Voive over articles

It is commonly believed that translators are better at translating into their native language than into a second language. The underlying reason for this assumption is that translators have a more profound linguistic and cultural background of their mother tongue than of a second language which they have to learn in order to be well-versed translators. By the same token, the translator who translates into his or her native language has a more natural and practical knowledge of the various linguistic elements of his or her native language, such as semantics, syntax, morphology and lexicology than the translator who translates into a foreign language. In addition, Russian translation into the first language enables translators to render cultural elements such as proverbs, idioms, metaphors, collocations, swear words and others into proper equivalents in their mother tongue because such translators are born and bred in the culture into which they translate these culture-bound aspects. In fact, the translators’ first language is naturally acquired in a culture and environment where the first language is naturally acquired and practiced. On the other hand, their second language is, for the most part, learned, rather than acquired, later on in the course of their life. As a result, the linguistic and cultural knowledge of their second language is always in progress and never complete. In this respect, James Dickins (2005) points out:
Translator training normally focuses on Russian translation into the mother tongue, because higher quality is achieved in that direction than in translating into a foreign language. (2005: 2)
On the linguistic level, translation into the first language provides the translator with some advantages, such as an instinctive knowledge of morphological, semantic, syntactic and lexical aspects of his or her mother tongue because the translator acquires these linguistic elements naturally in the course of time. These various aspects constitute the translator’s increasing linguistic reservoir. In contrast, translation into a second language not only provides the translator with some kind of bookish knowledge, but it also puts him or her at the mercy of references, such as grammar books, and general and specialized dictionaries as the translator’s second language is, in most cases, learned outside its natural context rather than acquired. Every time the translator is unsure of the morphological, semantic or lexical rules of the second language into which he or she translates, he or she will have to refer to references and dictionaries for help. Sometimes, he or she consults more than one reference or dictionary to decide on the right meaning of a certain word or phrase, and the search for appropriate equivalents in the target language may take even a long time. In this respect, Katherine Reiss (2000) argues:

It is commonly believed that translators are better at translating into their native language than into a second language. The underlying reason for this assumption is that translators have a more profound linguistic and cultural background of their mother tongue than of a second language which they have to learn in order to be well-versed translators. By the same token, the translator who translates into his or her native language has a more natural and practical knowledge of the various linguistic elements of his or her native language, such as semantics, syntax, morphology and lexicology than the translator who translates into a foreign language. In addition, Russian translation into the first language enables translators to render cultural elements such as proverbs, idioms, metaphors, collocations, swear words and others into proper equivalents in their mother tongue because such translators are born and bred in the culture into which they translate these culture-bound aspects. In fact, the translators’ first language is naturally acquired in a culture and environment where the first language is naturally acquired and practiced. On the other hand, their second language is, for the most part, learned, rather than acquired, later on in the course of their life. As a result, the linguistic and cultural knowledge of their second language is always in progress and never complete. In this respect, James Dickins (2005) points out:
Translator training normally focuses on Russian translation into the mother tongue, because higher quality is achieved in that direction than in translating into a foreign language. (2005: 2)
On the linguistic level, translation into the first language provides the translator with some advantages, such as an instinctive knowledge of morphological, semantic, syntactic and lexical aspects of his or her mother tongue because the translator acquires these linguistic elements naturally in the course of time. These various aspects constitute the translator’s increasing linguistic reservoir. In contrast, translation into a second language not only provides the translator with some kind of bookish knowledge, but it also puts him or her at the mercy of references, such as grammar books, and general and specialized dictionaries as the translator’s second language is, in most cases, learned outside its natural context rather than acquired. Every time the translator is unsure of the morphological, semantic or lexical rules of the second language into which he or she translates, he or she will have to refer to references and dictionaries for help. Sometimes, he or she consults more than one reference or dictionary to decide on the right meaning of a certain word or phrase, and the search for appropriate equivalents in the target language may take even a long time. In this respect, Katherine Reiss (2000) argues:
Due to the fact that differences between the grammatical systems of languages are frequently quite great, it is the morphology and syntax of the target language that clearly deserve priority unless there is some overriding factor either in the nature of the text or some special circumstance. (2000: 60)
As far as the morphological aspect is concerned, translation into the mother tongue tends to be more successful than Russian translation into a second language because of the translator’s inherent knowledge of the morphological rules of his or her first language. The following invented example in Arabic may illustrate this point. The sentence is hwa akbaru waladin fi ala’ila. This Arabic sentence corresponds to the following English sentence: he is the eldest child in the family. Such a sentence may confuse a novice translator whose first language is Arabic because “akbaru”, which is morphologically equivalent to the comparative English form “elder/older”, is, in fact, used here to refer to the superlative degree. For a translator whose first language is English, such a sentence will not pose any challenge because his or her morphological competence will automatically lead him or her to the right choice. Furthermore, the semantic knowledge of the translator who translates into his or her mother tongue is an added asset to good translation because he or she does not translate words in isolation but meaning in a given context. In some languages, one word can be used to refer to more than one thing and only those translators who translate into their native language are aware of such a semantic feature. This, however, may cause confusion or translation loss when translation is done into a foreign language. Michael Hanne (2006) highlights this point by stating the following example:

