Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Fairy Tale Updates




1. Nutcracker

For the original post, enter nutcracker in the Search box on the right.

At Christmas time this blog used to carry histories of fairy stories that had been transformed, first by translation and then by adaptation, from their original languages and versions into a sometimes ignominious adaptation for the British Christmas stage as pantomimes. One of them was Nutcracker, which had however the good fortune to be turned from a story by the German Romantic author E T A Hoffman (published 1816) into a much loved ballet for children. A recent article by Sarah Ardizzone, an award-winning translator of French children's books, tells a very different but no less fortunate history of Nutcracker in French.

She begins by telling us, in effect, that Hoffman's story itself had an element of adaptation:
"We can trace accounts of wooden nutcrackers springing to life in the folk taes of Bohemia, Poland and Muscovy. It was on this folklore that ETA Hoffman drew… pitted against the bourgeois values of 19th-century Bavaria, which reshaped the tale."
Then she goes on to trace the French translation:
"With its toy soldiers and sugarplum fairy who come to life on Christmas Eve, The Nutcracker has come to sum up the magic of the festive season. But there is a darker history to the story, and the French writer Alexandre Dumas was just one of the storytellers who was entranced by it...
Dumas's wife, the actress (born Marguerite-Josephine Ferrand) is credited with translating [it] into French. Dumas himself then adapted it, introducing a framing device and restoring the tale to its original storytelling tradition. Our narrator is tethered to a chair in the boudoir of a French children's party and the society brats refuse to untether him until he has told them a gripping story. Enter Hoffman's Nutcracker, with exceptionally high stakes. It is as imperative for Dumas's narrator to hold his audience's attention as for Scheherazade.
"Dumas's version is famously more saccharine than Hoffman's lugubrious tale, and when Tchaikovsky was commissioned to compose the score for a libretto by Marius Petipa [the choreographer of the Imperial Russian Ballet], he was unhappy that Petipa had adapted it directly from Dumas."
The moral of this tale is that translations of literature are like children of their originals. They live in another culture and, like children, they may well grow up to be quite different from their parents and from one another.

References
Sarah Ardizzone. The story of The Nutcracker - in pictures. The Guardian, 24 December 2015. It's worth going to the original publication to see the illustrations. Click here. or go to
http://www.theguardian.com/books/gallery/2015/dec/24/the-story-of-the-nutcracker-in-pictures

Alexandre Dumas. L'histoire d'une casse-noisette. 1844.


2. Perrault

Two other stories whose metamorphoses have likewise been described on this blog are Charles Perrault's Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty. To find them, enter perrault in the Search box. By magical coincidence, on the very day that I'm writing these lines (12 January 2016) the banner on the home page of Google is celebrating the 300th anniversary of Perrault's birth. Writers of his vintage never die.



NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.

Friday, January 1, 2016

Happy New Year 2016

A HAPPY NEW YEAR TO MY FOLLOWERS AND ALL MY OTHER READERS!

2015 was bad for me, as you know if you've been following the blog through the year. I owe a lot of apologies to people I let down when illness struck. Now that I'm recovering, albeit very slowly, I'm hoping 2016 will be a catch-up year.

When I began looking at Natural Translation in the 70s, the idea that translating could be done without training or professional qualifications was anathema to my colleagues. Even by 2009, when I started this blog, the literature on untrained, intuitive translation was infinitesimal compared to the flood of writings about what I polemically called "the icing on the cake": that is to say, all the skilled literary, legal, religious, etc. translating and its practitioners. To my mind the turning point came when Rachele Antonini organised NPIT1, the First International Conference on Non-professional Interpreting and Translation, at Forli in 2012. That was recognition. Now we're coming up to NPIT3 this year. Non-professional translation is not the same as natural translation, but it's a step in that direction. As a distinguished reader has just written to me, "The work that started several years ago is paying off today."

Thank you everybody.



NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.

