| Страници в темата: [1 2] > | Sworn translators: commissioner of oats Автор на темата: Samuel Murray
|
|---|
Samuel Murray 
Нидерландия
Local time: 20:13
Член (2006)
Английски на Африкаанс
+ ...
Hello everyone
I have a question specifically for sworn translators (certified translators in some countries). If your source text says "Commissioner of Oats", would you translate it into your target language as Commissioner of Oats or as Commissioner of Oaths? Or, how would you deal with that situation on your target document -- add a comment, perhaps?
I found this one on Facebook:
 ... See more Hello everyone
I have a question specifically for sworn translators (certified translators in some countries). If your source text says "Commissioner of Oats", would you translate it into your target language as Commissioner of Oats or as Commissioner of Oaths? Or, how would you deal with that situation on your target document -- add a comment, perhaps?
I found this one on Facebook:
And I found this one in a PDF with guidelines, after some aggressive googling (for Google will do all in its power to show only results that contain "oaths"):
I'm asking specifically for sworn translators' responses because I suspect ordinary legal translators might answer differently.
Samuel ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I would translate as it should be translated:) | May 29, 2013 |
Oaths and explain in brackets that there is an apparent typo in the original.
| | | |
ARKADIUSZ KACZOROWSKI wrote:
Oaths and explain in brackets that there is an apparent typo in the original.
Yup. But make completely sure it really can't have anything to do with cereal.
I would describe the typo somewhat in detail if I still had even an unreasonable doubt due to the context.
| | | | | flyer from BDÜ Bayern | May 29, 2013 |
I'm not a sworn translator, but I like the question ... In a flyer from a German translator's association (Landesverband Bayern des BDÜ), it says that obvious mistakes can be ignored but that, in cases like this, where the mistake theoretically still makes sense, the translator always ought to include a comment in the text of the translation or in a footnote. [http://www.bdue-bayern.de/publikationen/download.html (select: "Leitlinie zum Urkundenübersetzen) ... explanation under section 19]
... See more I'm not a sworn translator, but I like the question ... In a flyer from a German translator's association (Landesverband Bayern des BDÜ), it says that obvious mistakes can be ignored but that, in cases like this, where the mistake theoretically still makes sense, the translator always ought to include a comment in the text of the translation or in a footnote. [http://www.bdue-bayern.de/publikationen/download.html (select: "Leitlinie zum Urkundenübersetzen) ... explanation under section 19]
And how would you translate it literally? As the "commissioner of oats" in the target language or as the "commissioner of" + a comical, one-letter deviation from the correct target-language term? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Kay Denney
Франция
Local time: 20:13
Френски на Английски
| Good question! | May 29, 2013 |
I once had to manage a project involving the sale of patents as part of a takeover. There was a very misleading mistake in the source document, which could have led to a misunderstanding over which patents were being sold. If I remember rightly, there was a mix-up with the names and numbers of the patents. I asked the client for confirmation and whether they could correct the source, but this was not possible. They thanked me for pointing the problem out and asked for the translator to translate... See more I once had to manage a project involving the sale of patents as part of a takeover. There was a very misleading mistake in the source document, which could have led to a misunderstanding over which patents were being sold. If I remember rightly, there was a mix-up with the names and numbers of the patents. I asked the client for confirmation and whether they could correct the source, but this was not possible. They thanked me for pointing the problem out and asked for the translator to translate it correctly, with a note to explain why the number was different from the source. The source was simply nonsense so if they just translated it literally the translation would have been nonsense and of course the translator would be blamed. Even if we could prove that it was the fault of the source text, we would still have wasted time. The translator refused point blank to comply and I ended up having the file translated a second time with a translator who was prepared to do as the client requested.
I don't know which translator was doing their job properly, but I tore a lot of hair out over that job and I wish it had been the first translator's hair not mine!
Then there was the other time when a woman asked us to add a zero to the sum of money she was supposed to inherit. The lawyer had made a mistake and could no longer be contacted. That one we refused to comply with, and she stormed out of the office screaming that she had come all that way specially. Yes, Madame, but we didn't make you! ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Нидерландия
Local time: 20:13
Член (2006)
Английски на Африкаанс
+ ...
АВТОР НА ТЕМАТА | Oats literally | May 29, 2013 |
Michael Wetzel wrote:
And how would you translate it literally? As the "commissioner of oats" in the target language or as the "commissioner of" + a comical, one-letter deviation from the correct target-language term?
No, I would do that only if the intention of the original author was humour. If I had to do a literal translation, I would use the target language term for "oats". My own opinion on the matter in my first post (as a non-sworn translator who sometimes translates certificates) would be to translate it as "oats" and leave it at that. It is not my duty to interpret the legal aspects of the text, in the case of a sworn translation, and it is not my place to comment on it either.
| | | | | That's not really lawyering | May 29, 2013 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Michael Wetzel wrote:
And how would you translate it literally? As the "commissioner of oats" in the target language or as the "commissioner of" + a comical, one-letter deviation from the correct target-language term?
No, I would do that only if the intention of the original author was humour. If I had to do a literal translation, I would use the target language term for "oats". My own opinion on the matter in my first post (as a non-sworn translator who sometimes translates certificates) would be to translate it as "oats" and leave it at that. It is not my duty to interpret the legal aspects of the text, in the case of a sworn translation, and it is not my place to comment on it either.