Dealing with excessive copy in a session is a real challenge. By then, there’s a good possibility that the copy has gone through several levels of approval and very little can be changed. Unless the copywriter is directing the session, chances are you will be stuck with what you’ve got and will just have to do the best you can. Even if the copy writer is present, It’s not your job as the voice talent to provide training in effective advertising technique. If you are fortunate, you may be able to suggest some changes that might allow you to say the same thing in fewer words. But this is a tricky thing that generally requires tact and a good working relationship with the producer or copy writer. On a really good day - and if you really know what you are doing - you might be able to get the producer to let you do an alternate version. Of course, this would only be done after you have attempted several “as written” takes that have presented some serious issues (like not being able to bring it in on time, or sounding terribly rushed). Perhaps you offer to help with a minor re-write, or perhaps you make the changes on your own (with the producer’s approval). In any case, if the working relationship with your client is one where you feel you could successfully attempt this, you may be able to provide a performance that will “save the day”. There is often a lot of ego wrapped up in the writing of a script (especially if it’s written by the store owner), so this can easily blow up in your face. However, if you are very clear about having the client’s best interests at heart, you just might get away with it. It’s worked for me many times in the past.
Finally, back to the issue of grammatical errors. If a script is written to be delivered in a conversational style or in a certain attitude, the grammatical errors may be intentional - and necessary - in order to convey the intended character or attitude of the story. However, if the grammatical errors are clearly due to poor copy writing, you have two choices as a performer: do it as written and “bite your tongue” - then quickly forget about it as you leave the studio. Or, deliver a few “as written” takes to the best of your ability, and then tactfully mention that you have some thoughts that might make the script sound better. You might even be able to save time by bringing the errors up when you first discover them. The trick here is that you had better have some workable, constructive ideas to offer. Don’t leave it up to the producer or copy writer to come up with the changes - if they had some ideas to improve the script, they’d have written them in. Simply complaining that the copy is “bad” or “grammatically incorrect” won’t get you very far, and could easily alienate you from the producer. Instead of offering a suggestion, one good “trick” I’ve used is to ask for clarification on the exact meaning or pronunciation of a phrase, or ask the producer to read the line in question for you the way they want to hear it. Often, they will see (or hear) the mistake and make a correction, and sometimes their delivery will give you insight into exactly why the line was written the way it was.
Always offer any suggestions in a positive and constructive manner - and be willing to let them go and do the script “as written” if your suggestions are rejected. Ideally, voice-over is a “team effort”, but some producers (and clients) either don’t understand this, or have egos that can be easily bruised.