Friday, December 25, 2015

Mathematical Translatology

This post is for people who are mathematically minded. If you're not one of them, then skip it.

In my early days in translatology (aka translation studies) I laboured in machine translation (MT). There I was fortunate enough to work for a while under a brilliant French computer scientist, Dr Alain Colmerauer. He had begun his career, like many French computer scientists, as a mathematician, and he'd become an expert in the hybrid field known as mathematical linguistics (ML). In particular he specialised at that time in a type of ML called transformational grammar (TG). There's an article on TG in Wikipedia. His application of TG to translation, called Q-Systems (there's an article on them too in Wikipedia), was an early example (1970) of mathematical translatology and remains one of the best ever.

You still need maths to work on the design of MT systems, but since the late 1980s the maths has changed radically and TG has been swept away by statistics. Still, from time to time I'm taken by a nostalgia for the old days of ML. And so I set to thinking recently about whether ML could be used to characterise not the translation of specific sentences or sentence structures – which is what we mostly used to do – but the whole of translation. This is what I came up with.

Let I1 be an idea or message, piece of information, emotional feeling, etc.
Let I2 be another idea or message, piece of information, emotional feeling, etc., that is the same as, similar to or different from I1.
Let L1 be a natural language.
Let L2 be another natural language.
Let E be the expression function by which any I is expressed in any L.
Let T be the relationship of translation.

Let ei be an expression (utterance, text, etc) that is a product of E: ei = E(La, Ix)
Let ej be another expression (utterance, text, etc) that is a product of E: ej = E(Lb, Iy)

If Ix = Iy and La = Lb, then we have a paraphrase and not a translation.
Otherwise:
If Ix = Iy, then ej is a precise translation of ei.
If Ix ≈ Iy, then ej is a paraphrastic translation of ei.

In either of the latter two cases, let's label the relationship as T(ei:ej).

The question of what constitutes precise and paraphrastic is too big to go into here. It leads to a whole literature on 'equivalence' in translation. For the moment it must remain a subjective evaluation.

So far so good and quite obvious, but let's go a little further.

Let us declare that the relationship T is ordered and reversible.
Then T(ei:ej) ≠ T(ej;ei) and Ta(ei:ej) => Tb(ej;ei).
The formula models a procedure that is widely used in certain fields of translation and is called back translation. It happens to be empirically testable using an MT system that operates in both directions. Why MT? Because that way we can be sure of the stability and objectivity of the translator's 'mind'.
Here's a test using Google Translate and translating between English and French.

Input 1: My mother has gone shopping and will not be back before lunch.
Output 1: Ma mère est allée faire du shopping et ne sera pas de retour avant le déjeuner.
Input 2: Ma mère est allée faire du shopping et ne sera pas de retour avant le déjeuner.
Output 2: My mother went shopping and will not be back before lunch.

The result is a paraphrastic back translation. (Went doesn't have exactly the same meaning as has gone, but the tense of the French verb est allée permits two possible translations into English.)

Let's now declare that the relationship T is transitive:
Ta(e1, e2) and Tb(e2, e3) => Tc(e1, e3).

Thus, according to Google Translate again, where L1 is English, L2 is French and L3 is German:

T1(My mother has gone shopping and will not be back before lunch, Ma mère est allée faire du shopping et ne sera pas de retour avant le déjeuner.)
and T2(Ma mère est allée faire du shopping et ne sera pas de retour avant le déjeuner, Meine Mutter ging einkaufen und nicht zurück vor dem Mittagessen sein.)
=>
T3(My mother has gone shopping and will not be back before lunch, Meine Mutter ging einkaufen und nicht zurück vor dem Mittagessen sein.)

That's another paraphrastic translation, but close enough to validate tbe formula. (The mistake in the German is Google's.) Incidentally this example models that if either T1 or T2 is paraphrastic (or both are), T3 will also be paraphrastic. This operation is all the more interesting because it models a common procedure which is usually called relay translation or relay interpretation and is in practice widely used, especially in literary translation and conference interpreting, where a work or speech is often translated through an intermediate language by a translator who doesn't know the source language. Surprisingly, though MT was used to test it here, it's not exploited in any of the MT systems I've tried.

