diptrans examiners' reports for small entry languages 2011

1

2011 DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION

SMALL ENTRY LANGUAGES

EXAMINERS’ REPORTS

Contents

Language Combination Page No.

Arabic into English ……………………………… 2 -5

Chinese into English ……………………………… 6 -10

Croatian into English ……………………………… 11 -13

Dutch into English ……………………………… 14 - 17

English into Albanian ……………………………… 18 - 24

English into Arabic ……………………………… 25 - 29

English into Bulgarian ……………………………… 30 - 37

English into Croatian ……………………………… 38 - 39

English into Czech ……………………………… 40 - 47

English into Danish ……………………………… 48 - 53

English into Dutch ……………………………… 54 - 57

English into Farsi ……………………………… 58 - 60

English into Hungarian ……………………………… 61 - 68

English into Japanese ……………………………… 69 - 71

English into Kurdish (Sorani) ……………………………… 72 - 74

English into Lithuanian ……………………………… 75 - 81

English into Panjabi ……………………………… 82 - 84

English into Romanian ……………………………… 85 - 91

English into Serbian ……………………………… 92 - 94

English into Slovak ……………………………… 95 - 104

English into Thai ……………………………… 105 - 106

English into Turkish ……………………………… 107 - 113

English into Urdu ……………………………… 114 - 118

Finnish into English ……………………………… 119 - 122

French into German ……………………………… 123 - 129

French into Spanish ……………………………… 130 - 131

Greek into English ……………………………… 132 - 139

Hungarian into English ……………………………… 140

Japanese into English ……………………………… 141

Polish into English ……………………………… 142 - 149

Portuguese into English ……………………………… 150 - 154

Russian into English ……………………………… 155 - 164

Spanish into French ……………………………… 165 - 167

Spanish into German ……………………………… 168 – 175

2

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ARABIC INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Results show a good performance. The main problem encountered was some unfamiliarity on the part of candidates with the precise names of Sudanese political entities and geographical regions. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Comprehension and accuracy were generally very good. In at least one case, the grasp of register was excellent. The names of Sudanese political entities and geographical regions posed a challenge. Note, for example, that Bahr el-Ghazal is not a lake or a sea but a land region, or that the ruling party in the country is the National Congress (not Conference) Party. Arabic needs to be closely read. For example, zaʻm (claim, allegation) is not the same as raghm (despite), although they might look very similar. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates generally demonstrated a sound grasp of English tenses. Errors included, using the past perfect instead of the simple past, leading to some confusion in the time-frame involved. The use of connectors, although generally good, could be improved by some candidates. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The use of capital letters was often not correct. For example, it is always: the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Otherwise, candidates displayed a sound grasp of technical points. Legibility was a problem in some cases. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Translations were excellent. Appropriate register as well as familiarity with the terminology of the subject matter (mobile telephones) and a very high level of accuracy were shown. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Excellent comprehension of the text was demonstrated. Several modern terms such as “multimedia” or “touch-operated screen” amongst others which cannot be found in dictionaries were well handled. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Translations were fluent, coherent and cohesive. In a few cases, the word “also” was somewhat overused.

3

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The use of capitals in English might be reviewed. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The text was about the ability of the Saudi Economy to withstand the shock of the global economic downturn. The overall performance of some of the candidates was good and most of the economic terms were translated into good equivalents in English. In these cases the translation was of a professional standard. Pass cases contained inaccurate translations of some economic terms. Papers missing 5% of the translation were an automatic fail in spite of a good performance in the rest of the text. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Much of the text was well translated by the majority of the candidates. A good example was the expression translated as hedge-funds which demonstrated good knowledge of the subject matter. There were no real examples of serious mistranslation which would have led to major confusion. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Overall grammar was handled well. Some of the translations were typed and legibility did not pose a problem in the handwritten ones. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) This Aspect was generally well handled. There were very few names which needed transcribing. The name which came up was correctly transcribed as Alfred Winslow Jones. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The main problem candidates seem to have faced was unfamiliarity with the (semi-) technical terminology contained in the text. Despite challenges related to terminology (and associated spelling), candidates performed well and turned in good translations. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) In a few instances, an overly informal style weakened the rendering of a paragraph into an appropriately scientific register (“…..that’s why it’s better to”). Good paraphrasing attempts were made to compensate for unknown terms such as streptococcus. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were some instances of subject/verb disagreement.

4

One of the translations suffered from minor omissions, which would confuse the reader. The use of prepositions could be improved, for example: research into instead of “research about”; in a solution instead of “on a solution”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling of semi-technical terms posed challenges. In a few cases, where the script was handwritten, there were problems of legibility. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The text was about the Egyptian film The Night of the Fall of Baghdad. The overall performance of the candidates was excellent and many quite sophisticated expressions in the Arabic were rendered into good idiomatic English. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Particularly impressive was some candidates’ ability to find a good English version of the Arabic expression rendering it as venting spleen, in one case, and apportioning blame in another. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) This aspect was handled well. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) This was generally well done although this text did contain titles of Arabic films such as

. It is conventional that titles of Arabic films are translated into English and not transliterated as, for example, Ma’laysh iHna binbahdil. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance The translation was sound and marred only slightly by a few mistranslations (see below). A sound grasp of the register and terminology required of a text dealing with legal matters (although not itself a legal text) was demonstrated. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidates’ comprehension and level of accuracy were good, marred only slightly by a few rather awkward mistranslations, such as “freedom to socialize” instead of, for example, freedom of assembly; Arabic ikrāh means force or compel, but not “dislike”, which is “karh”). Also competent judicial authorities is better than “authorized judicial authorities”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There was some minor incoherence, due largely to misuse of prepositions such as “international agreements for human rights” or “for deciding on its conformity with the Constitution”. Also “…..hardline Islamic forces with their two Sunni and Shiite halves” would be better rendered as, for example, hardline Islamic forces, both Sunni and Shiʻ ite.

5

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The use of punctuation, especially commas, left something to be desired. There was an occasional failure to capitalise properly, e.g. “council of deputies”. Legibiity was not a problem. Recommendations to candidates

Develop familiarity with key political and other developments in the Arab countries and knowledge of principal actors.

Candidates need to be sure that they are aware of the exact English equivalents any terminology used for each specific topic. Candidates must read carefully in their own field in both target and source languages.

Study the use of capital letters in English.

Familiarise yourself with the use of logical connectors in English.

Pay greater attention to the register/style of technical and scientific English, even in semi-specialised texts.

Pay particular attention to the use of English prepositions especially in Law texts.

Pay attention to the precise words in the text, rather than cognates thereof.

Remember that Arabic names of films are normally translated into English. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010)

-*- * Although great care has been taken in the compilation and production of this report, the IoLET cannot, in any circumstances, accept responsibility for errors, omissions or advice

6

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE CHINESE INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates must be able to fully understand the source text (ST) and pair this understanding with a comprehensive knowledge of target language vocabulary and grammar. For the majority of candidates in this exam, it was understanding the ST which was the most problematic. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Many candidates translating this ST encountered problems with rendering the long, multi-clause sentence beginning in line 23. Few candidates managed to successfully incorporate all clauses into their own translation, with many areas being marked as omissions. For some this appeared to

be due to lack of comprehension, such as translating 历史典故 as “historical literature” instead of

allusions to historical events, whilst for others it was a problem of translation into appropriate target

language vocabulary, such as 古今中外，天南海北 being translated as “different places” rather

than past and present, in China and around the world. Translation into idiomatic English also appeared to be problematic for many, particularly in line 26

where the ST uses the construction 不能为幽默而幽默. The correct structure in English is one

cannot/should not be humorous for the sake of it. Candidate translations such as “don’t use humour in order to be humour”, “humour cannot be made humorous” etc. conveyed the ST meaning incorrectly due to a lack of familiarity with idiomatic English. The list of types of humour at line 19 was a further sticking point. Few candidates were able to translate all 7 styles listed by the author. Some candidates chose to omit styles from the list. This is not a solution. Candidates also showed a lack of sufficient vocabulary in their target language, evidenced by poor

or inappropriate selection of terminology in many places. 心宽气朗 (line 13) was frequently

translated as “clear and broadminded” rather than the correct carefree, 乐观 (line 8) was written

as “happy” rather than the more accurate optimistic, and the majority of candidates failed to grasp

the context of the Engels quote (line 9), translating 事业 as “career” or “occupation” rather than

cause. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The majority of the candidate submissions were well organised and coherent but marred by small errors in the use of grammar. Problems with correct use of pronouns, definite and indefinite articles, word order and tense were all noted. Whilst these issues were generally not sufficient to affect the readability of the translation as a whole, they did highlight the need for candidates to

work further on their target language. A common example of this was the translation of 较高 as

“higher” or “better” rather than quite high or quite good. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Candidates must be confident in their use of punctuation in the target language. Errors, such as too many commas, can make a translation disjointed. Transfer of names and places must be undertaken carefully and accurately. The name Engels (line 9) was incorrectly transferred in more than one translation and was also accompanied by Chinese characters in one candidate’s script. As Engels was not Chinese by origin, this was unnecessary.

One candidate also offered two translations for the sub-title 掌握幽默须通过哪些途径 at line 7

writing “How to use humor (Ways to know the use of humor)”. This would not be acceptable in a professional context where translators must produce a finished translation.

7

Unit 01: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010)

UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY

General Report on Candidate Performance Candidate problems with this ST were representative of those often made in translation of technical texts more widely. Understanding the subject matter of the ST and knowing and applying accurate technical terminology was the key to attaining a good pass.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Knowledge of accurate and specific scientific terminology is crucial to a good translation for a journal of the kind specified in the context. Some candidates struggled with key technical terminology relating to the subject matter, which affected both the accuracy and the rendering of

the target text. One candidate attempted to ensure the correct meaning of 微型仿生机器人 was

conveyed with the translation “mini biomorphic (lifelike) robotic fish” which was significantly less succinct than the more scientific microbionic robot. Such translations immediately highlight a translator’s lack of expertise in the subject matter. Understanding of the original ST was also an issue for some and resulted in the original meaning

of the ST being misconstrued in the final translation. For instance, the translation of 据了解，哈尔滨工程大学长江学者讲座教授郭书祥带领的课题组 as “Professor Guo Shuxiang said at Ha’erbin

Engineering University’s meeting of the ‘Yangtse River Scholars’ (of which he is the head)…” is significantly different in meaning from the correct translation of According to our understanding, the expert group led by Ha’erbin Engineering University ‘Yangtse Scholar’ lectures professor Guo Shuxiang…

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The grammar and cohesion of the translations submitted in this unit were generally very good. Candidates are reminded however that translation of technical subject matter is no excuse for the inclusion of awkward translations which would not be acceptable elsewhere.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Technical aspects are just as, if not more, important in a translation based on technical subject matter. Spelling errors such as “min_a_ture” and “marv_o_lous” make an otherwise good translation look unprofessional. Accurate punctuation and transfer of names is equally crucial. One

candidate effectively transferred the official English language name for the 自动化学院仿生微机器

人实验室 as the College of Automation Bionic Robot Laboratory but omitted to capitalise the name.

Recommendations to candidates As the internet is not available to candidates during the exam, it is crucial that they arm themselves with appropriate technical dictionaries. Prior to the exam, extensive reading of relevant technical material in both the source and target language is vital to building up background knowledge and understanding of both concepts and technical terminology. Remember that specialist terminology is strict and synonyms cannot be substituted. The grammar and sentence structure of long, complex Chinese phrases will always be problematic and there is no substitute for repeated practice.

Unit 2A: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 0% (2010)

UNIT 02B: BUSINESS

General Report on Candidate Performance

A degree of under-translation, or low register e.g. “dodge” for 回避, “millionaire” for ‘multi-

millionaire’ etc. was noticed in some scripts. There was also a recurrent problem with collocation, as in the candidates’ renderings “rises and falls” instead of rise and fall and “How about in China” instead of, for example, What is it like in China? or What about China?. Also, while it is possible for the reader to work out what the translator is attempting to say with “The effective of rewards and

8

rewards again will make the investors become super rich people”, reading this rendering requires effort, and is not authentic English.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The level of English masked the comprehension in a few cases; other candidates appeared to have understood the ST well.

The register of the ST was not very formal, and this was conveyed well in some of the translations as in the following examples: “the magical effect of compound interest” and “the market has plummeted”.

The biggest challenge of the text was translating the section about the ‘Rule of 72’, which hinged on accurate transfer of figures (see below).

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In some of the scripts the grammar was coherent and cohesive, while in other cases there were many basic mistakes, such as “the earliest foundation was appeared in 1998”. There was also evidence of some confusion with regard to basic syntactical rules as in “It can be deduced similarly, the money in the whole world will belong to you if you are long life enough”.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

Technical details were not always accurately conveyed. Sums of money are given as 元, and,

unless the text provides additional information such as 美(US) or 欧 (European) it should be

assumed that this is RMB and should be translated as yuan or dollars rather than “$”. Some figures were inaccurately transferred, and figures for percentages and sums of money were written out as words, which is inappropriate in a text about business and money.

The names mentioned were not always accurately translated. For example, “Grouse” and “Glass” were both used instead of Gross.

Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 100% (2010)

UNIT 03D: SCIENCE

General Report on Candidate Performance The text posed challenges both in terms of understanding the meaning of the ST and in being aware of and selecting appropriate technical terminology. As with other texts of the same nature, attempts by candidates without sufficient background understanding of the subject matter were unsuccessful.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Translation of technical subject matter for journals of the type specified in the context requires the

use of appropriate, technically accurate terminology. The ST included scientific wording such as 同震位移 coseismic displacement, 运动学参数kinematic parameters, and 斜滑推覆 oblique slip nappe

for which non-specialised terminological substitutes are not appropriate. Candidates’ understanding of the meaning of the ST was also an issue, particularly with regard to the long sentence at lines 6-10 in paragraph 2. Candidates must be careful to ensure the correct grammatical construction is transferred from the source to the TT as such mistakes can completely

alter the meaning of the translation. For example, the sentence 地震地表破裂是。。。的主要表现形式之一 translates as Earthquake surface rupture is one of the main manifestations of… not “One

of the main characteristics of an earthquake is…”. Candidates are reminded that omission or overly broad translation in place of unknown technical terminology is not a solution.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence)

9

There were no significant grammatical or cohesion errors noted with regard to this text. However, candidates are reminded of the need to maintain appropriate grammatical structures in their target texts in the face of long, complex and technical Chinese sentence structures.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Candidates should make every effort to be familiar with official translated names of key institutions

in the relevant subject area. In this case 中国地震局 is officially translated as the China Earthquake

Administration not the “Chinese Bureau of Seismology” as one candidate guessed. Candidates should also be careful to change punctuation appropriately if the target language calls for it, but not unnecessarily. One candidate added the use of brackets to the TT in place of replicating the original and valid sentence structure, which was unnecessary and made it look as

though they were unable to work the clause into the sentence structure appropriately. 汶川8级大地震 was thus translated as “…earthquake (8 on the Richter scale)” instead of …earthquake,

registering 8 on the Richter scale.

Unit 3D: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE

General Report on Candidate Performance The text appears to have been understood, but the lack of authentic idiom in the English has created translations which would be very hard for a reader to grasp.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) A formulation such as “having knowledge on the world of nature and physics and at the same time could partially utilise and apply the physical element provided unprecedented results” is totally

unacceptable in terms of TL syntax. The word “stands” for viewpoint or standpoint; 总结的究竟 is

an under-translation as are “combined outcome” and “a study combining”.

These had some impact on both authenticity and accuracy.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) One of the biggest problems was deictics: candidates use incorrect prepositions, such as in “knowledge on the world of nature” instead of knowledge of the world of nature or “in another words” instead of in other words, amongst other examples.

The correct part of speech was not always used, such as in “Egyptian culture system” instead of Egyptian cultural system.

The sentence structures “Thus in both Eastern and Western Culture, whatever that was passed down from ancient times till now, what appears to be religion…” is syntactically impossible.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were only a few spelling errors such as “blend” for bland and “fervant” for fervent.

Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance Some translations did not show native command of the English language. Others were readable, though contained some errors pertaining to specialist vocabulary.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The main problems lay in the rendering of official Chinese terms for institutions, judicial procedures, and laws. Modern Chinese favours very brief expressions (equivalent to acronyms, in

10

this case 三个至上) which are not always easy to translate idiomatically into English. The most

used term is the three paramounts, which is ungrammatical, though it is frequently the case with official Chinese English. Inaccuracies were mainly due to lack of specialist (not technical)

vocabulary, such as “rhetorics” for 说法, “context” for 语境.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The apparent native speakers had no problem with either syntax or morphology, and restructured sentences appropriately.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Upper case should be used for the initial letter of proper nouns, including ‘Section…’ and particularly The People’s Republic of China. There was the usual problem of transferring into English Chinese inverted commas (which are used for emphasis purposes) and for phrases which stand as names. English rarely uses inverted commas for names and, for example, to write “fairness and justice” may imply irony.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates must concentrate on their ability to fully understand the ST. In Chinese this often means repeated practice at understanding complex sentence structures, in which many clauses are woven together. Being able to render these sentences into English accurately and authentically takes repeated practice but is crucial to the production of a good translation.

Further, command of the basic building blocks of English grammar is essential. No translation will be coherently and cohesively rendered without this. A good basic grammar book and style guide of the kind used by journalists will assist.

Accuracy is also a necessity – overly broad translation and omission of unknown words will not be accepted in the professional world. Be faithful to the original and allow time at the end of the exam to re-read your translation to catch errors.

As the internet is not available to candidates during the exam, it is crucial that they arm themselves with appropriate technical dictionaries. Prior to the exam, extensive reading of relevant technical material in both the source and target language is vital to building up background knowledge and understanding of both concepts and technical terminology. Remember that specialist terminology is strict and synonyms cannot be substituted. Building up glossaries is a way of becoming more familiarised with this type of terminology.

The grammar and sentence structure of long, complex Chinese phrases will always be problematic and there is no substitute for repeated practice.

Candidates must make sure that their level of English is native or near-native.

Study English punctuation, including inverted commas and upper case, because it carries important meaning. Compare the way in which items such as inverted commas are used in Chinese and in English. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 71% (2010)

-*-

* Although great care has been taken in the compilation and production of this report, the IoLET cannot, in any circumstances, accept responsibility for errors, omissions or advice

11

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE CROATIAN INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The standard of the translations was good. There were, however, gaps in subject knowledge as can be seen from the comments below. In order to meet the requirement of professional acceptability, it is particularly important to produce a text in fluent and appropriate English. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) When the source text refers to the Hill of Appearance, a candidate adds a translator’s note reminding us that the Vatican has not authenticated “The hill where the Virgin Mary is said to have appeared.’’ This was completely unnecessary and not required by the ST. In the second paragraph, St. James’ church is translated as “St. Jacob’s’ church”. In a dictionary of name translations both James and Jacob can mean Jakov; however, in Međugorje, the parish church is known only as St. James’ Church. There are some stylistic inaccuracies in register. See also notes under Aspect 2. In the second paragraph of the original text the word stajala stood is omitted. It is a minor stylistic error and a more accurate rendering would be, for example, In 1981, the large church of St. James stood surrounded only by.... There is a minor difference in tense in the English translation “because no one dreamt of putting concrete and building on fertile soil”, which would be more faithful to the ST if translated as, for example, no one would dream of concreting and building on the fertile soil. In the third paragraph, Božja providnost would be better translated as divine providence rather than just “providence.’’ The word sumrak twilight (line 45) is omitted. The translations show good understanding of the subject matter though sometimes the poetic style of the original depicting what the writer is seeing has not been transferred effectively, thus losing the subtlety of the source text. This can be seen in, “Climbing down Križevac”, which should read, for example, Descending into the twilight from Križevac.... It should be emphasised that translator’s notes are the exception rather than the rule. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The second paragraph of the ST (line 7), “tells the same story....” should read It is the same story; the word stajala stood (line 8) is omitted. “In 1981, the large St Jacob’s Church was surrounded only by tobacco fields and vineyards.” contains a minor stylistic error; a more accurate rendering would be, for example, In 1981, the large church of St. James stood surrounded only by.... In some cases the definite article before the word “Vatican” was omitted. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There is a minor technical fault in the reference to the bible: “(St John 20, 29)” instead of (John 20:29)

12

In the second paragraph, there is a typo, since “spent much” is repeated. The scripts were technically well-presented, legible, correctly spelt, punctuated and paragraphed. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) Unit 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of the translations varied throughout the text. One problem, as always, was the candidates’ unfamiliarity in conveying the message in the appropriate way in English. Candidates let themselves down by not checking through the text to ensure there were no omissions. Unnecessary translator’s notes were included. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There is a problem related to verb tense (and accuracy) in the second paragraph: Biološki agensi se........inficiranih prijenosnika was translated as “Biological agents have been used in various ways for 2,500 years...” whereas a more accurate rendering would be, for example, Biological agents have already been in use for 2500 years… Also, “to releasing carries of diseases…” should read to releasing infectious carriers in this context. …strah od primjene biološkog oružja.. (line 17) is translated as “the fear of biological weapons....” instead of, for example, the fear of the use of biological.... The rendering “All of them, that is, the expanded public health...’’ for javno zdravstvo u proširenom sastavu... (line 41) is clumsy. A better suggestion would be, for example, All the services mentioned, that is, the extended Public Health Service.... Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) At the beginning of the second paragraph the definite article has been omitted: “Biological warfare is (the) use...”. In lines 19-21, “difficult to prove...” should read it is difficult to prove... and “and are suitable for waging...” should read and with them you can wage.... Karakteristike primjene tog oružja... (line 20) is translated as ‘”What is characteristic of this warfare is that...” instead of, for example, The characteristics of the use of this type of weapons.... osigurati trajno dežurstvo (line 37) was translated as “ensure 24-hour duty” instead of, for example, ensure constant vigilance. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The translations were technically well-presented and legible, correctly spelt, punctuated and paragraphed. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance The standard of the translations was outstanding and showed familiarity with legal terminology. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any)

13

The translations showed excellent comprehension, register and subject knowledge. The translation also showed excellent command of the subject matter, appropriate renderings and lexis as in “...Family Law entered into force....”. The choice of language and register was appropriate and there was an excellent and appropriate translator’s note explaining the ObZ Croatian abbreviation for Family Law. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) ...ili kraće ako je u njoj rođeno dijete... (line 14) was rendered as “or for a shorter period of time if they have had a child during this relationship.” Although this is an accurate literal translation it does not read fluently and should be better rendered as, for example, or for a shorter period of time if they have a child. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Technical aspects were very well handled. Recommendations to candidates

Only include translator’s notes if absolutely necessary.

Be aware of the culture of the country and the conventions associated with them.

Stick as closely as possible to the style and register of the ST.

Leave time at the end to proofread the work to ensure there are no omissions, typos or minor grammatical errors.

Read quality journals such as New Scientist and Nature as part of the preparation for the exam, if the science option is to be chosen.

Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010)

-*-


14

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE DUTCH INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance All candidates showed a good general understanding of the source text, but had varying ability in conveying the meaning. Some of the candidates expressed themselves with acceptable to reasonable clarity; the English of the failed candidates was not of an acceptable standard. There were a very few punctuation or spelling errors that made the comprehension of a few sentences difficult. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Certain errors in comprehension reappeared in more than one of the papers. The Dutch strategic planning term mainport, for example, which is actually unknown in British English, was left untranslated when it should either have been paraphrased as transport hub, or explained in a translator’s note. More than one candidate stumbled over geluidsemmers. These should have been translated literally as noise buckets, preferably between inverted commas, as they refer to a policy of closing airport runways when the noise level rises so high that the noise bucket overflows. More than one candidate had a problem with geluidsstelsel, translating it as a “noise” or “sound system” rather than a noise abatement system. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The quality of written English in the papers ranged from good through acceptable with isolated lapses in register to completely unacceptable in the case of the failed papers. One problem arose with reported speech where spokesmen were quoted in inverted commas followed or preceded by volgens or aldus (according to), e.g. line 28 in the Dutch. Some of the candidates translated this by says in the present tense, where it would be more usual to put said in English, as the statement was made in the past. Some candidates followed the Dutch in omitting the definite article and title when referring to persons and their office, e.g. demissionair minister Eurlings (line 9), but this does not sound courteous in English. It would be preferable to write the outgoing minister, Mr. Eurlings. A circumlocution was used to translate de bewindsman by writing “the member of government”, which is technically correct, but the minister is a neater way to say the same thing. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The candidates generally wrote legibly. The punctuation was generally satisfactory, although a few commas would have helped in comprehension; there were only two spelling mistakes throughout: “forsee” instead of foresee, and “breaks” instead of brakes. Unit 01: Pass Rate 80% (2011); 57% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The text had some challenges. eisen was translated as “requirements”, while demands would have indicated the tone and register of the text more clearly. There were also some other lexical mistakes made such as “better” where more was required. Generally, the tone of the texts was misconstrued; candidates failed to understand the gravity of some of the language.

15

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Marktwerking was translated as “processes” when mechanics would have been a more suitable choice as the author was speaking of the workings of the project. Often a direct translation of the Dutch was offered as English rather than opting for a more suitable English word. For example, meespelen was translated as “play along”, instead of comply. The final sentence of the text was complex and needed careful analysis. “Interesting differences or similarities may well emerge with respect to the situation in Eastern Europe” was an appropriate version. “There will no doubt be interesting differences from or similarities to the Eastern European context...” was less appropriate. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Coherence and cohesion were problematic areas for candidates. At times, the Dutch sentence structure was retained. This made the target texts sound unnatural, as in “the project of strategic management and entrepreneurship” instead of the strategic management and entrepreneurship project. Problems with tenses were also apparent: the present continuous was used in the place of the present simple e.g. “are viewing” for view. Also, “do” instead of will which led to understanding being impeded. The passive tense was also required at times: are made would have been more suitable than “they do make”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Commas enclosing relative clauses were omitted. Technical aspects were well handled. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 75% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The standard of translation was good in this piece of work in that it reflected the tone of language chosen by the author. A straightforward translation would not have adequately reflected the humorous and upbeat style of the Dutch language. The candidates were accurate in their adoption of register and lexis which enhanced their translation. The candidate also provided a very interesting and astute translator’s note on the protagonist’s name. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Good points included the translation of the creditors’ punishment threat “his feet encased in concrete…”. The humour (if a little black) is well-reflected here. “Cloven” seems clumsy and archaic – chopped is better here, particularly in the context of butchery. When describing the theatre play, the candidate did well to appreciate the register here, however, the image of the audience laughing hysterically at Braakensiek’s acting shortcomings was diminished by a couple of lexical errors eg “clasping” instead of hanging on... “columns” instead of pillars. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were occasional omissions and inclusions of the definite article as if the candidates had directly translated from the Dutch into English eg “direct the traffic”. Also at the bottom of the Amstel instead of “from” – the tone of the text implies that the chef would be conversing with the fishes only after his demise. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

16

Ludwig II was translated as “Louis II”. This is a risky strategy unless the translator is absolutely sure of his/her historical facts as to the identity of the person in question. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Apart from a couple of terminological errors and use of the wrong register in a couple of places, this was a generally creditable performance, assisted by the clear and legible presentation. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were no serious translation errors, although in two instances the candidate failed to use the correct scientific term. One example occurred in the first line, where the candidate has translated taxa as “species” when it should have been left untranslated, as “taxa” is also an English word, the plural of “taxon” meaning a group of species. The other inaccuracy was the translation of koppelen and koppeling (lines 11, 17) by “to connect” and “connection” instead of to couple and coupling, which are the terms generally used. However, this did not obscure the meaning of the text. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The papers were generally well written, but there were a couple of sentences that are best described as rambling, and where the register was not appropriate to a scientific report. The first example was in lines 4 to 5, which was translated as “All the studies conducted, however, had quite some objections”. A possible translation would be, for example, There were considerable drawbacks, however, in all the studies conducted. The other sentence translated in a rambling manner begins at line 32: Voor een twaalf miljoen jaar oude neushoorn …. The candidate has written “For a twelve-million-year-old rhino (warm-blooded) and an equally old alligator (cold-blooded), as expected, significant differences in temperature were determined: the temperature of the rhino turned out to be some 6 degrees Celsius higher than that of the alligator”. Here, the candidate has adhered too closely to the word order of the Dutch original and this could be rephrased to read: As expected, significant differences in temperature were determined for a twelve-million-year-old rhino (warm-blooded) and an alligator (cold-blooded) from the same period: the temperature of the rhino was found to be some 6 degrees Celsius higher than that of the alligator. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The papers were clearly presented, with few crossings-outs, and there were no punctuation or spelling errors. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance This was a competent piece of work which showed more than adequate understanding and sensitivity to the text and its context. In general, most of the errors were minor although one more serious error in translation was noted where the candidate directly translated a Dutch expression into English which was difficult to understand, had one had no knowledge of the source language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any)

17

Some minor errors were evident in the translation. There was a slightly casual approach to some of the terms e.g. “coming up against” instead of encountering which was more appropriate to the register of the text. A more serious error was the translation of Argusogen as “Argus eyes”. The Van Dale N/E dictionary’s version of suspicious would have offered more clarity as to the meaning of the sentence. Good points included some sound sentence structure in English and lexis choices. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The use of within would have enhanced the translation at times instead of the more prosaic “in” as it needed to be clear that some of the actions were taking place within the workings of the unions themselves. Also, the present continuous tense was used in translating when this merely reflected the Dutch sentence and not its true meaning when put into English. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) This aspect was handled well. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) Recommendations to candidates

Read through their papers once without reference to the source text to see whether what they have written reads like a piece of original English. The ability to write well in one’s mother tongue is just as important to a translator as a good knowledge of the foreign language. One way of acquiring this ability is to read well-written books and quality publications such as the broadsheet newspapers and weekly magazines.

Think carefully about tenses – where the present continuous is correct in Dutch, the present simple may be better in English. Also the passive voice is often used in a text of this kind and should be translated as such.

Pay particular attention to the use of prepositions.

Be careful of errors in Aspect 3 as these may bring down marks unnecessarily.

Try to think of ideas and themes as a whole when translating them into English as this helps the translator to avoid structural errors.

