Explore news about our company, interpretation events and translation services!
« Back toNews
Language is an art filled with infinite complexities. When delivering an idea, thought or concept between two native speakers of one language, there is always a place within those words for interpretation. The difficulty in getting an understanding of true intention from one person to another can be extensive from the smallest thought to the most in-depth discussion or material.
Now, take that same complexity and add another level on top of it with translation or interpretation. When making the transfer of an idea, thought or concept from one language to another the level of difficulty is compounded exponentially! Communication is not just a series of words; it is a combination of elements to derive an overall meaning.
In the case of translation and interpretation, there is not just intention to convert, but there is also culture to consider as well. If you take 5 of the world's best English - Spanish translators and gave them all the same paragraph to translate, you would get 5 different translations, all correct, but all different. Why, because the transfer of language cannot be pinned down to an exact science like math. It requires the human element which will always be influenced by education, experience, background, preferences, styles, culture and more. It is because of this that I bring up the topic of back-translations.
There are a lot of controversies surrounding back-translations. Some are convinced that it is the only way to prove the accuracy of a translation. Ask most professional linguists and they'll wholeheartedly disagree. The reason for the opposition is because of the complexities going from one language to another are doubled by going back the other direction. Think of the childhood game telephone where a group of kids sit in a circle and whisper a phrase. The final phrase is never the exact same as the original. Some of it is error, some of it is meaning, some of it is intention. The more processes to go through, the more diluted the end product will become.
Back-translations aren't always bad, but must be taken for what they are: a diluted version of the original. When used to assess a generalized meaning of the original the process can be helpful. The reader must understand though that not all elements will transfer back exactly because translation will also include some localization to make the text appear original to the target reader. Without this understanding, this process can and will turn into a battle.
For the most accurate assessment of meaning, the best process is double proofreading; once by the linguist's partner and once by an independent third party, both equally qualified. This way, the professionals can account for the original meaning, the cultural adaptation and other small nuances necessary to make it appear native for their target.
July 01 2009
Back-Translations: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Truth - Global View -July 2009
Language is an art filled with infinite complexities. When delivering an idea, thought or concept between two native speakers of one language, there is always a place within those words for interpretation. The difficulty in getting an understanding of true intention from one person to another can be extensive from the smallest thought to the most in-depth discussion or material.
Now, take that same complexity and add another level on top of it with translation or interpretation. When making the transfer of an idea, thought or concept from one language to another the level of difficulty is compounded exponentially! Communication is not just a series of words; it is a combination of elements to derive an overall meaning.
In the case of translation and interpretation, there is not just intention to convert, but there is also culture to consider as well. If you take 5 of the world's best English - Spanish translators and gave them all the same paragraph to translate, you would get 5 different translations, all correct, but all different. Why, because the transfer of language cannot be pinned down to an exact science like math. It requires the human element which will always be influenced by education, experience, background, preferences, styles, culture and more. It is because of this that I bring up the topic of back-translations.
There are a lot of controversies surrounding back-translations. Some are convinced that it is the only way to prove the accuracy of a translation. Ask most professional linguists and they'll wholeheartedly disagree. The reason for the opposition is because of the complexities going from one language to another are doubled by going back the other direction. Think of the childhood game telephone where a group of kids sit in a circle and whisper a phrase. The final phrase is never the exact same as the original. Some of it is error, some of it is meaning, some of it is intention. The more processes to go through, the more diluted the end product will become.
Back-translations aren't always bad, but must be taken for what they are: a diluted version of the original. When used to assess a generalized meaning of the original the process can be helpful. The reader must understand though that not all elements will transfer back exactly because translation will also include some localization to make the text appear original to the target reader. Without this understanding, this process can and will turn into a battle.
For the most accurate assessment of meaning, the best process is double proofreading; once by the linguist's partner and once by an independent third party, both equally qualified. This way, the professionals can account for the original meaning, the cultural adaptation and other small nuances necessary to make it appear native for their target.