Well that's enough for now. A complete description would require incorporating other factors such as pragmatics. Have fun over Christmas!

Image
Alain Colmerauer, Chevalier de la Légion d'honneur.

Reference
Alain Colmerauer. Les systèmes-Q ou un formalisme pour analyser et synthétiser les phrases sur ordinateur. Publication interne no 43. Université de Montréal, [Dép. d'informatique], September 1970. 45 p. "Ce travail a été subventionné par le Conseil National de la Recherche du Canada: ceci dans le cadre d'un octroi à titre personnel et dans le cadre du projet de Traduction Automatique de l'Université de Montréal."

Google Translate: the examples cited were obtained 24 December 2015.



NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.

Monday, December 21, 2015

Syrian refugees land in Canada




"These are challenging times for Arabic and Kurdish language professionals who will not only be overwhelmed with work but will see an influx of non-professionals taking interpretation assignments out of the need to support the refugees.
— Multi-Languages Corporation, Toronto, December 2015

And where would they be without the non-professionals? And how would they get non-professionals without the Natural and Native Translators?

Image
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau greets Syrian refugees upon their arrival in Toronto. Source: Multi-Languages, a very responsible provider of professional translation services.

NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.

Saturday, December 19, 2015

Um… Uh…


Preparing my paper for the NPIT conference in May forces me to look again at some of the things I've written. For instance, at what distinguishes the Expert Interpreter from the Natural or Native Interpreter.

Like all things natural, Natural Translation, as has been said before on this blog, has its pathology. So does natural speaking; and since one half of interpreting is speaking, the pathology of speaking tends to carry over into interpreting. See for example what has appeared here before about the interpreter's voice (enter voice in the Search box on the right).

There is a lady who calls her self Impromptu Guru (see Reference and Image) and who advertises on the internet. Her headline goes like this:

How to Eliminate the 'Ums' and 'Uhs' from Your Speeches.

and she calls them "cringe-worthy".

Linguists call them filler words, though they aren't really words. Filler sounds would be better. Their absence may be superficial but it's one of the symptomatic differences that distinguish the polished Expert Interpreter. I used to be in a team sometimes with such an interpreter who happened to be a French Canadian nun and worked only for NGOs. French Canadian nuns (and probably other nuns) are notable for their clear enunciation. One day somebody in our audience said to me, "It's a real pleasure to listen to your colleague. She speaks so firmly, never stumbles, never backtracks, never says er or um." And she was equally so in English and French. I felt envious and it made me conscious of my own tendency to do so, which is typical of native English speakers especially from the UK. We might call it 'the English disease'.

We must take Natural Interpreters as we find them, but it follows that the Expert Interpreter should be a good speaker; and this is especially true in consecutive interpreting, where the output is rephrased and is conditioned by the interpreter's own speech habits and there is more opportunity to aim for quality. It's also something to be considered when selecting candidates for training and during the training itself.

Reference
Jill Schiefelbein. How to eliminate 'ums' and 'uhs' from your speeches. Entrepreneur Network, 9 December 2015. http://www.entrepreneur.com/video/253719

Image
Source:www.stitcher.com

NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.

Monday, November 30, 2015

Einstein's Translator





Regular Followers of this blog know I have a penchant for history.
So I can't let this month go by without remarking on the centenary of Einstein's theory of relativity.

It was in November 1915 that he finished Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relitivatätstheorie and sent it to the prestigious printer, Johann Ambrosius Barth, in Leipzig. It was published the following year. In those days Leipzig was the Mecca of German scientific publishing and German was the dominant language of science. Until World War II, PhD candidates in the sciences were expected to have a knowledge of German. Therefore the fact that Einstein published in German was not such a drawback as it would be today and by 1919 the book was enormously famous in scientific circles. Nevertheless it was generally felt by publishers that an English translation was needed for the American and British markets.