-*-


18

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ENGLISH INTO ALBANIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Most candidates’ performance and results have been satisfactory showing that there was proper preparation; great efforts were made in translating the materials to a professional level. Most target texts read naturally and fluently. In these cases, the use of the target language and structure was up to standard. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidates showed adequate knowledge of specialist vocabulary. Style and register were appropriate. There were minor omissions/distortions and in some examples the words were left in English and not translated at all, for example: “Online” or “tweet”. There were instances where the candidates had used words in Albanian that are not originally Albanian words, (keywords, so called literal translation) where, with some extra effort, the Albanian equivalents could be found: (primary) “primar” the correct word in Albanian is parësor (opaque) “opake” the correct word in Albanian is e paqartë (relaxed) “e relaksët” the correct word in Albanian is qetësuese, shplodhëse.. (environment) “ambjent” the correct word in Albanian is mjedis Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The candidates provided well-organised texts which facilitated a coherent reading and conform to the conventions of the relevant genre. There were some grammar/syntax mistakes, for example: (internet guru) “guruja i internetit“ should have been gurunë e internetit (what) “ç’farë” is not written with an apostrophe in Albanian, because it is a single word, therefore it should be “çfarë” (to him/her) “ti” is written with an apostrophe in Albanian: “t’i” because “i” is a clitic in this case. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The candidates provided texts which adequately enable the reader to act appropriately on the basis of the translation. There were various spelling mistakes such as: “djelli” – should be dielli “interetit” should be spelt internetit “kariera” – should be karriera “steriotipi” – should be stereotipi Unit 01: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance

19

There was some preparation but no efforts made in translating the specialist terms, therefore the candidate was not able to translate to a professional level. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate did not show adequate knowledge of specialist vocabulary.

Brushless Direct Current motors – left in English.

AC Induction motors – left in English.

Permanent Magnet motors – left in English.

Nickel-Metal Hydride batteries – left in English. A suggestion would be bateri hidrur me metal të nikeluar

There were examples when the candidates had used some words in Albanian that are not originally Albanian words, (keywords, so called literal translation) with some extra effort the Albanian equivalents could have been found : (performance) “performancë” the correct word in Albanian is funksion Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The candidate provided well-organised text;however there were some grammar mistakes: (an electric car lacks) “një makinë elektrike i mungon” should have been një makine elektrike i mungon – dative case (EV’s power source: the battery pack) “burimin e energjisë së EV-së: pakoja e baterisë” should have been burimin e energjisë së EV-së: pakon e baterisë – accusative case (to buy) “të bleni” – should have been të blini - subjunctive mood Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The candidates produced a text that was correctly punctuated and legible. However the candidates could have done a much better job with the paragraphs and maintaining the same format as the original. The reader cannot tell where a paragraph begins and ends. There were various spelling mistakes: “e përgjithëshme” – should be e përgjithshme; “motorrin /motorrit / motorri / motorrash” – should be motorin /motorit / motori / motora; “njesoj” – should be njësoj; “ta zevendësojë – should be ta zëvendësojë. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Performance and results were excellent and up to a professional level. Sentences and paragraphs read as if they were originally written in Albanian. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The following example shows good knowledge of specialist vocabulary: “Ligji po ashtu krijon një këshill të fuqishëm të rregullatorëve që do të vëzhgojë rreziqet në tërë sistemin financiar” for The law also assembles a powerful council of regulators to be on the lookout for risks across the finance system.


20

The text is grammatically accurate, coherent and well-organised. It facilitates a coherent reading and conforms to the conventions of the relevant genre. For example, root out the fine print and hidden fees was correctly endered as “nxirrte në pah klauzolat e shkruara me germa të vogla dhe pagesat e fshehura”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The text was correctly paragraphed and legible. There were only a few spelling mistakes such as “nxirte” instead of nxirrte or “dërmuese” instead of dërrmuese. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The content was adequately conveyed. The literary quality of the translation is of a good standard and it reads as if it were originally written in Albanian. The style of the translation is maintained consistently throughout the text. Specialised terminology and vocabulary were well handled, resolving many language difficulties thus making it easy and satisfying for an Albanian reader. Correct, colourful words that convey the best meaning were chosen. The translation was presented in a coherent form and was well constructed and interesting. However, there were some inaccuracies. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translation was presented in a coherent form. Examples of inaccuracies are as follows:

“jo si një kukull, por si Lushën Frojd në revistën e shkëlqyeshme të arteve” (not like a Bonnard, but like the Lucian Freud in the glossy arts magazine) – Bonnard was translated as “kukull” (doll) so the text translates as: ‘....not like a doll, but like a Lucian Freud .....’ The candidate does not seem to have understood that “the nude from the eighties” referred to further on in Line 7 of the English text has to do with the painting from the eighties.

“Vendin e telefonit pa kordon” (cordless carolling) – Carolling was translated into Albanian by the candidate as “place of the cordless telephone”. So it does not convey the meaning that the telephone is playing a tune.

“Do të ishte krejt e pashpresë” (she’d be hopeless) – The candidate’s version translates as “she would be without hope”, so the candidate has missed the point that hopeless refers to performing very badly.

“Si një maxhordom që po del në pension” (like a retiring butler) - The candidate’s version translates as “like a butler that has reached the retirement age” so the candidate has missed the point that retiring refers to leaving the room.

“derrat” (boars) – The candidate version translates as “pigs”, so a suggestion could be derrat e egër (wild pigs) so it does not get confused with farmed domesticated pigs.

Six thousand volts missing in the Albanian text. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The candidate provides text which facilitates a coherent reading. The candidate provides text which conforms to the conventions of the relevant genre. The text is well-organised. The following points about cohesion and structure have to be noted

21

“Xhulian Deill ishte një mik i vjetër. Kush fliste ndonjëherë ashtu përpara një pikture?” (Julian Dale being an old friend. Who never talked like that in front of a painting): one version reads as an interrogative sentence: “Julian Dale was an old friend. Who would ever speak like that in front of a picture?” The point that it is Julian Dale that never talked like that in front of a painting was missed.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The candidate produced a text that was correctly punctuated, paragraphed and legible. The candidate maintained the same format as the original. There were two spelling mistakes: “veçanërish”, which should be veçanërisht and “të cileve”, which should be të cilëve. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Comprehension of the source text and adequate knowledge of the specialist terminology was clear. However, there were some grammar inaccuracies which do not facilitate coherent reading. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translations were presented in a coherent form; and the candidate demonstrated adequate knowledge of specialist terminology.

“Ambjent” is not an original Albanian word; the correct word is mjedis.

“Six thousand volts” is missing in the Albanian text. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates provided text which did not adequately facilitate coherent reading. They also provided text which did not conform to the conventions of the relevant genre. Some of the mistakes make it difficult for the text to flow when reading, therefore the translation did not attain a professional level in presenting his/her work. There were several grammar mistakes:

“Europjanë” (European) is not written with a capital letter, no “u” and no “j”. It is only written with a capital letter in cases such as Parlamenti Evropian (European Parliament), Bashkimi Evropian (EU). The correct version in Albanian is evropianë.

Regarding cohesion / structure the following can be pointed out:

“... duke shtuar përbërës anti-plakës që ose bllokon degradimin fillesar – për shembull duke vepruar si krem për djellin – ose që spastron produktet e shpërbëra që janë shkatërruese” (...by adding anti-ageing compounds that either block the initial degradation – by acting as a sunscreen, for instance – or mop up the destructive breakdown products): In this sentence the conjugation of the verbs (third person singular) ‘bllokon’ (block) & ‘spastron’ (mop up) do not match with the respective noun in plural “përbërës (compounds) therefore the reader gets confused about whether it is the compounds or the day that block the initial degradation when reading the sentence. The correct version is third person plural bllokojnë and spastrojnë.

“ç’farë” (what) is not written with an apostrophe in Albanian, because it is a single word, (interrogative pronoun), therefore it should be çfarë.


22

The reader cannot tell where a paragraph begins and ends. There were spelling mistakes such as “djellit”, which should be spelt diellit; “menyre” instead of mënyre; “kushuri” instead of kushëri; “gjëndje” instead of gjendje. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates’ performance was impressive. It showed that there was proper preparation by the candidate and he/she has made great efforts in translating the material and he/she has the ability to translate to a professional level. Some of the sentences/paragraphs offered very good renderings and read as if it was an original text written in Albanian. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidates showed adequate knowledge of specialist vocabulary. This is shown in the following examples: “Do të bëhet një anketë pyetësore kombëtare, ku të rinjtë që votojnë për herë të parë do të zgjidhen në mënyrë të rastësishme nga regjistri i votuesve” is an accurate rendering of A national survey will be carried out, with attainers selected randomly from the electoral register.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates provided well-organised text which facilitated a coherent reading and conformed to the conventions of the relevant genre. For example: “Ndërkohë që ata janë ekspozuar ndaj shumë prej faktorëve kyç që përcaktojnë socializimin e hershëm politik…..” as a rendering of Whilst they will have been exposed to many of the key factors that determine early political socialization…… The texts were grammatically accurate, coherent and well-organised. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The target texts adequately enabled the reader to act appropriately on the basis of the translation. There were some spelling mistakes and some commas were missing, and these errors could have been avoided by reading the text again after a short break. Examples of spelling mistakes: “niveli arritjeve” should be niveli i arritjeve; Paragraph 2, Page 1: “...çështja më e gjërë nëse ka apo jo...” should be ...çështja më e gjërë, nëse ka apo jo... Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance Inaccuracies found led to misunderstandings. The translations showed inadequate knowledge of specialist terminology. Paraphrasing and grammar were inaccurate in parts. Some points contained in the source language were missed and as a consequence the target text does not read coherently. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translations were not presented in a coherent form; they also showed inadequate knowledge of specialist terminology. For example:

23

“për të arritur në një vendim..” (to make an informed independent decision ...): the correct expression should be marr një vendim (make a decision). The verb marr collocates with vendim-decision. Arrij is used, for example, in arrij në përfundim (reach/come to a conclusion).

“arsyeshmërisht” (reasonably) is not said in Albanian; the correct translation would be në mënyrë të arsyeshme.

“performancë” for performance in English should be funksion in Albanian and in this context. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Some translations did not facilitate coherent reading. They did not conform to the conventions of the relevant genre. Some of the mistakes make it difficult for the text to flow when reading, and the work did not reach a professional level. There were several grammar mistakes. Mistakes related to cohesion / structure:

“..apo që duhet të kishin qenë arsyeshmërisht, të njohura për, apo të ishin konsideruar, nga palët kur ishte bërë kontrata” (...or ought reasonably to have been, known to, or in the contemplation of, the parties when the contract was made): it is a word for word translation which results in a confusing sentence for the reader. In “të njohura për” (known to), the preposition should be followed by an object but cannot be left on its own and followed by a sentence with a conjunction. There is no need for commas before and after “të njohura për”.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) In general terms the texts produced was correctly paragraphed. The format of the original was maintained. There were various (repeated) spelling mistakes. For example:

“standarte” instead of standarde.

“proçedure” instead of procedurë.

“proçess” instead of proces. Recommendations to candidates

Always proofread your work.

Make sure no sentences/words are left out.

Produce a layout that corresponds to the original unless there is a justifiable reason for the change.

Study past examination papers.

Existing online courses can help translators to update and practise their knowledge and skills.

A translator needs a broad cultural knowledge of both native and target country, its history, its customs and its society. This can only be achieved by reading extensively in both languages.

Keep up-to-date your knowledge of current issues in the UK, particularly in the subjects of specialisation.

Familiarise yourself with relevant terminology. The only way to achieve this is by regularly reading specialised magazines.

Remember that specialised terminology is strict and synonyms cannot be substituted for scientific terms.

Correct collocation of words is crucial.

Do not think that translating allows you to use awkward expressions you would never use as a native speaker.

Different registers must not be mixed (unless the original calls for this).

Even a very good paper will be failed if it is word processed without the relevant diacritical marks and punctuation.

Always consider whether the ordering of the sentence in the source text should be modified in the interests of greater clarity and authenticity in the target text.

24

Candidates/Translators must "read" the translated text with the eyes of a third party, without reference to the source in order to assess their translation in an objective way.

Candidates should be encouraged to use dictionaries judiciously to find the appropriate words which are applicable to the subject matter and to the context.

Unit 3F: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010)


25

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE

ENGLISH INTO ARABIC UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The source text was full of lexical and cultural references that needed practical and real-life knowledge of the English language – the kind of knowledge you do not get from any vocabulary lists however long.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The main problem that candidates faced and mostly failed to solve, was to comprehend the ST. In general, candidates did not deal satisfactorily with the nuanced and “advanced” vocabulary used in the text. Arabic dictionaries did not help here as they gave only the most basic meanings of words such as bleak, dreary, unnervingly, illuminating and exhibitionism. Only very few were able to go beyond the limited choices given by the Arabic dictionary. And of course some were more successful than others in dealing with idiomatic language, as for example the phrase bowls you over, which some translated literally. Some candidates also exhibited an unacceptable lack of knowledge of the source culture and the subject matter. The verb to tweet in the text proved too hard for some who translated it as to “chirp,” which it certainly is, but not in this context. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) However, the main obstacle faced by the candidates in this exam was the last paragraph, particularly for its structure. Many candidates just lost their way through this paragraph with regrettable results. This paragraph was the direct cause of many fails. Another aspect of the last paragraph that caused it to be such an obstacle was the grammar. For example the sentence why does anyone feel the need to tweet that they’ve just ... caused problems for many because the singular subject seemingly changes into plural. Some did the same in Arabic which caused confusion. Candidates should have realised that the they here is another way of saying he/she – being politically correct. So the right strategy in Arabic, which was followed by some, is to ignore this shift in subject. Also regarding grammar, some candidates did not stop to note that the speaker in this paragraph is a woman (such information was given in the introductory part), which required conjugating verbs in the feminine. Candidates also tended to follow some of the structures of the ST too closely. Also most of the candidates failed to notice the fact that the ST speaks of an internet guru, not the internet guru as most of them rendered it.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The careless use of dots and hamza is not acceptable from a professional translator. One candidate failed on this account alone; otherwise the translation would have passed. It is true that the hamza is the most common native-speaker spelling mistake, but it should not, and is not, tolerated from someone whose job is precisely to write clear and accurate Arabic. The rules of the hamza could be learned, practised and consolidated in one hour. It would be an hour well-spent.

26

Unit 01: Pass Rate 21% (2011); 22% (2010) UNIT 02A TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance There were some excellent performances but some texts were not up to standard either in terms of syntax or of register.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) While the efficiently translated texts mirrored the source, the reader of the badly rendered ones would have the impression that it was a transcription of a vernacular monologue uttered by an uneducated person. Thus, judging by the target text of the unsuccessful candidate, it would be hard to imagine that it came from an American website devoted to scientific treatises. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Failed scripts contained syntactical errors that made the translation read very awkwardly. Translator’s notes were incorporated as an appendix at the end. However, the hapless candidate neglectfully failed to bring to mind that Arabic does not use acronyms or abbreviations. Therefore, imitating the ST by using Arabic letters to refer to the EV is a peculiar and unheard-of practice. Disappointingly the candidate was satisfied to transliterate each term (despite the fact that Arabic has its corresponding technical equivalents which are known, available, and instantly accessible). While the spelling mistakes were plentiful, other properly spelt words were incorrect, either because they were fuzzy and ill-defined or thoroughly colloquial. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were spelling mistakes, which varied from negligible diacritical and minor punctuation marks, to the more serious errors of misspelling that distorted the meaning of entire sentences. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The qualities of writing in the Arabic language have not been impressive this year; even the couple of candidates who produced passable translations did not surpass the ordinary in their composition skills. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Disappointingly, most candidates did not understand what period means (ignoring the context, they rendered it as amount of time rather than “enforced decision” or “determined declaration”). Neither were they able to render fine print correctly. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Most candidates organised their work in a pleasing layout; however, the grammar proved to be below standard in many instances. It is, therefore, not the technical terms that needed to be handled with care, but rather upholding the grammatical rules. Some scripts included elementary grammatical errors.

27

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There are no comments to be made under this heading. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 25% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance Overall, the informational content of the source text (ST) was understood by most candidates; however the quality of the target text (TT) ranged from good to poor. A few problems were caused by "fuss" which was translated as instead of . Another example of a bad translation was "omelette" for rather than . Some good renderings included: Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Problems in Aspect 1 included a number of clumsy and inappropriate renderings such as for "sharpest figure" instead of and for "glossy arts magazine" instead of ; as well as mistranslations e.g. terrific idea was mistranslated as “horrible/terrible idea”. On the other hand there were some good, close to the ST, renderings where appropriate lexis and idiom as well as register were used, for example for "retiring butler" , or

for "all he did was gossip, queer- gossip". Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were some well organised translations with good sentence structure and overall coherence. Some appropriate renderings included for "sagging flesh"; or for "what a terrific idea". Others did not read like original pieces of writing as they were stilted and incoherent. This was caused mainly by too much adherence to the ST structure. There were also instances of masculine adjectives used to qualify feminine nouns e.g. for "unappetizing breast”. Apart from that, differentiation between nominative and accusative cases caused some difficulty as well e.g . Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling was the biggest problem under this Aspect. The most basic mistakes included (who) misspelt as ; or (this) as . Unit 2C: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The great majority of candidates showed understanding of the ST. Their failure was mainly due to insufficient skills in Aspects 1 and 2. A few problems were caused by the phrase "public institutions" which was translated as instead of Another example of an inaccurate translation was direct relevance for direct application rather than . Some good renderings included . The quality of renderings varied especially with regard to the use of appropriate register and terminology. A few examples of bad choices included for "young people" rather than Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) In terms of the command of the subject matter the target texts ranged from good, through average to disappointingly poor. The poor translations contained a mixture of clumsy and inappropriate renderings such as for of its kind, both major and minor inaccuracies e.g. for crisis; or

28

for eligible which distorted or impaired the message. There were also some incorrect choices of register and terminology e.g. for Greater London Assembly instead of

or unidiomatic use of language as in for political engagement and citizenship rather than . Some good choices included . Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Typically, the most serious errors occurred under this Aspect of performance. It is difficult to master this area without perseverance and continued practice. Examples of serious mistakes included:

. Candidates who acquired high marks in this Aspect proved they had put a lot of hard work towards achieving the high standard. Examples of good renderings included . Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most serious technical errors were related to spelling. The most common errors were as follows:

. The other technical points were dealt with reasonably well. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 38% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance: Candidates did not do well enough on a legal text that is easy by any standards. Those who failed did so because of their unfamiliarity with legal terminology. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The source text did not pose many comprehension difficulties. The main legal terms in the text were “limitation of liability”, “standard terms and conditions”, “breach of contract”, “contractual term”, “ineffective”, “remedy”, “damages” , “reasonableness”, “warranty”, “capped.” We could add to this list the less specialised phrase “informed decision”. It is clear from this that they are reasonably basic legal terms and do not constitute much of a surprise. However candidates did have problems with some of these terms. The problems were essentially of two kinds: the first is not distinguishing between the general meaning of a term and its legal usage. Famous among these terms is the “damages”, which in a legal context means compensation. Candidates did not note this. “Ineffective” is another example: in the legal context it means essentially “null and void” / with no legal consequence. The second kind of problem was more damaging in this exam: it is being so uncomfortable with a term that you change its translation every time you use it (hoping perhaps that one of the translations will ring true). The worst place to do this is a legal translation, because every time it will indeed mean something different. This happened in this exam primarily with “standard terms and conditions” leading to inauspicious results. “standard” was translated in different ways, and “terms and conditions” was translated also in different ways. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The main problem that the candidates faced with this Aspect was the complex, peculiarly legal, type of sentences, for example: The reasonableness of the term will be evaluated having regard to the circumstances that were, or ought reasonably to have been, known to, or in the contemplation of, the parties when the contract is made. These “embedded” clauses are a feature of legal writing and legal translators should be ready to deal with them. These are explained in legal translation textbooks. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Candidates did best in this Aspect. The spelling mistakes related to the rules of the hamza.

29

Recommendations to candidates Candidates should be hundred per cent clear that the Diploma in Translation is a professional exam. If the translation is not good enough for a client it is not good enough to pass. Spelling mistakes should be seen in this light. Also, a professional translator should be more than familiar withthe source language culture. In that sense your preparation includes reading newspapers, watching TV and talking to people. General knowledge, serious preparation for the exam, good command of the Arabic grammar, and – finally – weighing the possibility of using a simple, undeviating, term can make a huge difference to your overall result. General knowledge, serious preparation for the exam, good command of Arabic grammar.

Read a substantial number of quality English and Arabic books and magazines. Make sure you master the grammar of the Arabic language before attempting this professional level examination. Acquire a broad cultural knowledge of both source and target languages.

Organise glossaries with specialised terminology.

Always double-check meanings found in dictionaries. In preparing for a legal translation exam, candidates should spare no effort in learning their specialised terminology. This is not as difficult as it sounds. There are lists and books that do just that. Also candidates should study legal style and make use of legal style manuals and legal translation textbooks (English/Arabic). Unit 3F: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010)

-*-


30

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ENGLISH INTO BULGARIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates’ overall performance did not meet the expected professional standards. A number had problems fully understanding the source text and did not seem to have sufficient in-depth knowledge of the finer points of the source language. The majority of the mistakes were due to lack of comprehension. These candidates would benefit greatly from more extensive and in-depth study of English. On the whole, grammar was satisfactory; however, some of the grammatical errors were basic, not expected at this level. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Most of the candidates did not show understanding of the fine details of the ST. There are a few sentences which are not ambiguous and do not represent a great translation challenge; nevertheless, most of the candidates had difficulties translating them. For example: and to put it in one bleak sentence, no medium has survived the indifference of 25-year olds (line 5) was translated as “И за да изразим това в едно безперспективо изречение, няма носител на информация, който се е спасил от равнодушието на 25 годишните.” Most of the candidates rendered this sentence incorrectly. They struggled with the words: bleak, medium, survived, indifference. “И да обобщя с едно не особено радостно изречение, никоя медия не е оцелявала безразличието на 25-годишните.” is an example of a very good translation Other separate lexical items which proved challenging for the candidates were: crushingly dreary (line 11) was rendered as “смазващо безмислен” instead of for example смазващо отегчителен. at the very least (line 20) was translated as „...в най-лошия случай” and it should be най-малко. opaque (line 11) was translated as “глуповато” and it should be - for example, неразбираемо. funny (line 11) was translated as “странно” instead of, for example смешно. billion (line 27) was translated as “билиони” instead of милиард (109 ) which is widely accepted in Bulgaria. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammar was generally satisfactory. Nevertheless, the mistakes that were made should not occur at this level. For example some of the candidates do not seem to be very familiar with the Bulgarian article. It has been omitted in several places: it should be отговорът and not “отговора”; неговият instead of “неговия”; стандартният and not “стандартния”. There are tense and aspect mistakes which distort the sentence: in “се усмихваше и ми отговаряше”, the two verbs were translated in past tense, imperfective aspect and should be translated in present tense, perfective aspect as they appear in the ST laughs and admits (line 36); scorns is translated in past tense “би осмял” instead of present tense.

Problems with coherence appear at various points due to very long sentences and sometimes not enough in-depth understanding of the ST. For example: at the very least, you’d probably want to (line 20) … was translated as “И накрая, вероятно бихте искали...”. (какво?). The translation is not explicit enough and it does not provide the information implied in the original.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling was good, the punctuation satisfactory. The transfer of names was generally good; however, some of the candidates did not transcribe the names, and the title of the book was not

31

translated. There was not a note explaining the reason behind this decision. This is not acceptable especially when two different scripts (Latin and Cyrillic) are involved. Unit 01: Pass Rate 25% (2011); 33% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance The text is from a website whose content is contributed by students and strives to be informative, clear, straightforward, simple and succinct in style. It should be pretty easy to decode, limiting the translator’s challenge to rendering the terminology properly. Only one of the candidates was familiar enough with the subject matter to do so. All of the candidates would benefit, in various degrees, from improving their insight into the syntax of both languages and doing a comparative study of the differences between them. The same applies to spelling and punctuation. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Of the 30 terms used in the text, one of the major stumbling blocks has proved to be the term range, whose Bulgarian equivalent in this context is пробег. One of the candidates has translated it as „възможности” (= capability), and another in different ways at each of its three occurrences, none of which makes sense in the context: The Lithium Ion batteries give the best performance and range is translated as „Литиево-йонните акумулатори са най-ефективни и многообразни” (=The Lithium Ion batteries are the most effective and varied); Electric cars do not require any special tires, but because their range is very limited, it pays to buy the more expensive ...tires to increase your vehicle’s range is translated as „Електрическите автомобили не изискват някакви специални гуми, но тъй като техният асортимент е много ограничен, си струва да се закупят по-скъпи ... гуми, с които ще се подобри обсега на Вашето превозно средство” (= Electric cars do not require any special tires, but because there is a very limited selection, it pays to buy the more expensive ... tires with which the scope of your vehicle will be improved). The word for „scope” in Bulgarian is used in the sense of coverage for radars/networks etc. To add insult to injury, the gap in the latter sentence contains the adjective Low Resistance which is translated as “нискоустойчиви” (= nondurable). The logic of having to buy nondurable tires because their selection is limited in order to improve the scope of your car is obviously faulty. Thus the translator has ignored the principle of consistency, the contextual clues and the collocation requirements and has completely obscured the meaning of the sentence. The translation of gas as „газ/газов” shows a complete lack of awareness of the differences between American and British English usage. Gas in American is short for gasoline and stands for petrol in British English and бензин/бензинов in Bulgarian. Not knowing the difference in national usage of such a basic term and not even suspecting the need to confirm the meaning, based on the context, lays the candidates open to major problems in any field of translation. There are occasional inaccuracies in the translation of the general lexis as well – e.g. the translation of As far as batteries are concerned as „от гледна точка на батериите” (= from the viewpoint of the batteries); not to mention being much smaller translated as „освен че са много по-малки” (= and besides are much smaller) instead of да не говорим, че са много по-малки. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The interpretation and use of basic conjunctions, such as but and and, in the candidates’ native language leaves a lot to be desired. Here is an example of but, used as a coordinating conjunction in the source, and translated as a subordinating one: You will notice that an electric car lacks a tailpipe ..., but the overall structure is basically the same is translated as „Въпреки че цялостната структура в основни линии е еднаква, ще забележите, че при електрическия автомобил липсва ауспух ” (= Even though the overall structure is basically the same, you will notice that an electric car lacks a tailpipe ...) instead of Ще забележите, че електрическият автомобил няма ауспух, но като цало кунструкцията му е същата; the connector but also is translated as „като в същото време” (= while at the same time) in line 18 and as “като обаче” (= while

32

however) in line 22 instead of но също така; the conjunction and joining the two clauses in a compound sentence in line 31 and uses ... is translated as „като използва ...” (= by using) instead of и използва. The translation of is gaining much more support as “се ползва с много по-голяма подкрепа” (= enjoys a much bigger support) shows that the candidate would benefit from comparing the differences in the expression of grammatical meanings in the two languages. Although the verb “се ползва” is of the Imperfective aspect it does not on its own relay the idea that the process has only started recently and is unfolding at the moment which has to be clarified through lexical means – се радва на/печели все по-голяма подкрепа (= is gaining an ever bigger support). There are gross errors in misinterpreting syntactical relationships even on the phrase level – e.g. AC Induction (motor) is translated as “с индукция на променлив ток” (= with the induction of AC), instead of „индукционен двигател с променлив ток”; the Permanent Magnet motor is translated as „Постоянния магнитен мотор” (= The permanent magnetic motor), instead of моторът с постоянен магнит; The Nickel-Metal Hydride batteries is translated as “Батериите, които са никелово-метални хидриди” (=The batteries which are nickel-metal hydrides) instead of никело-водородните акумулатори /акумулаторите с никелово-метален хидрид/никел-метал-хидридните акумулатори. Problems with the use of the full/short form of the Definite article also suggest an insufficient grasp of syntax. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Failure to pay sufficient attention to the punctuation in the source and lack of awareness of the differences between the punctuation rules in English and Bulgarian deprive the candidates of important clues for comprehension. This could, at least partially, be the cause behind the misinterpretation of the sentence The electric motor needs no oil, no tune-ups and, since there are no tailpipe emissions, no smog checks is translated as “Електрическият мотор не се нуждае от масло или настройване, тъй като при него няма отделяне на газови емисии, нито е нужна проверка на смога.” (= The electric motor needs no oil or tuning, as there are no gas emissions, nor is a smog check necessary.) The candidate has disregarded the commas in the original and failed to detect the ellipses (marked in Bulgarian by a dash, but not marked in English). Lack of awareness of acronym and capitalisation conventions and the logic behind them can also pose serious problems. EV is a popular acronym in English and its use makes reading the text easier. Not so in Bulgarian, where there is no established acronym. One of the candidates creates one, based on the Bulgarian translation of “electric transport vehicle”. The first problem with it is that it is ambiguous with other accepted acronyms. Then the acronym is given first, and its meaning follows in brackets – it should be the other way around. All this is followed by the English acronym in brackets. And later on the final syllable of the final word behind the acronym in Bulgarian is added to signify the plural which takes some figuring out on the part of the reader. In addition to that, the translation of the three types of electric motors is followed by the terms in English in brackets. The candidate has probably assumed that, since they are capitalised in English, they should be treated as proper names. However, even if that were the case, the names should be left in English first and their meaning in Bulgarian should be added in brackets. The result of this confusion is a text that is extremely cluttered and difficult to follow. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 33% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The overall candidate performance was mediocre or worse. It needs to be said that the ability to produce a text in fluent and appropriate Bulgarian is important in meeting the requirement of professional acceptability. There were a number of clumsy and inappropriate renderings which distort the message. There were no omissions.