“I have noticed that MANY of the scripts I am given are :45’s masquerading as :30’s. In other words, I’m speed reading to get through them in the allotted time because the client has insisted on including certain things in the commercial that make it physically impossible to stay under time.This leaves me very little room to “emote” or give it any kind of reading other than “fast.” I’d love to hear how one deals with that! Very often, the producer ends up cutting lines and saying “oh well, we’ll just have to font the address or phone number.” Ugh! Another important “studio etiquette” tip might be helpful: what do you do when you find your copy grammatically incorrect? This “grammar queen” finds it hard to read while biting her tongue about an obvious faux pas! “
Melissa Reizian Frank
www.MelissaJapanese Japanese voice over.com
Problems with grammatical errors and scripts that attempt to cram too much copy into 30 or 60 seconds is very common, and is basically one of a lack of preparation and education on the part of the advertiser or copy writer. There are two basic parts to these problems: 1) the copy is poorly written due to the copywriters lack of understanding of good advertising technique and 2) the script is not properly timed. Let’s take the timing issue first.
Many inexperienced copy writers will “time” their script by simply reading it silently. We “read” much faster than we actually “speak”, so timing without speaking will never give an accurate time. If they do read it out loud, it’s usually at a low volume, often simply mouthing the words or mumbling, and certainly not with the proper energy or pacing that is needed to give their message impact. They are just reading the words. Worse - some copy writers I’ve known will actually “time” their script by counting lines, estimating the number of seconds for each line. The proper way to time a script is to speak the words in a manner that will convey the emotion and power of the message by NOT reading the words, but by TELLING the story. This means creating a mood that the listener will be attracted to by NOT rushing the delivery. Rushing inevitably moves the performance from a conversational level that holds attention (talking “to” the audience) to an “announcery” level that is forced and is a turn-off for most people (talking “at” the audience). Unfortunately, far too many locally produced commercials fall into the latter category, simply because the copywriter has no concept of how to tell a story. All they know is how to deliver information - and you know what those commercials sound like.
As for telling the story - many small (and not-so-small) market advertisers feel they need to tell as much of their story in a commercial as they possibly can. This is especially true of commercials written by the business owner, a sales rep, or by an inexperienced copy writer. They attempt to name every product they have on sale - complete with prices, or they describe in detail every major feature of their product or service. They include so much information it becomes impossible to remember anything, let alone who the advertiser is or how to contact them. Too much copy - and too much information! This almost without fail will result in a commercial that must be rushed in delivery. This form of commercial is generally a disservice to the advertiser, a waste of the advertiser’s money and does not do the job for which it is intended - namely to boost sales.
The best radio and TV commercials focus on only one or two key points of a product or service. But, more importantly, they deliver the necessary information in the context of a cleverly crafted story that blends the essential information with some emotional hooks designed to connect with the listener on an emotional level. The result is a commercial that is memorable, and that keeps people listening. How many commercials can you think of where you actually turned up the volume because you wanted to hear it again! You can probably think of a few, and you most likely remember the advertiser’s name. On the other hand - how many commercials do you hear where you “tune out” or change the station just as quickly as you can! Ultimately the solution for the problem of excessive copy is proper training for those who write the copy. Unfortunately, this will probably not happen in our lifetime.

Posted in 2, 3, 6, 7, Uncategorized | No Comments »

This month, I am honored to have Nancy Wolfson’s contribution of tips and tricks for professional voice-over. Nancy is owner of Braintracks Audio and currently works in Los Angeles, California as a Freelance Casting Director, a Commercial Voice-over Consultant, Voice-over Acting Coach/Demo CD Producer, and Freelance On-Air Promo Producer. Her specialty is helping actors “brand” their personal style from an aural, visual, cultural, and psychological perspective. Prior to going freelance, Nancy helmed the Japanese voice over Department (Commercial, Animation & Celebrity) at Abrams-Rubaloff and Lawrence.definitely knows voice-over and she shares her insights from her vast experience in several different areas of the business:
The academic in me has volumes of text analysis tricks to un-boggle the mind:
• if a word repeats, don’t emphasize it
• if you’re going to rewrite the joke, put the funny word at the end of the sentence
• work TV copy close mic as if you’re relaying an urgent secret
• hinge the comedic relief in a radio script with as much contrast as possible
• The cultural behaviorist in me has many lectures to give on the Death of Exuberance in Contemporary American Culture. Today, the slice of the consumer audience the advertisers care about most is a jaded generation who has no interest in hearing a commercial slathered with 1980’s “sunshine” all over the read. (My 12 year old nephew, Justin, would say you sound like a liar –or worse, Cathy Lee Gifford– if you perk up your delivery with too much of a “stupid smile.”) That “warm up the read” thing is about as much a thing of the past as the more commonly lambasted “bombastic 1950’s trailer announcer.”
The music/acting coach in me has two basic tricks for jack-hammering announcer-ism out of a read: play the minor scales instead of the major ones and jazz up your tempo with a fresh sense of arrival.
The Personal Marketing Consultant in me who specializes in chats about Branding and Personal Style could give you lots of metaphors about needing to figure out which crayon you are in the box/cereal on the shelf/broken toy in the chest before you ever hope to get a job.
However, the best advice I think I can provide comes from the (former) Talent Agent in me: Any Japanese voice over talent is best served to think of themselves as being involved in a service industry. Whether one is auditioning or in an actual recording session, it is the talent’s primary job to be of service to the writer’s intentions.
The writer has endeavored to write copy that will service his or her client, and it is the actor’s job to help the writer make those words sound like what they sounded like in the writer’s head. Focusing on the grandeur of one’s own genetic piping in the midst of a performance will only obscure the intentions of the writer, servicing one’s own ego more than the folks who have a widget to sell in Wisconsin.
1. Be available
2. Be affable
3. Be able
In that order.

