Nothing substitutes the flesh and blood
translator and interpreter. The professional translator doesn’t use translation
machines to perform his work for him. He/she can, however, use the available
translation devices to understand a bit the languages he/she doesn’t know and
increase his/her knowledge about other peoples and cultures as well, in cases
he/she can’t count on foreign colleagues to help him/her. I believe technology
serves to help man, never to substitute him. It’s always man’s intelligence
that’s behind the machines.
The “Phraselator” technology mentioned
here, from the glorious “Star Trek”, is actually being used nowadays, especially
in the military area. Those who are smart enough to use it when it’s strictly
necessary, however, are also smart to know they’re carrying a kind of electronic
phrase dictionary, not a versatile human translator and interpreter.
A
translator uses a bilingual dictionary (and even consults reliable translation
sites) as a mere tool, the same way a writer uses his native language
dictionary to elucidate doubts. But there’s a big difference between the human
and the automated translation and their respective usages.
Only the human translation
transmits the precise sense of a text in a way that’s completely understandable
to the reader. The automated translation, in its turn, has a fantastic comprehensiveness
of languages and it’s a useful and valid tool to several kinds of professional
in many situations. When there can’t be an interpreter available, the automated
translation facilitates the communication between several peoples during trips
around the world and the cultural interchange. (I myself, for instance, here on
the blog, as I mention on the presentation, have included the Google translator
because _ though I never use it professionally as a translator, since
translations are too literal and usually don’t “fit” _ I think it’s a very
useful tool for any language reader to understand at least the contents of a
foreign text).
Basically, it would be
something more or less like this: “Just when the access to a “Personal Human
Translator” is not possible for some reason, take your “Phraselator” with you.
Translation is not a mechanic
act. It’s not the transcription of word for word of a text literally. It’s a
kind of craftsmanship, even an art. As an example, when we translate a word
from English to Portuguese, such as “water”, we have one meaning, but if we add
another word, such as in “water
clock”, “water closet”, “water mill”, “waterfall”, “waterfront”, the meaning changes, naturally, and the
translator has to know that in order not to translate those words separately
and getting wrong meanings. If you take a word in Portuguese such as “água”
(water), and add other words such as in “água-viva” (jelly-fish), “água
sanitária” (chlorine bleach), água-forte (etching) etc., you have other
meanings. In phrases, and, especially in paragraphs and longer texts, the
meaning one wants to give to words and to the general context becomes more
complex, and so it would be impossible to merely replace words. That is,
translation can’t be done word for word, literally. It’s a combination of ideas,
a composition elaborated with the knowledge of the origin and target languages
and of several cultural aspects, besides other factors.
The same way an artisan creates a piece
with all his/her care, the translator composes a translation by attaining the
feat of being faithful to the author and, at the same time, being faithful to
the reader.
My humble tribute to
the brilliant “Star Trek” which I was be able to
watch in Brazil (among
countless people), when I was a kid, thanks
to the talent and dedication of
several professionals,
including the translators.