33

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Accuracy is important. Candidates had problems with accuracy and register. One error was the translation of legislation as „законодателството” which is inaccurate. Understanding fees was translated as „споразумяване за такси и възнаграждения” instead of разбиране на таксите. „Тайни налози” was the translation of hidden fees. A more accurate rendering could be, for example скрити такси. Another decoding error was the translation of abusive terms as „обидни термини” which is a very literal translation and is difficult to understand. A more accurate rendering could be, for example неблагоприятни договорни условия. The sentence The president said otherwise was translated as „Освен това президентът каза.” which distorts the meaning of the ST. A more accurate rendering could be, for example Президентът каза точно обратното. There were some good terminological and vocabulary choices such as „финансови пазари” and „потребители”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a few grammatical mistakes mainly with tenses and word order. One such mistake was the translation of the past tense construction (line 25) as present simple tense. There were some good sentence structures (line 4) but also some sentences that were poorly constructed (lines 21-26). Some sentences were clumsy (lines 11-12) and did not sound natural in the target language. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling and punctuation were good with some minor mistakes involving missing commas. This could have been avoided by allowing time for proofreading. The transfer of the names was accurate. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The text was a translation challenge because of the use of very interesting descriptive language and unusual lexical choices like the name FUSSPOT. However, it was not technical and did not contain any specific professional terminology. Performance was poor and the majority of the mistakes were due to lack of comprehension. The beauty of the text and the author’s message were completely lost. The candidate had problems fully understanding the ST and did not seem to have sufficient in-depth knowledge of the finer points of the source language. The grammar was good. The punctuation was inappropriate. There were question marks added to the TT which did not exist in the ST. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) It is difficult to talk about lexical choices because whole sentences and paragraphs have been misunderstood. Following below are some of the comprehension mistakes: Line 2, “ всъщност много части от тялото” was the translation given to or many faults instead of или много недостатъци. Line 5, „печално отпусната плът” was the translation given to sombre tones of sagging flesh. The candidate has failed to understand that the author talks about sombre colour tones. he/she has omitted the word sombre and has translated (back translation) sombre sagging flesh. There was a 6 word omission in line 6 she was trying not to get wet. In line 12, the word pale has not been rendered. In line 15 fuss fuss was translated as „ отново-дзън,дзън” (back translation: ring, ring). A more accurate rendering would be for example оплаквания, оплаквания. In line 16, „нещо никак не беше наред: сигурно са получили някаква новина от някого?...” (back translation: something was really wrong; maybe they received some news from someone?)

34

was the translation of metaphysically wrong; they should have had some kind of intermediary. An agent. this sentence was completely misunderstood. a better translation would be for example…метафизически погрешно; може би те трябваше да имат някакъв вид посредник. Агент. The whole of paragraph 3 was rendered inaccurately. The candidate failed to understand that SHE (line 18) in the first sentence refers to Lucy and not to Mrs Fusspot as it appears in the TT. Line 20, she was reasonably sure her mind was going is translated as „Беше обаче сравнително уверена, че ума ѝ все още не ѝ изневеряваше,...” (back translation: She was reasonably sure her mind still was not betraying her) This translation is exactly the opposite in meaning to the ST. Line 33, to get rid OF is rendered as “да се освободиш от” instead of да се оттървеш от.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The grammar was good, however the decoding errors mentioned in Aspect 1 led to incoherence.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling was good the punctuation – satisfactory. There were extra question marks inserted at the end of paragraph 2 and at the beginning of paragraph 5 in the TT which do not appear in the ST. The Direct speech (lines 23-26) was not punctuated properly in the TT.

The name Fusspot should be translated not transcribed because there was a hidden meaning behind it. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The text is from a science magazine and website covering recent developments in science and technology for a general English-speaking audience. The subject terminology is easily understood by laymen who would be familiar with most of it, yet one of the candidates has had serious problems with it. Candidates would benefit from improving their insight into grammar, and syntax in particular. Of the technical problems, punctuation seems to have presented the biggest challenge. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Problems with the translation of the terminology arise from a candidate trying to translate word for word most of the terminology, instead of matching the English terms to their Bulgarian equivalents, changing or obscuring the meaning of the text in the process. As early as line 1, the central term conservation is translated with a single word “опазване”, immediately associated with “environmental protection” instead of the preservation of plastics. Thus the reader is introduced to the wrong topic and the introduction does not cohere with what comes afterwards. Another key concept, occurring regularly throughout the text using synonyms, such as decay/break up, is translated as “рухна/разруха” (= ruin/downfall). The list of serious errors is long and spreads even over the general lexis: carbon-based molecules is translated as „с предимно въглероден състав молекули” (= molecules in whose composition carbon predominates); photons translated as „протони” (= protons); guncotton translated literally as „пистолетен памук” instead of пироксилин; reels translated with the term used for “spools of cotton/thread” = “макари” instead of киноролки; additives translated as „съставки” (= components); alternative translated as „вариант” (= variant). The other candidate understood and rendered the text adequately. As far as terminology is concerned, there is only one recommendation, regarding the translation of conservation as „консервиране”. While not an error, as the required meaning does exist as a second choice, the

35

main meaning of the word is associated with the preservation of food. On the other hand, the same root with a different suffix, консервация, is used exclusively for works of art and non-food objects, and would be preferable in this context. In addition to that, the quality of the translation would improve if the Latin loan word were replaced, at least occasionally, with its Bulgarian equivalent съхраняване to avoid repetition, especially in the last paragraph, where the term occurs three times. There is a serious concern about attempts to achieve the proper style by making it more prosaic: the imagery in before it crumbles into dust is substituted with a stock phrase “преди да е станало прекалено късно” (= before it is too late), the figurative expression go up in smoke is translated literally, using a technology term, as “подпушиха”, instead of отидоха на вятъра; and the evil day of decay is reduced to „неприятният разпад” (= the unpleasant decay). This has probably been done in the belief that it would make the text sound more scientific, but it must be remembered that an image is worth a thousand words in any text and that the translator must stay true to the original in every respect. In the sentence Cinema film made from celluloid ... caused the movie industry to explode in more ways than one the candidate has failed to see the pun on the literal and figurative meanings of the word explode and has altered and obscured the meaning: „Кинолента, изработена от целулоид, доведе до избухването на киноиндустрията по един по-различен начин” (= A cinema film made from celluloid ... led to the explosion of the movie industry in a somewhat different way). Explosion here could be translated with the word for boom, as in Bulgarian it also stands for the sound made in firing a gun - Кинолентата, изработена от целулоид, предизвика бум в киноиндустрията по няколко начина. A phrase, such as a ticking bomb, translated literally as “бомба с часовников механизъм”, sounds like the description of a type of a bomb, rather than an impending disaster, and should be replaced with the set phrase for time-bomb = бомба със закъснител. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The sentence structures were often long and convoluted, far from the clear, succinct style of the source. On several occasions, lines 7, 8, 21 the candidate used the demonstrative pronoun “това” (=this) instead of personal pronouns in joining clauses together, which makes the sentences clumsy at best. The contrastive function of a simple conjunction, such as but in line 16, was misinterpreted as „но освен това той е” (= but in addition to that it is) instead of ала той еи (= yet it is also). Noun phrases, e.g. “с предимно въглероден състав” (= in whose composition carbon predominates), were used as adjectives before a noun – in Bulgarian they are only allowed in post-position. Subordinate clauses were separated by lines of text and other candidates for subjects from their intended one, making sentences incoherent, e.g. clusters of long, chain-like carbon-based molecules that can be shaped when warm is translated as „групирване на дълги, наподобяващи верига, и с предимно въглероден състав молекули, чиято форма може да бъде променяна докато е топло” (= groupings of long, similar to chains, in whose composition carbon predominates molecules, whose form can be changed while it is warm). Non-matching parts of speech, e.g. a gerund instead of a noun in translating clusters as “групирване”, were used for no reason. Parasitic words and phrases were added - e.g. at that point translated as „в този даден момент” (= at this given moment). Although the exception, rather than the rule, the second candidate made a few mistakes with regard to cohesion and matching the grammatical meanings of the English verbs to the Bulgarian ones. An example of the former can be found in lines 5 – 6, where an impersonal construction, meant to refer to plastics, comes straight after a different noun (flexibility) at the end of the preceding sentence. As a result, the gender-number agreement of the substituting indirect object pronoun sounds at odds with its immediate syntactical antecedent. Furthermore the anaphora is part of the first clause of a compound sentence, which uses an impersonal construction, whereas the second clause in the sentence assumes plastics to be the omitted subject. The conjunction yet in line 36 is translated as “въпреки това” (= despite that) instead of затова пък. The problem, relating to verbs, is revealed in the translation of lines 18 – 19. It is not suitable to keep the past simple tense in the translation here, as this tense emphasises the concrete occurrence of the action in a specific place plus an eyewitness experience of it – Bulgarian makes

36

it a point to specify whether the source of information is direct or indirect and, unlike English, has an alternative mood to the indicative, to distinguish accounts of actions which have not been witnessed by the speaker. So the combination of the meaning of the past simple tense with the perfective aspect of the verbs, as is the case here, in the Indicative mood results in the idea of a single action completed in a given moment in the past and witnessed by the speaker. The idea of a single occurrence has been reinforced by the addition of the definite article to the adverbial modifier „в горещото време” (= in the hot weather). All of this can be resolved by using the Bulgarian equivalent of the present perfect tense plus the imperfective aspect of the second verb in the sentence to signify that the action was not limited to one occurrence: Много от ранните целулоидни филми са отишли на вятъра заради спонтанно възпламеняване на архивираните киноролки в горещо време. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation proved to be a big problem for one of the candidates. Commas were added where they should not be – e.g. within an insert as in line 1-2 and around “обаче”. However, they were omitted on many occasions at the end of a clause, or before a conjunction requiring them. The dash was omitted where it should mark an ellipsis in Bulgarian where the candidate failed to translate ranging from in line 7. A dash was used instead of a comma after “So” in line 25. There was just one bad spelling mistake, which, luckily, is easily identifiable in this context, but could be very serious in another. The meaning of give (form), which the candidate is aiming at, is rendered by the verb придаде, while “предаде”, as spelled by the candidate, stands for hand over/betray. This is one of the commonly misspelled words that a professional should watch for and guard against. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The overall candidate performance was mediocre or worse. It needs to be said that the ability to produce a text in fluent and appropriate Bulgarian is important in meeting the requirement of professional acceptability. Some candidates followed the English word order slavishly and produced a stilted translation. There were a number of clumsy and inappropriate renderings which distorted the message at several points. There were no omissions. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Although the English text did not appear to include, at least at first sight, any particularly difficult terminology, many candidates had problems with accuracy and register. The main error was the translation of the key word in this text attainer which received many versions such as: „университетската младеж”, „академичната младеж”, „младите специалисти”, „студенти”, „пълнолетни” which distorted the meaning of the source text. A more accurate rendering could be, for example новите потенциални гласоподаватели. Other serious mistakes were: the translation of group as „групировка” which has a negative meaning in Bulgarian and is not the correct choice here; „централни и районни управления” was the translation of central and local government and is difficult to understand; public institutions was translated as „общински организации” which is incorrect and distorts the meaning. There were some good terminological choices such as „проучване” and „политици”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) This aspect was handled better than the first one. There were few grammatical mistakes mainly with tenses and word order. One such mistake was the translation of a future perfect tense construction (line 23) as a simple future tense one. Some renderings did not use an appropriate Bulgarian construction. For example: the word order in the translation of lines 5, 22, 34. The

37

sentence beginning with Whilst they will have been exposed…..caused a particular problem and the correct tense was not used by many candidates. There were some good sentence structures.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling and the punctuation were good with no serious errors. One mistake was the rendering „Уелското Събрание” where the second word should have a small letter and not an initial capital as in English. The transfer of figures was accurate except where one candidate wrote the figures in words in brackets which was not necessary. The names Welsh Assembly and Greater London Assembly were not translated correctly by many candidates.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates should leave time to read the ST and the introductory paragraph carefully. A translator needs a broad cultural and linguistic knowledge of both native and target country. This can only be achieved by reading extensively in both languages.

Candidates should be faithful to the original and always double-check meaning in the dictionary. Before starting, read the ST carefully and try to identify key phrases, hidden “traps” and complicated clauses. Some of the translations showed that candidates need more English language training.

The context is the translator’s best friend. It provides you with logical, grammatical and punctuation clues – follow them when working out the meaning of unfamiliar words and challenging structures.

A translator needs a broad cultural knowledge of bothnative and target country, its history, its customs and its society. This can only be achieved by reading extensively in both languages. Familiarise yourself with relevant terminology by reading specialised newspapers, magazines or websites for example www.msnbc.com, The Financial Times etc. Always allow time for proofreading. Do not think that translating allows you to use awkward expressions you would never use as a native speaker.

Candidates would benefit greatly from more extensive and in-depth study of English. A translator needs a broad cultural and linguistic knowledge of both native and target country. This can only be achieved by reading extensively in both languages. The candidate should be faithful to the original and always double-check meaning in the dictionary.

The importance of re-reading the original and revising your translation cannot be overemphasised. Always ask yourself if the way you have interpreted and rendered the text makes sense. And then ask yourself if it sounds right. Do not shy away from figurative language in scientific texts – it has got its important role to play there as well.

Familiarise yourself with relevant terminology. The only way to achieve this is by regularly reading specialised magazines or online editions of, for example The International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, The Times newspaper etc. Also become familiar with the political system in the UK.

Before starting the translation allow time to read the ST carefully. At the end always allow time for proofreading. Always double check meanings found in dictionaries.

Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


http://www.msnbc.com/

38

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ENGLISH INTO CROATIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Very good understanding of the source text (ST) was shown. Only occasionally some minor mistakes were made. The translations were well organised, with good sentence structure and overall coherence. There were no omissions and names were transferred correctly. It needs to be said that it is important to scrutinise every sentence when translating no matter how simple it may look in English. Only one serious mistake is enough to lower an overall impression. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Translations showed a good command of the understanding of the ST and only occasionally was there a slight lack of clarity. The vocabulary, terminology, idioms and register were faithful to those of the ST. There were some mistakes in appropriateness of rendering and lexis such as in the example He winces when I say which was translated as “trznuo se kad sam mu to rekao”, a more accurate translation could have been trgnuo se kada sam mu to rekao. Some very good choices were made as in the translation of Shirky turned to the fledging phenomena of online social networking translated as “Shirky se okreće prema tek nastajućem fenomenu internetskih društvenih mreža. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure. Texts read well with good cohesion and coherence. Minor structural mistakes occurred in the text mainly due to some lack of cohesion, such as in the sentence “njegova predviđanja......pokazala se točnom“, which would be more accurate as njegova predviđanja ….pokazala su se točnim. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Both punctuation and transfer of names were generally correct. Only minor mistakes occurred such as “University-ju” which would have been better translated into the target language. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should leave time to read the ST carefully so that superficial misreading is avoided. They should also read their version at the end, without reference to the original. They would thus would have a better feel for how it should sound in the target language. Use the dictionary intelligently, not slavishly. It is important to understand the concepts behind an article. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE

General Report on Candidate Performance Excellent understanding of the ST was shown. Only occasionally some minor mistakes were made. Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure and overall coherence with only minor mistakes in rendering and grammar. There were no omissions and names were transferred correctly. It needs to be said once again that it is important to scrutinise every sentence when translating, no matter how simple it may look in the target language. Only one serious mistake is enough to lower an overall impression.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any)

39

Translations showed good understanding of the ST and only occasionally was there a slight lack of clarity. The vocabulary, terminology, idioms and register were faithful to those of the ST with only minor mistakes in appropriateness of rendering and lexis such as in the example Jean-Luc has at last shown translated as “Jean-Luc je pokazao barem”; a more accurate translation would have been Jean-Luc je konačno pokazao. Some very good choices were made. For example, The distant-distorted voice was rendered as “Glas izobličen radi udaljenosti“.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Translations were well organised with good use of sentence structure. Texts read well with good cohesion and coherence. Minor structural mistakes occurred in the target texts (TTs) mainly due to certain grammar choices, such as in the sentence “koji je ju je imao na pretek” which would sound better as, for example, koji je nje imao na pretek.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The punctuation was generally correct as was the transfer of names. Only minor spelling mistakes occurred such as “njiovih imena”.

Unit 2C: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

UNIT 03D: SCIENCE

General Report on Candidate Performance The translation showed very good understanding of the ST. Only occasionally were some minor mistakes made. Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure and overall coherence.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Translations showed good understanding of the ST. Lack of clarity was found occasionally. The vocabulary, terminology, idioms and register were faithful to those of the ST. There were some mistakes in appropriateness of rendering and lexis such as in the example caused the movie industry to explode in more ways than one which is translated as “koja je uzrokovala raznovrsne eksplozije u filmskoj industriji”; a more accurate translation could have been koja je uzrokovala eksploziju u filmskoj industriji ne samo na jedan način. Some good choices were made in the translation of Our love affair with plastics stems in large part from their flexibility translated as “Naša zaljubljenost u plastične mase potiče u velikoj mjeri iz njihove savitljivosti. “

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The translation was well organised, with good sentence structure. The text read well with good cohesion and coherence. Minor structural mistakes occurred in the text mainly due to lack of cohesion such as in the sentence “djelujući baš kao i zaštita od sunca, ili na primjer,” which would sound better if it had been restructured.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Technical aspects were handled well. There were only minor spelling mistakes such as “oubličiti”.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates should leave time to read the ST carefully so that superficial misreading is avoided. They should also read their version at the end, without reference to the original. Th would then have a better feel for how it should sound in the target language. Use the dictionary intelligently, not slavishly. It is important to understand the concepts behind an article.

Unit 3D: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


40

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ENGLISH INTO CZECH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Most candidates unfortunately did not perform very well: .There was a large discrepancy in performance; the main reason could be that candidates were expecting a more general topic and thought that was more specialised as it was about the Internet. But the Internet and everything connected with it is now very mainstream. Another reason may be that the candidates did not recognise the humorous parts of the text or those that were meant to be humorous. They also had problems with the many adjectives in the text and opted for near rather than precise equivalents. There were problems with the names – to decline or not to decline. Then there was the title of a book – how to translate it; some did not translate at all. And numerals – some still do not know that the English billion is miliarda in Czech. One has to be precise and if the text says dozens one cannot just say “tucet” but tucty. And one has to pay attention to syntax and how to deal with it in Czech. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Here there were problems both with understanding the text and then with translating it. A good example is the word techie which was best translated as “ajťák“. Technický nadšenec is also acceptable but most people translated it as “technik" which is just technician which misses the point entirely. Crushingly dreary proved a real problem. The worst translation was “jízlivě fádní“, the best “zoufale nudné“ but most people got it wrong. Another problem was illuminating. We had “nejosvícenější“, “nejvzdělanější“,which is quite wrong as it should be poučný, instruktivní. Bleak sentence was another big problem. Some people looked it up and used the term “holá věta“ which really is a grammatical term and it should be neradostná, pochmurná. Another problem was rhetorical fluency which really means řečnické umění but most people translated it as “rétorická plynulost“. Technoluddite is not “rádoby technolog but odpůrce technologie“ or “odpůrce technického pokrouk“, dodo means je již pasé and not “průmyslový krach“. Examples of good renditions: Very obvious as “nasnadě“ or “evidentní“. Wilfully opaque as “záměrně nesrozumitelná“, unnervingly as “znepokojivě“, bowls you over as “dech vám však vyrazí“, bewildered as “nejde mu do hlavy“, so it came to pass as “tak se i stalo“, juvenile vacuity as “dětinská bezduchost“. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a few problems with grammar that came up several times: the Czech conditional form is byste and not “by jste”. The preposition skrz is purely colloquial and it is never used in written Czech. The name Clay Shirky should be declined. Then there were problems with syntax – the candidates did not read carefully enough to get the right meaning and produced totally incorrect versions. Examples: …his conversation is warm and discursive, intently engaged yet relaxed is not “s plynulým a navazujícím obsahem konverzace, velmi zaujatý a klidný” or “jeho řeč je vřelá a nesoustředěná, bedlivě zaneprázdněný, přesto uvolněný”. The right translation is ...hovoří s vřelostí a zeširoka, s pozorným zájmem, a přitom uvolněně or jeho konverzace je vřelá, logiská, pozorně angažující, a přesto uvolněná. Now 46, his first career … caused problems as well. It is not “...Jeho kariéra začala ve věku 46 let…” or “Nyní ve věku 46 let, jeho první zaměstnání bylo …” A correct translation would be simply: Teď je mu 46 let. Another problem was: If a guru is defined by the credulous deference he commands from others, then… It is not “…důvěru vzbuzující úctou, se kterou jej ostatní poslouchají…” or “guru, jako o expertu v oboru” (the latter example is not even an attempt at translation) or “je definován důvěřivou úctou, kterou nařizuje ostatním”. It should be: A je-li guru definován důvěřivou ůctou, kterou v ostatních vzbuzuje, ...

41

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were several problems under this aspect: Using a capital letter in “Váš” applies to informal letters only. New York University is not just “universita v New Yorku”, it is the name of that university i.e. Universita New York. There were a couple of other problems: the title of the book proved difficult to translate; and there was an absence of the bracketed English title which should have been inserted after the translation. Here Comes Everybody: How Change Happens When People come together is best translated as Všichni jsou tady: Jak dochází ke změnám, když se lidé dají dohromady. Numerals: billion is miliarda in Czech. There were no major problems with punctuation. Recommendations to candidates Students should read extensively in both languages, on history, customs and society as well as on current issues in the UK. This background knowledge is essential. Candidates should read the source text (ST) very carefully and try to identify key phrases, hidden ‘traps’ and complicated clauses. It is necessary to do this first to avoid a possible misunderstanding. Candidates should be well versed in English syntaxIt is important to adopt the Czech word order which may differ from the English one and, if wrong, can change the meaning or just sound awkward. New pieces of information are usually at the end of a sentence. Make sure you transfer the figures correctly. Read the final text as seen through the eyes of a potential reader and adjust. Unit 01: Pass Rate 36% (2011); 62% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Whilst candidates demonstrated good comprehension of the (ST), there were significant differences in terms of their ability to reproduce this in their translations. Whilst some translations were faithful to the style and register and read as authentic pieces of writing, others failed to adopt the appropriate style and register, and were stylistically deficient. None contained any major technical faults. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Whilst some displayed excellent comprehension and command of language use with a number of minor inaccurate renderings, others failed to render the message accurately due to misunderstanding. In some cases the register was not rendered accurately as the language and style were more colloquial than that of the ST. “Auto” was used instead of automobile, “nějaké speciální pneumatiky” (“some special tyres”) instead of žádné speciální pneumatiky. The number of inaccuracies varied in their number and severity. In the trunk was translated as under the trunk, [driving] range was translated as “rozsah funkcí vozidla” (meaning vehicle’s range of functions) as opposed to jízdní dosah. In one paper Nickel-Metal-Hydride battery was translated as “baterie vyrobená z niklu” (“battery made of nickel”) rather than Nikl-metal hydridová baterie. smog check was translated as “emissions control”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Whilst some translations were almost faultless in terms of style, others contained too many grammatical errors and faults in structure and cohesion. Word order and sentence structure are important not only to make the text read authentically but also to stress the right words. In “Existují tři hlavní typy elektrických motorů v současných elektricky poháněných vozidlech” (There are three major types of electric motors in EVs today) the subject is changed into an object and vice versa,

42

creating an impression that the next passage is going to be about the EVs whilst it is, in fact, about motors. The sentence sounds unnatural and confuses the reader. It should have been V sooučasných elektrických vozidlech existují tři hlavní typy elektromotorů. There were also issues with incorrect usage of conjunctions where two adversative conjunctions are used in sequence, creating an unbalanced sentence e.g. “Druhý typ má nejvyšší zrychlování, ale jen průměrně vysokou rychlost, avšak je také nejdražší.” (The second type has the highest acceleration but only an average high speed however it is also the most expensive.) Apart from the obvious mistranslation of higher as “highest”, there are two adversative conjunctions (and is translated as “but”) which not only changes the impact intended by the ST but also constitutes a grammatically incorrect sentence. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were some minor spelling and punctuation faults as well as incorrect paragraphing. Some translations contained large paragraphs instead of small ones, altering the impact intended by the ST. Recommendations to candidates It is necessary to pay attention to the style, register and terminology used. Candidates would benefit from expanding their vocabulary in order to be able to use synonyms in appropriate contexts. Being able to comprehend any text is only one part of a successful translation; it is equally important to reproduce it using the correct structural and grammatical techniques as well as appropriate vocabulary. Developing an active and accurate grasp of Czech grammar, lexis and sentence structure would be beneficial. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The overall performance of candidates was very high. They had to understand the topic, translate it into appropriate terms and make sure that the final text was stylistically and syntactically acceptable. Candidates’ writing in Czech gave evidence of authentic expression and choice of vocabulary. Naturally, there is room for improvement and it would be good to have total comprehension of the (ST) at the start of the translating process. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Full comprehension is important. The word regulator exists in Czech as regulátor. In spite of that two people wrote kontrolor which is not the same. The phrase abusive terms was translated as podezřelé odborné názvy which is a strange sounding phrase in the first place and it does not make any sense in the text. On the other hand, there were some very good renditions. Assessing risks as “zvažování rizik, posoudit rizika, zhodnocování rizik”, shadowy deals as “nejasné transakce”,or put the complex law in consumer-oriented terms as “orientovat složitý zákon na spotřebitele”,or as “snažil se zaměřit”, or another one to foot the bill as “aby zatáhli účet, platit za chyby”, or no more tax-funded bailouts as “konec finanční pomoci z kapes daňových poplatníků” or as “záchrany před bankrotem financované daňovými poplatníky”. Further ones are as follows: signed the law as “zlegalizoval”, to wind down without endangering as “aby byla postupně likvidována”, to impede job growth as “brzdit růst pracovních příležitostí or zpomalit tvorbu pracovních mist”. Or another one: heated election season as “roznícené volební období”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) This Aspect was very well handled. The candidates used correct sentence structures, complex sentences and word order appropriate in Czech. There was good use of passive voice and verbal nouns which is appropriate for this type of specialised text. Examples: “budou chráněni”, “jsou

43

schopni”, “aby byla likvidována”, “podepisování smluv”, “zhodnocování rizik”, “byla zapříčiněna”, “nebudou požádáni”, “byla ohrožena”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The technical aspect was almost faultless. There were no errors in spelling, punctuation or transfer of names. Recommendations to candidates Study past examination papers and try to find similar texts in English or Czech newspapers. Keep up to date knowledge of current financial and economic issues in the UK and worldwide. Read the ST very carefully, try to identify key phrases and hidden “traps”, go over specialised terminology. Always double check meanings found in dictionaries. Make sure you truly understand the ST and know the relevant Czech terminology. Only then start translating. Try to see the final text through the eyes of your reader and clear up any ambiguities. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 75% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance Most candidates failed to provide an appropriate rendering that would preserve the humorous style and structure of the ST. There were a lot of problems with grasping the fine nuances of the text. The sentence structure of the ST was intentionally unconventional but most candidates replaced it with complex clauses that diminished the intended impact. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Comprehension was a real issue for most candidates, especially where fine nuances were concerned. Only one candidate understood the correct meaning of the retiring butler. The Fusspots is meant as a derogatory name but only 2 candidates realised this and provided an appropriate alternative in Czech. Others left it as Fusspots, which cancels the satirical tone. None of the candidates managed to provide an accurate rendering of the sharpest figure – the sharpest – of any of her circle, and the translations varied from “well-defined figure, the best from any angle”; “sharply-defined outlines – the best in her surroundings”; “great figure – the greatest in her surroundings”. Only one candidate put both adjectives into the superlative but the chosen term, “most elegant” diminishes its punchiness. Similarly, only one candidate translated circle correctly, whilst most opted for “surroundings” and one for “any angle”. Perhaps the translation could have been kdysi mívala tu nejlepší postavu – tu nejlepší – ve svých kruzích (remembering to italicise the second sharpest for more impact). Only one candidate managed to transfer the word carolling correctly, most opted for “receiver”, “telephone” or omitting it altogether. The sentence she felt it was somehow wrong, metaphysically wrong; they should have had some kind of intermediary. An agent. An agent from the Lord. was misconstrued by all but one candidate. Most changed the meaning, two of them making it sound as if it was wrong to have an intermediary, one putting “She felt that something was wrong, metaphysically wrong; perhaps they should procure some intermediary, some aristocratic agent.” The one correct one was “Měla pocit, že to jaksi nebylo v pořádku, metafyticky špatně; měli by mít nějakého zprostředkovatele. Agenta. Agenta pánaboha.” Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Most candidates altered the sentence structure of the original by removing the verbless sentences and joining them into complex clauses. Whilst one candidate managed to do so successfully by retaining the humorous nature, most others changed the style completely, the satire was replaced by descriptive style. Only one candidate remained faithful to this structure and it clearly works in the Czech language too. There was an issue with a possessive versus reflexive pronoun, where she … had the sharpest figure … of any of her circle was translated by all candidates as “měla

44

nejlepší postavu v jejím okolí” – the possessive pronoun here is incorrect and needs to be in the reflexive form as we are talking about the subject of the sentence – ve svém okolí. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) A number of candidates changed the paragraph structure by condensing two or more paragraphs into one and then splitting one into two. This is not acceptable, especially in this sort of writing as paragraph structure is intended to create focus and impact. Some quotation marks for direct speech were removed, blurring the speech and thought process into one. One candidate translated six thousand volts as “six hundred volts”. “Mr Fusspot” was either left untranslated or part-translated as “Pan Fusspot”. Recommendations to candidates Be aware that literary style is the most varied of all styles, and does not necessarily conform to the conventions of grammar and sentence structure. It needs to be cohesive and coherent, and if an author chooses to adopt a style of “incomplete sentences”, as long as they are cohesive and coherent within the context, the translator should not feel the need to change their structure as that removes the intended style and impact. It is also crucial to be sensitive to the abundant nuances that English has to offer – literary style relies on these to create a desired effect. Vast majority of English words have multiple, often unrelated meanings, and it is important to recognise this and not always opt for the most obvious choice when rendering them. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 40% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The candidates’ level was very high. In fact, the distinction grade was the most faultless translation of any paper ever. It shows that even a scientific text can be viewed as a piece of art! There was a failed paper, on the other hand, where the candidate did not know Czech translations of general chemical terminology – a rather basic requirement in a science paper – and did not comprehend the text or write the translation in good Czech. It is also important to beware of Czech colloquial forms of conditionals that are not acceptable in written Czech. And as usual, it is important to truly understand the ST – one should not rely on the meaning coming out if one knows the words. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The comprehension was very good on the whole. It is important to emphasise that one has to check if there is Czech terminology available and not just use English terms. It is also important to be as accurate as possible in choosing the right alternative, and then it can be the English version that is more frequently used. Example: Cinema film made from celluloid should be translated as kinofilm vyrobený z celuloidu rather than “filmy do kin vyrobené z filmového pásu”. It is very important to recognise metaphors or funny undertones. Example: … caused the movie industry to explode in more ways than one means filmový průmysl zažil explozi, a to nejednu and not quite “filmový průmysl vyletěl ve vice způsobech” or zapříčinil výbuch ve vice než jednom případě”. Candidates found it difficult to translate the term guncotton. They used terms like “bavlna pušek” or left it untranslated, although any reader would recall the term střelná bavlna used in 19th-century literature. Other examples of good renditions: racing to save as “mají napilno, aby zachránili”, weak spot as “slabina”, once cooled as “po ochlazení”, over time as “v průběhu času”, ambient heat as “teplo z okolního prostředí”, archived reels as “kotouče uložené v archive”, can be delayed as “lze zbrzdit”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The main problem here was that following the English syntax slavishly can lead to misunderstandings. It is important to actually understand how the English syntax works and find appropriate ways to express it in Czech. It is also important to beware of the Czech word order

45

which is governed by functional sentence perspective which means that the most important part of the message is usually placed at the end of a sentence. Examples of mistakes: by acting as a sunscreen as “zabraňuje slunečnímu záření” instead of tím, že působí jako clona proti slunci, as the plastic ages as “při stáří plastu” instead of při stárnutí plastu. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were no significant mistakes in spelling or punctuation. Transfer of names: Until recently, all female surnames were required to have an –ová ending. Now, women married to foreign nationals can decide not to use the ending, but in print the custom is still to add this ending to foreign female surnames. Recommendations to candidates It is important to understand the ST, to be fully at ease with the English syntax as that can change the meaning in precise scientific texts. And remember that specialised terminology is strict and scientific terms cannot be replaced by synonyms or indiscriminate use of English terms. Therefore, candidates must become familiar with relevant terminology. Study past examination papers, create your own scientific lists and read similar texts in Czech magazines dedicated to science or technology. And remember that even a scientific text must be readable. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 75% (2011); 57% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The candidates demonstrated a varying degree of comprehension skills, range of specialised vocabulary, and ability to render the text in grammatically and structurally correct sentences that would appropriately reflect the style, register and intended purpose of the original. Whilst some candidates were able to reconstruct sentences in an excellent way, others adhered too closely to ST sentence structure and word order and this resulted in stilted and even incoherent passages. All contained only a small number of technical errors. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Even the best candidates fell prey to using literal translations of certain terms that may not carry the same meaning in Czech or may not be the most appropriate in the context. In Institutions, processes and procedures terms used are “procesům a procedurám” which are almost synonymous in Czech and in this context “procedura” has a colloquial connotation whilst “process” is more synonymous with ‘trial’. Postupům a metodám would have been a much more appropriate choice. Designed in Political institutions designed to strengthen... is translated as “navrženy”. This is not correct in the context as the institutions were not just ‘proposed’ to work in this way, they already function thus Politické instituce určené k posílení... fits the context much better. Whilst attainers is a difficult word to translate, “target group” or “school leavers” does not perhaps correspond too well. One good translation was prvovoliči. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) It is crucial to pay close attention to grammar in papers of this register and purpose. Correct usage of pronouns and appropriate declensions are the basic skills of a translator. In “Hledáme způsoby financování tohoto našeho návrhu, jejímž cílem je první britská národní studie...” the relative pronoun “jejímž” is in feminine form yet the noun it relates to is in masculine. It should be jehož. In “spoustě klíčovým faktorům” (many key factors) – the ‘key factors’ should be in genitive, not dative – spoustě klíčových faktorů. In one paper there are also two pronouns to one noun: “tohoto našeho návrhu” (of this our proposal). It needs to be realised by linguists that although the word “narozdíl” (unlike) is widely used, it is in fact grammatically incorrect, and should be na rozdíl.

