Tag Archive for english

Did I just say that? Language mistakes

Girl with covered mouth

Making language mistakes is no excuse to not try.


Caution:
This post and its comments contain themes of an adult nature, although at the time not intentional. This is purely to illustrate how despite slips of the tongue and language barriers, you can still convey meaning in another language.

One of my proudest moments, despite feeling very ashamed of my parents behaviour at the time, was on holiday in Majorca. My parents wanted tea with milk, but the lady serving didn’t speak a word of English. She grasped that they wanted tea but didn’t understand ‘with milk’. So (red face memory), they started mooing like a cow and role-playing the milking of udders.

To end the horrendous experience I shouted out “té con leche”, which immediately remedied the situation and stopped the poor lady calling the police.

My point in this case is that a bit of ’swotting up’ on basic terms in the local language before visiting the country can go a long way. Surely getting a bit of pronunciation wrong would be far less embarrassing than this little anecdote?

There are plenty of examples of language mistakes, and even though I have fallen victim to odd mistake, I never fail to chuckle when I read about them. My personal favourite was when I was at school; a friend had a German exchange student staying at her house. We were all innocently laughing at something she had done when she told us all to “stop pissing on her!” This only added to the hilarity but we all knew that she was trying to say ‘stop taking the mickey’.

I’m pretty sure this term only exists in English and has no German translation equivalent, so for her to even attempt it was pretty brave. And one thing is for certain, her English is far better than my German, so who am I to point the finger?

There are also other examples of English phrases which don’t carry the same meaning when translated into another language; the best example I heard recently was Justin Timberlake’s film “Friends with benefits.” When the previews hit France the film’s title did not mean anything to the French public, so it was marketed as “Sexe entre amis”, literally meaning “sex friends”, not exactly subtle.

I’m sure these instances occur in every language on a regular basis. I know when I attempt to speak abroad I’m always getting my gender references mixed up. In fact I’m willing to hold my hands up and say half the time I don’t even know so I guess – there’s a 50% chance either way right? Or I say it in such a way so that it’s not completely clear what I’ve said but emphasized what I deem to be the key indicators. Not ideal, but it conveys meaning.

I’m hoping I’m not the only person who is willing to share my experiences, personal or otherwise. If you’ve got a cringe worthy story you’re dying to get off your chest please feel free to console me by leaving a little piece of you in the comments box below. I look forward to reading them :)

Language fit for a royal wedding…but not for everyday use.

"One must speak properly".

 

With just two days to go until the wedding of Prince William and his bride-to-be, Kate Middleton, it seems like the ideal time to once again consider the use of The Queen’s English in today’s society.

I have a vested interest in this topic as my mother grew up in Inverness where, according to linguistic experts, the best Queen’s English is spoken.  I had my speech corrected from an early age and, to be honest, I still have it corrected today.  However I am pleased that this is the case as it has definitely been an advantage to me in my chosen career of communication – although my colleagues can vouch for the fact that I can by no means claim to be a grammar or pronunciation Queen!

Award winning films, such as The Queen and The King’s Speech, which have been viewed around the world by millions, have allowed this old fashioned way of speaking to be shared on a global scale but does it make sense to protect this form of the English language, which is now considered by many to be dated, indefinitely?

English has changed significantly over the years.  The term, “The Queen’s English”, dates back to the 16th century and I’m not sure that anyone from the Elizabethan age would understand what some recent entrants to the Oxford English Dictionary, such as OMG, actually mean!

The Queen’s English Society certainly has a strong view, with its president publishing a very interesting article in The Independent newspaper highlighting concerns around the dumbing down of the English language.

So, should we be encouraging native English-speakers to adopt the traditional and regal way of speaking or does it confuse people trying to learn English as a second language?  Similarly, does it complicate things for the translation community. English translation of a company’s literature, brochures and websites might read strangely to English speakers if adhering to the rules of the Queen’s English and most businesses hope to convey their brand and messages using a conversational style and tone that has become commonplace in today’s marketing collateral.  At the same time, however, would you dismiss a job applicant’s CV if it was written in an informal style and do you still expect job seekers to submit a CV written in the Queen’s English? It seems to me that there is a time and a place for the most traditional use of the English language and I am sure that the royal wedding attendees will be putting their Queen’s English into practice this weekend.

