From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Literal translation, direct translation or word-for-word translation, is a translation of a text done by translating each word separately, without looking at how the words are used together in a phrase or sentence.[1]
In translation theory, another term for «literal translation» is metaphrase (as opposed to paraphrase for an analogous translation).
Literal translation leads to mistranslation of idioms, which was once a serious problem for machine translation.[2]
The term as used in translation studies[edit]
Usage[edit]
The term «literal translation» often appeared in the titles of 19th-century English translations of classical, Bible and other texts.
Cribs[edit]
Word-for-word translations («cribs,» «ponies» or «trots») are sometimes prepared for a writer who is translating a work written in a language they do not know. For example, Robert Pinsky is reported to have used a literal translation in preparing his translation of Dante’s Inferno (1994), as he does not know Italian.[citation needed] Similarly, Richard Pevear worked from literal translations provided by his wife, Larissa Volokhonsky, in their translations of several Russian novels.[citation needed]
Poetry to prose[edit]
Literal translation can also denote a translation that represents the precise meaning of the original text but does not attempt to convey its style, beauty, or poetry. There is, however, a great deal of difference between a literal translation of a poetic work and a prose translation. A literal translation of poetry may be in prose rather than verse, but also be error free. Charles Singleton’s translation of the Divine Comedy (1975) is regarded as a prose translation.
As bad practice[edit]
«Literal» translation implies that it is probably full of errors, since the translator has made no effort to (or is unable to) convey correct idioms or shades of meaning, for example, but it can also be a useful way of seeing how words are used to convey meaning in the source language.
Examples[edit]
A literal English translation of the German phrase «Ich habe Hunger» would be «I have hunger» in English, but this is clearly not a phrase that would generally be used in English, even though its meaning might be clear. Literal translations in which individual components within words or compounds are translated to create new lexical items in the target language (a process also known as “loan translation”) are called calques, e.g., “beer garden” from German “biergarten.”
The literal translation of the Italian sentence, «So che questo non va bene» («I know that this is not good»), produces «Know(I) that this not goes(it) well,» which has English words and Italian grammar.
Machine translation[edit]
Early machine translations (as of 1962[2] at least) were notorious for this type of translation, as they simply employed a database of words and their translations. Later attempts utilized common phrases which resulted in better grammatical structure and capture of idioms, but with many words left in the original language. For translating synthetic languages, a morphosyntactic analyzer and synthesizer is required.
The best systems today use a combination of the above technologies and apply algorithms to correct the «natural» sound of the translation. In the end, though, professional translation firms that employ machine translation use it as a tool to create a rough translation that is then tweaked by a human, professional translator.
Douglas Hofstadter gave an example for the failures of a machine translation: The English sentence «In their house, everything comes in pairs. There’s his car and her car, his towels and her towels, and his library and hers.» is translated into French as «Dans leur maison, tout vient en paires. Il y a sa voiture et sa voiture, ses serviettes et ses serviettes, sa bibliothèque et les siennes.» That does not make sense, because the literal translation of both «his» and «hers» into French is «sa» in case of singular, and «ses» in case of plural, therefore the French version is not understandable.[3]
Pidgins[edit]
Often, first-generation immigrants create something of a literal translation in how they speak their parents’ native language. This results in a mix of the two languages in something of a pidgin. Many such mixes have specific names, e.g. Spanglish or Denglisch. For example, American children of German immigrants are heard using «rockingstool» from the German word «schaukelstuhl» instead of «rocking chair».
Translator’s humor[edit]
Literal translation of idioms is a source of translators’ jokes and apocrypha. The following has often been told in relation to inexperienced translators or to machine translations: When the sentence, «The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak» («дух бодр, плоть же немощна«, an allusion to Mark 14:38) was translated into Russian and then back into English, the result was «The vodka is good, but the meat is rotten» («водка хорошая, но мясо протухло«). This is generally believed to be an amusing apocrypha rather than a reference to an actual machine-translation error.[2]
See also[edit]
- All your base are belong to us
- Calque
- Dynamic and formal equivalence
- Literal Standard Version
- Metaphrase
- Semantic translation
- Translation
- Transliteration
- Young’s Literal Translation (of the Bible)
References[edit]
- ^ «LITERAL | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary». dictionary.cambridge.org. Retrieved 2019-09-21.
- ^ a b c Hutchins, John (June 1995). ««The whisky was invisible», or Persistent myths of MT» (PDF). MT News International (11): 17–18. Archived from the original on 3 January 2021. Retrieved 16 February 2022.