46

Sentence structure is also crucial in papers of this nature and over-complex clauses only make decoding information more difficult. It is important not to follow the English structure as it can make the text stilted or, even worse, incoherent: We will gain important insights into the broader question about whether or not there is a crisis of democratic legitimacy in Britain is translated literally, to the word, including the two prepositions denoting place (there and in) “Získáme důležité porozumění širší otázky, jestli je tu krize demokratické legitimnosti v Británii”. Whilst they will have been exposed to many of the key factors is translated as “Mezitím, co byli vystaveni mnoho klíčovým faktorům“, which is clearly incorrect as whilst may mean ‘whereas’ as well as ‘during the time’; it also contains a major grammatical fault where “mnoho” should be dative, not nominative – mnoha. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most of the papers were of good standard but close attention needs to be paid to the placement of commas. Also reorganising the paragraph structure is not acceptable and candidates should not feel the need to condense an 8-paragraph text into a 3-paragraph one. It is also important to transfer names and titles correctly. Greater London Assembly is not “big assembly in London” but Shromáždění Velkého Londýna. Recommendations to candidates It is imperative to recognise that many English words have multiple, often unrelated meanings, and to not always opt for the most obvious choice when rendering them. Sometimes it may just not be appropriate for the context, whilst at other times it can actually be inaccurate. We repeatedly see adequate comprehension skills from candidates that are not matched by their ability to render the text into Czech to the required standard. This is especially important in papers of a scholarly nature and candidates would certainly benefit from improving their knowledge of Czech grammar, rules of sentence construction and punctuation. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance Both translations produced good TTs in terms of register and specialised terminology. They demonstrated excellent knowledge of the subject matter, comprehension of the fine nuances, and a good range of general vocabulary and specialist terminology. With small exceptions, both candidates demonstrated an ability to produce well-organised, cohesive sentences. The text in both was well modified and adequately reflected the complexity of style. Aspect 3 was almost faultless. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) To a large extent any inaccuracies are a question of incorrect selection of a term. Legal terminology is very closely interrelated and the differences in meaning of individual words can be imperceptible. One candidate translated High Court as “vysoký soudní dvůr” instead of nejvyšší soud. Unless the contractual term doing so is reasonable is translated as “unless the contractual term is not acceptable” and reasonableness as “acceptability”. bespoke is translated as “předem objednaný”, where this term only suggests that it had been ordered from mass stock, not to personal requirement, and should be na zakázku. ...actual pre-contract process used by the supplier and for the supplier to ensure that it does not... is translated as “process used by the supplier and for the supplier prior to entering the contract so that it can be ensured that a contract is entered into in the manner...” – by the supplier and for the supplier are placed as two equal subjects. The translator did not recognise that here it signals a new clause and should be process, který dodavatel užívá, a aby dodavatel garantoval, že se skutečně smluvně zavazuje...

47

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There are a small number of exceptions where complex clauses would benefit from reorganisation to improve their coherence and cohesion: The limitations of R’s liability in the standard terms were unfair and inapplicable... was translated as “Omezení odpovědnosti, kterou R měl, v běžných podmínkách bylo nespravedlivé a nepoužitelné” – it may be a misplacement of the second comma which should be between běžných and podmínkách but the sentence would still benefit from simplification, for example Omezení odpovědnosti R v běžných podmínkách bylo nespravedlivé a nepoužitelné. R argued that any liability that arose from the software being defective had to be dealt with in accordance with the standard terms was translated as “R tvrdil, že jakákoli odpovědnost, která byla důsledkem toho, že software byl závadný, bude vyřízena v souladu se sdandardními podmínkami.” “Odpovědnost byla v důsledku” is not grammatically correct, and should be jakákoli odpovědnost vyvstávající ze závadnosti softwaru. Also, had to be dealt with should be translated as musí být vyřízena, not “bude vyřízena”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The translations are of good technical quality. The only issues were a repeated use of “standartní” instead of standardní – it is a non-existent word but may be also construed as a mistranslation in a noun form (“standart” means a banner). It is also crucial to use commas in the correct places. Recommendations to candidates Legal texts can be very complex in terms of nuances and sentence structure. It is crucial to be familiar with this subject matter in order to produce accurate translations. It is also imperative to pay close attention to placement of commas in Czech sentences as they may in circumstances alter the meaning of a sentence. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 50% (2010)


48

DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ENGLISH TO DANISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The candidate had understood the source text (ST) well, and the translation flowed well, apart from a few areas where it was a little unclear. There were no omissions or missing text. The quality of the candidate's writing in the target language was good and, for the most part, grammatically accurate and cohesive. However, there were some problems with organisation of work, which lead to slightly convoluted translations, and a very small number of grammatical mistakes. There were a considerable number of technical errors, mainly punctuation, and some typos, which indicates carelessness. It was because of the sheer number of these technical errors that the candidate received a mark below the minimum pass mark in Aspect 3. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate was able to write well in a register appropriate to the ST. There were, however, a few instances where the choice of a different word/phrase would have been more appropriate, and one instance where the candidate's choice of word made very little sense. The following sentences are used to illustrate the above points: - “ugennemsigtigt” was the translation given to opaque. A more accurate rendering in this context would be “uklart” because this is less tangible and in keeping with the English meaning. An example of a very direct translation. - “knusende” was the translation of crushing. A more accurate rendering in this context would be “overvældende”. An example of an overly direct translation. - The English phrase techie stereotype was translated as “tek-stereotype”, which sounds made up. As techie is an abbreviation of technician or technology and words such as “teknofob” (technophobe) exist in Danish, it would be acceptable to translate the words with “tekno-stereotype” or even “techie-stereotype” thus keeping the English word, which is now in common use in Danish. - in theatre was translated with “i teater”, but a more appropriate rendering would be “inden for teatret”, with the noun in the determined form, because a particular industry is referred to. - a guru is defined was translated as “en guru er defineret” - not grammatically incorrect, but it would be more accurate to say “en guru defineres” because the ST is talking about gurus in general. - an obscure concept was translated as “en upåagtet ide”. It makes very little sense to use “upåagtet” here, a word which can mean unintentional. A more precise rendering would be “et lidet kendt begreb”, meaning a little known concept. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a few minor points on grammar and organisation of work, as follows: - the indifference of 25-year-olds was translated as “de 25-åriges ligegyldighed”. This is a slightly convoluted translation, and also signals that 25 year-olds care about nothing, which isn't true. It would be better rendered as “ligegyldigheden blandt (de) 25-årige”, meaning the indifference among 25 year-olds. - he is one of.... people was translated as “han er en af de... mennesker”. This is incorrect and should be “han er et af de... mennesker” because “menneske” (person) in Danish is a noun in the neutral gender, and the determiner is therefore “et” and not “en”.

49

- Arrestingly self-assured and charismatic, his conversation is warm and discursive, intently engaged yet relaxed... was translated as “Frapperende selvsikker og karismatisk, hans samtalestil er varm og konverserende, med et intenst engagement og dog afslappet”. Not only does this translation maintain the English sentence construction, which is stilted in Danish, it also implies wrongly that it is the man's conversation which is self-assured and charismatic, and not the man himself. This sentence would need to be rewritten for the purposes of translation to, He is arrestingly self-assured and charismatic....etc, thus rendering it in Danish as follows: “Han er frapperende selvsikker og karismatisk og har en samtalestil, som er både varm og konverserende, med et intenst engagement og dog afslappet.” - The business model of the traditional print newspaper... has been translated as “Den traditionelle trykte avis' forretningsmodel...”, which is somewhat convoluted. A better rendering would be “Forretningsmodellen for den traditionelle trykte avis...”. - The sentence “..monopol på nyheder, som den har nydt godt af...” (singular) would be better as “...monopol på nyheder, som de har nydt godt af...” (plural), because the it in the English should be interpreted as referring back to newspapers, not the business model. A business model is inanimate and can't enjoy anything, but newspapers, consisting collectively of editors, journalists, printing staff etc., can. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The script is perfectly legible, but with a large number of technical errors, mainly punctuation mistakes. Examples are given below: - “...Guardian, vil det du har...” There should be a comma after “det”. - “...var i teater, i New York...”. There should be no comma after “teater”. - “... dog afslappet – men det er...”. There should be a comma after “afslappet”, and not a hyphen. In Danish a hyphen is only used to indicate a shift in content, for dramatic effect, or for adding something as an aside. - “...hans retoriske udtryksevne som...”. There should be a comma after “udtryksevne”. - “...en intuition om at...”. There should be a comma after “om”. - “...sociale netværk var – en upåagtet...”. Instead of a hyphen there should be a colon after ”var”.See comments above on the use of the hyphen. - “...og Twitter og...”. There should be a comma after “Twitter”. - “...foruroligende præcise, 2009 ville...”. There should be a full stop after “præcise”. - “...forretningsmodel, er ifølge...”. The comma should be after “er”, not after “forretningsmodel”. - “...på nyheder som den...”. There should be a comma after “nyheder”. - Rupert Murdoch is spelt with a “ch” not a “ck”. - “...”The Times” og Shirky...”. There should be a comma after “The Times”, not a hyphen because there's no shift in content. - “...er overbevist om at...”. There should be a comma after “om”. - “...slags kyniker som...”. There should be a comma after “kyniker”. - “...nye bog håner – en teknologifornægter...”. Colon after “håner” is preferable because what follows is an explanation of what is being scorned. - “...teknologifornægter som er...”. There should be a comma after “teknologifornægter”. - “...at tweete at de...”. There should be a comma after “tweete”. - “...en kebab senere) bekymret over...”. There should be a comma after the end brackets because these are items on a list (i.e. what worries the aforementioned cynic) - There is no “h” in “hvirkeligheden” Recommendations to candidates

When looking up a word in the dictionary, be careful that you choose the right synonym. It may help to use a Danish to English dictionary to double-check this, and sometimes to “think outside the box”, in other words to be a little creative when using synonyms. Also, when e.g. translating a noun, checking the verb and/or adjective form of this noun, can be of help.

Double-check grammar in relation to gender of nouns.

50

Work on your punctuation. Generally there are 2 ways to punctuate in Danish: grammatical comma or comma to indicate pause. Using comma to indicate pause is very difficult in Danish, and my advice would be to learn grammatical punctuation first before even attempting the other. The Danish “Retskrivningsordbogen” includes a very clear and concise appendix on punctuation. Also, try not to be influenced by the punctuation in the ST – different languages follow different rules.

Unit 01: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The candidate had understood the ST very well, and conveyed it very well in the target language, maintaining the sardonic wit, tone, and style of the original text. There were no omissions or missing text. The quality of the candidate's writing in the target language was good and generally grammatically accurate and cohesive. However, there was one problem with organisation of work, where a better rhythm was desirable, and one very small grammatical mistake. There were a small number of punctuation mistakes, but there were also some very good examples of the use of comma to indicate pause, pace, and rhythm in the translation, which is important in a piece of literature. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate was able to write well in a register appropriate to the ST, and the translation flowed well apart from a few minor issues. The following sentences are used to illustrate the above points:

...the sharpest figure – the sharpest - ... was translated as “...den flotteste figur – den flotteste - ...”, but emphasis is lacking on the second use of the word “flotteste”. This could be indicated by using the word “allerflotteste” of the people in her social circle.

Fusspot family was translated as “familien Pylrehoved”, which is a good attempt at maintaining the sardonic humour in the translation. However, the verb “pylre” is more commonly used about children – when referring to adults, the reflexive verb “brokke (sig)” is more appropriate. Therefore it would be more appropriate to translate it as “familien Brokkesen”.

cinema was translated as “cinema”, but the text refers to the invention of the motion picture (invented by Lumiere) not the actual room where a film is shown, and a more appropriate rendering would be “spillefilm”. Cinema isn't really used in Danish.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There a couple of were minor issues, one a minor grammatical mistake, as follows:

Two sentences on page 1 start with the words “Hun havde...” and “Hun havde engang...”. This is a piece of literature and needs to have a certain rhythm, but a way around this would be to reorganise the second of the two sentences to, “Engang havde hun...”

radio panel program should be a compound word in Danish, “radiopanelprogram”, or one could just use “radioprogram”.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The script is perfectly legible, but with 6 punctuation mistakes, as follows:

51

“...da opringningen kom, det var...”. There should be a hyphen after “kom” to indicate a shift in content.

“...det glittede kunstmagasin hun...”. There should be a comma after “kunstmagasin”.

“Hvorfor så skinnende.”. There should be a question mark after “skinnende”, because this is a question.

“...efter den trådløse som rullede...”. There should be a comma after “trådløse”.

“...at hun vidste at det var...”. There should be a comma after “vidste”, and one could even omit the second “at” to maintain the flow of the language.

“...et fladt uappetitligt bryst.” There should be a comma after “fladt” because this is a list of adjectives describing the breast.

Recommendations to candidates Always double-check your punctuation, and try not to be influenced by the punctuation in the ST – different languages follow different rules. There are some good examples of the use of a comma to indicate a pause in the translation. Recommended reference material is the Danish “Retskrivningsordbogen”, which includes a very clear and concise appendix on punctuation. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The candidate had understood the ST well, and the translation flowed well, apart from a few areas where it was a little clumsy. There were no omissions or missing text. The quality of the candidate's writing in the target language was good. However, there were a number of grammatical mistakes, mainly relating to the use of prepositions and predicates. There were a considerable number of technical errors, mainly punctuation, and some typos, which indicate carelessness. It was because of the sheer number of these technical errors that the candidate received a mark below the minimum pass mark in Aspect 3. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate was able to write well in a register appropriate to the ST. There were, however, a few instances where the choice of a different word/phrase would have been more appropriate. The following sentences are used to illustrate the above points:

young people who are eligible... was translated as “... de unge, som er kvalificeret til...”, but it should read “...som er berettigede til...”. ”Kvalificeret” means qualified for a job and is incorrect here.

study was translated as “studere”, which is a literal translation of study. A more appropriate rendering would be “undersøge” or even “forske i”, meaning research.

...a minimum sample size of 1,000... was translated as “et minimum materiale i størrelsen 1.000...”. A more appropriate rendering would be “en minimum stikprøve på 1.000...”

52

...for both academics and non-academics... has been translated as “til både akademisk og ikke-akademisk brug”, meaning “for academic and non-academic use”, thus changing the meaning slightly. A more accurate rendering would be “...til brug for akademikere og ikke-akademikere”.

...political participation in Britain has been translated as “...politisk deltagelse i...”. A more accurate rendering would be “...den politiske deltagelse” because this is a specific place (i.e. Britain)

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a number of grammatical mistakes, as follows:

...eligible was translated as “kvalificeret”, but it refers back to a plural noun (people) and should have a plural ending “de”, thus ”kvalificerede”. See example in Aspect 1 for comments on the word

used here.

...vote in... was translated as “...stemme til...”. This is incorrect, and should read “...stemme ved...”, using the correct preposition.

“...hjælpe til...” is incorrect in this context and should read “...hjælpe med...”, using the correct preposition. “hjælpe til” would be used for e.g. a child helping out at home.

“... forståelse af politisk... og af holdningerne...” is incorrect and should read “...forståelse for politisk.... og for holdningerne...”, using the correct preposition.

Same issue as above. The predicate should have a plural ending because it refers back to a plural noun (”grupper”), and should read “interesserede”

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The script is perfectly legible, but with a considerable number of technical errors, mainly punctuation mistakes. Examples are given below:

“Dette er forslag...”. There should be no verb “er” after “dette”.

In Danish language adjectives are not spelt with a beginning capital letter. Thus “Britiske” should read “britiske”.

“generalt” should read “generelt”

“legimitet” should read “legitimitet”

“...også undersøge i hvilken grad...”. There should be a comma after “undersøge”.

“... vil undersøge hvorvidt...”. There should be a comma after “undersøge”.

“socialklasse” should read “social klasse”, i.e. 2 words in Danish. However, working class would be 1 word, “arbejderklasse”. One way around this issue would be to use the translation “socialt lag”, meaning social “layer”.

family background is a compound word in Danish and should read “familiebaggrund”.

“Vi vil bedømme i hvilken grad...”. There should be a comma after “bedømme”.

53

“...med politiske partier, end de førstegangsvælgere som bor...”. The comma should be moved to after “førstegangsvælgere”, because this is where the relative clause begins.

“bevarere” should read “besvarere” (respondents)

“...et betydeligt kvantitativt datamateriale...”. There should be a comma after “betydeligt” as this is a list of adjectives.

“Ydermere, forventes det at...”. The comma should be moved to after “det”, because this is where the subordinate clause begins.

Recommendations to candidates

When looking up a word in the dictionary, be careful that you choose the right synonym. It may help to use a Danish to English dictionary to double-check this. Try to avoid hidden “traps” when translating as this can lead to a subtle shift in the meaning.

Double-check grammar in relation to predicate endings. Speech has become “lazy” in Danish, but the written word still has to be correct. Also, make sure you use the right preposition for the relevant context.

Work on your punctuation. Generally there are 2 ways to punctuate in Danish: grammatical comma or comma to indicate pause. Using a comma to indicate pause is very difficult in Danish, and my advice would be to learn grammatical punctuation first before even attempting the other.

The Danish “Retskrivningsordbogen” includes a very clear and concise appendix on punctuation. Also, try not to be influenced by the punctuation in the ST – different languages follow different rules.

Spell-check your work carefully. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)


54


ENGLISH INTO DUTCH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance In general terms, candidates showed understanding of the source text (ST). There were no failed scripts. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Registers used were appropriate. The section troubled by its juvenile vacuity (line 42) was challenging. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Some grammar problems were encountered. For example: now 46, his first career was…………(line 15) was translated as “nu 46, zijn eerste carriere was”… instead of, for example, nu is hij 46 en zijn eerste carrier was. arrestingly self-assured and charismatic, his conversation is (line 17) was translated as “verbazingwekkend zelfverzekerd en charismatisch, zijn onderhoud is instead of, for example, zijn onderhoud is verbazingwekkend en zelfverzekerd Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling and punctuation did not present any problems; legibility was difficult in a handwritten script, but it was not a major issue. Recommendations to candidates No major recommendations other than those mentioned above. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 60% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The ST was full of possible pitfalls for translation. Candidates made good attempts at finding solutions, although the end results were still some way away from standing up as a piece of writing whose ironic intentions were clear. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidates managed to come up with a number of good solutions to the list of words/expressions that required particularly careful decoding and encoding, e.g. the meaning of the sharpest figure, pseudery, bumpy, retiring etc. were correctly interpreted, showing a good comprehension of English. Examples of successful renderings are “genadeloos door de tand des tijds werden blootgelegd.”, “het draadloze gekweel” en “Meneer Pietlut bleef maar doorgaan over een elektrisch hek”. Unfortunately, there were failures to convey the geographical terms with which Lucy surveys the landscape of her body: fault lines and fissures could have been found in the dictionary as meaning

55

spleten and breuklijnen instead of tears and faulty forms. “scheuren” incorrectly implies the flesh is torn. It would be more common to refer to a woman’s figure with figuur rather than “model”. The translation “de Luciaanse versie van Freud” for a Lucian Freud implied an unfamiliarity with this well-known artist and together with the above errors meant that the initial impact of the piece was somewhat lost. “conversationele manniërist” for conversational mannerist: “conversationele” is not a word found in the dictionary and would have been better rendered with e.g. onderhoudende. The colloquial nature of Lucy’s final remark on the telephone, What a clever way to get rid of one’s husband, is denied by the use of the formal verb “geraken” instead of the commonly used komen. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were no major errors in grammar. As regards tense, they should have had (line 16) was translated in a slightly convoluted way as “Ze zouden…moeten gebruikt hebben”, which could have been simply hadden moeten gebruiken. “de tachtiger jaren” is now considered to be incorrect and should be de jaren tachtig. The work should be organised with clear paragraph breaks instead of simply starting on a new line. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) This was a very difficult piece in terms of punctuation and on the whole the candidate stayed close to the idiosyncrasies of the ST. Unfortunately, changing the original semi-colon in the first line into a comma implies that it is the phone that is floating in the foam, not Lucy. There were no problems with spelling, accents or other technical points. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 75% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates had difficulties in fully understanding the ST and in providing accurate translations. There was evidence of misreading the ST and of rushing through, resulting in a number of sloppy and avoidable errors, such as omitting or repeating a phrase, and in one case translating the opposite of what was meant in the ST. One candidate was paraphrasing rather than translating some sentences. There were no serious technical errors, except that candidates should be expected at the very least to be able to spell the Dutch word for the country whose language they are translating from: Groot-Brittannië. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Notes were provided to defend the decision not to translate the key term attainers in the first sentence, or to prove that it is possible to find a solution, making a good attempt with “junior stemgerechtigden”, which goes some way towards a more Dutch sounding solution, e.g. stemgerechtigde jongeren.

56

There was inappropriate rendering, e.g. “genegenheid” as a translation of attachment (to political parties). This word for affection should have been replaced with a word which conveys a feeling of belonging, i.e. horen bij/zich aansluiten bij. In terms of register, the rubric clearly stated that this was a research proposal submitted by two people, which is reflected in the frequent use of phrases such as we will gain / We will also explore / We will examine. One candidate, however, inappropriately eliminated the personal we and replaced it with impersonal verbal constructions such as “zal waardevol inzicht verschaffen” / De studie onderzoekt tevens / Gekeken wordt”. Comprehension of the ST was patchy; with one candidate interpreting they are far less likely as the opposite: “is het veel waarschijnlijker”. There were many inaccurate translations where there are standard terms in the Dutch, e.g. questionnaire can be translated as vragenlijst and survey as enquête – frequently recurring terms in commercial translation these days - instead of “nationale questionnaire” and “onderzoek”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a number of grammatical errors: Problems with declining adjectives were found, for example: The adjective in “van politieke engagement”: as engagement is a neuter noun, the adjective politieke does not require an e. Similarly, in the final paragraph, the adjectives “grotere theoretische” do not require an e as they are followed by the neuter noun inzicht; and similarly with “rechtstreekse praktische relevant”. “alle” should have been allen, as it refers to people, not things, and “Daarnaast is het verwacht dat” should be Daarnaast wordt verwacht dat. Translating data (as in information) with the Dutch data is confusing, as this can also mean dates in Dutch; it is therefore safest to use gegevens. “zal de data” is incongruous, since “data” in Dutch is not normally used as a singular noun in the way that it can now be in English, despite its plural Latin original. There were instances of incoherent sentences, e.g. the first sentence where one candidate had “ter subsidie” followed by “om” instead of van, so that the sentence did not flow naturally. There were instances where the English construction was adhered to too closely, as well as sentences which were translated too freely and therefore lost their accuracy, e.g. A national questionnaire survey will be carried out, with attainers selected randomly from the electoral register was rendered as “De studie verstuurt per post een vragenlijst naar willekeurig uit het kiesbestand gekozen attainers uit het hele land.”, the first part of which has also lowered the tone of the sentence by making it too simple. One candidate failed to organise the work with paragraph breaks. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were no serious technical errors, except for the misspelling of Groot-Brittannië as “Groot-Britannië” and “Groot-Brittanië”. When using inverted commas for the transfer of English names, it is not advisable to half-translate a name and then use inverted commas for that, e.g. “de ‘Assembly van Wales’, het ‘Schotse Parlement’ en de ‘Assembly van Greater London’”. Another candidate had solved this more satisfactorily by saying: “het Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament en Greater London Assembly – de parlementen van respectievelijk Wales, Schotland en Londen en omstreken).”

57

Recommendations to candidates For the literature text it would be helpful to candidates to read contemporary English novels, rather than those from previous eras, as well articles in arts magazines and those on the arts pages of quality newspapers. Whilst there is always an issue of time, it is always a good idea to reserve some time at the end to read through the translation with a certain detachment, to see if it stands up as a piece of writing in the target text. And if there are some things which sound stilted or are still unclear, the candidate should dare to think of freer ways to translate these passages. Candidates are advised to read the ST through in its entirety and look up terms they are not familiar with or are not sure of, in other words, they need to prepare the text more thoroughly before starting to translate. This, together with allowing themselves sufficient time at the end to have a final read through their translation, would avoid errors of comprehension, repetition and omission. Candidates must not resort to summarizing a sentence if they find it too challenging, but to build it up piece by piece and look at it in the context of the paragraph and the text as a whole. They need to ask themselves questions such as ‘Who is the target audience?’, ‘What is the writer trying to say?’, and ‘What is the tone of this text?’ More dictionary work needs to be done, rather than hazarding a guess and putting down a word which merely approximates the term when there is a widely acceptable translation of that term. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 57% (2010)


58


ENGLISH INTO FARSI UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Unfortunately the text produced was not appropriate as a quality work for publication. There was almost no omission and all information was transferred, but the language used in many parts of the translation is confusing for the prospective Farsi readers. Candidates need to know that producing a text in fluent Farsi is a professional requirement, Translation must be very clear if they are to be professionally acceptable. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There is only one minor omission, and register in some parts is good. One major inaccuracy and several other major and minor errors in the choice of language has affected comprehensibility of the translation. Omission: cheezi (means something) is missing in line 7 on page one. Accuracy Mistake: Line 11 on page one, candidate writes “Aan Cheezeh Pichideye Nist” instead of, for example, na faghat pichideh hast balke for the translation of …is not just willfully opaque... Major errors on choice of language:

“ az bist’o panj saal ba paeen bashid” instead of for example bisto panj saleh ya kamtar bashid for translation of 25 or younger.

the word “kelishi” written in the 3rd line of paragraph 3 is not understandable.

“ darvish” was written instead of, for example, khebreh for the translation of guru

“ shodeh ast” in line 8 on page 2 should be changed to kardeh ast .

“ tweet bekonad” , line 13 on page 3 should be changed for example to ba khoshhali sohbat konad for translation of .. to tweet..

“ tavizhaye 2 on last page instead of for example taasobhaye for the translation of prejudices. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The TT has no major grammatical errors. It is well organised although not always entirely coherent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation, paragraphing, transfer of names, figures and dates are all good; there are only 3 minor spelling mistakes (line 10&11 on page one and line 9 on page two). Recommendations to candidate

Always allow time for proofreading, assess your translation with the eyes of a third party.