One final point for those champions of the English language.  All languages evolve over time and let us not forget that English in fact a West Germanic language that originates from Anglo-Frisian dialects!

Does text speak spell the end of the English language?

Text Abbreviations

R u down wiv txt speak?

It’s a subject I have touched upon in previous posts, but since reading an article specifically aimed at how text speak has the potential to threaten the English language as we know it, I thought this topic needed a little more exploration.

There are many scenarios in which text speak can cause embarrassment and numerous websites aimed at highlighting such misfortune. One example that came into my inbox recently was a lady mistaking LOL to mean ‘lots of love’ when most people read this as ‘laugh out loud’; probably not appropriate when announcing the death of a relative, but let us not forget why text speak exists and why it is increasingly popular amongst the younger generations.

Back in the day text messages were limited to 160 characters (with Twitter being a more modern day example, limited to a mere 140) and, unless lucky enough to have parents that would subsidise a contract phone, under 18s were bound to the restrictions of pay as you go phones, which don’t always offer the same ‘unlimited text’ allowances. Therefore cramming every last morsel of information in to just 160 characters is only going to be achieved by the severest of abbreviations, some of which are open to interpretation (such as LOL) and others could warrant a translation service.  As we absorb more information as an adolescent this could explain why, as we grow older, such habits die hard.

Linguistic experts fear that these habits can harm our academic development but according to research carried out by Manchester Metropolitan and Lancaster Universities, texting and Twitter are not the first time we have got our knickers in a twist about preserving the English language. The Edwardians’ worried that the informal tones of postcards would change the way people communicated, which undoubtedly they did but formal communication still exists today and there is nothing to suggest that it will not continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

D’oh! Simpsons greatest contribution to English language

“You may know it from other popular Simpsons’ catchphrases, such as ‘eat my shorts’ and ‘craptacular’”.

I_believe_in_D__oh_by_mistermoster

Homer Simpson: Influential

Well, that would probably be how Troy McClure would introduce it, but you might know it from mocking yourself (or someone else) after a moment of absent-mindedness.

No wonder then, that Homer Simpson’s “D’oh!” has been confirmed as TV-hit, The Simpson’s greatest contribution to the English langauge.

The origins of the word go back as far as 1945, however in the show, Homer was initially scripted to utter an “annoyed grunt”.

A recent study of 300 professional linguists concluded that D’oh!, having worked its way into the Oxford English Dictionary in 1998, was the show’s stand-out contribution to the English language, along with other commonly-used phrases from the show with 37% of votes, along with:

  • Introubulate – 13%
  • Craptacular – 11%
  • Eat my shorts – 10%
  • Knowitallism – 9%
  • Embiggen – 7%
  • Meh – 6%
  • Learning juice – 4%
  • Cheese-eating surrender monkeys – 3%
  • Kwyjibo – 1%

It was also claimed that Homer must be “the most influential wordsmith since Shakespeare”, to which he would (probably) have replied “Meh!”

Other “non-words” from TV that have infiltrated the English language include “go commando”, made famous by Friends (I’d Google the meaning!), “bouncebackability” from Hull City manager, Ian Dowie (though this is, amazingly, disputed) and the now annoying “simples” from a popular car insurance comparison website.

Do you know of any others?

Night at the Museum – Quite the Discovery!

by Shane Grevin

Noche_en_el_museo

I’m at the foot of the Golden Gate Bridge, in a picturesque field surrounded by a group of forty kindergarteners.  The business world of multiple languages is the furthest thing from my mind, for about two minutes that is… until my girl finishes her snack and we head to the basura to drop our non-recyclables.  I stop in my tracks.  Basura?  Even before my daughter and I enter the Discovery Museum, I have learned something.  This is an English/Spanish bilingual Touch, Play, Learn & Say museum.

