In my second post, I explained why I started my blog. I have decided to do an updated post because there are other things I’ve thought about that I would like visitors to this blog and to my Twitter homepage to know. However, I am going to keep the old post up, which you can view here, though most stuff there will be repeated in this post.
This post is an assignment I did in English 101 in the summer of 2017, and I would like to share it with the world. The assignment was to do a paper on careers, and I did mine on translators. I hope that those of you who hope to work in translation find this helpful.
I have to admit that I am having a hard time determining my career path! I haven’t even chosen a major! All I know is that I want to do something different from what I have been doing. For this reason, I have started researching careers that interest me, based on my interests, skills, and values. In this essay, I will analyze four articles related to the career of translating.
Review of “Interpreter and Translator”, by Sally Driscoll
The first article I will discuss is “Interpreter and Translator” by Sally Driscoll. In this article, she lists the interests, work environments, duties, and responsibilities of interpreters and translators. She shows how interpreters and translators differ. She gives the pay and growth rate of these occupations. She concludes by listing the education, training, and experiences that are helpful, even necessary, to become a translator or interpreter.
This article is meant to inform people about the professions of interpreter and translator, and it presents good ideas in a clear, coherent, and orderly manner. Her information has increased my interest in becoming a translator. Driscoll writes, “Interpreting and translating attract those who are linguistically gifted and enjoy foreign cultures. Translators tend to be introverts who prefer reading and writing…” (under “Occupational Interest” heading) Well, I am an introvert who loves other cultures, has considered being a writer since childhood, and enjoys reading. Furthermore, I have a better idea of which courses I need to take should I decide to become a translator. Thus, my conclusion is that Driscoll has made her point well, and I would refer aspiring translators and interpreters to the article.
However, I do have a critique. Driscoll didn’t address global employability. While she mentioned “Employment & Outlook: Faster Than Average Growth Expected”, she neither addressed whether or not red tape is reduced when translators seek work outside their home countries nor gave tips on where to seek foreign employment. Since she mentioned “foreign cultures” under “Interests’, this would imply that some translators would like to work outside their home country. So it would seem logical to reference it.
On the other hand, perhaps that topic was beyond the scope of the article. After all, she did mention the practicality of travel and study abroad programs, and said that sometimes internships are needed. Perhaps she included foreign employment under that umbrella.
Review of “Differentiated Instruction and Language-Specific Translation Training Textbooks”, by Anastasia Lakhtikova
The next article I will discuss is Anastasia Lakhtikova’s “Differentiated Instruction and Language-Specific Translation Training Textbooks”, in which she reviews two Russian language textbooks (Russian Translation: Theory and Practice by Edna Andrews and Elena Maximova; Introduction to Russian-English Translation by Natalia Strelkova) and one Spanish translation textbook, Manual of Spanish-English Translation by Kelly Washbourne. Lakhtikova is not impressed with Russian Translation, because she assesses that it contains a lot of dated exercises (such as a medical text from 1942, on p. 154) and requires an advanced level while marketing it to people with only two years of college Russian (p. 155). On the other hand, she highly praises Strelkova’s Introduction to Russian-English Translation, calling Strelkova “a Julia Child of translation giving enthusiastic advice to apprentices”, and “Students would find it useful to read it over and over again before going to bed” (p. 156). Lakhtikova also heaps praise on Washbourne’s Manual of Spanish-English Translation. She praises both as practical, but says that Washbourne’s work is even better, in that, unlike Strelkova’s, it is useful for translation students in general. That is, what Washbourne includes is useful even for translation students not working with Spanish, provided they find similarly-themed material to the stuff included in the exercises. Lakhtikova sees this as developing skills that translators use.
The purpose of this article is to inform readers on the quality of three translation textbooks, and it presents good ideas in an orderly, clear, and coherent manner. I find Lakhtikova’s tips to be useful in determining resources, should I embark on a journey to become a translator. There are a number of things I like about Lakhtikova’s review of Introduction to Russian-English Translation. “Its discussion of written bureaucratese (i.e., administrative language) and colloquialisms is aimed at non-native Russian users…the text focuses on ‘accuracy’ (Chapter 3), ‘readability’ (Chapter 5), and ‘correctness’ (Chapter 6)” (p. 156), all of which is useful. However, due to my desire to be able to translate multiple languages, I particularly like the review of Manual of Spanish-English Translation. Since the latter book teaches the skills needed to actually do the work, and is applicable across languages, a multilingual translator could apply the principles to other languages as well. So, I think Lakhtikova made a good point.