Read books, journals, magazines and daily newspapers written in Farsi to keep your language up to date.

Always double check meanings in both Farsi and English dictionaries.

A translator needs a broad cultural knowledge of both Iran and England, their history, customs and society. This can only be achieved by reading extensively in Farsi and English.

Unit 01: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 50% (2010)

59

UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Lack of knowledge of the subject was evident. The candidate should have read the introductory paragraph which said “the text is taken from the US-based website” to realise that the word gas is used for petrol in the US. Generally, there are no serious omissions, but because of a serious error and some spelling mistakes the candidate performance is not professionally acceptable . Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There are 3 omissions and a serious mistake. These have had a serious effect on the sense of the target text. For example: Lead, Hydride and Ion were omitted. Gas is translated “gaaz” instead of BENZENE. The style of the translation was sometimes deficientfor example:

Gas tank was translated as “Tanke Gaaz” instead of Baake Benzene.

Magnetic field was translated “Markaze Magnetiky” instead of Markaze Meghnatisy.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammar and organisation of the text are acceptable. The translation is coherent with some minor grammatical mistakes, for example:

“Raa” in line 8 and 23 of the translation is written twice instead of once.

“Shod” in line 9 should be written SHODEH.

“Miangirihaye Motevaseti Raa Darad” in line 19 should be written as AZ HAR LAHAZ BAINE IN DOH GHARAR GERAFTEH.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation, paragraphing and transfer of (names, dates, and figures) are good, but spelling mistakes have made the Farsi text unprofessional:

“Aazaye“ in line 5 is spelt wrong.

“Tanzeem” in line 6 is spelt wrong

“Moter “in line 15 should be written MOTOR.

“Bishtarn” in line 18 should be written BISHTARIN

“Reghab” in line 29 should be written REGHABAT Recommendations to candidates

Always read the introductory paragraph for guidance about the subject.

Remember that you should produce a text that is professionally acceptable, that is, suitable to be published in papers/magazines or used on line.

Always read your translation to assess it with the eyes of a third party.

Always double-check meanings in both Farsi and English dictionaries.

Reading good articles in Farsi newspapers/magazines helps to avoid spelling mistakes.

Always make yourself familiar with the subject by reading quality specialised magazines/journals related to new technologies before attending the examination.

Studying past examination papers could be useful. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW

60

General Report on Candidate Performance One serious problem was the candidates’ unfamiliarity with how to convey the message using a suitable register of Farsi. It needs to be said that the ability to produce a text in fluent and appropriate Farsi is important in meeting the requirement of professional acceptability at the Diploma in Translation level. Understanding English is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Accuracy is important. For example, is a correct translation for without reason rather than for unreasonable. Also, in some contexts translating ineffective as (“without effect”) might work, but here we have the phrase …the standard terms and conditions… was ineffective. This should have been translated as (without credibility). Inappropriate choice of register in Farsi can obscure the sense of what is meant. The defects in the software were fundamental should have been rendered as rather than

(“very large/great”). Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates need to ensure that the sentences read as an authentic text in Farsi. In English a sentence may refer to a required outcome in the preceding sentence by simply saying in order to do so, he should have been provided with the operating documents. However, in Farsi using the term (“for doing (so)”) to start a sentence without stating what action it is referring to (as indicated in the preceding sentence) is not sufficiently clear and does not read like an authentic Farsi text. Overlooking the overall cohesion of the text in the target language can result in producing sentences which read awkwardly and, on occasion, incomprehensibly. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) A number of spelling mistakes were present in the translated text. Checking the text for accuracy is as important. Recommendations to candidates The main problems in translating this kind of text are, generally, unfamiliarity with the topic and the concepts, and lack of knowledge with respect to the appropriate vocabulary and phrases in Farsi. Candidates are recommended to study relevant authentic texts in Farsi, some of which are also available online as part of their preparation for the Diploma. It is as important to develop an awareness of the language and phraseology used as it is to understand the concepts behind an article. Candidates should read their translated text to check for spelling mistakes but, more importantly, to see if it works as a piece of writing in Farsi. They are also advised to use the dictionary intelligently and not slavishly (i.e. a first step would be to buy a dictionary which gives examples of usage of words in context and for the candidates to read and compare those examples before deciding on the right word to use). Unit 3F: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)


61


ENGLISH INTO HUNGARIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Performance was quite varied this year in the general option. One paper stood out from the three in quality and merited a distinction. The profound difference between the other two papers and this one was not only that the candidate avoided a number of serious mistakes the others’ work was plagued with but also in the general knowledge and command of the Hungarian used in the media today.

It is difficult to overestimate the importance of knowing your target language – candidates seem to be quite prone to making the mistake of believing they are ready to take the Dip.Trans. examination because they can understand the source text (ST). Even if this is true – which it is often not – a good command of the target language is just as important as comprehension of the original. Knowledge of conventions such as abbreviations, capitalization and punctuation is also essential – it can make or break a translation. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) As the performance was quite varied, there were a number of good and bad examples that might be useful for future candidates. Performance throughout individual papers was fairly even and there did not appear to be problems with timing. Each paper had a good solution for industrial dodo; all candidates used colloquial phrases to translate the word not used in Hungarian. Techie is not only colloquial but also has a rather specific meaning – in one paper the inventive “a technológia szerelmesei” (lovers of technology, colloquial-idiomatic Hungarian) was used. One particular phrase seems to have been difficult for all candidates, regardless of their overall achievement: Shirky’s conversation was reported as intently engaged. Candidates did not succeed in finding a good translation for this. They used “tudatosan elkötelezett” (consciously committed) or even the almost tautological „akaratlagosan elszántan elkötelezett” (willingly resolutely committed). In some instances reference between clauses was misinterpreted, probably mainly because of the different clause structure in English and Hungarian. This is also compounded by the comparatively scarce use of commas in English. In the first and second sentences, for example, In less than 50 years … it won’t exist at all has been understood to refer to Western Union telegram rather than to the printed newspaper.

The verb’s reference caused misunderstanding in the following sentence: monopoly of news it enjoyed ever since the invention of the printing press; it was translated as “a nyomtatott sajtó feltalálása óta kedveltnek számított” ([the monopoly of news] has been cherished since the invention of the printing press)

The object of the scorn was the focus of the following mistake:

I am precisely the sort of cynic Shirky’s new book scorns was translated as “mint amilyen gúnnyal Shirky új könyvében élt” (the scorn Shirky uses in his new book

Some of the mistakes occurred simply because the meaning chosen for the particular sentence was not the most appropriate or was missed entirely. Amusing errors based on misreading a key

62

word, like when dedicated to liking toast was translated as dedicated to licking toast, is not the norm; most such mistakes are more than a result of simple oversight.

The meaning of the clause while several others [i. e. newspapers] moved their entire operation online was completely missed on one occasion because of the interpretation of operation: the translation was “sok más újság teljes előállítását elektronikus úton végzik” (other newspapers are produced completely electronically).

No medium has ever survived the indifference of the 25-year olds was in one case translated as “egyetlen egy (sic!) média (sic!) sem élt még túl 25 évnyi közönyt” (not a single media (sic!) has ever survived 25 years of indifference).

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In the past few years it always seems to have been a case that we had one or two really good entries while the rest of the translations were passes or fails. This seems to have been the case this year as well. For the one outstanding script this year, it would be difficult to point out mistakes in this category and the examiner usually finds it hard not to mention the fact that all scripts with a distinction have to demonstrate proficiency in reordering the clauses and the sentence structure. Since the structure of English and Hungarian is profoundly different, this is just as important a part of the translation process as understanding the ST and using correct vocabulary. It is not possible to produce a professionally acceptable Hungarian text without this skill. Telltale signs of not having this competency are the overuse of relative (ami / amely) and demonstrative pronouns (az / azt, ez /ezt, őt), as well as conjunctive adverbs in general and the awkwardness due to infelicitous, “foreign” clause order.

“Amennyiben ezt a cikket a Guardian egy nyomtatott példányában olvasod – amit ha 15 év múlva a kezedben tartasz – ódonnak fog tünni ugyanúgy, ahogyan a Western Union egy távirata is, mely Clay Shirky szerint kevesebb mint ötven év múlva egyáltalán nem is létezik majd.” One of the many solutions to avoid such mistakes is breaking the sentence into more than one – again, reordering of the structure is also possible but the translator has to make a choice based on their competence as to whether the resulting sentence is too long or complicated. In some cases word order was a problem. This is once again due to inefficient reorganization. “valószínű, hogy ezt olvasod már a számítógéped képernyőjén” should have been valószínű, hogy ezt már a számítógéped képernyőjén olvasod. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) No paper was failed on this Aspect alone; some candidates had an excellent command of punctuation and spelling. This is probably the one Aspect in which success relies mainly on target language competence. A reader can easily tell whether a translator is familiar and confident in their TL use after reading the first few sentences. Technical points help to set the tone of the finished work and have to be taken just as seriously as the other Aspects.

Candidates who are underperforming in this Aspect mainly do so because of a lack of consistency in using commas. Conventions are rather different in Hungarian and English. In the following sentence three commas were omitted (underlined): “ Az olvasó valószínű, soha nem hallott Shirky-ről, és be kell, hogy valljam, eddig az interjúig magam sem tudtam, ki ő.”

63

Transferring the book title into the TL was a problem in some cases. Titles are capitalised only in English (Here Comes Everybody as opposed to Itt jön mindenki...) Recommendations to candidates To be successful in an assignment, it is imperative that the client does not have to struggle through a text in his or her native tongue because the sentence structure, cohesive devices, punctuation and syntax were often "not translated" into Hungarian. Try to re-read your texts with the eyes of a native speaker and to imagine that this is the first time you encounter - and try to understand - the translation. Timing will always be an important issue in an examination, so make sure that you always allow time for a final check

Use dictionaries creatively and be careful not to take the first meaning for a word or a phrase; sometimes you have to dig deeper to find the appropriate translation. An English dictionary can be very useful for cross-referencing. Expose yourself to spoken and written language in you choice of SL. You have to be able to keep up with changes in the language and, more importantly, you have to keep (or gain) a good command of your native tongue. This is especially important if you have been living in an English-speaking environment for a long time and have come in contact with your first language irregularly. Unit 01: Pass Rate 33% (2011); 75% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance There was a single entry for the technology module of unit 02 this year. The candidate tackled the task with confidence and gained a distinction.

All Aspects of the translation were very well executed from comprehension and accuracy to syntactical reorganization and diacritics. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate submitted a very good paper with only very few minor mistakes.

The use of specialist vocabulary was particularly good (benzinüzemű, energiaforrás, töltőrendszer, etc.) and the resulting text, for the most part, reads as if written in Hungarian.

Mistakes: If you look under the car and sometimes in the trunk translated as “Ha benézünk az autó alá, illetve néha a csomagtérbe” (autó alá, illetve bizonyos esetekben a csomagtérbe would be more accurate as the translation is likely to be interpreted as if there would be something in the car’s trunk only at certain times)

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Apart from two small mistakes, the text is flawless in all Aspect 2 criteria. The candidate has obviously a very good command of Hungarian and seems to be an experienced translator. Repetitive use of szabályoz in paragraph two: “A vezérlő szabályozóként működik és szabályozza…” (vezérel would be the best alternative but has been used at the beginning of the sentence. Alternatively adagol (could be used or the second szabályozza could have been moved to the end of the clause: szabályzóként működik, amely az akkumulátorból kapott energia mennyiségét szabályozza Paragraph 6, sentence 1: and (és) is somewhat awkward here. Could have been broken into two sentences or semicolon could have been used.

64

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Apart from one slight mistake (kommuntátor rather than kommutátor) the spelling and punctuation are excellent. A good solution is to give the abbreviation EV (electric vehicles) in brackets. Recommendations to candidates It is difficult to find points of recommendations for a candidate who executes his/her task so well, other than keep up the good work.

It seems that this particular candidate has a very good hand in what he/she is doing and can practically perform close to perfect under examination conditions as well. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance There was a single entry for the business module of unit 02 this year.

Unfortunately the paper was not good enough to merit a pass.

The candidate showed unsatisfactory performance in all three Aspects. There were a number of inaccuracies and omissions in the paper, some of which distorted or changed the meaning of the ST.

The translation does not read as originally written in Hungarian and falls short of an acceptable quality. Coherence and cohesion was also quite poor; sentence structure and text cohesion had many flaws. Spelling, punctuation and the use of diacritics suffered as well; a number of serious spelling mistakes marred the text and the use of punctuation marks was also poor, especially around quotations. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Only the more serious mistakes are listed here for this Aspect as they sufficiently support the mark awarded.

The text sounds foreign to the native speaker and falls short of the quality required from an article to be published in the media.

Sent the US economy into the worst recession since the 1930s translated as “melyek 1930-as évek egyik legrosszabb gazdasági visszaesését okozták” (which caused the worst economic downturn of the 1930s)

Republicans portray the bill as a burden on small banks and the businesses that rely on them and argue it will cost consumers and impede job growth. is translated as "A Republikánusok (sic!) úgy vélik, hogy ez költségvetés (sic!) teherként fog jelentkezni a rájuk támaszkodó kisebb bankoknál és cégeknél. Vitatják azt is, hogy ez a fogyasztók rovására megy, megakadályozva a munkahelyek növekedését." „Republicans think that this will present a budgetary burden to the smaller banks and businesses relying on them [i. e. on the Republicans] They also contest that this would be on the consumer’s expense and it would impede job growth. ”

...for many lawmakers ... Obama sought to put the complex law in consumer-oriented terms translated as “több törvényhozónak ... Obama szerint az összetett jogot fogyasztó-központú

65

terminusba kell helyeznie.” (by many lawmakers ... according to Obama, the intricate right has to be put in consumer-oriented terminus)

law is translated as „jog” (legal; right) on more than one occasion. Should be törvény in this context.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The text does not read as if written in Hungarian and it is not up to the linguistic standard of a broadsheet newspaper. The reader has to struggle through a number of difficult and awkward phrases and constructions and is often left with ambiguous meaning. The cohesive devices are not used adequately in many places and this gives the text a foreign feel. There are some problems with subject-object agreement as well.

“pénzügyi piacokra, akiknek…” (on financial markets, who) Here amelyeknek should have been used

Quotations are not introduced correctly. Use of hogy usually precedes an indirect quotation; it has been used by direct quotation in paragraph 4. Conversely it was omitted twice in paragraph 5, where it would have been necessary.

In a few cases changing the word order could have made the text sound better.

Example of a flawed phrase: “melyek az emberek mindennapi életében segítségre lesznek” Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There are quite a few spelling mistakes, some of which are fairly serious. The punctuation also has a number of shortcomings, mainly in terms of comma use and punctuation around quotations. Word processing is clear and legible. Serious mistakes: Republikánus (should not be capitalised); közepedte (közepette), megsemmisítettni (megsemmisíttetni); Egyesült Államokbeli (egyesült államokbeli); Novemberben (novemberben) Less serious: taps vihar (tapsvihar); hozzá tette (hozzátette); támazkodó (támaszkodó); csómó (csomó); irónikus (ironikus) Unnecessary commas: “Barack Obama, elnök, …” Missing commas: “aszerint, ahogy a pénzügyi rendszer is idomul…” Quotes: “Nem lesz többé adózás által finanszírozott szubvenció (sic) periódus, “ Obama továbbá hozzátette…” (– Nem lesz többé az adófizetők pénzéből finanszírozott banksegélyezés. Pont. – tette hozzá Obama.) Recommendations to candidates The most important point to remember for this candidate is to work on the command of Hungarian. Because the knowledge of the TL is not satisfactory, the outcome of the examination would have been the same even without the more serious mistakes.

It is essential that candidates can produce translations that are up to the standard of the given task (in this case to be published in a newspaper). The best method to work on this skill is for candidates to expose themselves to the texts they aspire to produce: newspaper articles, books, and reliable Internet resources. Another important point is to re-read the original a few times to make sure that the meaning is understood correctly. A number of serious mistakes resulted from not reading the SL text thoroughly enough. Prepare a rough version and check it against the original sentence by sentence. If you are satisfied with the result, work on the stylistic aspect of the TL version, checking that any changes you make do not change the meaning of the text. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 100% (2010)

66

UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The scripts received for this option could hardly be more different – a distinction (99 marks) and a fail were awarded.

It is difficult to overestimate the importance of knowing your target language – candidates seem to be quite prone to making the mistake of believing they are ready to take the DipTrans examination because they can understand the ST. Even if this is true – which it is often not – a good command of the target language is just as important as comprehension of the original. A good translation should also pay close attention to conventions such as abbreviations, capitalization and punctuation. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) As the performance was quite varied, there were a number of good and bad examples that might be useful for future candidates. Performance throughout individual papers was fairly even.There was no sign of shortage of time to finish the task. The forte of the paper rewarded with distinction was not only that it was to a professional standard but also the use of specialist vocabulary (első választók [attainers], kortárs csoport [peer group], kulcstényező [key factor], etnikai hovatartozás [ethnicity], számszerű adat [quantitative data] etc.) On the less successful side, most serious problems were created by mistranslated words or phrases rather than misinterpretation of whole sentences:

Attainers translated as “támogatók” throughout the text (supporters)

Uniform is translated as to form (verb) in paragraph 3, changing the message of the sentence

Assembly translated as “gyülekezet” (congregation) in paragraph 4, Greater London Assembly translated as „London Külvárosi Gyülekezet” (London Suburban Congregation)

…have different levels of attachment to political parties from those attainers who live in other areas translated as “milyen különböző szinteken kapcsolódnak a politikai pártokhoz azokkal egyetemben, amely (sic!) támogatók más területeken élnek.” (on what levels are they attached to political parties, along with those living in other areas) Here, the awkward sentence structure is less of a problem than the fact that from was translated in an opposite sense: with.

Use of specialist vocabulary was also rather poor “Megyei” for regional (should have used regionális); “Szociálódás” for socialisation (the correct term is szocializáció); “levelezési kezdőlista” for initial mailing (a number of good solutions exist); “politikacsinálók” for policy makers (politikai döntéshozók)} in the unsuccessful paper.

The SL also very heavily influenced sentence structure and certain phrases should have been interpreted rather than translated verbatim. Reorganization is essential to produce a grammatical Hungarian text from the English original. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The papers showed the two faces of translation: the well-prepared and practised, resulting in an excellent text and the less successful, where a client would probably not think about re-employing the translator. One of the main points of difference, as pointed out before, was the ability to produce a TL text that gives the impression that it was in fact written in that language. It is only possible to achieve that if the candidate is proficient in the TL.

67

To retain the original order of clauses or word order is, in most cases, not acceptable when translating English into Hungarian. An example: …policy-makers are becoming increasingly concerned about the lack of engagement that young people appear to have with the formal political process and with democratic institutions more generally

Solution 1: “…a politikacsinálók egyre jobban aggódnak a fiatalok teljes kötelezettségvállalásának hiánya miatt, melyet a hivatalos politikai folyamatok és a demokratikus szervezetek iránt mutatnak, nagy általánosságban.” Solution 2: A politikai döntéshozók egyre inkább aggódnak amiatt, hogy a fiatalok, úgy tűnik, nem tanúsítanak kellő elkötelezettséget a formális politikai folyamatok és általában a demokratikus intézmények iránt. The second solution is clearly better, not only because of a better vocabulary but also because it reshuffles the sentence to make it sound good in Hungarian. The use of passive voice – although increasingly popular in the form cited below in certain circles in Hungary – is still not grammatical (“lettek kifejlesztve”; “kerül lefolytatásra”; “kerül kiküldésre” etc.) Similarly, constructions with whether are used differently in Hungarian (i. e. ellipsis of or not) Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling and punctuation were good for both papers, although one serious mistake was spotted (Britt instead of brit) Britain is not used as a standalone country name in Hungarian, Nagy-Britannia should have been used on all occasions. Number conventions were not observed in one case: English: 3,000; no comma used in Hungarian (3000) or number is written out (háromezer) The names of assemblies used in the text were in one case mistranslated as the word congregation (gyülekezet) was used instead of nagygyűlés. Recommendations to candidates To be successful in an assignment, it is imperative that the client does not have to struggle through a text in his or her native tongue because the sentence structure, cohesive devices, punctuation and syntax were often "not translated" into Hungarian. Try to re-read your texts with the eyes of a native speaker and to imagine that this is the first time you encounter - and try to understand - the translation. Timing will always be an important issue in an examination, so make sure that you always allow time for a final check

Use dictionaries creatively and be careful not to take the first meaning for a word or a phrase; sometimes you have to dig deeper to find the appropriate translation. An English dictionary can be very useful for cross-referencing. Expose yourself to spoken and written language in you choice of SL. You have to be able to keep up with the change of the language and, more importantly, you have to keep (or gain) a good command of your native tongue. This is especially important if you have been living in an English-speaking environment for a long time and have come in contact with your first language irregularly.

68

If you also decide to sit a speciality unit, like this one, make sure you are up-o-date on the latest developments and vocabulary for your option.

Unit 3E: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 67% (2010)

-*-


69


ENGLISH INTO JAPANESE UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The general quality of the translations were sound and the candidates showed a good command of the subject matter. There were no serious errors or omissions and the wit expressed was captured very well using natural Japanese, making it enjoyable to read. Th main problem was legibility throughout the translation, especially towards the end of the text. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidates used some excellent expressions, capturing the wit expressed in the source article, and most parts of the text were translated accurately in the right register. There were some inaccuracies listed below though they are unlikely to affect the overall comprehension of the reader. In the latter half of the third paragraph, listeners (those who are ‘bowled over by his rhetorical fluency’) are translated as “readers” which is inaccurate as the source text (ST) is referring to when Shirky is speaking to others. Paragraph 4: fledgling is translated as “a young bird which has started to learn to fly”, which is a literal translation but the meaning becomes unclear when translated in this way. A more accurate rendering could be, for example, ‘(Japanese) touji wa mada atarashikatta (literally, what was still new then)‘. The very last sentence in the very last paragraph: the like in what I like to think of is translated literally, making the meaning a little unclear – a more accurate rendering could be, for example, ‘(Japanese) iken (or kenkai) dearuto kangaetai kotoga jissai niwa…’ Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Most of the texts was well organised with good sentence structures. There were some minor grammatical problems (listed below), mainly caused by the difficulties of translating such grammar into Japanese. Paragraph 2: Someone in someone will say to him is translated literally but a more grammatical translation which matches the “(Japanese) …to kikareru” would have been ‘(Japanese) yoku hitoni’. The last sentence of paragraph 4: communicate, organise and change the world is not translated with correct grammar, though this is clearly caused by the difficulty of translating the word organise in this context into Japanese. It may have been better to say, for example, ‘(Japanese) komyunikeeshon shitari (or renraku shiattari), nittei (or sukejyuuru) o kundari, sekaiwo…’. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most of the technical aspects are accurate, but there are problems with legibility in many parts of the translation, especially towards the end. At times, it was hard to make out what is written without referring to the ST. One minor spelling mistake in para 2 – Shirky is spelled “Jerky (wrong phonetic rendering in Japanese)”.

70

Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Despite the overall adequate translation, candidates appeared to have run out of time towards the end and omitted nearly 15% of the ST resulting in failing this component. See below for comments on the parts which were translated: Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Most of the penultimate paragraph and all of the last paragraph are missing in one translation. Most other parts that were translated showed adequate command of the subject matter and would not cause readers to misread the overall information. However, there appeared to be lack of full comprehension of the ST in the following four places: Para 6: fine print is translated wrongly as “notification of fine/penalty payment”. The correct translation would be, for example, (Japanese) shomen no shitani chiisana moji de kakareta jouken. Para 7: that rely on them is missing from the translation. Para 8: He argued…happen again is mistranslated due probably to lack of comprehension of the phrase a crippling recession which is translated as “to delay recession”. The correct translation would be, for example, (Japanese) kinyuu shisutemu no houkai ga keiki koutai no omona geninde,. Para 8: those reforms in the last line is translated as “this law”, when it should have been translated as, for example, (Japanese) korerano kaikaku wa. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Apart from some minor grammatical mistakes listed below, most parts of the texts were well organised. Para 5: The as in as the financial system adapts in the sentence… that lawmakers will still need to….adapts to the changes is translated as “in order for”. A more accurate translation would be, for example, (Japanese) ukeireru ni shitagatte. Para 8: Obama said is translated as “he says”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There are minor problems with legibility in two places but otherwise all information was transferred well. Recommendations to candidates Candidates may wish to practice how to organise time in the examination situation so that they will not run out of time and thus omit more than 5% of the ST. The use of a word processor may help speed up the writing process.

Candidates may also wish to practice paying more attention to English articles (a in a crippling recession in para 8) especially under time pressure, in order to avoid unnecessary misinterpretation of sentence structures.

Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

71

UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE

General Report on Candidate Performance Some translations showed an adequate command of the subject matter with overall sound sentence structure and only one minor spelling lapse. However, there was some awkwardness in places giving the impression to the reader that it was translated from English.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Good comprehension overall but there were some relatively minor inaccuracies:

Para 5: to which is translated as “which”. The correct translation would be to remove the “dono” and probably also remove “dono youna ten de” from the translation.

Para 6: The sentence Whilst….is mistranslated due probably to lack of comprehension of the tense of Whilst they will have been. An accurate translation would be, for example, ‘(Japanese) …sudeni sarasareta de aroutowaie, mada…’.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Though they do not hinder the overall comprehension, there was some awkwardness and lapses in grammar, as follows:

Para 4: A more authentic rendering of the sentence Regional analysis… maybe, for example, ‘(Japanese) chiiki-betsu bunseki wa sononakademo tokuni kachi ga takai to omowareru. Nazenara,…’. The translation as it stands makes the meaning somewhat unclear.

The very last sentence in the ST: The translation does not read well and gives the impression that it is a translation from English. It could be translated instead as, for example, (Japanese) sonoyouna shuudan towa,……wo sasu, or, sonoyouna shudan niwa…to doujini ….mo fukumareru.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There is one minor spelling/omission mistake (probably forgot to add a particle after using tippex) in the very last line of the text. Otherwise all information was transferred accurately.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates need to practise reading more English through, for example, British newspaper articles, in order to achieve a better organization of sentence structures that read like a text originally written in the target language (Japanese). Much of the written/spoken English people are exposed to in Japan is US English.

Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)


72


ENGLISH INTO KURDISH (SORANI) UNIT 01: GENERAL General Report on Candidate Performance There were problems with understanding the source text (ST) as well as contemporary technological terms. There was an instance of the internet being mistranslated as “computer” in the sentence where Clay Shirky’s mother introduced him to the internet. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Translating internationally used proper names such as Western Union, Facebook, MySpace, etc. into Kurdish was a major accuracy error. These names are accepted and recognised in all languages, including Kurdish, and should not be translated. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Examples of grammatical errors included: 25 year-olds (line 6) was translated “25-year old” When I ask (line 7) was translated “When I asked” Dozens (line 15) was translated “Dozen” Billions (line 27) was translated “Billion” Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) No major spelling or punctuation errors were found. Recommendations to candidates Candidates are advised to update their general knowledge on a regular basis. They should be familiar with current technological terminology and work hard on improving their English as it is essential to be fluent in the source language in order to produce good translations. Unit 01: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance The performance was satisfactory. The candidate seems to have understood the text and the translated version is adequate apart from some inaccuracies which are explained below. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The text was accurate and comprehensible in spite of some problems such as: ‘’hat’’ for hood; “role” for act; “shapes” for types; “finds itself” for falls; “parts” for categories; “all” for every; “specified” for limited. “until now” for currently; “gradually” for eventually. There are some inaccuracies, like: ‘’exactly’’; “controller”; “since” and “permanent”. The candidate should have used more common words. There are some omissions, such as: basically; right; Hydride and Ion. There are also a couple of additions, like: “so” and “a new one to put in their place”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The text is coherent/cohesive, however, there are some grammatical problems, such as: The use of plural instead of singular “differences”; The use of singular instead of plural “type”; “electric car”

73

lack of definite article, such as “electric motor”; Word order: The use of verb “received” in final position, not before subject. The use of passive voice instead of active voice, as in “gained”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The text is clear and legible, but there are sometimes very minor problems, such as: lack of space between two words or spelling mistakes, such as: “hood”; “becomes”; “replaced” Lithium is transliterated, but it should have been between quotation marks to be clearer for the readers. Recommendations to candidates

Read the text carefully and ensure that you understand it before embarking on the translation.

The translated text needs to be as accurate as possible, i.e. without any addition or omission, but taking into consideration that literal translation is avoided.

The use of more common words for the benefit of the readership.

Familiarization with technical terms and expressions in both languages (source and target).

Working on grammatical points, such as: singularity/plurality, word order, and the appropriate use of nouns/verbs.

Improvement of spelling by looking up the words in the dictionary.

When transliteration is used, it should be placed between quotation marks to avoid any confusion on the part of the readers.

Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The performance is unsatisfactory. The main problem is to do with comprehension and accuracy. The candidate does not seem to have fully understood the text and therefore the translated version is inadequate due to the inaccuracies that are explained below. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The text has been distorted due to lots of wrong translations, such as: ‘’supply’’ for seek; “range” for field; “administration” for process; “institutions” for formal; “inside” for in; “check” for examine; “history” for background”; “consultant” for peer; “investigation” for analysis;” make the way better for us” for enable; “event & information” for experience; “again” for follow-up; “technical” for academics; “non- technical” for non-academic; “we assess to some extent” for we asses the extent to. There also are some inaccuracies, such as: ‘’proposal’’; “attainers”; “value” (has been translated as an Arabic-like word); “findings”; “survey” & “randomly”. There are some omissions, such as: appear; now and all There are also some additions, such as: “an attempt” and “non-availability”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In terms of grammar, the text is coherent/cohesive enough apart from one error such as: The use of singular instead of plural “voter”; Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The text is legible and clear enough.

74


Read the text very carefully and ensure that you understand it before starting the translation.

The translated text needs to be as accurate as possible, i.e. without any addition or omission, but taking into consideration that literal translation is avoided.

The use of more common words for the benefit of the readership.

Familiarization with technical/specialist terms and expressions in both languages (source and target), such as: proposal, peer, background, non-academics, etc.

Paying more attention to grammatical points, such as: singularity/plurality, and the appropriate use of nouns/verbs.