At first I think it is neat…  The teléfono is next to the baño and exposición de peces, etc.  Later, as my six year old studies a mariposa, I get to thinking harder about it – is the Museum catering to enough languages or too many?  What made them think, “We need to label everything in Spanish and English,” and not, say, Simplified Chinese or Japanese?  I mean, we are 15 minutes away from Chinatown and at least that far from any primarily Spanish-speaking areas of San Francisco or Marin Counties.

Of course, a day later a client asks me, “How should I set my team up for success to localize our application and support documentation for the first time?  What should I translate? What can I get away without translating? Who might buy an English-only version?” Typically, I have an easy answer – and it starts with questions – Who do you want to reach?  What market do you want to penetrate? How will you measure success? What is your budget? I advise… know your reason for doing it and how/what to do it will come easily.

And that brings me full circle: I wonder if the Discovery Museum went through these or a similar set of questions?  I can tell you the only ones speaking Spanish this day were my pack of kids, clearly not the intended audience as English is their first language and they just happen to take Spanish classes because Dad is pushing them toward being bilingual.

Come to think of it, by the time they are grown will bilingual be enough?

How do you or company go about making decisions about what & how much to translate?

Please leave a comment and let us know!

Are we ready for a unified global language? Introducing the case for “Globalese”

Following on from my recent blog about the effects of “Slanglish” on translation, I was wondering if the global community is ready to consider a common language.

We seem to have discovered the whole planet, we have a global economy and travel is much more extensive.

Elvish - NOT Elvis - was created by JRR Tolkien

Elvish (NOT Elvis) was a JRR Tolkien creation for LOTR

In the recent Avatar film we have also seen the creation of a new language.  JRR Tolkien also outlined “Elvish” for the use in his Lord of the Rings trilogy and Hobbit creations.

So we could have a couple of options.  Firstly do we create one from scratch along similar lines to Esparanto  or secondly do we adopt an already existing language and create a new standard?

As a Director of a language solutions company it is a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas but, think how much easier it would be in our 21st century if we were all able to communicate in the same language.

I reckon with the proper plans in place and the correct emphasis placed on this matter by governments within a couple of generations we could possibly see a very high percentage uptake.

Think how much money companies would save in the long run.  In the US alone the translation business is estimated to be approximately $10billion per annum and growing.

We have already seen the adoption of regional wide currencies, global standards on measurements (well not discounting us Brits and the US).  Of course being British and fact that majority of people take English as a second language I would propose adopting that as the standard or I would be absolutely be delighted to go to my grave leaving a legacy of harmonising the world’s language into a new one created.

The word “Globalese” (or Globese) has just sprung to mind.  I might be onto something here.

Don’t Shoot the Translator!

 

Just the translatorWhy translation can only be as good as your original content. (Which in some cases is pretty bad.)

By Greg Rosner

“Garbage in, garbage out,” they say. And it certainly holds true for translations. I’ve seen some pretty flowery marketing text recently that customers have asked us to translate – and of course we do our best. But unfortunately, our best may not be good enough for their audience. Some call it the “Obscurity Trap.”

Many talented marketing professionals tasked with writing English text about what their company does, for websites, product literature, manuals, press releases and such, have been seduced by a false-god of good writing. These writers believe that in order to have text that sounds great, they have to write content that sounds just like marketing material we’ve all read before, and have been put to sleep by. You know the kind; writing that tries to sound intelligent, never mind that it doesn’t really mean anything to anyone. Take this quote from Enron Corporation’s 2001 Annual Report, for example:

“Enron’s success in 2000 was a success by any measure, as we continued to out-distance the competition, and solidify our leadership in every major business. We have robust networks of strategic assets that we own, or have contractual access to, which gives us greater flexibility and speed to reliably deliver widespread logistical solutions…We have metamorphasized from asset-based pipeline and power generating company to a marketing and logistics company whose biggest assets are its well-established business approach and its innovative people.”

What?

The fact that this company was subsequently found out to be a fraud is not as shocking to me as the fact that this type of vague writing is still an epidemic even today, spreading throughout every industry, from Energy to Manufacturing to Life Sciences to Financial Services.