The translator appointed was Robert W. Lawson, MSc., a lecturer and member of the Physics Laboratory at the University of Sheffield in England. In British universities, lecturer is equivalent to North American assistant professor. Note too that Lawson had an MSc., not a PhD. Until World War II the MA/MSc was considered a terminal degree in the UK, not the stepping stone to something higher as it is today. (When I was a student, the leading British linguist of his day, J R Firth, was appointed Professor of Linguistics in London with an MA.) Lawson was well known as a physicist. From 1913 he was an honorary Assistent (assistant lecturer) at the Vienna Radium Institute. Lawson set to work in 1919 and in August 1920 his translation came out in London and New York. There was already a second edition the same year and three further editions within two years. It's still the standard English version (see Amazon, etc.) and the one that's most read today in any language. It's one answer to the age-old question: Is it better to have a technical text translated by a translator who knows the subject or by a subject specialist who knows the languages? It's doubtful whether it could have been done so successfully in 1919 by someone who didn't have advanced training in physics. But where did Lawson learn such good German? He had taught in Vienna and he is said to have polished his German while a prisoner of war in Austria. He went on to translate a couple of other scientific books (see References). I haven't managed to find out more about him. Perhaps one of you knows something.

How did Lawson meet up with Einstein in the first place and obtain his approval? Shortly after the success of the eclipse expeditions to the South Atlantic in 1917 which proved part of Einstein's theory – another British contribution to Einstein's fame – Lawson wrote to him on behalf of the editor of the leading British science journal Nature asking him for a popular short article explaining his theories. A month later, Einstein told Lawson that the article was almost ready but it was probably too long, and he went on to prepare a shorter one. The first version was never published, but it was the beginning of their relationship.

Lawson wrote later to Einstein telling him about a letter he'd received from the British publisher, Methuen, while he was at work on the translation. It requested him to make the description of its contents
"as intelligible as possible to the ordinary man. Our travellers [i.e., salesmen] tell us that there is complete ignorance in the public mind as to what Relativity means. A good many people seem to think that the book deals with the relations between the sexes."
To give you a taste of Lawson's English, here's his translation of Einstein's famous first paragraph:
"In your schooldays most of you who read this book made acquaintance with the noble building of Euclid's geometry, and you remember – perhaps with more respect than love – the magnificent structure, on the lofty staircase of which you were chased about for uncounted hours by conscientious teachers. By reason of your past experience, you would certainly regard every one with disdain who should pronounce even the most out-of-the-way proposition of this science to be untrue. But perhaps this feeling of proud certainty would leave you immediately if some one were to ask you: 'What then do you mean by the assertion that these propositions are true?' Let us proceed to give this question a little consideration,"

For Einstein, Lawson did more than translate. He thought the book would be accepted better if its author could provide a proof of the general theory. So Einstein wrote a six-page paper for him in just a few hours and sent the manuscript to him in Sheffield. Lawson used it as an appendix to the book and kept the manuscript as a souvenir of his relationship with the great man. At the time of writing this post, the Einstein-Lawson papers are on display at Oglethorpe Museum of Art in Atlanta, Georgia. USA.

Lawson deserves credit in any history of science translation. Though Sheffield started translation courses early on, there is no indication that Lawson ever took such a course. He began as a typical Native Translator.


Footnote 1: Bose
Lawson's wasn't the only English translation of Einstein published in 1920. There was also one by M. N. Saha and S. N. Bose (of boson particle fame), physicists at the University of Calcutta. But it was too remote to have a readership like Lawson's. Nevertheless it illustrates the universality of translation as well as the high standard of mathematics in an Indian university of the period. Einstein rewarded Bose by recommending him for a post at the University of Dhaka even though he didn't have a doctorate.