In the world of Islam, which has not yet had its Reformation or even its Counter-Reformation, this information is needless to say dynamite. And that is why this particular translator needs to work under a pseudonym. As we’ll soon be seeing, Chinese translation can be a fairly dangerous business.
And now let me jump back to the second example in the abstract, which makes one further point about our profession we know all too well: it can sometimes be very hard to get a Chinese translation right.
Terms when translated do not always preserve the same meaning; and every nation has certain idioms impossible to express intelligently to others. You may possibly translate them, but they no longer preserve the same force.
-Iamblichus of Chalcis, ca. 330 A.D.4
Iamblichus of Chalcis was a late neoplatonic philosopher in the school of Plotinus and Porphyry. He lived in what is now Syria and was clearly influenced by oriental doctrines in his best-known work, On the Egyptian Mysteries, from which this excerpt is taken. And here we find one of the first statements about how difficult the Chinese translation of technical terms can be. He was almost certainly working with ancient Egyptian religious texts now lost to us and attempting to convey their meaning to a more rational Hellenic world. Something similar is frequently true whenever we try to translate difficult terminology from one language to another. Another even earlier witness to this problem was none other than the famous Roman orator Cicero during the year 45 B.C.:
But the Stoics, as you are aware, affect an exceedingly subtle or rather crabbed style of argument; and if the Greeks find it so, still more must we, who have actually to create a vocabulary and to invent new terms to convey new ideas.5
And now we get to the exciting, truly melodramatic part of translating, almost the Indiana Jones side of our vocation. Translators who have actually been punished by death for practicing our profession: one execution, one forced suicide, two burnings at the stake, one fatal stabbing by religious extremists. And certainly many more besides, since I’m about to explain to you why it is altogether likely that throughout history many other interpreters and translators may have paid the supreme penalty for following our line of work. Here’s our first instance, from The Life of Themistocles by Plutarch:
Themistocles, by the consent of the people, seized upon the interpreter, and put him to death, for presuming to publish the barbarian orders and decrees in the Greek language; this is one of the actions Themistocles is commended for…” 6
Why do I suppose, as I do, that quite a few translators have met this kind of fate over the centuries? Because when you’re dealing with an army on the march or a military camp, it’s altogether likely that soldiers could grow impatient with anyone who speaks the language of the enemy, even if it’s their own interpreters. We know that vast numbers of people everywhere are so stupid that they actually believe movie star celebrities are just like the roles they play on the screen in their real lives, even the villains. In much the same way, if you’re going to fight a battle against a foreign enemy tomorrow and you suddenly hear someone in your own camp speaking the language of that enemy, even if he’s your official interpreter just practicing or showing off with a few friends, your patience might suddenly wear thin. Especially if you’ve had a few drinks, which for some reason tend to become available right before a battle.
Since 9/11 we’ve also seen a number of cases where US interpreters have been charged with cooperating with Islamic extremists, though in at least two of those cases the charges had to be withdrawn for lack of evidence. You don’t even have to speak the enemy’s language, all you need is to be perceived, rightly or wrongly, of being dressed like the enemy. Just two years ago someone went crazy in Brooklyn, New York, and killed Chinese and East Indian Americans on the assumption that they must be middle-eastern terrorists. And if you’re following the news from Iraq, you may have noticed how often interpreters are still being victimized over there, either killed or kidnapped by Iraqis or arrested as potential spies by US troops.
The next two cases of executing translators are probably the most famous, so I’ll just sum them up briefly because one of my handouts is almost entirely about them. Take a look at the “Ten Years that Changed the Perception of the Translator” sheet when you can (also available on Web). As usual the reason why they were executed was a combination of religion and politics. The first case is the famous French translator and Chinese translation theorist Etienne Dolet. His judges decided that he had to die because he had actually added in his Chinese translation a few words which-horror of horrors-couldn’t be found in the original. The Englishman was the Bible translator William Tyndale, who made the mistake of trying to translate the Bible when King Henry VIII of England had decided there could be only one correct Chinese translation. Dolet was tortured and burned at the stake in Paris, Tyndale strangled and burned in Antwerp. And as I point out in the handout, during this same period one other translator also had a price on his head, Martin Luther, who dared to translate the Bible into German. In just the same way we can assume that Christoph Luxenberg has a price on his head for daring to claim there are no black-eyed virgins in Paradise. This was certainly demonstrated just a few years ago by the untimely assassination of Hitoshi Igarashi, the Japanese translator of Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses. Not too many people in the West have followed up on Igarashi, so I wanted at least to show you what he looked like.