Lingo, wordiness and evasiveness are rampant in today’s business-speak and together, create “The Obscurity Trap,” as Brian Fugure, Chelsea Hardaway, & Jon Warshowsky, call it in their book Why business people speak like idiots. In this refreshing take on business communications, the authors illustrate several reasons why even good writers fall into this bad trap. How they get a false sense of security by writing something that sounds intelligent, sounds like it has been written before, sounds like something no one has ever complained about, but is complete bull$&#@. How can they believe that they will never get fired for writing something that sounds so completely benign and incomprehensible?

When it comes to language translation, where the art is to interpret the message and translate that message as accurately as possible in another language, this type of writing will only get more obfuscated. Or worse; the obscurity trap will propagate in every market that you are spending tons of money on trying to do business with, and hamper your ability to communicate your value to your audience there.

Article snapshotWhat does this say?

Have a read of this excerpt of a press release published by IBM. It’s so full of jargon and vague language that even someone at IBM will not have a clue what this message is all about. This press release is full of words that have no value: “flocking”, “resources”, “capture”, “ecosystem”, “solutions” – words that have a ring of metaphor about them, but really say nothing about IBM’s partner program. Now, if you were to translate this, do you think the translation stands a chance at being a great piece of writing?

There are many reasons why English content authors for major companies fall into this obscurity trap. In this case, as it is often with many so called “press releases” that the goal was to impress rather than inform the reader.

So my advice to our clients is this:

Write clear, simple, concise text, so that when it comes to translation, you stand the best chance of being understood by your in-market audience.

‘Slanglish’ – What does slang mean for English and translation?

The Oxford English Dictionary is seen as the benchmark for the English language, but in recent years it has seen the introduction of a number of terms and words that previously would be described as slang.

Therefore are we seeing the introduction of “slanglish”. What impact does this have on the future of translation and the localisation of English text?

A number of these new phrases and words have come from television commercials (Meerkats), reality shows (X Factor, Britain’s Got Talent, etc), which have no meaning in other regions or countries. However, these new found words are becoming used in common day to day language within the UK and are relied upon by the many  that are using them.

Am I Bovvered? TV is fastly affecting how slang is incorporated into everyday use.

"Am I Bovvered?!" TV is fastly affecting how slang is incorporated into everyday use.

Therefore, before we start using source text for localisation, do companies need have content checked for “slanglish” terms and put into “normal” English?  If not, it could be compounded as some of these slanglish words actually have other meanings.

I could imagine that when trying to localise some of the following terms:

Simples; Subo; Mini-me; Threequel; and Bouncebackability (which is common parlance in football punditry nowadays); I am sure non-English equivalents are occurring, which must have a similar impact when translating into English.

In the industry we can see a possible large number of terms in glossaries or a move to business standard language.

Well, it’s either that or we turn to “slanglation”… (b-dum-tshh).

What do you think – do you think slang poses a threat to the future of translation?

Dog understands only Polish commands…

Ten out of ten for the good people at the RSPCA Oldham for getting some much deserved publicity, particularly at this time of year, about dogs needing homes, by informing the media that one of their four legged residents can only understand Polish commands.

Polilsh Scenthounds... probably don't understand English

Polilsh Scenthounds... probably don't understand English either.

Being based in the North West of England this is probably not as unusual as we might all think, with Polish now being one of the most common languages that we receive interpreter requests for in the region – in fact it is in the top three along with Urdu and Arabic.

The most unusual language we book interpreters for, out of our 4000 interpreter requests per month, is Malay.

Who knows, there may just be a dog out there that only understands “Duduk” and “Tunggu” rather than sit and stay…

Ist Sprache mehr als Worte?

Ist Sprache mehr als Worte?

Greg Rosner

Greg Rosner

 

 

 

 

 

Wie liest sich das?