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link) - ^ Hofstadter, Douglas (30 January 2018). «The Shallowness of Google Translate». The Atlantic. Retrieved 16 February 2022.
Further reading[edit]
- Olive Classe, Encyclopedia of literary translation into English, vol. 1, Taylor & Francis, 2000, ISBN 1-884964-36-2, p. viii.
Advantages and disadvantages of Word for Word Translation
Word for word translation or literal translation is the rendering of text from one language to another one word at a time with or without conveying the sense of the original text. In translation studies, literal translation is often associated with scientific, technical, technological or legal texts.
A bad practice
It is often considered a bad practice of conveying word by word translation in non-technical texts. This usually refers to the mistranslation of idioms that affects the meaning of the text, making it unintelligible. The concept of literal translation may be viewed as an oxymoron (contradiction in terms), given that literal denotes something existing without interpretation, whereas a translation, by its very nature, is an interpretation (an interpretation of the meaning of words from one language into another).
Usage
A word for word translation can be used in some languages and not others dependent on the sentence structure: El equipo está trabajando para terminar el informe would translate into English as The team is working to finish the report. Sometimes it works and sometimes it does not. For example, the Spanish sentence above could not be translated into French or German using this technique because the French and German sentence structures are completely different. And because one sentence can be translated literally across languages does not mean that all sentences can be translated literally.
Literal translation can also denote a translation that represents the precise meaning of the original text but does not attempt to convey its style, beauty, or poetry. There is, however, a great deal of difference between a literal translation of a poetic work and a prose translation. A literal translation of poetry may be in prose rather than verse, but also be error free. Charles Singleton’s translation of The Divine Comedy (1975) is regarded as a prose translation.
Machine Translation
Early machine translations were famous for this type of translation because they simply created a database of words and their translations. Later attempts utilized common phrases which resulted in better grammatical structure and capture of idioms but with many words left in the original language.
The systems that we use nowadays are based on a combination of technologies and apply algorithms to correct the “natural” sound of the translation. However, professional translation agencies that use machine translation create a rough translation first that is then tweaked by a professional translator.
Mistakes and Jokes
Literal translation of idioms results quite often in jokes and amusement among translators and not only. The following famous example has often been told both in the context of newbie translators and that of machine translation: When the sentence “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak was translated into Russian and then back to English, the result was “The vodka is good, but the meat is rotten. This is generally believed to be simply an amusing story, and not a factual reference to an actual machine translation error.
Sign up and receive weekly tips to get started in translation
Sign up and receive free weekly tips
No spam, we promise.
Since an early age I have been passionate about languages. I hold a Master’s degree in Translation and Interpreting, and I have worked as a freelance translator for several years. I specialize in Marketing, Digital Marketing, Web and Social Media. I love blogging and I also run the blog www.italiasocialmedia.com
Word-for-word
translation is another method of rendering sense.
It presents a consecutive verbal translation though at the level of
word-groups and sentences. This way of translation is often employed
both consciously and subconsciously by students in the process
of translating alien grammatical constructions/word forms. Sometimes
students at the initial stage of learning a foreign language may
employ
this way of translation even when dealing with seemingly common
phrases or sentences, which are structurally different from their
equivalents in the native tongue. Usually the students employ
word-for-word
translation to convey the sense of word-groups or sentences which
have a structural form, the order of words, and the means of
connection
quite different from those in the target language. To achieve
faithfulness
various grammtical in translation, word-for-word variants are
to be corrected to avoid various grammatical violations made by the
inexperienced students. Cf. You
are right to begin with*BU маєте
рацію,
щоб
почати
з
instead of Почнемо
з
того/припустимо,
що
ви
маєте
рацію/що
ви
праві.
-
Interlinear translation.
The
interlinear1
way/method of translating is
a conventional
term for a strictly faithful rendering of sense expressed by
word-groups
and sentences at the level of some text. The
method
of interlinear translation may be practically applied to all speech
units(sentences, super syntactic units, passages). Interlinear
translation always provides a completely faithful conveying only of
content, which is often achieved through various transformations of
structure of many sense units.
Interlinear
translating is widely practiced at the intermediary and
advanced stages of studying a foreign language. It is helpful when
checking up the students’ understanding of certain structurally
peculiar
English sense units in the passage under translation.
The interlinear method of translating helps the student to obtain
the necessary training in rendering the main aspects of the foreign
language.
The
method
of interlinear translation is practically employed when rendering
some passages or works for internal office use in scientific/research
centers and laboratories and other organizations and by students in
their translation
practice
-
Literary translation.