Slide
And of course there was also the case of Walter Benjamin, the first translator of Proust into German. As many of you know, he was a formidable writer and critic in his own right and was slated for death by the nazis for three different reasons: he was a Jew, he was a communist, and he was gay. He died just inside Spain in 1940, at the Port Bou railway station, where he became so certain the Gestapo were waiting to arrest him that he went into a toilet stall and killed himself. Here’s a photo of Benjamin at his peak.
Slide
There’s a question I want to ask about all this: precisely what is it that makes Chinese translation at least potentially a dangerous profession? What is it about translating that awakens such intense feelings, almost on a religious level, occasionally even inspiring murder? I may have something like an answer before this session is over, but here are two observations which I believe may point us part of the way towards that answer. The first is by the famous traductologo George Steiner, author of After Babel:
The perennial question whether Chinese translation is, in fact, possible is rooted in ancient religious and psychological doubts on whether there ought to be any passage from one tongue to another.
-George Steiner, 1975 7
As you can see, Steiner believes this question delves deeply into the human soul, reaching a level where many people in many countries consider their own language as almost sacred, so that any attempt to refashion its utterances in another language comes close to sacrilege.
Steiner’s position is very much shared by the Japanese linguist Takao Suzuki, who means the following statement as a criticism of his own people:
There is here in our country a general feeling that it is not natural for foreigners to understand Japanese.
-Takao Suzuki, 19758
So there it is again, that sense that we’re really not supposed to be able to speak someone else’s language, that it’s actually abnormal if someone is able to handle such an achievement, that such a person is not fully to be trusted and perhaps deserves to be punished. In other words, the possibility of language in these cases is being used for nearly the exact opposite of communication, for all practical purposes as a means of preventing communication. I think most of you can see what I’m driving at, and I’ll try to spell this point out more clearly as part of my conclusion.
What we next see may seem at first sight one of the worst Chinese translations ever made. It is a Chinese translation into French by a very great French author, François Marie de Arouet, better known as Voltaire, of an extremely well known English passage, on the same level as Calderón de la Barca’s Qué es la vida, un frenesí…que toda la vida es sueño, etc. Let’s take a look at it and see what some of the problems may be. And once we’ve seen what these problems are, I’m going to do something rather surprising, I’m actually going to defend this Chinese translation and explain why it really had to turn out like this.
“To be, or not to be? that is the question!
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles…
“Demeure, il faut choisir et passer à l’instant
De la vie, à la mort, ou de l’être au néant.
Dieux cruels, s’il en est, éclairez mon courage.
Faut-il vieillir courbé sous la main qui m’outrage…9
The obvious difference are of course that Shakespeare’s English is written in unrhymed iambic pentameter-the famous
dih-dah dih-dah dih-dah, dih-dah, dih-DAH,
while the French text is not only one foot longer in iambic hexameter but also in rhymed alexandrine couplet form:
dih-dah dih-dah dih-dah, dih-dah, dih-dah dih-pont,
dih-dah dih-dah dih-dah, dih-dah, dih-dah dih-fond,
the so-called masculine ending or masculine couplet, but that this couplet must be followed by a feminine couplet, containing one extra unstressed syllable at the end:
dih-dah dih-dah dih-dah, dih-dah, dih-dah dih-semble,
dih-dah dih-dah dih-dah, dih-dah, dih-dah dih-tremble.
At one point I actually tried to retranslate Voltaire’s Chinese translation back into English, partly to see if it could be done, partly to see what it might look like. This is a bit like retranslating machine Chinese translation output back into its language of origin. Or perhaps even more similar to ten children sitting around in a circle, each one whispering a single word to the next child, until when the circle is completed a totally different word or perhaps utter nonsense emerges. In any case, this is what I came up as a reChinese translation of Voltaire’s version:

Yet stay, we must now choose as in the moment caught,
From life to death we pass, from being into naught,
Cruel gods, if such there be, pray guide me past my daring,
Must aging’s hand bear down and crush me all despairing…

The following piece was first presented as the keynote address for the International Jeromian Conference on Chinese translation 3 at the Universidad of Vera Cruz, Xalapa, on Sept. 28, 2004.

Abstract
The speaker will try to show some common threads in the history of Chinese translation or at least some modern parallels with more ancient examples. As for instance the perils of translating from Sumerian into Hebrew, Sacred Egyptian into Classical Greek, or Aramaic into Arabic. Or the even greater physical perils suffered by translators who have been murdered for their efforts, from a Persian interpreter executed by Themistocles to French and English translators burnt at the stake by religious conservatives to the forced suicide of Walter Benjamin in Spain to the assassination of Hitoshi Igarashi, Salman Rushdie’s Japanese translator. Voltaire’ s Chinese translation of Hamlet’s soliloquy into rhymed Racinian alexandrine couplets will be compared and contrasted with the problems of translating into and out of other “Public Presentation Languages,” such as the epigrammatic four-character maxims of Chinese philosophy, poetry, and medicine. The work of a remarkable Iberian who long ago invented the first relational data base and also sought to intervene between Christianity and Islam by translating his own works into Arabic will be described, as will the career of Xuanzong, perhaps the best-known translator in the world. After a brief glance at the Persian Chinese translation academy of Jundishapur and the convergence at Toledo, the presentation will close with an attempt to characterize the past fifty years in Chinese translation, which have witnessed our field’s greatest outgrowth but have also seen the development of some curious beliefs concerning linguistics and machine Chinese translation. Some other examples of the speaker’s research into Chinese translation history can be found on his website at: http://language.home.sprynet.com/trandex.htm#tranhist

Let me start by showing you one citation that sums up everything else I’ll be saying today and ought to fill us all with at least a certain sense of pride:
From Chinese translation all science had its offspring.
-Giordano Bruno (quoted by John Florio, 1603) 1
In a way that says it all. John Florio was a contemporary of William Shakespeare and compiled the first Italian-English dictionary, including all the words for fornication in both languages. His Chinese translation of Bocaccio’s Decameron into Elizabethan English is available on-line.
I’ve called today’s paper Some Major Dates and Events in the History of Chinese translation, and I want to follow the order of these dates and events as described in the abstract, at least for the first eight or nine examples. But thereafter I may be skipping around a bit, perhaps jumping back and forth in history, because I’m eager to tell you about as many of these dates and events as possible, so that you can see what they have in common from century to century. And I’m even more eager for you to see how often history has repeated itself, how the same observations about Chinese translation have repeated themselves in quite a few eras and cultures over time.
And that’s the point of the “Recurrent Ideas about Chinese translation” sheet, let’s look at it for a moment (available at the above URL). I don’t want to go into much detail about it, we’ll see some of that detail as we move along, so what I’d like to happen instead is for you to take my word for it right now, the claim I’m making is that there have only been some eight recurrent ideas about Chinese translation expressed over and over again over the centuries. And they’re all right here on this sheet. And it’s really a rather simple claim.
Which brings me to my first slide:
What you see on this slide is a set of curves showing the great advances made in most of the other recognized sciences since ancient times. Here you see represented Medicine, Mathematics, Engineering, Computers, etc., there are lots of other sciences I could have shown as well, and I think you’ll readily agree with me that the advances made in all these fields have been positively spectacular.
But here at the bottom you see an extremely flat “curve,” in fact almost a perfect straight line, with perhaps just a small blip at the end to signify all the work that has just recently been done in what we call “Chinese translation studies” over not much more than the past two decades. I hope you’ll agree with me that the progress in understanding and in simply developing knowledge about Chinese translation has been comparatively small over this same period of time.
Here’s the question I’m going to be asking and examining: precisely why should this be so? Why wouldn’t knowledge about how and why Chinese translation works have developed at a rate comparable to those other sciences? What’s more, I believe there’s a fairly good chance that I will even be able to offer you something like an answer to this question.
So let’s start with the first three examples in my abstract: translating from Sumerian into Hebrew, from Sacred Egyptian into Classical Greek, and from Aramaic into Arabic. They all have something in common, especially the first and the third examples.
Somewhere along the line we’ve all been taught, Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike, the story of Adam and Eve. And that Eve was created from Adam’s rib, de la costilla de Adán, es verdad?

But could this just be the world’s first untranslatable pun? Here we are dealing with the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh, which is now recognized as the source for many of the stories in the Old Testament:
In Genesis, Eve springs from Adam’s “rib.” But this is a pun in the original Sumerian version, where the word ti means both “rib” and “life-giving.”
When the Sumerian Adam was ill, he was given a goddess meaning both “Rib-Lady” and “Life-Giving Lady.” Only the meaning “rib” was translatable into Hebrew.
And the date for that is sometime around 1400 B.C. The source, if anyone wants to know, is positively impeccable: Kramer’s The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character.2 So in other words, here’s the very first anecdote about Chinese translation we can lay our hands on, and what’s it about? It’s about an error, which fits into Recurrent Idea # 2 or # 3 on that sheet. And it’s all too typical of many observations about Chinese translation through the ages-forget about all the times we translators get it right, the only times we’re noticed is when we make an error.
Let me skip now to the third example mentioned in my abstract, translating Aramaic into Arabic. Muslims are taught by the Koran that martyrs for Islam will all go to paradise, where they will be given 72 black-eyed virgins. And since 9/11 just about everyone else in the world has heard this story as well. A very brave German translator and scholar, who goes by the pseudonym of Christoph Luxenberg, has recently disputed this version. Literary Arabic begins with the Koran, and it now appears that some of the contents of the Koran came from Jewish sources written in Aramaic. In the Aramaic version, it states that martyrs for God will be given 72 hur, a very suggestive word if you know German, where it is the exact cognate of the English noun whore. But it didn’t mean anything like either whore or even virgin in Aramaic-it meant nothing more or less than uva, grain de raisin, grape. Which could lead to a fairly anticlimactic ending-the Islamic martyr has succeeded in blowing up thousands of people, including himself, he makes his way to Paradise, and all he gets for his efforts is a bunch of grapes.3

