Interpretations and Translations Questions and Answers

Question:
I am currently applying for Canadian permanent residency and, as part of this process I need to translate my Malaysian birth certificate from Malay into English. I also require a "sworn affidavit from the translator, that the contents of the translation are a true translation and representation of the contents of the original document". Does your translation service provide this sworn affidavit, and also a certified true copy or notarization of the translation set? I was also wondering how much would all this cost, and how long would it take? Could I just send you a scanned copy of my birth certificate?

Answer:
We do provide translation services from Malay into English. If you could Please send your documents by email or fax, and we will provide you with an estimate. Please note that we only attach a "translator's declaration" to our translations, which is sufficient for your purposes as we are a very well known translation agency in British Columbia. We do not provide "certified true copies". Only Public Notaries and Lawyers offer this type of service in BC. 

Question:
Are graphic representations essential to the technical translation of advertisements and other materials for print?

Answer:
Translations of technical content are challenging if graphic representation of the product is not available. Usually, there are very little resources to draw from when researching specific terminology on the Internet. Previously translated text relevant to the current work helps to keep vocabulary consistent throughout the documentation of the product.  

Question:
Would back-translation verify the fidelity of the translated text to the source as far as the accuracy, tone and register of the translation is concerned?
 
Answer:
The process of back-translation has its inherent limitations, and its success very much depends on what one wants to accomplish. If it is just checking for accuracy, possible omissions, etc., then the process is unnecessarily cumbersome. To ensure more reliable results, one would have to involve not only a translator for the back translation but also a proofreader to ensure quality. But, if one’s goals were to check for accuracy, omissions, etc., the chances are, one would get an answer. The question, however, remains – at what price? Wouldn’t it be possible to accomplish the same with much less effort and expense by simply vetting the existing translation? Back-translation is twice as expensive as proofreading.

 
If the goal of the back-translation is to establish that the target text was faithfully rendered as far as tone, register and cultural sensitivity are concerned, then the problems are even more intricate. It is an old truism that anything could be translated in many different ways and yet remain faithful to the translator’s understanding of the original text. When using the back-translation verification method one would have to assume that the translator performing this task would be making the same decisions, as did the original writer of the source text. Many decisions translators make are, whether we like it or not, arbitrary (Willard Van Orman Quine, 1960 Word and Object, MIT Press, Chpt. 2 sets out the indeterminacy of translation thesis), and these decisions become even more arbitrary when it comes to issues such as tone, register, etc. Consequently, any result of a back-translation endeavour would have to go through an “editing” process, during which an editor would have to be able to ascertain that while the back-translation expressed things differently than the original text, the spirit (and that includes the register, style, etc.) of the original text has been preserved. Needless to say, this is yet another, rather elaborate procedure that would consume enormous effort, not to mention cost.
 
The approach that we favour is a proofreader working closely with the original translator and bilingual experts in the field (psychologists, psychiatrists, etc.) to ensure fidelity of the translated text to the source as far as the accuracy, tone and register of the translation are concerned.

Why do we need two different versions for Cantonese and Mandarin speakers?
 
Answer:
One can suggest two possible reasons why some readers may find a generic translation into Chinese a little hard to understand by different audiences.
 
Although Chinese speakers could read each other's script to a certain extent, the terms used by those from China may sometimes convey a different meaning to those from Taiwan and Hong Kong. For example, a term used in China for "computer" actually means "calculator" in Hong Kong. A translator, if originally from Hong Kong, will usually be choosing the diction that reflects his or her cultural background. Somebody from Mainland China will choose different words for the same document and, if the readers are mostly from the Mainland, it would be easier for them to understand the content. A specific example is the rendition of "medical facility," where the words do translate directly into Chinese (that term is well known in Hong Kong), but the preference in China, obviously more common, is "institution/organization." Both terms are correct, but a translator from Hong Kong will not pick the latter because of its connotation as something larger in scale and organizational than just a "facility" (not to mention that, quite often, "institution" refers to corporate organizations in Hong Kong). The process of trying to find neutral terms satisfactory to a wider audience is ongoing, but not always possible.

Caitlin Walsh’s Top Ten Misconceptions about Translation and Translators