However, this is not enough, in my opinion. Right now, this is just someone’s opinion. What I would like to know is what the rate of user satisfaction among both instructors and students is. I would like to know about research done on these textbooks, on whether or not they are effective.
Review of “Some Misconceptions Concerning Bilingualism and a Career in Translation”
The third article that I will discuss is “Some Misconceptions Concerning Bilingualism and a Career in Translation” by James Bell. The bottom line is that a career in translation requires more than bilingualism. First, the author mentions overhearing a conversation between two students who were complaining about their English Comp class. One student said that the English Comp class was one of the reasons that she was majoring in Spanish. She told her friend, “I want to teach Spanish, but if I can’t, after taking a couple of professional translation classes and being bilingual, I can always translate or interpret.” (p. 38). Bell arranged to meet with her later to clarify things. At that meeting, after telling her the average annual pay for translators and informing her that the industry is expanding, he told her that she has to have a good knowledge of both languages. The author then responds to a couple of the student’s questions. The first question was why translators need to translate into their native language, “since translation appeared to be a two-lane road…both leading to the same direction.” (p. 40). His answer was cultural knowledge, and that cultural misunderstandings can lead to misleading translations. The second question was, “So why am I going to take ‘Introduction to Professional Translation’ and ‘Advanced Professional Translation’ as part of my Spanish major?” (p. 41) Bell’s answer is that translation enhances Spanish learning (p. 41). He concludes by saying that the reference to “Professional” should be dropped from the course title.
In this article, the author tells readers a story in order to inform readers that there is more to being a translator than being bilingual. He tells the story and presents his information in a clear, coherent, and orderly manner. As someone who did not know what being a translator entails beyond bilingualism, I find this article enlightening. I have a strange feeling that the student and I are not the only ones. Because of this, I think this is good advice for aspiring translators. I especially like the following quotes from M. Eta Trabing’s article “Beyond Bilingualism”: “Having two languages does not make you a translator or interpreter any more than having two hands makes you a pianist” (quoted by Bell, p. 39); and “For translation you must know the target language (the one that you are translating into) in great depth, and your grammar, spelling, and punctuation should be nearly perfect.” (quoted by Bell, p.40). I see the point of the latter, in that, in my experience, knowledge of grammar in English has helped me learn other languages. I also like his mention of the need for cultural awareness: “Culture is arguably the main reason a translator, especially a beginning translator, should translate into his or her native language, rather than a second language.” (p. 40). Due to the existence of culture-specific terms and the existence of figures of speech, I find this advice to be wise. Furthermore, I like the fact that Bell takes the student’s objections seriously and replies to them. In my view, this makes him seem more informed. With his replies to the student, his mention of language competence in both languages, and his comment on the need to be culturally aware, Bell’s article gives direction on a couple of areas of knowledge that aspiring translators need to seek.
I do think, though, that the author could have given more information on what is needed to become a translator. My question is, “What else is needed to become a translator?” On the other hand, the author was responding to a specific incident, and trying to correct a misconception that one merely needs to be bilingual to be a translator: thus, that may be beyond the scope of the article. Ultimately, this article is helpful for those seeking to become translators.
Review of “What Does It Take to be a Good Translator?”
The last article that I will discuss is Jim Healey’s “What Does It Take to be a Good Translator?” In this article, Healey asks four professional translators their thoughts on a Parade article called “What People Earn”, from 15 April 2007. Healey’s questions focused on the line, “not all jobs require a four-year degree… ‘Some of the best opportunities are for workers with an associates degree or some kind of vocational training. One type of worker in particularly high demand is interpreter/translator.’” (quoted in Healey, p. 29). Among the translators, there is agreement that bilingualism is insufficient to be a translator. In addition, more than one mentioned the need for good writing skills and cross-cultural knowledge. However, they differed on the necessity of a college degree. Two of the translators, Dena Bugel-Shunra (a freelance translator specializing in IT and sub-specializing in legal translation [p. 29] ) and Lori Thicke (co-founder of Eurotexte, which was renamed Lexcelera [p. 32] ) said that a degree isn’t that important. Bugel-Shunra says that clients generally do not ask about degrees (p. 30); however, she recommends getting one for the societal advantages that it gives (p. 31). Thicke says, “In the 20 years since I moved to Paris and co-founded Eurotexte (now known as Lexcelera), I have noticed that certain characteristics are shared by virtually all good translators, and that a degree in translation is not one of them.” (p. 33) She then goes on to list seven traits she feels define a good