Improvement of spelling by looking up the words in the dictionary. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


75


ENGLISH INTO LITHUANIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Although the candidates seem to have understood the source text (ST) adequately, there were several mistranslations and inaccurate renderings. Large sections did not read like an original piece of writing. The candidates have too often adhered to the sentence structure of the ST. As a result translations lack natural flow. Candidates should have paid more attention to punctuation and other technical aspects.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Although candidates seem to have understood the ST adequately, there were several mistranslations and inaccurate renderings. Examples of mistranslations were:

(Paragraph 6) techno-luddite was mistranslated as “technologijos žinovas”, which reads something like “technology expert”.

(Paragraph 6) social networking was translated as “socialinės ryšių plėtros”. The candidate should have used socialiniai tinklai, an established term in Lithuanian.

(Paragraph 1) Western Union telegram was mistranslated as “Western Union telegrafas”, which reads as “Western Union telegraph”. (Paragraph 4) billions was mistranslated as “bilijonai”. The candidate should have used milijardai. One candidate used unnecessary translator’s notes as the meaning of the phrases could have been easily understood without any explanation. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates sometimes strongly adhere to the sentence structure of the ST. As a result two translations were difficult to follow and understand. One candidate made two serious grammatical errors: (Paragraph 1) “mažiau nei 50-ies metų laikotarpyje” is grammatically incorrect. The candidate should have written mažiau nei po 50 metų. (Paragraph 2) In Lithuanian the conjunction “kad” should never be followed by the infinitive form of a verb. Thus the candidate made a serious grammatical error in “tam, kad įkelti…”. The correct structure should be tam, kad įkeltų. Some examples of mistakes related to organisation of work, sentence structure and coherence are: (Paragraph 4) The sentence “2000-aisiais, vedinas „intuicijos, kad internetas taps socialiniu“, Shirky atsigręžė į dar visiškai žalią socialinės ryšių plėtros reiškinį – tuomet tai buvo mažai žinoma idėja, virtusi „MySpace“, „Facebook“, „Twitter“, ir nuo to laiko milijardams žmonių visame pasaulyje tapusi pagrindine interneto paskirtimi” closely adheres to the structure of the ST, hinders natural flow and has several punctuation errors. In addition, the candidate should have written „žalias“ using inverted commas. (Paragraph 2) The sentence “Įprastas jo atsakymas – „aš dirbu su socialinės žiniasklaidos teorija ir praktika“ – skamba ne tik sąmoningai nesuprantamai, bet ir pritrenkiančiai nuobodžiai, o tai

76

juokinga, nes jis – vienas labiausiai švytinčių žmonių, kuriuos aš esu kada nors sutikusi” closely adheres to the sentence structure of the ST, which hinders its natural flow. The sentence does not read like an original piece of writing and is not completely coherent. (Paragraph 5) His predictions for the fate of print media organisations have proved unnervingly accurate; 2009 would be a bloodpath for newspapers, he warned – and so it came to pass was translated as “Jo pranašaujamas likimas tų žiniasklaidos priemonių, kurios spausdina, buvo stebinančiai tikslus; 2009-ieji – skerdynės laikraščiams, jis buvo apie tai įspėjęs, būtent taip ir nutiko”. The sentence does not make sense. Its meaning is lost due to inadequate use of cohesive devices and adherence to the sentence structure of the ST. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) In Lithuanian a person’s last name cannot appear in a written text without the initial of their first name. The candidates did not follow this rule. They should have written C. Shirky instead of just “Shirky”. The title of Clay Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody: How Change Happens When People Come Together was translated into Lithuanian without any reference to the English title. The candidates should have put the English title either in brackets or as a translator’s note so that it was clear to the reader what book it is. It was clearly indicated that the interviewer is a female (Decca Aitkenhead reports on her interview). Two candidates did not take this fact into consideration. They should have used cinikė instead of “cinikas” (par. 6), girdėjusi instead of “girdėjęs” (par. 2). The candidates sometimes stuck to the punctuation used in the ST, without adapting it to the Lithuanian rules. For example: There should be no dash after “The Times” in “Rupertas Murdochas jau pradėjo imti mokestį už galimybę internete skaityti “The Times” – tačiau Shirky yra įsitikinęs, kad šis eksperimentas bus nesėkmingas”. The candidate could have put a comma instead. Recommendations to candidates It would be helpful to re-read the translated text without reference to the ST in order to assess the translation in an objective way and see if all sentences and links make sense. The text should read well as a piece of Lithuanian; therefore, it would be a good idea to change word order of some sentences. Candidates should try not to adhere to the ST sentence structure and punctuation, as it hinders coherence and natural flow. Unit 01: Pass Rate 33% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance There were too many clumsy and inappropriate renderings, inaccuracies and mistranslations, which distorted the message conveyed by the ST. The translation did not read like an original piece of writing. A number of sentences closely adhered to the sentence structure of the ST. This made the text hard to follow and understand. It lacked natural flow and coherence. The translation had a serious grammatical error (repeated twice) and several spelling mistakes. In Lithuanian, a person’s last name cannot appear in a sentence without the initial of their first name. The candidate did not follow this rule. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any)

77

The message of the ST was distorted by a number of inaccuracies and mistranslations, such as: (Paragraph 1): banking and Wall Street regulations was translated as “banko ir Niujorko vertybinių popierių biržos nuostatų”, which reads something like “bank and New York stock exchange regulations”. (Paragraphs 2, 6): in some cases the candidate used a noun in the plural when the ST indicates singular and vice versa. Creates a new agency was translated as “sukurs naujas įstaigas”, which means plural in Lithuanian. The candidate translated Lawmakers as “įstatymo leidėjų”, which means makers of only a single law. (Paragraph 2): to guard consumers in their financial transactions was translated as “apsaugoti vartotojus ir jų finansinius sandorius”, which is slightly inaccurate and conveys the meaning “to guard consumers and their financial transactions”; (Paragraphs 5 & 8): bailouts was incorrectly translated as “išpirkos” (“redemption”?). (Paragraph 6): November was translated as “spalis”, which means “October” in Lithuanian. The mistake could have been easily avoided if the candidate had read the sentence more carefully. (Paragraph 6): hiddenfees was translated as “slepiamus mokesčius”, which is inaccurate and ambiguous, as it could be understood as “concealed taxes”. (Paragraph 8): the law of the land was translated as “šalies įsakymu”, which is incorrect as “įsakymu” means “order” and not “law”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) A number of sentences closely adhere to the sentence structure of the ST. The candidate should have chosen better cohesive devices. All this makes the text hard to follow and understand. It lacks natural flow and coherence. (Paragraph 6): ... Obama sought to put the complex law in consumer-oriented terms was translated as “Dėl to Obama siekė supaprastinti sudėtingą įstatymą į vartotojų suprantamus terminus”, which is incoherent in Lithuanian. (Paragraph 5): Repetitiveness hinders natural flow of the text, as two consecutive sentences start in the same way, i.e. “Jis taip pat pabrėžė…”, “Jis taip pat teigė…”. The candidate could have easily avoided this mistake by paying more attention to proofreading. (Paragraph 6): In the midst of a heated election season for many lawmakers who face voters in November, Obama sought to put complex law in consumer-oriented terms was translated as “Kol vyks įsikarštijusių rinkimų sezonas, daugeliui įstatymo leidėjų teks žiūrėti į balsuotojų akis šį Spalio mėn. Dėl to Obama siekė supaprastinti sudėtingą įstatymą į vartotojų suprantamus terminus”. The Lithuanian translation does not make any sense.

(Paragraphs 2, 8): The candidate made a serious grammatical mistake three times – “kad apsaugoti”, “kad išaiškinti”, “kad sustabdyti”. In Lithuanian the conjunction “kad” should never be followed by the infinitive form of a verb. Possible alternatives here could be kad apsaugotų or kad galėtų apsaugoti, kad išaiškintų or kad būtų išaiškinta; kad sustabdytų or kad būtų sustabdyta.

(Paragraph 9): the sentence “Ironiškai baigdamas savo kalbą, Obama pasirašė įsaką skambant fanfarai, didžiuliame Ronaldo Reigano Pastate, pavadinto prezidento vardu, kuris sėkmingai panaikino valstybės kainų reguliavimą” has several problems with cohesion, coherence and natural flow. The candidate should have used better cohesive devices as it is not clear from the sentence who championed deregulation – the president, his name or the building. Likewise the whole sentence is incoherent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) In Lithuanian a person’s last name cannot appear in a written text without the initial of their first name. Therefore, the candidate should have written B. Obama instead of just “Obama”. (Paragraph 6): the word “įsikarštijusių” does not exist. (Paragraph 7): the correct spelling of “skaičio” is skaičiaus.

78

(Paragraph 3): there should be no comma after “apibūdino” in “Obama visa tai apibūdino, kaip logiškas reformas…”.

Recommendations to candidates The candidate should have read the ST more carefully in order to understand it completely. This would have helped the candidate to avoid inaccuracies and mistranslations. Problems of consistency and more general errors can be avoided by allowing time to step back from your translation and re-read and proofread it prior to submission.

Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The translation is well organised and coherent. It preserves the light and humorous tone of the passage and has only one translation mistake. The candidate made several really wise translation decisions (e.g. “Erzelių šeimyna” for the Fusspot family or “plyšaujančio ant stiklinės lentynėlės” for carolling on the glass shelf). There are no serious technical issues.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate made several really wise translation decisions (e.g. “Erzelių šeimyna” for the Fusspot family or “plyšaujančio ant stiklinės lentynėlės” for carolling on the glass shelf). There was only one translation mistake in paragraph 3. Like a retiring butler, which means leaving the room, was translated as “lyg į pensiją einantis liokajus” (i.e. ceasing to work because of reaching the age of retirement). (Paragraph 1): Glossy arts magazine was translated as “blizgančiame meno žurnale”. A better choice would have been a commonly used phrase blizgus žurnalas.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The translation is well organised, with good sentence structures and overall coherence. There are only a few minor errors, for example:

(Paragraph 1): Better cohesive devises could have been used in the sentence “Telefonas suskambo, kai Liusė Sandler gulėjo vonioje, apsvaigusi nuo pro lėktuvo langą matomą debesų paviršių primenančių burbulų”. In its present form the reader has to read the sentence twice in order to understand it properly.

(Paragraph 1): Fault lines, fissures, inadequate muscle tone was translated as “negrakščios linijos, įtrūkinėjimai, neadekvatus raumenų tonusas”. The words “įtrūkinėjimai” and “neadekvatus” hinder the flow of literary text. A more appropriate translation could be, for example, suskeldėjusi oda and prastas raumenų tonusas.

(Paragraph 5): “Neturėjo reikšmės, jog ji žinojo, kad tai visiškai netiesa” is rather clumsy and lacks natural flow. The sentence would be more coherent with slight changes, for example, “Ir visai nesvarbu, jog ji žinojo, kad tai netiesa”.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The text was spelt and paragraphed correctly with only a few technical points but nothing major.

When translating fiction, foreign names based on the Latin alphabet should be adapted. The candidate has successfully done that in the majority of cases, with the exception of two names. Julian Dale was partly adapted to “Džiulian Deil”; however it would be better to adapt it fully and use Džiulianas Deilas instead. Marie Curie was written as “Marie Cure”, which is neither adapted to Lithuanian, nor left in the original form. (Paragraph 1) – “Kuris niekad taip, prie paveikslo, nekalbėdavo”: commas are not necessary.

79

Recommendations to candidates All the errors related to coherence and natural flow of the text as well as technical problems could have been easily avoided if the candidate had re-read the translation without reference to the ST.

Unit 2C: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE

General Report on Candidate Performance There were no serious mistranslations and only a few inaccuracies. However, the translation does not read like an original piece of writing, is stilted and incoherent. Many sentences lack natural flow due to inappropriate use of cohesive devices. There were no very serious technical errors, except for some punctuation and one spelling mistake.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translation shows an adequate command of the subject matter. There were no serious mistranslations and only a few inaccuracies.

(Paragraph 2): Democratic legitimacy was translated as “demokratijos pagrįstumas”. A more accurate translation would be demokratinis teisingumas or demokratinis teisėtumas.

(Paragraph 2): more generally was translated as “labiau apibendrinant”, which in this context is not accurate, sounds clumsy and hinders natural flow. A more appropriate term would have been apskritai.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The translation did not read like an original piece of writing, is stilted and incoherent. Many sentences lack natural flow due to inappropriate use of cohesive devices Again due to inadequate use of cohesive devices, the meaning of the first sentence was lost.

The candidate made one serious grammatical error in paragraph 3 where influence (verb) was translated as “įtakoja”. According to the Lithuanian State Language Commission, it is incorrect to use the suffix –oti when forming verbs from abstract nouns (like “įtaka”). “Įtakoti” should be replaced by daryti įtaką, paveikti, veikti.

(Paragraph 3): educational attainment was translated as “išsilavinimo pasiekimų lygis”, which sounds rather awkward in Lithuanian. It would be more natural to say simply išsilavinimo lygis.

(Paragraph 6): key factors was translated as “esminių faktorių”. The Lithuanian State Language Commission recommends avoiding the word “faktorius”. A more suitable equivalent would be veiksnys.

(Paragraph 2): the sentence “Tyrinėdami naujų rinkėjų požiūrį į politines partijas, gausime svarbių įžvalgų atsakymui į platesnį klausimą – ar demokratijos pagrįstumo krizė egzistuoja Britanijoje, ar ne” lacks coherence and natural flow. The phrase “gausime svarbių įžvalgų” is a literal translation of we will gain important insights and does not make much sense in Lithuanian. (Paragraph 5): The sentence “Įvertinsime, kiek vietovėse, kuriose veikia tokios institucijos, gyvenančių rinkėjų prisirišimo prie politinių partijų lygis skiriasi nuo kitose vietovėse gyvenančių naujų rinkėjų” is clumsy and does not read like an original piece of writing.

(Paragraph 7): It would be more appropriate to change the word order of “Bus atlikta anketinė apklausa šalies mastu, iš rinkėjų sąrašo atsitiktinai atrenkant…” and start the sentence from Šalies mastu bus atlikta... The sentence then would be more coherent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

80

There were some punctuation errors and one spelling mistake.

(Paragraph 1) – “… t.y., tų jaunuolių, kurie…”: there should be no comma after “t.y.”; (Paragraph 3) – “Nagrinėsime ar lytis, socialinė klasė …”: there should be a comma after “Nagrinėsime”; (Paragraph 4) – “Škotijos Parlamentas” should be written as Škotijos parlamentas; (Paragraph 7) – “Apklausa bus atliekama paštu – pirmiausia anketos bus išsiųstos trims tūkstančiams rinkėjų…”. It would be more appropriate to put a full stop after “paštu”.

Recommendations to candidates It would be helpful to re-read the translated text without reference to the ST in order to assess the translation in an objective way and see if all sentences and links make sense. The text should read well as a piece of Lithuanian; therefore, it would be a good idea to change word order of some sentences. Try not to adhere to the ST sentence structure as it hinders coherence and natural flow.

Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no canadidates sat this option (2010)

UNIT 03F: LAW

General Report on Candidate Performance The source text was challenging, with long and rather complex sentences. As a result, there were a number of inaccuracies and even serious mistranslations, which in law texts, where precision is very important, could lead to misinterpretation of the text itself. The candidate used wrong terminology in quite a few places. Several sentences strongly adhere to the English language sentence structure. This makes the text hard to follow and understand. It lacks natural flow and coherence. There are quite a few punctuation mistakes.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Accuracy is of extreme importance in law texts. Therefore, the candidate should have paid more attention to comprehension and accurate rendering of the ST. First of all, wrong terminology was used in quite a few cases: The High Court should be translated as Aukščiausiasis teismas and not as “Aukštasis teismas”. Standard terms and conditions was translated as “nustatytus terminus ir sąlygas”, which is difficult to understand and is not normally used in the Lithuanian language. The candidate should have used bendrosios sutarties sąlygos instead. Unreasonable was translated as “nesaikingas”, which does not make any sense in this context. A better solution would have been to use, for example nepagrįstas. “Derėjimosi galios” was a translation given to bargaining power. A more appropriate Lithuanian phrase in this case would be derybinės galios. The fairness and reasonableness of the contract was translated as “dorumas ir tos sutarties saikingumas”, which does not make any sense. There were some serious mistranslations: Off-the-shelf software has the meaning ‘ready-made and available for sale, lease, or license to the general public’. However, the candidate has translated it as “nenaudojamos programinės įrangos” (“unusable software”); The fact that the software was not bespoke was irrelevant was translated as “faktas, kad nebuvo susitarta apie tai – nėra svarbu”. It does not make any sense as it reads something like “the fact that no agreement was reached in relation to it is irrelevant”. ...as R was withdrawing the software which K was already using was translated as “…nes R išėmė tą programinę įrangą iš apyvartos, nes K jau ja naudojosi”. The translation is not correct as it reads something like “as R has withdrawn the software because K was already using it”. Some other inaccuracies include: Ineffective in this context is negaliojantis rather than “neefektyvus”, as was translated by the candidate.

81

Performance, quality and fitness of the software was translated as “prekės kokybę, jos atlikimą ir tinkamumą”, which is not accurate and does not make much sense in this case as it reads something like “quality, execution and appropriateness of the goods”. Decision about the purchase of the software was translated as “sprendimą apie tą prekę” (“decision about the goods”), which is not very accurate as it does not include the aspect of purchase.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The translation does not read like an original piece of writing. A number of sentences closely adhere to the sentence structure of the ST. This makes the text hard to follow and understand. It lacks natural flow and coherence. The candidate wrote “kas liečia tos prekės kokybę…”. The phrase “kas liečia” is a serious grammatical error in Lithuanian and cannot be used in any kind of text. The sentence “šis sprendimas akivaizdžiai parodo, kad nepanašu į tai, jog teismai remtų atsakomybės apribojimus tokiuose nustatytuose terminuose ir sąlygose, kur nesąžiningai apribojama arba išvis neminima apie atlygį” adheres to the English language sentence structure but does not make any sense in Lithuanian. “…paprastai tokia prekė neturėtų būti leidžiami pardavinėti iš viso” is not coherent and is grammatically incorrect. Where parties contract on one party’s written standard terms of business, that party cannot exclude or restrict its liability in respect of its breach of contract unless the contractual term doing so is reasonable was translated as “Kai šalys sudaro sutartį tarpusavyje, toje sutartyje surašomi nustatyti verslo terminai. Tuomet ta šalis negali pašalinti ar apriboti atsakomybę, nes tokiu atveju būtų sulaužoma taisyklė, nebent tai būtų saikinga pagal sudarytus tos sutarties terminus”. The candidate divided the above sentence into two; the first is rendered inaccurately (on one party’s terms is omitted) and the second is completely incoherent.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were several punctuation and spelling mistakes: “Tuomet ta šalis negali pašalinti ar apriboti atsakomybę” should be apriboti atsakomybės. The wrong case was used. “Tuo metu, abi šalys neturėjo…”: there should be no comma after “metu”. “R žinodamas apie programinės įrangos…”: comma after R is missing. “Tas termino saikingumas būtų įvertinamas pagal tai, kokios aplinkybės būtų buvę ar turėtų būti; kurios būtų žinomos arba būtų apsvarstytos, kai sutartis buvo sudaryta”: a comma should be put instead of semicolon after “būti”.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates should become more familiar with the topic and terminology used in this kind of text. It is very important to read the ST carefully and understand each sentence correctly. This would help to avoid mistranslations and inaccuracies which are not allowedin legal texts. It would be helpful to re-read the translated text without reference to the source in order to assess the translation in an objective way and see if all sentences and links make sense.

Unit 3F: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


82


ENGLISH INTO PANJABI UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance There were almost no omissions, although some papers seemed rushed. It was also noticed that some candidates began well enough but could not keep the same standard of accuracy the further they went into the passage. Some candidates followed the English lexis and word order slavishly, producing stilted and unidiomatic versions. Translator’s notes generally appeared to offer meanings of isolated words. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). Most candidates were able to write quite well in a register appropriate to the source text. There were decoding errors. For example, indifference of 25-years-olds (line 6) as “25 swl dy aumr dy vkPy qoN izAwdw” instead of 25 swlW dy aumr dy bMidAW dI AxgihlI see (line 14) “dyKxw” instead of smJxw communication(line 30) “g`l bwq krnw” instead of sMprk krnw bloodbath (line 32) as “KUnIN ieSnwn” instead of Gwx krnw/mwr mukwxw define (line 8) as “d`so” instead of pirBwSw/l`Cx d`so. There are some good terminology choices such as “nIrs” for dreary, “Alokrq” for rhetorical. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Verbs of some sentences and clauses were changed. For example, Line 8 was translated in the past tense instead of the present tense. …. internet was turning social (line 24) was translated in the present tense. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Accents of here and Murdoch appeared as “hyAr” and “murfOc” instead of ihAr and mrfOk. Some candidates used source language word billions in the target language whereas Panjabi language has kroV for billion. Some candidates did not use “h” in words like ijhnW, iehnW, auhnW and some did not use bindi properly in spelling. There were no problems related to punctuation. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should read the source text carefully and, in order to find the usage of words used in different contexts, make use of SL dictionary at this stage of the examination task. They should read their version at the end, without reference to the original, to see if it reads well as a piece of Panjabi which conveys the same meaning as the SL. During this final reading they should keep their eyes on spellings, especially in the use of bindI and the use of bottom h. They should keep reading on-line Panjabi language magazines and newspapers such as Daily Ajit, 5jabi.com etc. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010)

83

UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Good knowledge of subject content and current issues was shown and good range of vocabulary was used. The candidates seemed well prepared for the Exam. A few candidates translated the additional two sentences, appearing in bold before ‘TRANSLATION TO BEGIN HERE’ and wasted some of their time. There were no serious technical errors. A few candidates needed more in-depth knowledge of English language and these would benefit greatly from more extensive and in-depth study of English. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The candidates showed good accuracy. Some words provided were less appropriate. For example financial meltdown (line 5) was translated as “iv`qI iFlkwE” instead of mwlI ivnwS as, in this context, meltdown should be rendered as near to ruin and not “near to melting of metals”. Some candidates rendered fanfare as “DUMm DV`kw” instead of qwVIAW dI gUMj and shadowy was understood as “sur`iKAq” instead of S`kI. The level of comprehension was satisfactory. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Some mismatch of tenses was noted but good vocabulary was used. There were some inaccuracies in coherence. For example – (line 31-32) in a note of irony,….. deregulation Ebwmw ny bhuq v`fI ronlf rIgn iemwrq iv`c bhuq DUm DV`ky iv`c ib`l qy dsKq kIqy, ijs dw nwm aus rwStrpqI dy nwm qy r`iKAw hY jo ik nymW nUM bdlx dw smrQk sI” . This sentence in the target language, when translated into English, means Obama signed the bill, named after Ronald Reagan, in massive Ronald Reagan Building. After critical thinking of the effect of a principal and subordinate clause, the correct rendering Ebwmw ny aus bhuq v`fI ronlf rIgn iemwrq …bdlx dw smrQk sI.could have been produced. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Some errors were found in the transfer of names. For example, Street was spelt as “sRrIt” instead of stRIt and United as “XUnItf” instead of XUnweIitf. The script was legible apart from some errors in the use of BINDI. Punctuation was good. Recommendations to candidates The translator should try to use more than one dictionary to find different versions of words used, both in source and target languages and try to make the target language more idiomatic when decoding and encoding the sense. The candidates should read more English books to understand the culture of the language. For example – to hang up boots sounds as if it means hanging up the boots on a peg but in a sentence like ‘Beckham hangs up boots’ the sense is ‘Beckham has stopped playing football for ever’ and the Panjabi translator can put as ‘bYkhm ny Putbwl nUM sdw leI m`Qw tyk id`qw’ and add life to the text. Keep your knowledge of current issues up-to-date in orderto acquire enough linguistic and cultural knowledge. Read the source text very carefully and try to identify key phrases, hidden traps and complicated clauses. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance

84

The content was well understood and the passage was translated after some critical thought.Most candidates seemed well prepared for the exam task. Instead of notes giving information, a small list of Panjabi language words was given as Translator’s Notes.This is not good practice. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The message was conveyed accurately. There were no serious errors and good vocabulary was used. Some source language words were translated with inappropriate Panjabi words. For example has held (line 1) was rendered as “mMinAw” instead of ies mqy dI puStI kIqI, unreasonable (line2) as “DoKybwz” instead of Anau``icq, argued (line 13) as dwAvw instead of dlIl. In At the time, the parties did not have equal bargaining power as R was withdrawing the software which K was already using, a few candidates translated as as “such” instead of because. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Paragraphs and bullets were observed and the translation was cohesive. A few candidates used SL words shelf and pack in the target language instead of AlmwrI dw Kwnw and bMfl. No serious errors were noted in the use of grammar and organisation of work. Some candidates translated names R and K as Awr and ky instead of letter for letter as r, k. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most of the texts were spelt correctly although some candidates did not take enough care in the use of BINDI. Texts were legible apart from the construction of the letter X, found in few papers. Recommendations to candidates: Candidates should keep in touch with current issues and read some journals related to their option to be familiar with the topic and the concepts and develop awareness of the language and phraseology. Candidates should always consider whether the ordering of the sentence in the source text should be modified in the interests of greater clarity and authenticity in the target language. Translators must read the translated text with the eyes of a third party, without reference to the source in order to assess their translation in an objective way and ask themselves “Have I remained faithful to the original?” Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


85


ENGLISH INTO ROMANIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of translations ranged from very good to poor. One problem lay in understanding the context in which various words were used. As in past years, some candidates made mistakes which might be due to lack of attention (thus translating illuminating as “illuminated” or not paying attention to ‘false friends’ (see below). Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The source text (ST) contains a few concepts which some of the candidates have trouble understanding, such as medium/media (translated as media channels, experiment etc.), social media (translated as social communication means, though the consensus in Romania is to leave it untranslated), new media (translated as new communication methods), media organisations (translated as printed publishing houses), traditional print newspaper (translated as traditional publishing house). Also, most candidates struggled with fledging (translated as novice), doomed, dodo (translated as cliché) and illuminating (none of the candidates managed to find an appropriate translation). There are a worryingly high number of mistranslations of uncomplicated words, e.g. archaic is translated as antic, bleak as monotonous or dry, illuminating as brilliant or enlightened, discursive as logical or chaotic etc. In addition, some mistranslations seem to indicate that candidates are not following the text closely enough, e.g. dedicated to licking toast (sic) instead of dedicated to liking toast, that I would like to think that my opinions are nothing but emotional damages (sic) instead of what I like to think of as my opinions are nothing else but emotional prejudices etc. Clumsy renderings are quite frequent, including “o intuiţie cum că” instead of o intuiţie că, “de ce oricineva ar simţi nevoia să se exprime prin reţeaua Tweet numai dacă au făcut o baie” instead of, maybe, de ce simte cineva nevoia să trimită un mesaj tweet spunând că numai ce au făcut baie, “Ca să punem totul într-o singură descurajatoare propoziţie” instead of, maybe, “Iar concluzia demoralizantă”, “ceea ce 15 ani de acum înainte” instead of, maybe, ceea ce peste 15 ani, “precum este o telegramă” instead of ca şi o telegramă, “nu e doar intenţionat atât de sec, ci de-a dreptul mohorât” instead of nu e doar în mod intenţionat sec, ci de-a dreptul mohorât etc. In the case of one candidate, the translation is marred not by a lack of understanding of the English text, but by a lack of proficiency in Romanian. His/Her translation contains a high number of calques, literal translations, non-existent Romanian words and wrong choices for terms with a low level of difficulty, e.g. “îl întreb” for ask instead of îi cer, „confidenţă” for self-assured instead of încredere, „individualilor” for individuals instead of indivizilor, „confident” for confident instead of încrezător, „prejudicii” (which means damages) for prejudices instead of prejudecăţi etc. Only one candidate managed to maintain the slightly playful, tongue-in-cheek tone of the original article. His/Her translation contains numerous examples of good to excellent renderings, such as “oricum citeşti aceste rânduri pe ecranul calculatorului personal” for already reading this on your computer screen, “Ca şi mine de altfel, probabil că nu aţi auzit niciodată de Shirky până la acest interviu” for You have probably never even heard of Shirky, and until this interview I hadn’t either, “om obsedat de tehnologie” for techie, “şi-a început cariera într-un teatru din New York” for his first career was in the theatre in New York, “în formare” for fledging, “condamnat la moarte” for doomed, “colos industrial în derivă” for industrial dodo etc. This candidate is also the only one who rightly decides to keep social media and new media in English.

86

One candidate omitted the entire last paragraph. S/he also made a few additions which changed the meaning of the text (e.g. newspapers names closed instead of newspapers closed, on the stage of the theatre in New York instead of theatre in New York, access to The Times editorial instead of access to The Times etc.). When in doubt, one candidate provided two choices of translation, i.e. guru (“guru/înţelept”) and doomed (“condamnat/osândit”). This is not an acceptable strategy. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammar ranged from clumsy to good. Some candidates had a problem with the sentence You have probably never ever heard of Shirky and, until this interview I hadn’t either: I hadn’t either was translated using the compound perfect instead of the pluperfect, and thus translated as “I did not either” or “I have not done either” (“nu auzisem” rather than nu am auzit). Some examples of clumsiness included “îl citeşte de pe” instead of îl citeşte pe, “îi cer să definească ocupaţia lui” instead of îi cer să-şi definească ocupaţia, “Lucrez asupra teoriiilor şi practicilor” instead of, perhaps, Lucrez în domeniul teoriei şi practicii, “respectul credul ce-l primeşte” instead of repectul credul primit etc. One candidate had trouble with the sequence of tenses rules in English and consequently got tenses wrong in Romanian, i.e. translating a verb which should be in the present tense as an optional, and a future tense, again, as an optional. As far as syntax is concerned, there are a few errors, e.g. “un anti-tehnică tip” instead of un tip anti-tehnică, “doar în cincisprezece ani” instead of în doar cinsprezece ani, “de fapt sunt prejudecăţi” instead of sunt de fapt prejudecăţi etc. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) For two of the candidates handwriting and presentation are a problem. One translation looks and reads like a draft. The text is full of deletions and corrections; on occasion, corrections are carelessly made and, as a result, the new word is incorrect (e.g. “motivuli”), the intended meaning is unclear (e.g. “ca să formulată într-o singură propoziţie”), or the old text has not been amended to match the correction (e.g. “noului fenomenului”). There are some missing diacritics but, overall, letters are so poorly formed it is very difficult to ascertain whether the diacritics are in place or not (ţ and ş are a particular problem). In the case of the other translation the writing is quite difficult to read, especially where corrections have been made. Old-fashioned spelling was found in a few scripts (e.g. use of “î” instead of â, “sînt” instead of sunt, “nici un” instead of niciun), in spite of the new rules having been introduced more than 10 years ago. S/he also failed to localise quotation marks. Some candidates made spelling mistakes, e.g. “vacum” (should be vacuum), “hilar” (should be ilar), “ideie” (should be idee), “nici un” (should be niciun), “iterviu” (should be interviu) “charismatic” (should be carismatic). Diacritics were sometimes left out. Most of the candidates correctly retained the names of well-known British papers in English; one of them translated The Guardian. In the case of the book title, only one candidate correctly left it in English with the Romanian translation in brackets; the others chose to translate it - badly in some cases (e.g. About All of Us for Here Comes Everybody). Two of the candidates did not observe the rule about writing on alternate lines, which made marking more difficult.

