here. It is a point of law, which the natives of the source language are not all clear about.
[Edited at 2012-04-25 09:19 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom Tyson 
Local time: 02:29
Member
German to English
| Now I'm beginning to understand | Apr 24, 2012 |
what this is really all about, thanks to your explanations, Christine. I'm grateful. And yes, the news here (BBC) restated last night that he claimed to have acted in self-defence: it doesn't make sense.
On the (off-)topic of English being used as a lingua franca, I think that it's inevitable that communicative purpose prevails over idiomatic appropriateness in these cases. There certainly is a new kind of global English evolving among non-native speakers. Good for them, at least th... See more what this is really all about, thanks to your explanations, Christine. I'm grateful. And yes, the news here (BBC) restated last night that he claimed to have acted in self-defence: it doesn't make sense.
On the (off-)topic of English being used as a lingua franca, I think that it's inevitable that communicative purpose prevails over idiomatic appropriateness in these cases. There certainly is a new kind of global English evolving among non-native speakers. Good for them, at least they make the effort. Where language fulfils a purpose it will survive. More communication in the English language passes between non-native English speakers every day than between people for whom it is their mother tongue. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 09:29
Chinese to English
| Bit off-topic, but | Apr 25, 2012 |
Gennady, to the extent that I understand your question...
> if a native educated (I guess, highly educated) person in the N country fails to differentiate between two relatively commonly used words in the N language, how a non-native interpreter from the B country would manage to do that?
By being an expert. My reading of Chinese is far from perfect. I'm not as fast as a native speaker/reader, and there are times when I miss cultural allusions. Despite that, I'm a bett... See more Gennady, to the extent that I understand your question...
> if a native educated (I guess, highly educated) person in the N country fails to differentiate between two relatively commonly used words in the N language, how a non-native interpreter from the B country would manage to do that?
By being an expert. My reading of Chinese is far from perfect. I'm not as fast as a native speaker/reader, and there are times when I miss cultural allusions. Despite that, I'm a better reader than the vast majority of Chinese people, because I read for professional purposes. When I look at a document I know how to and do assess its context, its purpose, the appropriateness of its language, its audience, etc. etc. I know the terminology, and if I don't, then I know how to find it.
A legal translator/interpreter knows a hell of a lot more law than an educated native in any language. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:29
Hebrew to English
| Oft quoted, rarely substantiated | Apr 25, 2012 |
Tom Tyson wrote:
More communication in the English language passes between non-native English speakers every day than between people for whom it is their mother tongue.
This is often the battle cry of those defending Globish but what I'd like to know is, how the hell can it be quantified, or verified?
In addition, surely the quality of the communication matters too? How much of this intra-non-native communication is practically jibberish? Or something which barely resembles English (and probably shouldn't be called so).
There are so many holes in the statement that it really shouldn't be used almost as a slogan. There's also the consideration that, if they are to be viewed as English / Globish, then you aren't comparing like for like.
[Edited at 2012-04-25 11:16 GMT]
| | | |
Hi Phil,
Christine answered the first part of my question: (The Word of "Source-Language" People) "I had to think twice and then look up what was actually involved" and let add: "and still uncertain." This is my point: you may call/translate dog dog (social acceptance of your definition could be as high as maybe 80!! percent, remaining twenty percent would ask - where?), but you are not able to call/translate necessity necessity or defens(c)e defens(c)e and be certain that other people wil... See more Hi Phil,
Christine answered the first part of my question: (The Word of "Source-Language" People) "I had to think twice and then look up what was actually involved" and let add: "and still uncertain." This is my point: you may call/translate dog dog (social acceptance of your definition could be as high as maybe 80!! percent, remaining twenty percent would ask - where?), but you are not able to call/translate necessity necessity or defens(c)e defens(c)e and be certain that other people will agree with your definition.
It's just food for brain, nothing more. The China people should like these puzzles 
[Edited at 2012-04-25 20:19 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 18:29
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| Self-defense | Apr 25, 2012 |
Christine is right. Neither 'nødrett' nor 'nødverge' are common, everyday words in Norwegian. When Norwegian speakers talk about self-defense they normally use the word 'selvforsvar'.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Interpreter error in the Behring Breivik Trial used in headlines around the world (source in Norwegian) | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