translator better than any degree. On the other hand, Cliff Landers (a freelance literary translator) and Donald Barabe (vice president, professional services, at the Canadian Federal Translation Bureau [p. 29] ) say that a degree is required. Landers is concerned that a lack of degree sends the message that one only needs to be bilingual to be a good translator. Barabe, observing declining language skills among the younger generation, says, “Recruits not having the basic skills normally acquired by a three-year university program in translation require additional training and supervised coaching.” (p. 35). Barabe then continues by discussing the Translation Bureau’s training program. The article concludes with Healey’s summing up his findings, with the following conclusion: “It becomes clear that there is no single path to becoming a qualified and successful translator. The profession has many avenues of entrance, not to mention the hard work, discipline, dedication, sacrifice and a love of languages that accompany this career choice.” (p. 36)
The purpose of this article is to inform readers: in particular, to analyze a claim made about the translation industry, and it was written in a clear, consistent, and orderly manner. I find Thicke’s aforementioned list of traits of good translators to be helpful. These traits are intelligence, discrimination (that is, between literal and figurative language), ethics (specifically quality work), writing style, experience in the source language culture, continuing access to the target language, and specialized knowledge (pp. 33-34). Concerning writing style, she says, “Good translators are good writers…often better writers than the original authors.” (p. 34) Since Landers also mentions cultural experience, I would like to share his thoughts on the topic: “Familiarity with German culture is likely to be more valuable in translating an Austrian novel than a Dutch one, and all but useless if the work is from Albania.” (p. 32) Not only do the translators clarify the misconceptions in the Parade article, they also give aspiring translators direction and advice on what they DO need. I think that with the advice given here, aspiring translators will have information to make plans on how to obtain their goal.
I also like that both opinions on the necessity of a degree were given. This allows people to make their own judgments based on their own personal situations. My personal opinion is that it is better to get the degree, in that it won’t hurt. In addition, the degree will increase employment prospects. Furthermore, getting the degree can help with specialization, something that Thicke mentioned helps make a good translator. (p. 34)
Having reviewed these articles, I find myself more informed on the translation industry. As I mentioned in my review of “Interpreter and Translator”, I have an interest in other languages and countries. This is what got me interested in the profession in the first place. However, as a couple of the articles revealed, bilingualism is not enough to be a translator. I have also learned skills about the skills that I need to become a translator, and thus am better prepared to take the steps needed to move in that direction. I still remain undecided, but I plan on taking my courses in such a way that being a translator is an option. Even as I have found these articles useful, I believe that they will be useful to other undecided students who are considering becoming translators.
Bell, James. “Some Common Misconceptions Concerning Bilingualism and a Career in Translation”. Journal of the Georgia Philological Association, 2008, pp. 38-42
Driscoll, Sally. “Interpreter and Translator”. Salem Press Encyclopedia, January 2016
Healey, Jim. “What Does It Take To Be A Good translator?”. MultiLingual, Vol. 18 Issue 5, July/Aug. 2007, pp. 29-36
Lakhtikova, Anastasia. “Differentiated Instruction and Language-Specific Translation Training Textbooks”. Translation & Interpreting Studies: The Journal of the American Translation & Interpreting Studies Association, Vol. 10 Issue 1, 2015, pp. 153-160
At the time of writing and posting this, we are coming upon Friday the 13th (13 April 2018, to be exact), a day considered unlucky according to superstition. (I personally do not believe in that, and would be more likely to have a party.) Anyway, superstitions vary across cultures. In Spain, Tuesday the 13th is considered unlucky because martes, the Spanish word for Tuesday, is derived from Mars, the Roman god of war. Anyway, this year, we had a Tuesday 13th for two months in a row. This has not happened for 11 years, and it will be another 11 years before this happens again.
So, here is what I find inspiring. This little bit of calendar trivia has me thinking of where I was 11 years ago, where I am now, and what has happened in between. In 2007, I was alternating working between various odd jobs with people at chhrch. I had some dreams, such as travel the world, work for world peace, promote human rights, promote the right to an education (or even teach), and be a life coach. I knew, however, those were not the focus at church, and the church was pretty controlling. (I was hoping to move abroad and start pursuing these things.)
Then, I started working for a certain guy, and was paid less than minimum wage for years, and worked long hours. I was told that if I didn’t accept the job, my marriage and ministry would be postponed. Then, after Obama’s first election, the church got really into conspiracy theories (which became virtual articles of faith) and became more insular. (It became stronger over time.) In fact, some things I valued were labeled as ideas of the Illuminati. Over time, these dreams died, and I dismissed them as goofy ideas resulting from youthful ignorance.
