| Pages in topic: [1 2] > |
Poll: Do translators have the right to introduce a neologism? Thread poster: ProZ.com Staff
|
|---|
This forum topic is for the discussion of the poll question "Do translators have the right to introduce a neologism?".
This poll was originally submitted by Floriane & Yuri. View the poll results »
| | | |
John Cutler 
Spain
Local time: 01:02
Spanish to English
+ ...
Whether we have the right or not, I don’t know, (is there an International Declaration of Translators’ Rights?)
In my own experience, however, it’s sometimes unavoidable. I have a client in one of my source languages who has decided to coin a new term. At first I resisted translating it the way they wanted (because I believed there was a perfectly acceptable "real” word already available), but then I saw that they had changed my translation into what they thought the word sh... See more Whether we have the right or not, I don’t know, (is there an International Declaration of Translators’ Rights?)
In my own experience, however, it’s sometimes unavoidable. I have a client in one of my source languages who has decided to coin a new term. At first I resisted translating it the way they wanted (because I believed there was a perfectly acceptable "real” word already available), but then I saw that they had changed my translation into what they thought the word should be in English. In the end, I decided to go with the flow and use the newly coined word in translations of their documents into English.
Will this Word become entrenched in the English language? I don’t know. Words come and go in English constantly. I do know that for now it gets 1 hit on Google based on a document I partially translated.
Who knows? It may be my lasting contribution to the English language. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
David Wright
Austria
Local time: 01:02
German to English
+ ...
Why should translators be excluded from creating neologisms? Everyone else seems to be at it.
I am myself guilty of doing it when I have needed to translate a word from German into English where there simply hasn't been a term in E. I then just add an explanation for the reader and use it.
(I wonder how many neologisms have actually been created by translators. They are probably the ones who are most acutely aware of a need for a new word. Whether the neologism will ... See more Why should translators be excluded from creating neologisms? Everyone else seems to be at it.
I am myself guilty of doing it when I have needed to translate a word from German into English where there simply hasn't been a term in E. I then just add an explanation for the reader and use it.
(I wonder how many neologisms have actually been created by translators. They are probably the ones who are most acutely aware of a need for a new word. Whether the neologism will prevail is of course a different matter.) ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Mary Worby
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:02
German to English
+ ...
If the original text contains a neologism, there is sometimes little option. Although obviously it depends on whether the original neologism is well thought-out and meaningful, rather than just laziness on the author's part.
| | |
|
|
|
| New words for new concepts | Jan 24, 2012 |
It may be necessary, and then it requires careful thought to find or create a word that fits.
The concept may not be entirely new. Where it is known in the source culture but less so in the target culture, translators have been doing this in practice from the earliest times.
I would have thought translators were at least as well qualified as anyone else to introduce new words!
But as Mary says, it does depend on whether the original neologism is well though... See more It may be necessary, and then it requires careful thought to find or create a word that fits.
The concept may not be entirely new. Where it is known in the source culture but less so in the target culture, translators have been doing this in practice from the earliest times.
I would have thought translators were at least as well qualified as anyone else to introduce new words!
But as Mary says, it does depend on whether the original neologism is well thought-out and meaningful, rather than just laziness on the author's part. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Rosa Grau (X)
Spain
Local time: 01:02
English to Catalan
+ ...
| If that is a right... | Jan 24, 2012 |
...it is for everyone, not just for translators.
| | | |
Julian Holmes
Japan
Local time: 08:02
Member (2011)
Japanese to English
... but only when absolutely necessary.
Language is dynamic, in a state of continual flux. There's no escaping the fact that new words or terms are always going to be cropping up.
This, however, does not automatically give me carte blanche to go out and dream up a plethora of new "logims." In this respect, I agree with Mary:
"it depends on whether the original neologism is well thought-out and meaningful, rather than just laziness on the author's part." Nicely put... See more ... but only when absolutely necessary.
Language is dynamic, in a state of continual flux. There's no escaping the fact that new words or terms are always going to be cropping up.
This, however, does not automatically give me carte blanche to go out and dream up a plethora of new "logims." In this respect, I agree with Mary:
"it depends on whether the original neologism is well thought-out and meaningful, rather than just laziness on the author's part." Nicely put. 
At the same time, however, I'm sure that there will be a higher likelihood that translators will have no choice but to originate new logisms in order to be faithful to innovatively or creatively written source text.
Even though I may be sufficintly qualified to do so as a language specialist, I try to steer away from new buzzwords and creatively use the current gamut of already useful words in my language pair - which, quite frankly, is a helluvalot. 