Dienstag, 5. Januar 2010, 18:15 Uhr. Ich schreibe diesen Blogeintrag in Deutsch, aber Sie lesen ihn in Englisch. Nun ja, hoffentlich größtenteils in Englisch. Versuchsweise habe ich meinen deutschen Blogeintrag von Googles Übersetzungstool in Englisch übersetzen lassen, um zu sehen, wie gut dieses ist. Das Tolle ist, dass der Text im Bruchteil einer Sekunde übersetzt wurde. Aber auch wenn Geschwindigkeit ein großer Vorteil ist – kann die Qualität mithalten? Also was denken Sie? Liest es sich gut? Ist es flüssig geschrieben? Sind Sie mit der Qualität der Übersetzung zufrieden? Können Sie etwas im Stil des Textes erkennen, das ungewöhnlich oder seltsam klingt? Es ist sicher nicht die Orthografie, dafür sorgt die Software. Aber es könnten Grammatikfehler, falsche Ausdrücke, der falsche Ton oder Stil sein. Es könnten Wörter sein, die Sie nicht im Kontext eines Blogeintrags über die Qualität von automatisierten Übersetzungen gegenüber von Menschen ausgeführten Übersetzungen verwenden würden. Sie können sich selbst ein Urteil bilden.

Ist Sprache mehr als Worte?

Obwohl maschinelle Übersetzung immer besser wird, hat sie laut neuesten Erkenntnissen aus der Branche noch längst nicht den Sprung vom Schreibniveau eines Drittklässlers auf das eines Gymnasiasten geschafft. Der Grund hierfür ist einfach: Worte sind im Wesentlichen Metaphern für Ideen. Wenn die Idee hinter den Worten von den Menschen, die sie sprechen (oder von den Maschinen, die sie übersetzen), nicht verstanden wird, ergibt auch die Aneinanderreihung der einzelnen Wörter wenig Sinn. Sie werden zwar gehört, aber nicht verstanden. Nehmen Sie Handbewegungen als ein weiteres Beispiel dafür, dass Sprache weit über Worte hinausgeht. Viele Menschen unterstreichen ihre Worte beim Sprechen mit Gesten und bewegen ihre Hände im Raum, als ob sie imaginäre Gegenstände verstellen oder Bilder malen. Bei all diesen bildhaften Handbewegungen handelt es sich in Wirklichkeit um Metaphern, die sowohl dem Sprecher als auch dem Zuhörer dabei helfen sollen, die Bedeutung der Wörter zu erfassen. Beim Übersetzen eines Textes aus einer Sprache in eine andere geschieht im Grunde das Gleiche, nur mit anderen Worten. Damit man dieselbe Aussage in einer anderen Sprache wiedergeben kann, muss man wirklich verstehen, was gesagt wird, und dies anschließend in einen neuen kulturellen Kontext übertragen. Deshalb ist es wichtig, mit Übersetzern zu arbeiten, die sowohl Muttersprachler in der Zielsprache sind, als auch Experten auf dem jeweiligen Fachgebiet.

Ein weiteres Beispiel, dass Sprache mehr als Worte ist, erlebte ich kürzlich, als ich eingeladen war, am Unterricht meines Sohnes teilzunehmen und seinen Vortrag über die Lebensgeschichte von Blackbeard, dem berüchtigten Piraten, anzuhören. Zuerst las er eine Weile aus seinen Notizen vor, und alle waren still und hörten zu. Doch als er die Seite umblätterte, um weiterzulesen, bemerkte er, dass ihm die zweite Seite fehlte, und er erstarrte. Er blickte auf und sagte den anderen, dass ihm eine Seite fehle – und dann fing er einfach an, den anderen von Blackbeards Leben zu erzählen. Blackbeard starb erst nach 5 (fünf!) Schusswunden und 20 Schwerthieben. Es war ein Unterschied wie Tag und Nacht – ihn erst seine Aufzeichnungen laut vorlesen zu hören und dann zu erleben, wie er einfach nur erzählte, was er über den unglückseligen Piraten wusste. Es war so viel einfacher für das Publikum, seinen improvisierten Ausführungen zu folgen, als ihm beim lauten Vorlesen seines Vortrags zuzuhören. Dieses Erlebnis war eine wichtige Lektion für mich im Hinblick darauf, dass Sprache so viel mehr als Worte ist. Worauf es ankommt, ist das Verstehen.

Ist es gut genug?