87

Recommendations to candidates: Candidates need to read carefully and make sure they understand the ST before starting to translate it. Once the translation is drafted, candidates should read it very carefully to make sure that things follow logically, and that the language makes sense. These steps would considerably reduce the number of mistranslations, calques, literal translations and poor collocations. Candidates need to keep abreast of changes in both their source and target language. It is not acceptable for a professional translator to still use spelling rules changed more than a decade ago. Cultural proficiency should be achieved, again, in both languages. A professional translator should be familiar with terms like social media, printed media, social networking; most people educated to degree level should know what a dodo or a luddite is. It is not enough for a translator to understand the ST. It is also necessary to be proficient in the target language. Use translator’s notes only as you would use in a professional capacity. Unit 01: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 33% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of translations varied from very good to very poor. Some candidates showed an excellent grasp of the subject matter, while others had evident difficulties in understanding what the article was about. It is important to be able to produce a text which reflects the original, and in the case of a technology text, a correct translation of specialised vocabulary is compulsory. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Some candidates showed and excellent knowledge of the specialised terminology, while others struggled with basic vocabulary. Thus there were a number of candidates translating hydrate (Romanian “hidrat”) as “hybrid”, controller as “electric switch”, range as “autonomy”, lead acid as “predominantly acid”, higher price tag as “priced accordingly”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In most cases the correct grammatical structures were used, although there was a grammatical mistake: “dezavantajele ei” should have been “dezavantajele lui”, when referring to a neuter noun. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling, punctuation and transfer of names, figures and dates were correct in all papers, with the exception of some missing diacritic signs: “masinilor” should have been maşinilor, “masină” should have been maşină and “masinii” should have been maşinii. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The ST was relatively straightforward, with no major linguistic or cultural challenges. In spite of this, both candidates failed to produce acceptable translations. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any).

88

One candidate misread the text at several points and provided misleading translations of the original (e.g. break up is translated as do away with, puts more light is translated as puts more emphasis, put complex law in consumer-oriented terms as reformulate the complex legislation in favour of the consumer, Obama’s bill-signing as the event in honour of Obama approving the law, In a note of irony as With a note of irony, who championed deregulation as who committed the highest number of crimes etc). Other mistranslations included: crippled recession (sic) for crippling recession, financial collapse for financial meltdown, dissolve for break up, labour development for job growth, the representative of the Republican Party for Republican Representative etc. One candidate showed a lack of familiarity with English names, and assumes that Darrell is a female name. Rather worryingly, another candidate did not appear to understand the word deregulation and consistently translated regulation/s as law/s. In one case, there was confusion in the target language between scrutină (scrutiny) and scrutin (ballot). In another case, regulators was translated as “regulatori legislativi”, a made-up term which does not make any sense. There were numerous instances of literal translations (“acompaniat de o mare fanfară” instead of, perhaps, cu mare tam-tam, “pentru asistarea în redresarea financiară... punct”, instead of, perhaps, pentru asistarea în redresarea financiară... şi gata, “aduce mai multă lumină” instead of aruncă mai multă lumină, “va ajuta la eradicarea ... şi a taxelor ascunse pentru oameni” instead of va ajuta oamenii eradicând ... şi taxele ascunse, “Ca o notă de ironie” instead of, perhaps, Ironia a făcut ca etc.) and clumsy renderings (“au adus ... pe tărâmul celei mai grave recesiuni” instead of au adus ... în cea mai gravă recesiune etc.) which made following the texts difficult. There were a few omissions; in one instance, the text was changed from a crippling recession was primarily caused by a breakdown in the financial system that cannot be allowed to happen again to the recession was caused by a breakdown in the financial system which cannot happen again, in another, from shadowy deals that caused this crisis to shadowy deals. Where in doubt, one candidate provided two translation choices, e.g. fees (“plăţilor/taxelor”), rules (“legilor/reglementărilor”) etc. There were instances where candidates appeared to have looked words up in the dictionary and picked the wrong choice, without giving any consideration to context, e.g. sought to was translated as “a căutat” when it should be a încercat, provide was translated as “oferi” when it should be asigura, room was translated as “cameră” when it should be sală etc. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammar ranged from relatively good to poor. The main problem in one of the translations was the lack of agreement between noun/pronoun and verb; this did not seem to be due to the candidate’s lack of knowledge but to a lack of concentration. The same applied to syntactical errors and incorrect tenses. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling was generally good. There were two spelling mistakes, i.e. “tam tam” instead of tam-tam and “deasemenea” instead of de asemenea. There were two incorrect name transfers (“Reagon” instead of Reagan and “Darrel” instead of Darrell). With reference to punctuation, there were a few missing commas, one instance of unlocalised quotation marks - nothing major. Recommendations to candidates: Candidates need to read carefully and make sure they understand the ST before starting to translate it. Once the translation is drafted, candidates should read it very carefully to make sure that things follow logically, and that the language makes sense. These steps would probably reduce considerably the number of mistranslations, incorrect word choices, literal translations and clumsy renderings.

89

It is important to familiarise oneself with field-specific terminology. In this case, although the ST was not highly specialised, candidates struggled with even quite mundane terms, e.g. regulations, regulators, deregulation, break up, wind down etc. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance There were very good translations one of which had to be failed because it was incomplete; legibility was a problem in the second part of the text. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The candidates understood perfectly the letter and spirit of the ST and produced a Romanian translation which fully retained the flavour of the original and made for a very good read. Language was used creatively so that the translation read like an original piece of writing. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammar was very good; the text read as if it was originally written in Romanian. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Technically, it is rather obvious that candidates run out of time. The writing becames more and more difficult to read, at times almost illegible, a lot of the diacritics are missing and letters are badly formed. Because of this, there were quite a few instances of incorrect punctuation (incorrect use of commas, unlocalised quotation marks) and one spelling mistake. Recommendations to candidates Candidates are advised to manage their time furing the examination. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The level of the translations varied from very good to acceptable. This means that some candidates did not pay enough attention in choosing the right words for the context. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Though all candidates showed a good or at least an adequate command of the subject matter, all had problems with the word squidgy, which was translated as “damp when touched” or “fluffy”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In most cases the correct grammatical structures were used, although there were a number of grammatical mistakes: Developing strategies has been translated as “dezvoltare a strategii”, when it should have been dezvoltarea strategiilor and variety of ways as “variile moduri”, rather than varietatea de moduri or variatele moduri. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling, punctuation and transfer of names, figures and dates were correct in all papers, with the exception of a missing diacritic sign: “asadar” should have been aşadar. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

90

UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The three words with which candidates struggled most were: attainers, insights and engagement. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). There were numerous examples of good renderings, e.g. “anturajul” for peer group influence, “La nivel naţional se va organiza un sondaj pe bază de chestionare” for A national questionnaire survey will be carried out, “caută surse de finanţare” for seeks funding, “cei care au ajuns la majorat” for attainers etc. Mistranslations included: collects funds for seeks funding, different for differentiated, family training (sic) for family background, should still be questioned for have yet to be challenged, achieve a minimum of 1,000 sample type responses for achieve a minimum sample size of 1,000 respondents, series of important data for important insights etc. The authenticity of the translated text was affected by:

bad collocations, most of them involving the nouns understanding and level (e.g. “unei înţelegeri teoretice mai vaste” instead of unei mai bune înţelegeri teoretice, “înţelegere pătrunzătoare importantă” instead of o mai bună înţelegere, “nivel obţinut” instead of nivel atins, “fortifice nivelul” instead of mărească nivelul etc);

clumsy renderings (e.g. “Acesta reprezintă un domeniu de studiu”, instead of Este un domeniu de studiu, “influenţa grupului de aceeaşi vârstă” instead of anturajul, “locuiesc în zone în care astfel de instituţii există acum” instead of locuiesc în zone în care acum există astfel de instituţii, “În timp ce aceştia” instead of Cu toate că aceştia etc.;

wordiness (“vis-a-vis de procesul politic official şi faţă de instituţiile democratice” instead of vis-a-vis de procesul politic official şi instituţiile democratice, “cu privire la acest aspect” instead of în această privinţă);

the use of the calque “angajament” for engagement, instead of implicare;

providing two choices of translations for engagement, i.e “angajament/implicare”.

Candidates chose to translate the Welsh Assembly – wrongly, as the Welsh Council, the Scottish Parliament – wrongly as the Scottish Assembly, and the Greater London Assembly – translated as The Council for London and its surrounding areas and Great London Assembly. Since these names do not translate easily and do not make much sense in Romanian, it would have been better to leave them in English, perhaps with a translation in brackets. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammar was generally good. There were a few instances of clumsy grammar, e.g. “cu privire la procesul politic” instead of faţă de procesul politic, “decât cei care nu locuiesc” instead of faţă de cei care nu locuiesc etc., two incorrect agreements (article/pronoun and noun/verb), an incorrect preposition (“atitudinilor asupra” instead of atitudinilor cu privire la) and an omitted article. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling was good; on one occasion a lower-case letter was incorrectly used. There was also a missing diacritic. With regard to punctuation, there were a few instances where commas were incorrectly inserted or omitted. Recommendations to candidates: Candidates should aim to read as much as possible in both languages in order to improve their vocabulary. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW

91

General Report on Candidate Performance The translations showed an adequate command of the subject matter, and the correct specialised vocabulary was used in most cases. Inaccuracies were minor and would not have given the reader false or misleading information. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The text was translated correctly, with just some minor inaccuracies, such as to uphold translated as “to encourage”, unreasonable as “exaggerated” and unfair as “incorrect”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Grammatical constructions were adequate. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The spelling, punctuation and transfer of names, figures and dates were mainly correct in all papers. There was, however a minor spelling mistake: “unea” should have been uneia. Recommendations to candidates: The above examples show the importance of reading the ST with great care in order to identify the ‘hidden traps’ and ‘false friends’ before commencing the translation. Often the context in which a word is used determines which version of the target word should be used in the text. Candidates should also read the ST very carefully to work out the right register in which to do their translation, based on the type of ST and on the target audience defined in the examination rubric. Specialised vocabulary needs to be learned before attempting to take this examination and important words like uphold in the legal option, for example, should be known to the candidates. It is always important for candidates to read the translation at the end to check for spelling mistakes and punctuation. More importantly, candidates must make sure the translation reads as a piece originally written in Romanian. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010)

-*-


92


ENGLISH INTO SERBIAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates showed an adequate understanding of the source text (ST). Only occasionally were there some minor mistakes made. Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure and overall coherence. There were no omissions and names were transferred correctly, although legibility was not very good. It needs to be said that it is important to scrutinise every sentence when translating no matter how simple it may look in English. Only one serious mistake is enough to lower the overall impression. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Translations showed good understanding of the ST and only occasionally was there a slight lack of clarity. The vocabulary, terminology, idioms and register were faithful to those of the ST. There were some minor mistakes in appropriateness of rendering and lexis such as in the example then Shirky unquestionably qualifies which was translated as “onda Širki bez ikakvog pitanja odgovara opisu”, where a more appropriate translation could have been onda Širki neosporno ispunjava te uslove. Another example was it`s his rhetorical fluency which bowls you over translated as “tečnost njegovog govora je ono što obara s nogu“ while it would have been more appropriate to render it as tek vas njegova govornička lakoća obara s nogu. Some good choices were made. For example, no medium has ever survived the indifference of 25-year-olds was translated as “ni jedan medij nikada nije preživeo ravnodušnost dvadesetpetogodišnjaka.“ Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure. Texts read coherently. Minor structural mistakes occurred in the text mainly due to some awkwardness and lapses in grammar such as in the sentence Shirky has been writing about the internet since 1996. translated as “Širki je pisao o internetu još 1996. godine”, it should have been translated as Širki piše o internetu od 1996. godine. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation and transfer of names were generally correct but there were legibility problems to be found, especially in the case of translations finished in a rush. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance A very good understanding of the ST was demonstrated. Only occasionally did some minor mistakes occur. Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure and overall coherence. It is important to scrutinise every single sentence when translating no matter how simple it may look in English. Only one serious mistake is enough to lower the overall impression. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Occasionally there was a slight lack of clarity. The vocabulary, terminology, idioms and register were faithful to those of the ST. There were some mistakes in appropriateness of rendering and lexis as in and uses the electric current to charge the batteries which was translated as “i koristi

93

električnu struju kako bi napunilo baterije”, where a more accurate translation could have been i koristi električnu struju za punjenje baterija. Some good choices were made; for example, Carmakers have been constantly competing was translated as “Proizvođači se neprestano utrkuju”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure. The texts read well with good cohesion and coherence. Minor structural mistakes occurred mainly because of problems of coherence; one word was omitted in the sentence “u jednom trenutku u potpunosti zameni konduktivni sistem punjenja” which would sound better as u jednom trenutku bi mogao da u potpunosti zameni konduktivni način punjenja. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation and transfer of names were generally correct; however, some foreign names of places were translated into the target language, while others were not. This showed inconsistency. More attention should be paid to legibility. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates showed an adequate understanding of the ST. Only occasionally did some minor mistakes occur. Translations were well organised, with good sentence structure and overall coherence. There were no omissions and names were transferred correctly. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translations do not show false or misleading information to the reader. There are some mistakes related to appropriateness of rendering and lexis as in We will examine whether their gender… which was translated as “Istražićemo i da li pol ...”, where a more accurate translation could have been Istražićemo da li rodnost… Some good choices were made also. For example, Attainers are a particularly important group to study because they are relatively inexperienced politically was translated as “Novi glasači su naročito važna grupa za izučavanje s obzirom da su politički relativno neiskusni.” Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) On the whole, sentence structures were used appropriately and the texts read well with reasonably good cohesion and coherence. However, there were minor structural mistakes as in “stećićemo” instead of steći ćemo or in “istraživajući” instead of istražujući. There were also some good choices such as who are eligible to vote in an election for the first time as translated as “koji pravo na izlazak na izbore stiču po prvi put”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation and transfer of names did not cause any problems; however, there were minor spelling mistakes such as “i” instead of u in Cyrillic, which could be due to rushing to finish the translation. Greater London Assembly was translated as “Skupština šireg Londona” which does not read well and could have been better rendered as, for example, Skupština za šire područje grada Londona. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should leave time to read the ST carefully in order to avoid misinterpretation of the contents. Reading the translation at the end without reference to the original is highly recommended. It allows the candidates to get a better feel of how the translation should sound in

94

the target language. Use the dictionary intelligently, not slavishly. It is important to fully understand the concepts behind an article. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


95


ENGLISH INTO SLOVAK UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Some of the translations were of a good professional standard. Several candidates had problems in fully understanding the ST. Candidates who do not seem to have adequate in-depth knowledge of the finer points of the source language were therefore unable to produce a good enough professional standard. These candidates would benefit greatly from more profound and in-depth study of English. There were also issues with excessive transliteration. Likewise, candidates who did not manage a required standard due to insufficient knowledge of Slovak grammar and syntax would benefit to a great degree from more extensive and thorough study of Slovak. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Overall, candidates were able to write quite well in a register appropriate to the ST. However, there were some serious decoding errors. For example, archaic (line 2) was translated as “zastarano” or “zastarané” instead of zastaralo or zastaralé a Western Union telegram (line 2) was translated as “noviny Western Union” instead of, telegram (spoločnosti) Western Union medium (line 6) was rendered as “stredný vek” instead of, for example, médium or komunikačný prostriedok He winces (line 13) was translated as “zagrimasil sa” or “uškrnie sa” instead of, for example, strhne/mykne sa or strhol/zarazil sa he commands from others (line 21) was rendered as “požaduje od druhých” or “vyžaduje od ostatných” or “z hľadiska iných” instead ofvzbudzuje/vyvoláva u iných dozens (line 33) was translated as “tucet” instead of desiatky or množstvo an industrial dodo (line 36) was rendered as “priemyselnou potrebou” instead of priemyselným prežitkom/pozostatkom/pasé really (line 45) was translated as “skutočne” instead of v skutočnosti When it came to the choice of register, some candidates too often opted for the literal translation of the words. Whilst technically correct, this resulted at several points in situations when it could be rather difficult for the layperson/reader/recipient to comprehend fully the meaning of the target text (TT). For example, Indifference (line 6) was rendered as “indiferenciu” instead ofnezáujem or ľahostajnosť discursive (line 18) was translated as “diskurzívny” instead oftriezvy, logický, rozumný, racionálny or rozvláčny online (line 34) was translated as “online” instead ofa more appropriate na internet to tweet (line 41) was translated as “pípať” instead of, a more authentic oznamovať/zverejňovať na Twitteri In addition, the information at the start informs the candidates that the article is written by Decca Aitkenhead (a female journalist as indicated by her interview), yet two candidates used the masculine version of verbs throughout. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Problems with cohesion occurred when inflecting the nouns such as “Podľa Clay Shirky” (it should have been Podľa Claya Shirkyho). These could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading.

96

In less than (line 3) should be O menej ako, not Za menej ako. The most common grammatical error occurred when writing the capital and lower-case letters, for example, “že Slnko zapadá” (it should have been že slnko zapadá) and when introducing a new sentence after a colon. Another common mistake was the use of a simple past tense when the ST used a simple present perfect, instead of a more appropriate simple present tense (for example, “Keď som ho požiadal” instead of “Keď ho požiadam”). However, if the candidates decide to use a simple past tense, they can, but they have to bear in mind that it is imperative to do so in the entire translation, that is, they have to be consistent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most scripts were perfectly legible. Only one candidate failed the Aspect 3. Spelling mistakes such as “bezpochy” or “práznotou” could have been avoided by allowing time for proofreading. Typos such as “newyorskom” could also have been avoided the same way, as well as omitted accents (e.g., “party” or “uvolnený”) and misplaced commas. There were several candidates who had problems positioning the comma or transfering the name of New York University. The title of Clay Shirky’s book was treated in different ways, with three candidates leaving an English title and not translating it, two candidates giving its Slovak translation followed by an English original in parentheses, one candidate providing only its Slovak rendering and one candidate keeping an English title followed by a Slovak translation in parentheses. One very enduring mistake occurred with punctuation before the sentence in direct speech - the candidates should acquire a more detailed knowledge of Slovak punctuation rules and conventions. billions should not have been rendered as “millions”. Whilst the number is only conveying the message of a ‘large number of people’ and there is some ambiguity about the meaning of the billion (109 in US system, 1012 in European, with UK not clearly defining which is used), acceptable translations in Slovak would have been miliardy or bilióny. Serious spelling mistakes include an issue with the use of ‘y’ instead of ‘I’ (in “ktorý” (singular) instead of “ktorí” for plural). Careless mistakes in punctuation and diacritics (e.g. “rukach” instead of rukách, “táký” instead of taký, “nazory” instead of názory) could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should leave time to read the ST carefully so that superficial misreadings are avoided and to read their version at the end, without reference to the original, to see if it reads well as a piece of Slovak (i.e. to produce the translation in steps: 1) reading the passage carefully; 2) translating so that your comprehension of what the passage means is imparted; 3) reading your version to check for spelling mistakes, etc. but more importantly to see if it works as a piece of Slovak); use the dictionary intelligently and not slavishly (i.e. a first step would be to buy a dictionary which gives examples of usage of words in context and for the candidates to read and compare those examples before deciding on the right word to use). Use translator’s notes only as you would use them in a professional capacity. Unit 01: Pass Rate 29% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance This year five candidates entered this category and most candidates encountered problems with the translation of technical terms, in some cases making the translation worthless as a technical article. This unfortunately brought down otherwise very good translations to a Pass level. This year the text was US-based and contained some words (that should have been generally known to potential translators) different from UK English (e.g. gas, trunk). It is important that the candidates familiarise themselves with variants of English language, in particular in technical terminology. There were also instances of excessive transliteration (see comments in Aspect 1) and incorrect punctuation as well as poor legibility of the final translation.

97

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) It is important to read the ST very carefully, especially when terms different from UK English are used (e.g. gas or trunk). Also, in technical translation it is unacceptable to use a translator’s notes simply to state that the technical terms were translated loosely as ‘accessible sources did not contain the required terms’ - it is therefore critical to have technical dictionaries accessible when attempting a Technology paper. More important, lead acid batteries have been in use for a very long time (in traditional cars) and thus this term should not have caused problems to candidates. However, some candidates either rendered it as “kyselina olovnatá (leaded acid – a term non-existent in Slovak)” or “lead-acetate” (equally unacceptable) or simply did not translate the term at all. Another problematic term was the Nickel-Metal Hydride batteries also known in Slovakia as NiMH batteries, which in some cases was partially translated (nickel spelt in Slovak, the rest transliterated) or a hydride was incorrectly decoded as a “hybrid” and car range is rendered incorrectly once as “car reach”, “car’s life expectancy” or paraphrased very descriptively as “the number of kilometres the car will drive” although Slovak has an appropriate translation: dojazd. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The sentence structure in most translations was sound to an extent, although there were some examples of unnatural structures being used, e.g. all you will see was often rendered literally and unnaturally. In some translations errors in relation to Aspect 1 resulted in serious problems with coherence (e.g. an incorrect translation of the sentence on tyres confuses the reader by stating that “due to a limited availability of such cars, it is better to buy more expensive tyres which will extend the life expectancy of the car”). Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most scripts were perfectly legible, with one exception, and no candidate failed the unit on Aspect 3 alone. One candidate’s handwriting was particularly difficult to read and, on a number of occasions, the benefit of the doubt was given as it was unclear what spelling they used. It is important that candidates’ handwriting should be clear. There were no serious mistakes in spelling and only careless mistakes in punctuation, which could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading. Recommendations to candidates Allowing enough time to read the final translation to complete the translation and to ensure it reads as a ‘natural Slovak’ text would have significantly improved the quality of translations. Reading the original text more carefully, becoming familiar with generic US English vocabulary and specific technical terms would also help. Always double-check meanings found in dictionaries.. Reading original technical Slovak books and articles (on-line newspaper and magazine articles are now widely available) also reinforces the use of correct use of grammar and spelling. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance This year seven candidates entered this category in this language combination and some of the translations were of a very good professional standard resulting in Merit awards. Other candidates who do not seem to have sufficient in-depth knowledge of the finer points of the source language were unable to attain a good enough standard. These candidates would benefit greatly from more extensive and in-depth study of both English and equivalents in Slovak. In the case of two translations, where otherwise a Pass might have been achieved, there were serious deficiencies in the decoding of the ST, as indicated below and hence only a Fail was awarded to these. In the remaining failing translations there was evidence of fundamental misunderstanding of the ST and

98

excessive adherence to the ST, resulting in a rendering that was confusing to intended readers (see examples below). In terms of technical aspects there was some defective punctuation, incorrect use of diacritics and, more seriously, declension of nouns and use of ‘y’ instead of ‘i’ as detailed below. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) As the ST referred to the US legal/legislative system, the candidates were expected to understand (and use a correct translation of) ‘Representative’, which was frequently translated literally (and inaccurately). The most serious errors included the mistranslation of the expression president who championed deregulation as either “president who created regulations” or “president who defeated deregulation” which are equally unacceptable and change the original meaning of the information. Further errors include the mistranslations of signed into law Wednesday - translated literally (and highly inappropriately)as “he signed his name under the law called Wednesday” (the ‘name’ of the law – Wednesday – is even translated in the brackets into Slovak) or simply “wrote into law”; escaped the oversight translated literally as “escaped the regulatory organs not spotting” or “escaped the carelessness of” (rather than the intended meaning of oversight); guard the consumers translated literally as “checking up on consumers” rather than the intended protective meaning. There were also some additions and omissions, e.g. addition of “in July 2010” in the first sentence although this information was only provided for information, not translation and was not contained in the ST to be translated; or the omission job from impede job growth gives the impression that all growth is impeded. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The translations were generally well organised with a good sentence structure although there were some departures from Slovak conventions and some examples of unclear connections, e.g. when referring to the portrayal of the law and that the consumers will pay for it. There is an example of cohesive devices not used appropriately “ako” – instead of more appropriate počas obdobia, keď. There were also examples of improper grammar – using ‘ktoré’ instead of ‘ktorý’ when referring to “krach”. A number of candidates used Wall Street transliterated, rather than translated using Slovak conventions (with appropriate declination endings). In addition a serious error in comprehension and incorrect grammatical tense was the use of the past tense in the sentence lawmakers who face voters (translated as “lawmakers who had to face voters in November” or even “in November of last year”) – considering this article was published in July 2010, it suggests that the elections took place in November 2009 – a fact that could possibly be verified on the internet, but the reader should not be misled like this, which was the main reason for a Fail in this Aspect. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most scripts were perfectly legible. Very few candidates failed the unit on Aspect 3 only. Serious spelling mistakes include the use of ‘y‘ instead of ‘i‘ (in ‘chránený‘ and ‘schopný’ (singular) instead of ‘chránení‘ and ‘schopní’ for plural) - this is a major issue in the Slovak language and at this level of translation it is unacceptable to make this sort of a mistake. Careless mistakes in punctuation and diacritics (e.g. “ľudom” instead of ľuďom) could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading. There were a few candidates who had problems positioning the comma and with translating 1930s - rendered incorrectly as “1930”. Recommendations to candidates Allowing enough time to read the final translation to complete the translation and to ensure it reads as a ‘natural Slovak’ text would have significantly improved the quality of translations. Reading the ST more carefully, rather than jumping to the most obvious conclusions would also help. Always double-check meanings found in dictionaries as this was a source of errors this year (specifically rendering oversight literally and hence wrongly). Reading original Slovak books and articles (on-

99

line newspaper and magazine articles are now widely available) also reinforces the use of correct use of grammar and spelling. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 29% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The overall performance of the candidates was good. The ST required an excellent command of idiomatic and literary English. There were a few points in the text which almost every candidate struggled with – these were mostly isolated words or idioms. There were almost no omissions. On the other hand, all candidates produced a text in fluent and appropriate Slovak. There were hardly any errors in grammar or sentence structure. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translations were mostly of good or very good standard, showing a good command of the subject matter. There were only a couple of sentences/expressions in the ST which proved difficult for nearly everyone. One of them, retiring butler (line 21) was mistranslated by all candidates – they wrote, for example, “ako keď sa zo služby stiahne verný sluha” (meaning “like a loyal servant leaving service), or as “sluha, ktorý odchádza do dôchodku”, meaning “servant who is leaving work because of reaching the age of retirement”. A more appropriate rendering would be, for example, nenápadne sa vytrácajúci komorník. Another, conversational mannerist (line 28), was misunderstood by all but one candidate. The most common rendering was “V konverzácii mala dobré spôsoby”, meaning “she had good manners in conversation, instead of V konverzácii bola manieristka. Heady with bubbles (line 1) was put as “s hlavou pokrytou penou” by one candidate, which means “her head covered with bubbles”, and omitted by others. A possible translation might be, for example, opájaná penou pripomínajúcou vrcholky… The expression queer-gossip was another challenging one, and got mostly put as “falošné ohováranie” (false gossip). However, the connotation of queer as homosexual was not picked up. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) All texts were put together in a very good Slovak. The tone, style, sentence structure, grammar were appropriate for the text. Only rarely did some constructions orexpressions feel unnatural. One example of a minor error: „skorý večer“ is a calque of the ST (early evening) and, while it can be understood, it should be podvečer. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Interestingly, only one candidate changed the name Lucy Sandler (line 1) into an appropriate Slovak form Lucy Sandlerová. Female surnames take on a suffix –ová in Slovak. However, since this rule is often ignored by some authors in Slovakia for gender-political reasons,this was not penalised. All candidates understood that the “surname” Fusspot was a made-up name and used suitable alternatives in Slovak “Prieberčiví”, “Puntičkári”. There were almost no spelling or punctuation errors. One candidate put France as “francúzsko”, but this should have a capital F (this was most probably just a typo).