And I for one know I'm not going to remember every word in both during my lifetime.
Happy translating! ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:02
Hebrew to English
| It's traxatious....everyone has the right....... | Jan 24, 2012 |
.....but just because you can, it doesn't mean you should.
On the whole, it probably isn't always the best idea in translation since you will always run the risk of someone reading your translation, reaching the neologism and thinking "huh?".
However, there are occasions when it may be unavoidable, especially if a word genuinely does not already exist (probably increases in likelihood with the level of speciality in the text - particularly techincal... See more .....but just because you can, it doesn't mean you should.
On the whole, it probably isn't always the best idea in translation since you will always run the risk of someone reading your translation, reaching the neologism and thinking "huh?".
However, there are occasions when it may be unavoidable, especially if a word genuinely does not already exist (probably increases in likelihood with the level of speciality in the text - particularly techincal texts).
Also, if you are translating something for in-house use, in-house jargon tends to be quite rich in neologisms....you may have to translate a neologism with a neologism (perhaps by simply transliterating the existing neologism).
*traxatious ©TyKendall2012* ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Patricia Charnet
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:02
Member (2009)
English to French
most definitely - I had a client who branded a new method and created a sandwich type word with 2 English words so I translated it in the French equivalent with the similar technique, gave an explanation in the manual and created a new name for the methodologist i.e. technician versed in the new method, who handles the said branded new method - it was well received by the agency and the client was happy with the result. That was some creative translating. The method manual now exists similarly w... See more most definitely - I had a client who branded a new method and created a sandwich type word with 2 English words so I translated it in the French equivalent with the similar technique, gave an explanation in the manual and created a new name for the methodologist i.e. technician versed in the new method, who handles the said branded new method - it was well received by the agency and the client was happy with the result. That was some creative translating. The method manual now exists similarly with the exact pattern in both languages in the UK and France/Belgium.
Depending on the context, if a word is to be exported then it is fine in my opinion to make sure it is exported well without any blunder made by the so-called marketing campaigns gone wrong created by incompetent company personnel or marketing agents with no knowledge of the said culture for the export country .
I think marketing and advertising translators are more likely to create neologisms - in my specialisations law and medicine - very unlikely
[Edited at 2012-01-24 11:56 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
neilmac
Spain
Local time: 01:02
Spanish to English
+ ...
John Cutler wrote:
Whether we have the right or not, I don’t know, (is there an International Declaration of Translators’ Rights?)
In my own experience, however, it’s sometimes unavoidable...
Will this Word become entrenched in the English language? I don’t know. Words come and go in English constantly. I do know that for now it gets 1 hit on Google based on a document I partially translated.
Who knows? It may be my lasting contribution to the English language.
Exactamundo. If the shoe fits, coin it. I feel almost as free to invent possible neologisms as I do to mix my meaningless metaphors or inflict needless alliteration.
Has anyone else noticed how "meme" has virtually disappeared from common use when it was almost ubiquitous just a few years back?
| | | |
Oleg Osipov
Russian Federation
Local time: 02:02
English to Russian
+ ...
Only writers, presidents and engineers are entitled to do that.
| | | |
Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 16:02
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam | Translators are writers | Jan 24, 2012 |
Oleg Osipov wrote: Only writers, presidents and engineers are entitled to do that.
| | |
|
|
|
| Couldn't agree more! | Jan 24, 2012 |
Mary Worby wrote:
If the original text contains a neologism, there is sometimes little option. Although obviously it depends on whether the original neologism is well thought-out and meaningful, rather than just laziness on the author's part.
| | | |
| Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member for the following reason: Removal requested by poster. |
If the tone of the source text is tongue in cheek, plays of words, then of course. Indeed, sometimes when a play on words in the source text just cannot be rendered by a play on words in translation, I tend to look for another opportunity in the text to be able to do so, if not too far on in the text from the original play on words!
Translation sometimes requries sacrifice. Among the worst things to do is to force a play on words when it just does not sound right in the target langu... See more If the tone of the source text is tongue in cheek, plays of words, then of course. Indeed, sometimes when a play on words in the source text just cannot be rendered by a play on words in translation, I tend to look for another opportunity in the text to be able to do so, if not too far on in the text from the original play on words!
Translation sometimes requries sacrifice. Among the worst things to do is to force a play on words when it just does not sound right in the target language. It is sometimes better to ignore it all together and accept that underplaying is better than overplaying. Worse still, is not to pick up on the original neologism and translate it literally. I bet we have all seen soem fantastic examples of that! ▲ Collapse
| | | |
| Pages in topic: [1 2] > |
Login to reply/comment 