Nah, that's not really lawyering just because the document is legal or the commissioner is a judicial official. If you had a clear misspelling there, you could probably even go 'oaths' and skip any comments, even in a translation specifically designated as literal. Only where a 'commissioner of oats' would make sense should you translate it like that but even then still make a brief note. Making the note brief, neutral and uninviting of further discussion is an art in itself, I suppose.
And yes, it sucks when you need to deal with errors like that in sources. The quality of written English is horrible these days. On the other hand, typos have always been there. Perhaps take a day off?
| | | |
.. Commissioners of Oats in Scotland. It's generally the guy in the white singlet and the red kilt.
Steve K.
| | |
|
|
|
Tatty
Local time: 20:13
Испански на Английски
+ ...
I would simply correct it and not include any footnote. It is an obvious misspelling after all.
| | | | Vanda Nissen
Австралия
Local time: 04:13
Английски на Russian
+ ...
ARKADIUSZ KACZOROWSKI wrote:
Oaths and explain in brackets that there is an apparent typo in the original.
Yes, translating as "oaths" and making a note regarding "oats".
| | | | Inge Luus
Южна Африка
Local time: 20:13
Член (2008)
Немски на Английски
+ ...
Given the context, I would say that it is an obvious typo and I would go along with Tatty and just correct it.
I think you could put yourself in a more difficult situation if you translated it literally as "oats" and had to justify why you did so in a court of law at a later date. I'm sure a literal translation would raise questions in any language.
| | | | neilmac
Испания
Local time: 20:13
Испански на Английски
+ ...
| Breakfast time | May 30, 2013 |
Like the scorpion in the fable, I'm afraid I'd correct it to "oaths", probably muttering a few choice ones along the way (but that's because I'm more sweary than sworn).
I'm off to have my porridge oats right now...
| | |
|
|
|
| Why is someone paying for the translation? | May 30, 2013 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Michael Wetzel wrote:
And how would you translate it literally? As the "commissioner of oats" in the target language or as the "commissioner of" + a comical, one-letter deviation from the correct target-language term?
No, I would do that only if the intention of the original author was humour. If I had to do a literal translation, I would use the target language term for "oats". My own opinion on the matter in my first post (as a non-sworn translator who sometimes translates certificates) would be to translate it as "oats" and leave it at that. It is not my duty to interpret the legal aspects of the text, in the case of a sworn translation, and it is not my place to comment on it either.
I don't know if it's your duty or not, but if you ask yourself why someone is paying you to do the translation, the answer seems easy. They are not going to be able to do what they want with the translation if it has "minister of oats" in the target language. If sworn translators are concerned about getting in trouble for taking liberties, then all they have to do is add a note.
My comment about a mock typo in the target-language was not meant seriously, but it points to a serious translation problem.
"Minister of oats" is ridiculous, but it is immediately recognizable as a mistake and the intended meaning is also immediately clear. If you invent a target-language term for this authority, it will not be immediately recognizable as a mistake and the intended meaning will not be clear at all. A direct translation would certainly be less equivalent to the source than a correction: The original states "minister of oaths" + "I am stupid and careless". I agree that it is a shame to lose the connotation of "stupid and careless" (although this can be avoided through the addition of a note), but it would be a very big problem if "minister of oats" gets lost.
| | | | Adrian Grant
Обединеното кралство
Local time: 19:13
Portuguese на Английски
+ ...
| Just leave it as is. | May 30, 2013 |
Why go against the grain?
| | | | | Mentioning it MAY be important | May 30, 2013 |
As a sworn translator in Brazil, where the relevant law is ancient (70 years next Oct.) and quite rigid, I must draw the line very clearly. While I am an expert in translation, I am definitely not qualified to ascertain an original's authenticity. However as a language expert, I am the last chance to point out some clue that a document may be counterfeit.
For example, one colleague reported having received a driver's LICENCE (... See more As a sworn translator in Brazil, where the relevant law is ancient (70 years next Oct.) and quite rigid, I must draw the line very clearly. While I am an expert in translation, I am definitely not qualified to ascertain an original's authenticity. However as a language expert, I am the last chance to point out some clue that a document may be counterfeit.
For example, one colleague reported having received a driver's LICENCE (sic!) from the USA, from either Masachussets or Tenesee, both words being pre-printed, and not typed, on the form.
My take is that it is part of a translator's duty to red-flag such unlikely occurrences in the translation, so authorities will undertake due diligence to determine the original's authenticity.
I advise my prospects that I can issue a sworn translation of anything, even from a message scribbled with lipstick on a nightclub napkin, however it won't vouch for the original's authenticity. After all, I might be translating a forged document as evidence for a lawsuit where someone obtained some undue benefit from it.
Yet I wouldn't make a big fuss about such a typo on a sworn translation. After all, for decades I saw each and every elevator in Sao Paulo bearing a small cast metal plate engraved with "Fiscalisação Municipal" (= city inspection) and a number, while the correct spelling is "fiscalização". ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Страници в темата: [1 2] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Sworn translators: commissioner of oats | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