Literary
translating represents the highest level of translator’s activity.
Literary translators in addition to dealing with the difficulties
inherent to translations
of all fields, must consider the aesthetic aspects of the text, its
beauty and style, as well as its marks (lexical, grammatical or
phonological) keeping in mind that one language’s stylistic marcs
can be different from another’s. the important idea is that the
quality of the translation
be the same in both languages while also maintaining the integrity of
the contents at the same time.
For
a translator, the fundamental issue is searching for equivalents that
produce the same effects in the translated text as those that the
author was seeking for readers of the original text.
Literary
artistic translation
presents a faithful transmission of content and of the artistic
merits only of a work.
Literary
translations are always performed in literary all-nation languages
and with many transformations which help achieve the ease and beauty
of
the original composition.
When
the SL and TL belong to different cultural groups the first problem
faced by the translator is finding terms in his own language that
express
the highest level of faithfulness possible to the meaning of certain
worlds.
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
First off, some data:
According to COCA word-for-word has 60 usages, 3 of them are «word-for-word translation». Word-by-word has 26 usages, none of them are «word-by-word translation» (but some with «transcription»).
The definition of word-for-word:
Oxford: In exactly the same or, when translated, exactly equivalent words
Merriam-Webster: being in or following the exact words, verbatim
The Free Dictionary: one word at a time, without regard for the sense of the whole
Only the last dictionary contains a definition for word-by-word, too:
The Free Dictionary: one word at a time
The definitions given by The Free Dictionary are, obviously, identical to each other.
Google hits:
Word-for-word ~21m
Word-for-word translation ~318k
Word-by-word ~3.8m
Word-by-word translation ~95k
According to usages and dictionaries word-by-word is, at least, less popular. And assuming that there may be a lot of usages from non-natives among the Google hits, this could be an indicator for word-by-word being even utterly wrong.
In another forum I found the following statement:
When I translate something «literally,» (wörtlich) it still follows the main rules of the language I’m translating into. What you mean is «word-by-word» (wortwörtlich) to me.
I assume that this was written by a German but I don’t know it. However, if this would be true a «word-by-word translation» would be a translation where I keep, for instance, the order of the words, disregarding if it makes sense in the target language.
Some examples:
Original: word-by-word
Word-by-word translation: Wort bei Wort (That’s a terrible translation!)Original: It is critical to know…
Word-by-word translation: Es ist kritisch zu wissen… (That’s a terrible translation!)Original: Ich glaub, ich spinne.
Word-by-word translation: I think I spider. (I guess only Germans understand this.)
A «word-for-word translation», however, would be an attempt to keep the word-choice as close as possible but following the rules of the target language (e.g. order of words) and also considering if the statement still makes sense in the other language. Here are better translations for the examples above:
Wort für Wort
Es ist wichtig zu wissen…
I think, I’m going nuts. (Actually, this is not a word-for-word translation but rather a sense-for-sense translation.)
So, my questions again:
- As neither Oxford nor Merriam-Webster have any entries for word-by-word in their dictionaries: is word-by-word actually valid?
- If yes, is there any difference between «word-by-word translation» and «word-for-word translation»? If yes again, what is it specifically?
From Teflpedia
A Word-for-word translation is a translation of language in one language to another language, one word at a time. The nature of this is that it retains the grammar of the first language but with the vocabulary of the second.
For example, consider the Chinese sentence 我 每天 和 朋友 在 餐厅 吃饭 (in Pinyin: Wǒ měitiān hé péngyǒu zài cāntīng chīfàn). The English translation of this is «I eat at the restaurant with my friends every day» (some minor variations are possible). However, the word-for-word English translation is *»I every day with friends at restaurant eat». As an English sentence, it is ungrammatical, but nevertheless comprehensible and this is broadly similar to Chinese learner English because Chinese learners’ interlanguage tends to be influenced by their L1 grammar due to L1 transfer.
Turning this around, we can start with the English sentence «I eat at the restaurant with my friends every day» and change this word-for-word into Chinese, producing *»我 吃饭 在 [the] 餐厅 每天 和 朋友» or *“Wǒ chīfàn zài [the] cāntīng měitiān hé péngyǒu». Note that the definite article has not been translated because Chinese lacks an equivalent. This is also ungrammatical but comprehensible to a Chinese speaker, but it may provide them some insight into the structure of English better than e.g. This sentence is «subject + verb + prepositional phrase adverbial (preposition + definite article + object of a preposition) + noun phrase adverbial (adjective + noun)».