Übertragen auf das Übersetzen bedeutet das, wenn der Übersetzer, bzw. in diesem Fall GoogleTranslate, nicht genau versteht, was ich in diesem Blog-Beitrag sagen will, werden auch die Ideen nicht vermittelt. Trotzdem werden möglicherweise die Kernaussagen herübergebracht. Ich hoffe, dass es Ihnen gelungen ist, trotz einer schlechten Übersetzung das Wesentliche herauszulesen. Unter Umständen ist das “gut genug” für bestimmte interne Mitteilungen innerhalb eines weltweiten Unternehmens, für Artikel, E-Mails und zur reinen Information, aber es ist mit Sicherheit nicht gut genug für Ihre Kunden in anderen Ländern – Kunden, die täglich darüber entscheiden, ob sie bei Ihnen kaufen oder lieber bei einer Firma, die ihre Sprache spricht.

Greg Rosner

- – -
Pictured here below is GoogleTranslate, the tool used to translate my German Blog entry into English.

Google TranslateBy the way, I speak a little German having spent summers in Austria with my Granparents as a kid. So to make sure my German blog entry was impeccable, I had a friend help me write this German post.

Here below is my German blog entry that was translated into English by GoogleTranslate. The title, Ist Sprache mehr als Worte? should translate into “Is Language More Than Words?”, but doesn’t here, as an example.

Language is more than words?

How to read this?
Tuesday 5 January 2010, 18:15 Clock. I am writing this blog entry in German, but read it in English. Well, hopefully mostly in English. Tentatively, I have to translate my German blog entry by Google’s translation tool in English, to see how good this is. The great thing is that the text was translated in a split second. But even if speed is a big advantage – can match the quality? So what do you think? Good reading it? Is it written in liquid? Are you satisfied with the quality of translation? Can you recognize the style of the text, that sounds unusual or strange? It is certainly not the spelling, ensuring the software. But it could be grammar mistakes, his false expressions, the wrong tone or style. It might be words that you would not use in the context of a blog entry about the quality of automated translations from translations performed by people. They can form their own opinion.

Language is more than words?
Although machine translation is getting better, she has not already done, according to latest findings from the industry made the leap from writing level of a third-grader to that of a schoolboy. The reason is simple: words are essentially metaphors for ideas. If the idea behind the words of the people who speak them (or from the machines that are going to translate them) do not understand is the juxtaposition of different word makes little sense. While they are heard but not understood. Make hand movements as another example of that language goes far beyond words. Many people emphasize their words when speaking, using gestures and move their hands in space, as if they pretend imaginary objects or draw pictures. With all these vivid gestures are in fact metaphors for both the speaker and the listener will help you grasp the meaning of words. When translating a text from one language to another is done basically the same, only with different words. So you can play the same message in another language, you have to really understand what is being said and this is then transferred into a new cultural context. Therefore it is important to work with translators, both native speakers in the target language, as well as experts in the respective field of expertise.

Another example, that language is more than words, I recently experienced when I was invited to participate in teaching my son and listen to his lecture on the life story of Blackbeard, the notorious pirate. First he read from his notes for a while, and all were quiet and listened. But when he turned the page to read more, he noticed that he was missing the second page, and he froze. He looked up and told the others that he lacked one page – and then he just started telling the other of Blackbeard’s life. Blackbeard died after only 5 (five!) Gunshot wounds and 20 slashes. It was as different as day and night – only to hear him read his notes aloud and then see how he simply told them what he knew about the unfortunate pirates. It was so much easier for the audience to follow his impromptu speeches, than listen to him while reading aloud of his presentation. This experience was an important lesson for me in view of the fact that language is so much more than words. What matters is understanding.

Is it good enough?
Transferred to the translation means, if the translator, or in this case googleTranslate, do not understand exactly what I want to say in this blog post are also the ideas are not taught.Nevertheless, the core may be brought over statements. I hope that you managed to pick out, despite a poor translation of the essentials. Under the circumstances, is “good enough” for certain internal communications within a global company, for articles, e-mail and to pure information, but can not decide for sure good enough for your customers in other countries – customers a day on or whether they buy from you rather be with a company that speaks their language.