However, a few years ago, after years of this, my friends started openly questioning dogma, which lead to our getting raises at minimum wage. I got a smartphone and social media. Over time, I remembered my former dreams, and realized how bad things were at church. After a few years, last year I left the church and got laid off from my job. I decided to go to college. (Actually, I had already decided to go to college, and was working towards it.) Now, I am doing well, thriving, figuring out goals, and even am in an honor society.
In short, eleven years ago, I would never have guessed that I would be talking on the internet about the bad things about my church and calling it “abuse”. And certainly I am much happier than I was five or six years ago, in which I hoped for more, despite the fact I saw nothing but day after day after day of the same thing. I will say that eleven years ago was much happier, and that the past year has been my best in 11 years, and I dare say the best (for my personal life) in my life. The intervening years were rough.
Now, the other thing I think about when it comes to the calendar’s not repeating itself for 11 years is where I want to be then. It makes a good benchmark for establishing long-term goals. Upon observing dates in which the calendar didn’t repeat for 11 years, I noticed that my life was always in a different spot in both spaces. So, this is an inspiration to think about where I would like to be in 2029. Life will likely be in a different place, so I wonder how I’ll feel about now, and how I will view the intervening time.
So, I can say the calendar geekery makes me happy as I look back and consider revived dreams and hope. While the intervening years were difficult, it is nice to see the dreams revived. As for the future, the goals inspire me, and help me to look forward with confidence.
Bobby had come a long way concerning amusement parks. As a kid, he rode mostly round rides in Kiddie Land. As a teen, his friends helped him overcome his fear of roller coasters. He was now at Cedar Point, on the 200′ Magnum with his friend Pat. The roller coaster slowly climbed the hill, and Bobby enjoyed the view before the drop. Bobby didn’t scream, as he felt that was cheesy. When the ride came to hills, Bobby let go of the restraints to get the full 0-G feeling.
Afterwards, Bobby and Pat said in unison, “Let’s ride again!”
This is a post for Friday Fictioneers by Rochelle Wisoff-Fields, photo by J. Hardy Carroll.
Robert Jones, an American EFL* teacher and archaeologist among the Maya in Guatemala, was exploring the ancient Mayan temple (dated to the Archaic Period**) with his colleagues Professors Maria and Delores Kan from the university, Fr. Pedro Tun, and Santiago Tupac, a shaman from the local village. They came upon a Long Count Calendar, and a discussion started about the Mayan calendar.
As they spoke, a glow appeared near the calendar, and three women (dressed in ancient Mayan dresses) and three men (dressed in jaguar skins, two as warriors one as a priest) just materialized. The priest, in proto-Mayan, told how, through a secret ritual, they went to the beginning of the next Great Cycle. Santiago indicated his belief in the story, and Robert suggested that the time travellers accompany them to the university.
On the way there, they stopped to get the time travelers modern clothes. As they were leaving the store, an inter-dimensional monster showed up. Nothing Santiago, Pedro, or the priest worked, but one of the female time travelers shrunk and jumped on the monster, crushing it beneath her new tassel loafers.
Maria simply commented, “A woman saves the day!”, to which Robert cheers with approval.
This is a post for Sunday Photo Fiction by Al Forbes.
*English as a Foreign Language
**Before 2000 BCE
I was sitting in the kitchen when the lovebirds, Marlene and Bob, returned to the WG* we share with two others. From what I hear, Bob is an American student here in Germany. The lovebirds talked, and were about to kiss when Marlene looked at me and shrieked, “A spider!”
Next thing I knew, I was on the floor at her feet. I gulped as she raised her foot to step on me. I squirmed under the sole of her penny loafer as she increased the weight until my body, unable to support the weight, collapsed with a loud crunch.
*WG, Wohngemeinschaft (lit., living community), in Germany, is a living arrangement in which people live together to share expenses.
Jake’s world tour was going phenomenally. He was just arriving in Amsterdam harbor on a boat from London. He grabbed his stuff and exited into the dusk. He found a bike shop, where he rented a bike and pedaled through the streets of Amsterdam. While doing so, he snapped pictures of the buildings, the canals, and the lights, and posted them on Twitter. He went to a café to finally meet Greta, whom he met on Twitter. After having snacks and drinks and talking, Jake headed to the hostel and fell asleep immediately.
The next morning he went to the rendezvous location, where Greta was standing outside a car. They got in and Greta drove off. “Now, off to Friesland and the Elfstedentocht*! I was practicing even in USA with both rollerblading and ice skating so I could participate in this 11-city race! I am so excited!”
Greta smiled, and said, “I’m glad you can participate, after all you went through back in the States!”