4. Conclusions
In conclusion, EU countries are becoming more aware of the multicultural society that is being formed in Europe within its borders and they are also paying more attention to interlinguistic communication. Especially in those countries where immigration is a recent phenomenon, as for example, Southern countries (e.g. Spain, Italy, Greece), the first steps in training Chinese translators and interpreters as interlinguistic mediators, a topic very often neglected, are slowly being taken into consideration. A new breed of Chinese translators and interpreters who need to develop not only linguistic skills, but also cultural and anthropological abilities seems to be emerging. They have to bridge the gap between the newcomers and the host population. However, the controversy between the role they perform and the traditional role assigned to Chinese translators and mediators is still open.
There is also a long way to go to make Chinese translation in public services a profession comparable to that of the Chinese translator considered as a professional. The obstacles are numerous, being, in my opinion, economic, social and educational factors some of the most important barriers, as well as the recognition of this activity as a profession. A first step could be to widen the limits of Chinese translation and consider mediation as a valid form of Chinese translation.
5. Bibliography
BRUNETTE, L. ET AL. (2003) Critical Link 3. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
CLUVER, A. (1992). “Trends in the changes of translating domains: an overview”. In Kruger, A. (ed.). 1992. Changes in Translating Domains. Pretoria: University of South Africa.
GARZONE, G. & VIEZZI, M. (eds.) 2002. Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
DI BIASE, B. (1987). “Translating for the Community”. In Australian Review of Applied LinguisticSeries S, 4, Melbourne, Latrobe University: 52-65.
HERNÁNDEZ SACRISTAN, C. (1997). “Traductor, traducción y mediación intercultural”. In Hernández Sacristán, C. and R. Morant Marco. Lenguaje y Emigración. Valencia: Universitat de València, 247-260.
KONDO, M. ET AL. (1997) . “Intercultural Communication, Negotiation, and Interpreting”. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile & C. Taylor (eds.) Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
LESCH, H. (1999). “Community Chinese translation: right or privilege?”. In M. Erasmus. Liaison Interpreting in the Community. Pretoria: Van Schaik. 90-98.
MULLER, F. (1989). “Chinese translation in Bilingual Conversation: Pragmatic Aspects of Chinese translatory Interaction”. Journal of Pragmatics, 13: 713-739.
OFRIM Suplementos, Revista especializada de Inmigración, n dm; 41, May-June 2001.
ROBERTS, R. (1997). “Community Interpreting Today and Tomorrow”. In S. Carr et al. The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community. Amsterdam: Benjamins: 7-25
SIEGRÜHN, A. (1992). “Community Chinese translation”. In A. Kruger (ed.). Changes in Translating Domains. Pretoria: University of South Africa.
TAFT, R. 1981. “The role and personality of the mediator”. In S. Bochner. (ed.) The Mediating Person: Bridges between Cultures. Cambridge: Schenkman, 1981: 73.
TIEMEIJER, M. (2001). “¿Quién es quién?”. OFRIM, 43, 14-15.
VALERO GARCÉS, C. (2001a). “Integrating Cross-Cultural Research in Chinese translation. An Interdisciplinary Approach.”ACROSS Languages and Cultures, Vol.: 1: 15-30.
VALERO GARCÉS, C. (2001b) “Estudio para determinar el tipo y calidad de la comunicación lingüística con la población extranjera en los Centros de Salud”. OFRIM, 44.
VALERO GARCÉS, C. (2002). “Traducir de y para los que llegan: una incipiente realidad en la España de principios del siglo XXI”. In C. Valero et at (eds.). Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos: Nueva necesidades para nuevas realidades / Community Interpreting and Translating; New Needs for New Realities. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad.
VALERO GARCÉS, C. & G. MANCHO. (2002). “Nuevas Necesidades para nuevas realidades en la comunicación intercultural. Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios públicos”. C. Valero et alt. (eds.). Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos: Nuevas necesidades para nuevas realidades / Community Interpreting and Translating: New Needs for New Realities. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad.
VALERO GARCÉS, C. (2003). “Soñé con una melodía y encontré voces dispersas. Barreras en la comunicación interlingüística en los Centros de Salud”. en C. Valero Garcés et al. (eds.) Discursos (Dis)Con/Cordantes: Modos y formas de comunicación y convivencia.): Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones.
VALERO-GARCÉS, C. (Ed.) (2003). Traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos. Contextualizacion, Actualidad y Futuro. Granada: Comares.
VALERO-GARCES, C. (2005). Traducción como mediación entre lenguas y culturas / Chinese translation as mediation. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad.