Footnote 2: Motte
Until Einstein came along, the dominant figure in mathematics and mechanics was still Isaac Newton (1643-1727). But Newton wrote in Latin and his magnum opus, the Principia, wasn't translated into English until 1729. The translator was another Native Translator, Andrew Motte, a London maths teacher. It was done during the transition from Latin as the universal language of science towards the European vernaculars and it's still Motte's version that's mostly read today. Meanwhile Einstein could have read it in German.


References
A. Einstein. Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativatätstheorie. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth, 1916. Published in Annalen der Physik, 4. Folge, Band 49, 1916, and as a separate offprint. Copies sell today for several thousand dollars.

Albert Einstein (University of Berlin). Relativity: the special and general theory. Authorised translation by Robert William Lawson (Physics Laboratory, University of Sheffield). London: Methuen and New York: Holt, 1920.

Albert Einstein. Relativity: the Special & General Theory. 100th Anniversary Edition. With commentaries and background material by Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn. UK and USA: Princeton University Press, 2015. This edition gives due importance to the role of Lawson.

Shelby Linerdman . Einstein papers at Atlanta's Oglethorpe still relative. WABE, Atlanta, 2015. http://news.wabe.org/post/einstein-papers-atlanta-s-oglethorpe-still-relative.

Johann Ambrosius Barth Verlag. Wikipedia (German edition), 2015.

Arthur Erich Haas. The New Physics. Authorised translation by Robert W. Lawson. London: Methuen, 1923.

Georg von Hevesy. Manual of Radioactivity. Translated by Robert W. Lawson. London: Humphrey Milford, 1926.

A. Einstein and H. Minkowski: The Principle of Relativity: Original Papers. Translated ino English by M. N. Saha and S. N. Bose. University of Calcutta, 1920.

Sir Isaac Newton. The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated into English by Andrew Motte. London: Benjamin Motte (Andrew's brother), 1729. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Mathematical_Principles_of_Natural_Philosophy_(1729)/Title_Page.

Jakob Philipp Wolfers. Sir Isaac Newton's Mathematische Principien der Naturlehre mit Bemerkungen und Erläuterungen. Berlin: Oppenheim, 1872.



Image
Page from one of Einstein's communications to Lawson. Source: Linerdman.


NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.

Sunday, November 22, 2015

Help from Young Interpreters


If you are a regular Follower of this blog you have already been introduced to the organization in England that runs a movement for training child interpreters in schools. If not, enter emtas in the Search box on the right. It's the Young Interpreter Scheme of the Hampshire County Council (EMTAS) under the direction of Astrid Dinneen. Their latest Newsletter (November 2015) has just arrived. It emphasizes the aids YI offers to teachers who want to set up a scheme in their own schools. YI is not confined to the UK; it already has a few followers in other countries.

YI's aims are twofold. On the one hand an immediately practical one of providing communication between school communities with minority languages and English; and on the other, to encourage children and adolescents to express themselves and develop their personalities in their 'heritage' cultures. Many people don't realize what a multilingual and multicultural country England has become. When I go back and visit my old school there, I see the building hasn't changed much, but oh! the pupils.

There is also another aspect that should interest even the community of professional interpreters. Interpreting is a skill. Like any skill – be it languages, music or football – the younger you start practising it the better. And so it is with potential Expert Interpreters: Start 'em young. The notion that interpreting can only be taught to adults and after extensive education, even a university degree, is out of date. Of course the would-be Expert Interpreter has much to learn, not only linguistically but about the world. Yet there are basic components of the skill, for example speed of thought transfer, that can be practised with pleasure and amusement from childhood.

Reference

Young Interpreter Scheme. https://www.facebook.com/Young-Interpreter-Scheme-1393344670884345/?fref=nf


NPIT3, Winterthur (near Zurich), 5-7 May 2016
International forum for Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation, the latest paradigm in translation studies. http://www.zhaw.ch/linguistics/npit3.