Jake smiled and enjoyed the scenery and Greta’s company. However, halfway to Friesland, the car made weird signs and stopped. Greta tried to rev it, but failed to start it.
The Elfstedentocht is an 11-city ice-skating race that occurs in the Dutch province of Friesland when the weather freezes the canals.
This is a post for Sunday Photo Fiction by Al Forbes, who also provided the photo.
The following post is a paper I did for World Civilizations I:
Slavery was widespread in the Roman Empire. In this post, which, I discuss Roman slavery laws based on the Institutes of Gaius, an ancient Roman legal textbook, and the Code of Theodosius. I will talk about freedmen and slaves in the Roman Empire, the conditions under which slave owners were liable for killing their slaves, and reflect on whether or not the Romans had a fairly liberal view of slavery, and whether or not they treated their slaves well.
First of all, the Institutes of Gaius classifies human as either slaves or free. The free were classified as either ingénue (born free) or libertine (freed slaves). The libertini were further subdivided as either Roman citizens, Latins, or deditici (subjects, the same category as conquered people).
Libertini were classified as deditici if they had been subject to chains, interrogation, and/or torture for a crime they had committed, or had been gladiators. Such freedmen were ineligible for both Roman citizenship and Latin status, and were barred from coming within 100 miles of Rome, on pain of being enslaved for life. They were deditici for life.
Libertini who neither fulfilled the requirements to become Roman citizens nor were deditici were classified as Latins. The conditions for citizenship were to be released after age thirty in front of a council for a just cause, to have served six years in the vigils (Roman police force), or, if a Latin, to be married either to a Latin of the same status or to a Roman citizen with seven adult Roman citizens as witnesses, then had a child, and next appeared before the local magistrate after the child’s first birthday to prove the process had been carried out in accordance with Roman law.
My mention of a just cause in reference to manumission brings up one of two types of slaves I would like to discuss. One condition that was considered “just cause” for manumission was to free the pedagogus, who was a slave who took care of children. The pedagogus would thus, if over thirty when freed (which is highly likely) and the master were at least twenty, become a Roman citizen, provided he had done nothing to earn the status of deditici.
The vigils were the ancient Roman police force. Slaves who served in the vigils got the special privilege of obtaining Roman citizenship upon release after six years of service (later reduced to three years), even if they were under thirty. Other slaves had to be at least thirty upon manumission to be eligible for Roman citizenship. However, these benefits only applied to Latins; deditici received no special privileges from serving in the police force.
The Code of Theodosius provided circumstances under which a slave owner could be charged with homicide in the death of a slave. One condition in which an owner was NOT liable was if a slave died in custody after a beating. However, the owner was liable if a slave died during a beating. Owners were also liable for inflicting lethal wounds, hanging slaves, having them thrown from heights, using punishments reserved for the state, and torturing them to death.
Now, did Rome have a fairly liberal view of slavery? On the one hand, no, in that they practiced slavery in the first place. On the other hand, “yes”, if the key word is “fairly”, as is shown by contrasting it with 19th-century American slavery. Roman law specifically called slaves “human”, whereas American slaves were not considered himan. Freedmen could become citizens in Rome, whereas American slaves only became citizens after the abolition of slavery. (It is true that the deditici could never be citizens; but that was based om behavior. In American slavery, it was race that barred a person from citizenship.) Roman law offered slaves protection that American law did not, in that an owner in the American South could kill his slaves and not face prosecution. (On the other hand, that raises the question of whether or not the Romans enforced their laws.)
Did the Romans treat their slaves well? Ultimately, the answer is “no” because owning someone is, by default, not treating that person well. It can be said that, for their era, the Romans treated their slaves well, especially compared to American slavery. For example, freed slaves were eligible for citizenship and had legal protections from excessive brutality. However, they were not protected from beatings and could lose their eligibility for citizenship. The question is, how easy was it for them to be accused of crimes that would get them labeled deditici? Was it easy for owners to kill slaves and make it seem legal? I have to say that the Romans were paternalistic in their treatment of slaves.
To um up, Roman law classified people as slaves or free, with the free consisting of those who were born free and those who were freed slaves. The freedmen includee Roman citizens, Latins, and subjects, with various conditions determining status. Subjects (deditici) were in that category for life, but Latins could become citizens. Two categories of slaves, the pedagogus and the vigils had a good chance of becoming citizens. Roman law allowed for owners in some cases to be prosecuted for killing slaves. The Roman views of slavery were not liberal due to their acceptance of slavery, but they were less brutal in many ways than was American slavery centuries later.