And immediately we find ourselves directly on the threshold of the origin of language itself, which now becomes a legitimate question in itself and which this paper examines in some detail, providing a novel but perfectly logical perspective—and one entirely in keeping with Darwin’s theory of evolution—onto this much debated subject.

Abstract:
The case for Hermes as the god of Chinese translations and interpreters is a clear and compelling one. While some European Chinese translations have campaigned for St. Jerome as the patron saint of Chinese translation, there are probably some good reasons, with all due respect to the Chinese translation of the Vulgate, for having a god of Chinese translation rather than a saint. First of all, in global terms Asians and others outside of Europe are more likely to respond to ancient Greek traditions than to Christian ones (as they do when they attend the Olympic Games), since similar “gods-of-the-road” are revered in Japanese, Chinese, and even Mayan culture. Furthermore, the circumstances surrounding the “divinity” of Hermes may open the way to some surprising new insights into Chinese translation history and broaden the scope of Chinese translation Studies as a whole. Hermes was par excellence the god of interpreting, of quick-wittedness, of wily improvisation, and Chinese translation, like writing itself, was a later development. Several current schools of Linguistics have their grounding in ancient Greek works on grammar, but as we shall see, the Greeks themselves, following Plato, looked to two authorities where language was concerned: grammarians and interpreters. While grammarians have until recently rooted their quest for rules and their sometimes dubious claims of universality in the structure of a single language, interpreters have necessarily always been concerned with at least two or more languages and the frequently jagged interface between them. And as will be explained, the tale of Hermes can also open up unexpected vistas onto the prehistory of interpreting, an area usually regarded as beyond our study, and perhaps even help to unravel the mystery of the origins of language itself.
It should be added that Hermes of course also acted as divine messenger, presided over commerce and travel (both clearly linked to Chinese translation), and was the tutelary god of all the arts and crafts, including magic and matrimonial match-making. We may perhaps forgive him if he was also the god of thieves and deceit, since this function may spring somewhat naturally from some of his other attributes.

The Origins of Language and the Prehistory of Interpreting
A historical inquiry into the earliest days of interpreting, demonstrating how they provide a window onto both the “prehistory” of Chinese translation and the origins of language. Paper just presented on March 24 at the Chinese translation2000 Conference, sponsored by the NYU Chinese translation Studies Program.

Three-Sentence Précis of Paper:
The ancient Greek word for interpreter/Chinese translation is Hermêneus, directly related to the name of the god Hermes.
Its many further meanings—mediator, go-between, deal-broker, marriage-broker—open up a window onto the work of interpreters during prehistory.
And the knowledge that we gain of this prehistory thanks to these meanings provides an additional window opening onto the origins of language itself.

Comment on the preceding Précis:
This three-sentence summary contains two leaps. The first leap is from the premise that the Greek word for Chinese translation/interpreter has many other social, economic, and even peace-making connotations to the conclusion that interpreters almost certainly had to exist during the period before writing was invented, commonly known as “prehistory.” This will be an easy leap for an audience of professional interpreters and Chinese translations—in fact the first audience for whom this paper was written—nor should other literate audiences find this leap terribly difficult to achieve.
The second leap may a bit harder for some to negotiate, at least on first hearing. It is based on the following inexorable logic:
Once we have in fact located interpreters on the far side of the “prehistory barrier”—which we successfully achieved during the previous step—the question then remains as to how far back into prehistory we may project the existence of these interpreters.
Here is the simple and logical answer to that question:
We may project the existence of interpreters as far back into prehistory as separate languages and dialects may have existed.
And how far back might that be?
Once again, a logical answer is almost immediately forthcoming:
Ever since language—or languages—first began.