Common Mistakes in Translation

Common mistakes in translation

“There is no such thing as a good translator. The best translators make the worst mistakes. No matter how much I love them all, translators must be closely watched.” – Isaac Singer

“Ye translators, do not sodomize us!” – Milan Kundera

Translators are regularly berated by various critics for their apparently endless “mistakes”. There are many possible reasons for those “mistakes” or the “inadequacy” of translation. These include the set nature of the original text and the changing nature of our language; the intricacies of cross-cultural research; as well as the ability of some languages to avoid adequate translation because “the words are simply unavailable or inefficient”. In the article “The Writing Life” written by Howard Goldblatt and published in the Washington Post, the author explains the “inadequacy” of translation as being the consequence of the “inevitable compromises” which “the tension between creativity and fidelity” requires in the “faithful” service of two constituencies.

From a functionalist approach, the prime principle determining any translation process is the purpose of the overall translational action. Each text is produced for a given purpose and should serve this purpose. This rule should be seen as: translate or write in a way which enables your text/translation to function in the situation in which it is used and with the people who want to use it and precisely in the way they want it to function. From this point of view, we might say that “the end justifies the means.”

A text is made meaningful by its receiver and for its receiver. Different receivers (or even the same receiver at different times) find different meanings in the same linguistic material offered by the text. We might even say that a text is as many texts as there are receivers. The translator is just one of many possible readers. Thus, the source text is not the first and foremost criterion for the translator’s...