Services

Direct Translation vs. Meaning-Based Translation

By Ken Sakai, President

In my line of work, I have a lot of opportunities to revise documents that other people have translated. As I look at the various styles of all these different translators, I think that in general they can be sorted into two basic categories: those who take a more literal approach ("direct translation"), and those who assign priority to conveying the intent of the source text ("meaning-based translation"). Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks, and in my opinion, neither method is definitively better than the other. Personally, speaking from the standpoint of one who has done many years of technical translation, I believe that the foundation of translation lies in direct translation. At least, when questions arise during the translation process, I think that it is best to fall back on direct translation. In this article, I will explain why.

The word "translation" really applies to a wide range of genres and their respective demands. In the case of technical manuals and texts, needless to say, it is essential that the contents be faithfully rendered in the appropriate industry terminology. It would be unacceptable for translators to invent their own technical terms or unilaterally employ whatever terms they liked. In that respect, I think direct translation is really the cornerstone of technical translation. That said, when dealing with a manual that describes the operation or maintenance of some equipment or apparatus, direct translation alone is not necessarily a sure formula for a flawless translation. In actuality, various problems are bound to arise. To some extent, adding some helpful words of explanation can contribute to a more fluid, smooth translation. At this point, our method has already diverged from that of direct translation, but it is still clearly different from pure meaning-based translation. In reality, most translation work demands this sort of blend of direct translation and meaning-based translation. However, my philosophy is that whenever you can, it is best to adhere as closely as possible to a direct translation approach.

In Japan, there are a number of vocational schools and correspondence courses for the study of translation. Sometimes, graduates of these programs apply for jobs at my company. At Pacific Dreams, Inc, we screen all job applicants with the same sample translation test in order to determine their ability level. I was surprised and dismayed to discover that applicants who have graduated with top marks from various translation schools and courses seem the most likely to live by the equation "translation=meaning-based translation", and they come up with translations very much opposed to what I had in mind. This leads me to imagine that such translation schools emphasize the difference in Japanese and English composition and teach students to radically alter the order of texts during the translation process. I suppose that this sort of method makes for better flavor when translating literary works and the like, but when technical documents and manuals are concerned, I feel that it serves to macerate the logic and thought process of the author and obscure the author's actual intent.

The goal of the translation process is to faithfully re-express in a different language what the author wrote in the source text. In other words, it is unforgivable for a translator to unilaterally change the original text, over-emphasize certain meanings, or jumble up the logic. Sometimes people mistakenly interpret this, resulting in the absurd misconception that translators who can produce meaning-based translations have a high degree of skill. If a translated text comes out much more well-written than the original document, it can hardly be said that the translator produced a faithful translation. However, in reality, when a client is anticipating a well-written translated text, the prospect of disappointing the client and the issue of customer satisfaction can create something of a dilemma.

We translators are not machines or computers, and our work involves more than indiscriminatingly converting lines of text from English into Japanese. Naturally, I think that it is essential to communicate closely with our clients and provide them with translations that fulfill their needs and requirements exactly. The other day, my staff and I were working on a web page translation for a company that designs semiconductor integrated circuits (IC). The contents of the web page were highly technical with a great deal of specialized terminology. It was very difficult, but the person in charge of constructing the web page requested a non-direct translation. Thus, we conducted the translation process with relative freedom, while taking care to nail the technical terminology. As a result, the client was very pleased with the translation we delivered. For us, this represented something of a deviation from our normal approach, but undertaking work that required us to prioritize communication with the client provided us with a very valuable experience.