Updated 1999-10-01
Formal vs. Informal Education in Translation: Q&A
by Tanya Sobieski
Questions to Tanya Sobieski from Kay Vreeland
We have received questions from JAT member, Kay Vreeland,
regarding Tanya Sobieski's article "Formal vs.
Informal Education in Translation" in this month's
bulletin.
Kay who is a professor of English and American literature is
currently serving as chair of the English Department at Kobe
College. Nearing retirement after 30 years in Japan, she is
looking towards translation as a second career. With two MAs
and a Ph.D in comparative literature, and a MA in Advanced
Japanese Studies from the U of Sheffield, she has done many
informal translations, but modestly considers her Japanese
language ability to be not fluent having been mostly
*self-taught* - as she describes herself. As all aspiring
translators who look toward the beginning of a new career, she
wonders whether *to attend the new Babel course being offered
in Japan or to strike out on her own in the school of hard
knocks.*
Publications Committee
Kay: Having seen both sides now, would you
encourage new would-be translators today to forgo formal
training for translation, just learn-by doing and only get such
training for simultaneous interpretation? Or in this age of
"licenses" is it preferable today to have
that formal training in translation to get a better/quicker
start? (How have values concerning training changed since you
got started--you said most translators around you as you
started out were learn-by-doing, but today the
"license" is king?)
Tanya: I believe that it was much easier to
become a self-taught translator when I got started, and that
the level of knowledge/professionalism required of a
starting-out translator is much higher today. However, I still
believe that the choice of formal versus informal education is
a case-by-case decision. As outlined in my paper, it depends on
the personality, areas and levels of pre-existing
knowledge/education, interests, etc. If one is starting out
with very little knowledge/education, formal education is
certainly the shorter, more efficient path.
By the way, I had the opportunity to have lunch with the
gentleman who was in charge of teaching Japanese-to-English
translation of legal text at Babel a couple of years ago. He
was unable to order his lunch in English. This did not give me
confidence in the teachers' abilities at Babel.
Kay: Years ago a Sorbonne professor and
multilinguist, Rene Etiemble, told us students we need to
really know the language into which we are translating and can
use dictionaries and grammar books to get the original
accurately. Would you agree we need to spend more time reading
in the field and language into which we are translating rather
than spend that time perfecting our ability to read the
original language? (Please don't answer 'you need both'...which
one deserves the most time?)
Tanya: I believe that thorough, precise,
accurate comprehension of the original text is the minimal
prerequisite as a translator. This is not limited to linguistic
comprehension, but to the subject matter as well. At MIIS, we
teach not only linguistic comprehension but also research
methodology that gives content comprehension as well.
Having said that, what separates the great translators from
the mediocre ones is the ability to write in the target
language. No matter how "accurately" a text
is translated, if the style/grammar of the target text is poor,
it cannot be considered to be a good translation.
Kay: What's the key to "keeping
up"? How can a new translator deal with allusions and
abbreviations of slang (ƒeƒŒƒNƒ‰, etc.)? I'm lost!
Tanya: Reading contemporary material,
particularly journals in the areas in which you are
translating, is critical. Most full-time, professional
translators deal with scientific/technical documents, so it is
imperative to stay current with the field, as well as with the
language.
Kay: What about the fear of the
"mentor mark"--that is, that a mentor's
style and type of translation marks (imprints) the fledging who
may have a harder time developing a personal style? Formal
education would give a survey of many styles and types and
leave more room for rooting a personal style.
Tanya: I think it depends on the mentor, and
on the school. In some schools, there is one professor who is
responsible for teaching one type of translation, and that is
tantamount to a mentor in that discipline. If the teacher is a
good one, he/she would not stifle the student's individual
style. The same would be true of a good mentor.
Kay: As a newbie in translation, I wonder
when I might expect to hit my stride, i.e.translate with
confidence? To avoid a "how long is a piece of
string" problem, we assume the new translator is
working steadily but without experience at the start. As
another way of putting it, I tell students 'five months' to
fluency in a new language if immersed in it in the country of
origin (my own experience in France). You said it took a year
for you--you were bilingual and had unbelievably generous
mentors--but we assume non-immersion and non-mentored since the
new translator will keep her day job.
Tanya: This is completely dependent on the
individual, and I wouldn't venture to guess. The best thing to
do is to hire an editor of your own, and see how much editing
is done to your work. Depending on the field I'm translating
in, I still hire an editor (after all these years).
Kay: I have always maintained the fastest way
to be proficient in understanding a foreign language is to
listen to a tape of a text while reading it--two senses in use
are better than one. Do you have any tips for keeping on one's
mental toes in the foreign language (we are assuming the new
translator has not been raised in a bilingual environment but
learned the foreign language as a young adult)?
Tanya: I think this is closely related to
Question 3. It is not only the language in which we must remain
current, but also in the subject matter that we are
translating, be it politics or genetics. Obviously, a
multimedia approach doesn't hurt, but for translators, the
written word is much more critical. After all, we aren't
required to pronounce any of the words that we translate.
Kay: How important do you think it is for us
newbies to know/study theories of translation? The history of
translation? Should we forget it and just get skills-based?
(You said that you consider education to be the system that
helps us get skills--what about knowledge? I am very interested
in your opinion on the knowledge vs. skills debate--raging in
English Departments here--this is not meant to be offensive,
but some knowledge-based people say that the
"skills-only" approach is
"content free education").
Tanya: When I first started translating, I
was completely unfamiliar with the theories of translation.
However, given that my background was in early childhood
education/counseling, I took the task analysis approach and
designed my courses based on what I understood from my
experience to be the necessary components of translation.
Now that I have studied translation theory, I am surprised
(pleasantly, I might add) that my courses very closely
reflected the components identified by translation theorists. I
think that comprehension of the contents of the theories is a
valid need in translation education; unfortunately, too many
theorists get caught up in the terminology, i.e., what to call
these contents. That's usually a waste of time.
I hope that these answers have been helpful.
Contents | Bulletins
Top | Home | Feedback