100

Recommendations to candidates The main problem in this type of text can be unfamiliarity with idiomatic expressions and words, as well as challenging unusual sentence structure. It is important to read a wide variety of texts to develop a broad vocabulary and awareness of styles and genres. This applies to English as well as Slovak literature. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 75% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of the answers varied. One serious problem was the candidates’ unfamiliarity with how to put things into the appropriate kind of Slovak. Most candidates encountered difficulties with the translation of technical terms, in some cases making the translation worthless as a technical article. Understanding the English is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success. There were also issues with excessive transliteration (see comments in Aspect 1) and punctuation as well as poor legibility of the final translation. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Comprehension is crucial. For instance, a network of European researchers (line 3) is skupina/sieť európskych výskumníkov/vedcovI, not skupina s názvom Európski výskumníci inevitable (line 20) is nevyhnutný rather than neodmysliteľný non-flammable (line 21) is nehorľavá, not horľavá essential (line 24) is základnou or hlavnou rather than najzákladnejšou But however much is added (line 29) should be, for example, No nech pridáme akékoľvek množstvo, not Ale akékoľvek množstvo je pridané Most modern (line 34) is incorrectly translated as Najmodernejšie. This shows the candidate did not decode the source phrase correctly – it should be Väčšina moderných or Väčšina novodobých cellulose acetate (line 36) is acetát/octan celulózy, not kyselina octová Similarly, accuracy is equally important. For example, ticking (line 1) is časovaná or tikajúca rather than načasovaná; plastic heritage is plastové dedičstvo rather than plastické dedičstvo; rock-hard (line 7) is tvrdej ako skala rather than just tvrdej; in sunlight (line 11) is v slnečnom svetle/žiarení rather than just vo svelte; to break down (line 22) is rozkladať/rozpadať sa rather than poškodiť sa Inappropriate choice of register in Slovak can obscure the sense of what is meant. For instance, love affair with (line 5) is láska k or vrúcny vzťah k rather than ľúbostná aféra s. In some contexts this substitution might work, but here we have the phrase love affair with plastics – ľúbostný vzťah s plastami is not an appropriate phrase transparent (line 16) was translated as “transparentný”. Although technically correct, a more appropriate rendering could be, for example, priesvitný or priehľadný. However, this applies only to the lay audience. If the translated article occurred in a similar publication to New Scientist, this would be absolutely acceptable

101

kyselina etánová (line 23) would be better rendered in this type of text as kyselina octová as this would make the TT more comprehensible to the lay reader. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates can be excessively influenced by the syntactic patterns of English: So is the situation (line 25) should be, for example, Je teda situácia rather than Je takže táto situácia; That’s when (lines 30 & 31) should be Vtedy rather than To je vtedy, keď or A to je to. Slovak does not permit this kind of stylistic or syntactical embedding. At several points, candidates were prone to writing stilted or contrived sentence structures. This happened primarily with longer and more complex sentences, and candidates either tried to unduly follow the STt or they decided to paraphrase or over-translate it. The resulting Slovak translation did not have a proper syntactical or grammatical form. For example, in consistencies ranging from (lines 6 & 7) was rendered as “a ich konzistencia je od“, which sounds wooden and a more appropriate translation could be, e.g., s konzistenciou od or v konzistenciách od clusters of long, chain-like carbon-based molecules (lines 8 & 9), which was translated as zhluk dlhých, ako keby v reťaziach uhlíkovo založených molekulách instead of zhluky dlhých, reťazových/reťazovitých molekúl na báze uhlíka caused the movie industry to explode in more ways than one (line 15) was rendered as, for example, spôsobil zánik filmového priemyslu …, a to viacerými spôsobmi rahter than, for example, spôsobil výbuch/explóziu vo filmovom priemysle vo viacerých smeroch. Candidates should take extra care when it comes to proper inflection of Slovak words: are polymers (line 8) should be sú polymérmi rather than sú polymérami cinema film made from (line 14) should be filmom vyrobených rather than filmom vyrobeným. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Now that candidates’ scripts are being word-processed, we are seeing what are apparently mistypings (oddlialený for oddialený, for example). These have to be penalised as much as other spelling errors. Checking is no less important. Candidates should stop and think about whether English punctuation conventions should be transposed directly into Slovak. The perpetual mark-losers are placement of commas and general punctuation rules and conventions. As for the National Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen, candidates ought to remember that in order to transfer a name correctly, one has to always translate the whole expression, applying Slovak capital and lower-case letters conventions. Candidates often translated only the first part of the expression, leaving Copenhagen in English (a correct Slovak equivalent is v Kodani). Candidates should also make themselves more familiar with the transfer of ordinal numbers from English into Slovak (z 19. a 20. storočia or z 19-teho a 20-teho storočia rather than z 19 a 20 storočia). Recommendations to candidates Candidates are recommended to study an English journal such as New Scientist (which is generally the type of equivalent publication implied in the rubric) and Slovak journals such as Quark or Geo, which are also available online, as part of their preparation for the Diploma. This will undoubtedly help them in making themselves more familiar with Slovak terminology, as well as

102

appropriate syntactical and grammatical structures. It is essential to develop a detailed knowledge of the language and phraseology employed as it is to understand the concepts behind an article. Allow enough time to read the final translation to complete the translation and to ensure it reads as a ‘natural Slovak’ text. Reading original technical Slovak books and articles (on-line newspaper and magazine articles are now widely available) also reinforces the use of correct use of grammar and spelling. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 7505% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Most candidates had problems decoding the source text (ST) it in its entirety. Only one candidate provided a text which showed a good command of the subject matter. What proved difficult were long passages with complex prepositions and linkages requiring a thorough understanding of every aspect of the English text (lexis as well as grammar) in order to fully grasp the meaning. Surprisingly, most candidates were not familiar with some of the terms which, being on the subject of elections and politics, are often present in daily newspapers and therefore should not be beyond the candidates’ reach.

In Aspect 2 candidates struggled to put together an appropriate Slovak sentence mostly in those instances when they were unsure of the original message. The more complex the original sentence structure the more challenging it was for the candidates to rewrite the sentence into a Slovak one.

In Aspect 3 only a few minor spelling and punctuation faults were present.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidates seemed to have difficulties with some of the terminology specific to the subject matter, as well as with some more general expressions used in a social science text. The term at the centre of the translation – attainers – proved difficult for all apart from one candidate. The Slovak equivalent is prvovoliči, however, candidates tried to substitute “voliči” (voters) or “voliaci nováčikovia” (voting novices), or in one case by a made-up Slovakicised version “attainéri”.

Another central term of the translation electoral register was also mistranslated in most cases, while the appropriate equivalent is zoznam voličov. One candidate wrote “register volieb” meaning list of elections, another put “volebný registrát” making up a non-existent word “registrát.

Words typically used in this type of text, such as sample (Slovak vzorka), or survey (prieskum), also need to be accurately translated. Another term, policy-makers was problematic, partly because there is not a straightforward equivalent for it. The best way of dealing with it was to put politickí predstavitelia, as a couple of candidates did. However, some used unsuitable renderings, such as “zákonodarcovia” (meaning law-makers).

An interesting case was the handling of the word study (i.e. a piece of research). One of the possible renderings would be štúdia (can also be, for example, výskum). There are two other similar words in Slovak “štúdio” (in English studio) and “štúdium” (studies) which some of the candidates confused. One candidate wrote “na vykonanie ... národného štúdia” in which national study was replaced by “national studio”. This points to the need for a greater familiarity with relevant Slovak literature in the field of social science.

The expression the extent to which (lines 10 and 18) proved difficult for most candidates. They confused it with “the extent of” and wrote, for example, “odhalíme mieru” “ohodnotíme tento

103

rozsah”, “ohodnotíme rozsah”. An appropriate rendering would be, for example, porovnáme, do akej miery, or porovnáme, či.

the sentence As a result they are far less likely….to have formed…. (line 25) was one of the more difficult to render, mainly because of the complex verb form. As a result one candidate translated it as “Výsledkom toho, budú formovať viac menej hlboko postavené názory … which (apart from the fact that the sentence structure is very awkward) conveys the meaning “as a result they will form more or less deeply-held views….”; another wrote “majú tendenciu si nevytvárať upevnené názory”, meaning “they have a tendency not to form deep-seated views” which goes against the sense of the original. A better way to put it could be, for example je oveľa menej pravdepodobné, že ich názory budú natoľko sformované…

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) This type of text proves quite challenging to candidates because of the complex sentence structures used in the original English text. Also, the sentences tend to be long with the argument often spread over 2-4 lines. In order to write a proper Slovak sentence the candidates need to be able first to fully understand the argument in the original and then rewrite it in a Slovak sentence, often ignoring the order in which it was originally put. Where candidates had difficulties understanding the ST they tried to translate it word for word, which resulted in very awkward contructions. For example: “sa stávajú stále viac a viac znepokojení” is a literal translation and does not read like a sentence originally written in Slovak – a more appropriate way to put it would be, for example, sú čoraz viac znepokojení. “Prvovoliči sú zjavne dôležitá skupina na študovanie” is stilted. “názory o politike .. a politikov” – incorrect preposition and also wrong case form, should be názory na politiku “Keď sa ten cieľ nedosiahne, ďalšia dávka pošty sa rozpošle tým, ktorí sa neozvali.” – the sentence is clear, but is not in the appropriate register for the type of text. “Tým, že sa preskúma to, ako sa prvovoliči stavajú k politickým stranám, by sa mohli získať…” is clear, but reads as a literal translation from English. A better way of putting would bePrieskum toho, ako prvovoliči vnímajú politické strany… Another problematic translation was of the preposition in study into (line 1). Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were not many errors under Aspect 3. However, candidates need to be aware that commas are used and placed differently in English and Slovak and must not “copy” them from the original into the translation. One example of such practice is the use of comma after, for example, “Okrem toho, je očakávané..” which copies the English In addition, it is anticipated… (line 36). As for spelling, candidates need to be more careful with the masculine nominative plural endings of adjectives and not confus the í and ý endings. For example, one candidate wrote „politický činitelia“ instead of politickí činitelia; another put “ktorý neodpovedali” instead of “ktorí neodpovedali” and also “voliči sú vystavený” instead of “voliči sú vystavení”.

the majority of candidates did not translate the names Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament and Greater London Assembly into Slovak, but in this type of text such practice would be acceptable in a real life professional situation. Recommendations to candidates Please make sure that you are aware of specific terminology, as well as of the register and style used in academic writing. The knowledge of literature relevant to the subject in both English and Slovak is essential to be able to first comprehend and then to convey every detail of the text. Synonyms or made-up words cannot be substituted for specialised terminology.

104

Be aware of the fact that what you are translating is often an argument which has an internal logic in it. Try to translate the argument – this often means that you need to ignore the sentence structure of the ST. Your aim is to come up with the same argument put in a good Slovak sentence which is easy to follow. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 20% (2011); 33% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance It is difficult to give any generalised comments on the performance of just two candidates. Both candidates passed and demonstrated a good command of the specific subject matter, vocabulary, terminology and style required in a specialised legal text Both candidates produced a translation in fluent and appropriate Slovak. There were only a couple of minor errors in grammar or sentence structure. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Both candidates mastered the translation well. In one case there were a few minor inaccuracies which did not cause any misunderstanding or distortions. For example:

bargaining power (line 19) was translated as “vyjednávacia právomoc“ while a more precise rendering would be vyjednávacia sila;

on representations (line 27) was put as “reprezentácia“ which is slightly less clear, and should be opis skutočnosti;

in line 5 the words on one party’s were omitted by one candidate. The use of specialised terminology was excellent. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The texts were put together in a very good Slovak. The tone, style, sentence structure andgrammar were appropriate for the text. There were only two constructions, which did appeared somewhat stilted. For example: “okolnosti, ktoré mali byť zvažované” is not a perfect Slovak construction. A more appropriate form could be okolnosti, ktoré strany mali zvážiť. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Apart from one or two misplaced commas, there were no technical errors in the translation. Recommendations to candidates Always make sure that you keep in touch with specialised texts in English and in Slovak. Look out for specific terms and have your own glossary of relevant terms and expressions. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 57% (2010)

-*-


105


ENGLISH INTO THAI UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates are reasonably fluent in both Thai and English but the translations defects arose from the use of English language structures in the Thai translation. There were no serious technical errors. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidates produced well-written transslations in a register appropriate to the source text (ST). There were some serious decoding errors. For example:

… juvenile vacuity was translated as " " instead of, for example*,

One candidate took the translations given in a dictionary for the word "vacuity " which were:

, , then put the whole lot together as a translation of " vacuity " and therefore,

the outcome did not make sense.

… ” was the translation given for when he had to be introduced to the

internet by his mother. A more accurate rendering could be, for example,

.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Problems with grammar occurred when using English structures in the Thai translation for example:

-

The candidate did not use the appropriate terms in the translation.

-

These could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

There are some minor mistranslations such as: and use of the pronouns for the same

person. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates are reasonably fluent in both Thai and English but the translations defects arose from the use of English language structures in the Thai translation. There were no serious technical errors.

106

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) For the ST’s ...puts more light on the financial markets that escaped the oversight of regulators...

one candidate wrote, “ ” instead of

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Problems with grammar occurred when using English structures in the Thai translation, for example:

One candidate wrote: “_ ”. The

sense is perfectly clear but putting the words in a different order would be better grammatically for

example:

These could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading.


There is a misspelling of " "

Unit 2B: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

UNIT 03F: LAW

General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates are reasonably fluent in both Thai and English but the translations defects arose from the use of English language structures in the Thai translation.

There were no serious technical errors.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) One candidate was able to understand the text well but there are translation errors. For example:

......In addition, R's liability for damages under the contract was capped.

One candidate wrote " _” A more

accurate rendering could be,

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Problems with grammar occurred when one candidate used English structures in the Thai translation, for example:

for ....R was withdrawing the software which K was already using. ,

one candidate wrote, “ ” instead of, for example:

.

These could have been easily avoided with thorough proofreading.

Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


107


ENGLISH INTO TURKISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance A number of candidates failed because they were clearly unfamiliar with the subject area; the terminology was incorrect and the register was not in keeping with the source text (ST). Many candidates’ spelling was not up to the task – one failed to put dots on the “I’s. On the other hand, certain candidates did not begin new paragraphs where required and others committed careless and unacceptable syntactical errors. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) An error that came up again and again was the use of archaic terms or borrowings from Arabic and Persian, eg: “mefhum” / “matbu”. It is dangerous to pick a word from the dictionary and to simply transplant it into a document because that word may be the entirely wrong word to use. A number of candidates translated certain terms literally such as “on the internet” as internet uzerinde. One candidate expressed “social media” as internet ustu sosyal baglantilar when the proper Turkish equivalent is sosyal paylasim siteleri. Candidates must not use the ubiquitous word “sey” (thing) in translations either. One candidate used this term loosely eg: boyle bir sey yok olacak. The sentence “Often, when he’s leaving a party” has been mistranslated as “when he is leaving a party which he often attends”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Many candidates found it hard to form grammatically and syntactically correct Turkish sentences. This may be the result of candidates coming to the UK at a young age and not having sufficient practice of writing in their mother tongue. Many candidates failed to use correct case endings and correct verb endings. Some candidates used singular and plural endings in the same sentence. The sentence “Arrestingly self-assured and charismatic” was translated as “dikkat cekici olcude kendine guvenli” which is incoherent and incorrect usage. A better translation would have been Carpici bir ozguvene ve karizmaya sahip olan… Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) If any candidate is thinking of typing the translation they should ensure that they have the target language’s script on their word-processor. One of the candidates typed out the whole translation and failed to insert the diacritics and cedillas by hand. This alone can result in a fail mark. It is important to know where to place apostrophes and have a good knowledge of punctuation. One candidate placed the apostrophe in the wrong place e.g.: universite’sinde and another candidate placed apostrophes where none were required. Another candidate misspelt the name of the protagonist Shirky, as “Shirly”. Such a mistake is very careless and costly. Recommendations to candidates It seems that many candidates continue to underestimate the very high standard required to pass the Diploma in Translation exam. This is, after all, a post graduate’s equivalent qualification and a professional exam. The vast majority of Turkish candidates did n ot, on this occasion reach the standard expected. Prospective candidates should practise translating as much as possible and review translations by other professional translators. Unit 01: Pass Rate 43% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY

108

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Clearly, candidates were not at all familiar with the subject matter of this text. To begin with candidates failed to grasp the term “range” menzil / mesafe and translated this term first as “çeşit” – meaning “type” and secondly, as “more useful”. Given that the article was about “electric cars” this is a fundamental error because the range issue was never expressed in the target language. In paragraph 4, Lead Acid batteries was translatedas “marka” meaning brand or make. In translating “Lithium Ion” s/he has forgotten the word “Ion” and in the penultimate sentence has failed to translate “the highest price tag” – “bu model pillerin de fiyat etiketi daha yuksektir” rendering it as “higher”, not highest. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) One candidate also mistranslated the different types of electric motors as “model” – meaning model, but in the body of the same sentence used the word “motor”, apparently not realising that they are all different types of motors. “top speed” has been oddly rendered as “ en yuksek hiz siniri” meaning “the highest speed limit” – In Turkish we express this as azami hiz. The candidate’s use of “highest speed limit” is not only a mistranslation, but it is also incoherent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Onecandidate committed a large number of spelling mistakes, mainly as a result of failing to put the dots over the “I”. Recommendations to candidates When beginning a translation it is essential to read the text at least twice and to understand the meaning and concepts referred to. If a candidate does not know key terms and concepts in a text, s/he should research them well. If there is no time to research key terms and concepts then s/he would be well advised to stay clear of that text. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Four candidates took the Business paper and with the exception of one extremely impressive candidate who produced a near-perfect translation all the rest failed. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) A few terms caused difficulties. One was: “to a burst of applause”. One candidate translated this as “In order to win applause, Obama…”. Many candidates omitted the word “overhaul”. One of the candidates translated the term “hidden fees” as “ortulu odemeler” meaning covert payments”. One candidate did not read the instructions at the top and translated “many lawmakers who face voters in November” as “Kasim ayinda secmenlerin karsisina cikan…” rendering it in the past tense. Had the candidate read the introductory piece s/he would have known the elections were coming up, not past (particularly as the article was written in July). The words “the worst recession” was under-translated as “duraksama” “pause / standstill”. The term “make adjustments” was translated as “make amendments”. The term “abusive terms” was translated as “involving corruption”. The words “There will be no more tax-funded bailouts” were mistranslated as “When a large financial institution is about to go bust”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In one of the translations a candidate used past, present and future tenses in the same sentence. The words “hem” and “ve” were used together which is an erroneous collocation of words. One candidate translated the term “bill” by three separate terms in Turkish: “kanun”, “yasa” and “yasa

109

tasarisi”. The term “job growth” was translated literally as “is buyumesi” whereas the term refers to employment, not work. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) One candidate misspelled the name of the best known president with a small “o”. One candidate who typed out the translation failed to put the diacritics and cedilla marks onto the Turkish characters. Some candidates failed to insert the inverted commas in accordance with the ST eg: “make adjustments”. Recommendations to candidates The candidates must be aware that the Diploma in Translation exam is a Master’s equivalent exam and to succeed, one has to be of a very high standard. To prepare, candidates should practise, practise and practise; build vocabulary; read quality newspapers; acquaint themselves with scientific, financial, business and technology areas and read literature. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 25% (2011); n candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of translations varied considerably. One candidate performed very poorly and the candidate’s language level was not higher than B2 level according to the CEFR (Common European Framework). This candidate had problems in fully understanding the ST. One candidate, submitted a completely professionally acceptable. This candidate has a very good command of the Turkish language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were instances where appropriateness of rendering was debatable: For example: inadequate muscle tone was translated as “not firm” or “in unfit form”. The carolling cordless was translated as “telsiz telefon” which means cordless phone. This is a comprehension error, but does not impede the general meaning. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were no major cohesion problems. One of the candidates made a grammatical mistake of separating nouns (not proper nouns) from suffixes with an apostrophe. This is a grammatical error. Examples are: “zaman’in, cit’ten”. This was quite surprising since the rest of the text displayed very good command of grammar. This is quite a basic grammatical error. There was a “consonant change” error: “zamanin tokatini yemis”. The consonant change rule requires that the T should change to D: it should be tokadini. Other than that, the sentence structures, grammar, linkages and discourse were entirely appropriate. One candidate, made major grammar mistakes (which overlap as spelling mistakes) For example : “sarfettiysede” stand alone, de should be detached from the word; it is not the locative suffix. “iyi oldugunu, ekledi” : The comma should not be there. This is indirect speech construction. Punctuation is a vital tool for the language and should be used appropriately and accurately. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

110

There were no serious spelling mistakes. The cedillas in Turkish are easy to forget and one Candidate had forgotten to dot an I and a C. This could have been avoided by allowing time for proof reading. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should read the ST carefully, to identify key words/expressions and to compare with their versions at the end. The problem with this text was to understand the colloquial terms used and to manage to find the phrases that convey the same nuances (weight, irony, feeling, description or sound) in Turkish. For example, in this literary translation: “Mr. Fusspot…” should have been renamed in the target language.One candidate had left it as it is.“Bay Purtelas” and “telase muduru” were translations by the other two candidates. Both sound equally good and reflect the style of the ST. A lot of varied reading is the key to acquiring a grasp of colloquial terms. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 67% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Three candidates took the science paper and all three failed. Clearly, none of the candidates were familiar with this subject matter. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The term “cellulose acetate” was incorrectly given throughout as “celluloid fibre”. One candidate failed to translate the term early eg: “many early cellulose films…”. The term “spontaneously” was translated “just like that”, and the verb to accelerate was translated as “artirmak” – meaning “to increase”. One candidate translated the term degradation as “cozunurluk” meaning “resolution”. One candidate translated the word treatment as “tedavi” meaning medical treatment. The correct term would have been muamele or islem. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates failed to observe Turkish grammatical and syntactical rules in many instances. There were a large number of case ending mistakes, different tenses being used in the same sentence, singular and plural verb endings were mixed and inauthentic collocations were used. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) One candidate failed to insert the dot on the I’s. One candidate placed commas where none was required: eg: bu, yok olusu bir anda gordugunuz. One candidate started sentences with small letters, eg: zamanla. Recommendations to candidates Candidates must prepare very well for this exam especially as too often, candidates underestimate the level one has to achieve to pass the Diploma in Translation. Also, candidates need to develop time management skills. It seems that do not allow themselves sufficient time to check their work. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of translations varied considerably. One candidate had problems in understanding the ST fully.

111

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Three candidates were able to write quite well in a register appropriate to the ST. Surprisingly, one candidate, who has extremely good command of Turkish language, had translated Britain as “England”. It is true that Britain is widely referred to as England in Turkey, but this should not have stopped the candidate from using the correct translation. First time voters was translated by one candidate as “Secmen adaylari” which literally means “voting candidates”. Although this can be interpreted as someone who hasn’t voted before i.e a voting candidate, a first time voter, it does not convey that meaning unequivocally, but attention to detail and fine tuning the finished work carries great importance. One candidate had problems in fully understanding the text. In the translation there were additions, omissions and quite a lot of distortions. This candidate did not have enough knowledge of the language to produce an accurate translation. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were no major cohesion problems. However, there were 3 grammar mistakes which could be avoided by studying the nature of the language. In Turkish only proper nouns are separated from suffixes with an apostrophe. One candidate separated common nouns with apostrophes. This is grammatically incorrect: Examples: “etkileri’nin”, “kurumlar’in”, “etkenler’e” should be etkilerinin, kurumlarin, etkenlere The same candidate failed to observe the consonant change rule in two instances. A suffix starting with a “d” should change to a “t” when it is attached to a word ending with a strong consonant. Example: “Yurtdaslarin” should be yurttaslarin. There is one mistake where the possessive ending had been omitted: “Kamu kuruluslar” should have been kamu kuruluslari At this level, candidates should fine-tune their grammar to produce acceptable work. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were no serious spelling mistakes. Candidates should not forget that letters containing cedillas are completely different letters and have to be spelled accordingly. They should also make note of the fact that capital letters need cedillas too. An undotted I, where a dot had to be present and vice versa is not acceptable at any level. Unfortunately, translators who have lived in the UK get into the habit of not placing the dots on “I”s or dotting the undotted i which is a completely separate letter in Turkish. One candidate had not dotted a capital I, this was such a shame in an otherwise perfect piece of work. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should read the ST carefully and compare with their versions at the end. Preparation of good up-to date specialised glossaries is vital. Regularly reading good publications in both languages will keep Candidates up to date with register and terminology. Reading the final translation with the eyes of a third party is a good way of assessing the translation in an objective way. Refer to www.eric.com.br/turkish-grammar/turkish-grammar.pdf. A good grammar reference book is as important as dictionaries and glossaries. There are two major grammar reference books for the Turkish Language. One is by the late Sir Geoffrey Lewis and the other one is by Celia Kerslake (Oxford Uni) and Asli Goksel (Bosphorus Uni).

http://www.eric.com.br/turkish-grammar/turkish-grammar.pdf

112

Unit 3E: Pass Rate 75% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of translations varied considerably. While one candidate’s work was of a standard which is definitely acceptable for submission to a client, the other Candidate did not use the correct register for a legal translation. Legal translations need specialised training and candidates should be made aware of the nature of the required register. Especially sentences leading to bullet points and handling bullet points are very tricky and need attention to detail. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) One candidate displayed excellent command of the subject matter. The work was almost faultless and accurate. The choice of language and register was exemplary. The candidate had made a note that “widely used Turkish term for ‘off-the-shelf’ would have been found on an online glossary” This was the one and only mistake. The candidate has used the phrase “magazalardan alinabilen” which should have been kullanima hazir. The difference between this software and others would be the difference between tailor-made and ready to wear. This software is ready to be used, in other words does not have to be or has not been adapted to the client’s specific needs. However, the candidate’s choice of phrase incorporates all software and does not change the overall meaning/message. In the above mentioned candidate’s work, the choice of register and specialised terminology displayed excellent command of legal texts. Example: “yazilimin ayipli olmasi” for software was faulty “sozlesmenin ihlalinden mutevellit sorumlulugu..” for liability that arose from the software being defective On the other hand the other candidate’s translation contained many instances of incorrect choice of register. The register of this translation was not of a standard to be submitted to a client. Examples: “…… olduguna karar verdi.” Should be: mahkeme …..’a hukmetmistir. Example: “…..yazilim satin aldi…” Should be : …yazilim satin almistir Reference: Turkish Grammar by Robert Underhill (MITpress,) Table on page 314: where formal and informal tense suffixes are compared. A legal text requires the formal register. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) One candidate’s organisation of work was remarkable. In legal translations, owing to the Subject, Object, Verb sentence structure of Turkish, bullet points are difficult to handle. This candidate handled them very well. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were no serious spelling mistakes. One of the translations did not have clear paragraphing. This is unacceptable, especially with a legal translation. The paragraphing should match the source language’s paragraphing. Recommendations to candidates Especially for legal translations candidates should prepare and regularly update their glossaries. Candidates should regularly read a wide variety of good quality publications in both languages. For

113

example “of the shelf” was a tricky phrase in the ST. It would have been helpful if Candidates had this phrase and its translation in their glossaries. Candidates should not forget to produce a layout that corresponds to the original. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 50% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*-


114


ENGLISH INTO URDU UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance On the whole the quality of the work presented was excellent. Most of the candidates displayed excellent comprehension of English as well as excellent command of the Urdu language. Consequently, the output was of professional quality. Some translations were flawless. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) In a few cases there was poor comprehension of the ST. Bleak was translated as “cold”, and heard of as “heard him” which is completely inaccurate. Several English words were simply transliterated e.g. charges, model, theory, practice, article, fashion. The text refers to Shirky as saying, Oh. I hate that, but few candidates ascribed these words to the writer of the article. There were some glaring errors such as sunset translated as “sunrise” and evolved as “merged”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) In general terms the work was very well organised. I ask was translated as “I asked”, which is not a serious error in this context. On the whole the writing was coherent, with good use of cohesive devices and grammatically flawless. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) All the candidates took good care of the technical aspects such as spelling, accents, punctuation, and transfer of names, figures, dates etc. and their writing read without any difficulty. Their writing was properly paragraphed and well presented. Unit 01: Pass Rate 75% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Only two scripts were entered for this option. There was quite a contrast between the two scripts. While both candidates displayed very good grasp and understanding of the source language, the same could not be said about one candidate regarding the target language. Overall performance of one candidate was well above average while the other remained below average. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) For this Aspect, one of the candidates appears to have fully understood the source text (ST) and has managed to carry the message across while the other has had difficulty in carrying the message across to target language. For example: “Once you lift up the hood, however, the difference becomes dramatic” is translated as “However, once you lift the cap/cork, the difference is dramatic (you will see)”. “Instead of a huge engine and all of the things you would expect to be under the hood, all you will see is an electric motor and its controller” is translated as “All the things that you were expecting under a cap/cork instead of a big engine everything that you will see is electric (of electric) motor and its controller (the one that controls)”.

115

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Uncertainty was demonstrated by giving more than one meaning of a word and then transliterating the word and transcribing the word after that. Sentence structure was incorrect on some occasions. Some examples: “Notice”, “Tune-ups”, “Smog”, “Energy”, “Recyclable”, “Range”, “Support”, “Replace”, “Paddle”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Although both candidates followed the paragraph structure of the ST, there were some spelling errors due to lack of care. Some examples: “Acceleration” was transcribed and transliterated as “Accelerator”; “Lithium Ion” is transcribed and transliterated as “Lithium Lon”. One target language letter, which has two different shapes depending on where it is used was confused and lacked consistency in its use. This can change the meaning of the word if used in the wrong way. Recommendations to candidates The most important task is to understand the ST and the message being expressed. Next, thought should be given to how that message would be understood in the target text (TT). Only then should the actual translation take place. Remember, it is not the translation of each individual word that is necessary; rather it is the message of the text that needs to be accurate. Quite often paraphrasing of the original may be required in order to give an accurate account of the text. Also, avoid transliteration, wherever possible, if an actual translation exists for that word even if the transliterated word may be more commonly used in the target language. You need to demonstrate that you have equal knowledge of the target language as of the source language. Of course, in technology, many words would need to be transliterated as there may not be an equivalent word available in the target language. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Only two scripts were entered for this option. There were some similarities in the work produced as well as strengths and weaknesses. While both candidates showed good grasp of the source language, one of the candidates exhibited better understanding of the skill required to translate from the source language into the target language. There were certain mistakes evident in both the scripts with regard to cohesion, and accuracy of some words. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). Both candidates were able to write quite well in a register appropriate to the ST. One of the candidates understood the ST fully and therefore avoided using literal translation, whereas, examples of lack of paraphrasing were evident in the other script. For example: ST, line no 18-19, sentence: He said it would help root out fine print….transactions of Wall Street. This was translated literally by the phrase “Fine Print” in the target language; whereas, in its actual essence of meaning it should be translated as the text that is written in small print which was going to be rooted out according to the new law. ST line 19-20: The words deeper scrutiny were translated using much heavy terminology when it could easily be replaced by a simple translation of the phrase in the target language.

116

ST line 25, the phrase crippling recession was translated literally whereas, in the target language there is an alternative idiomatic expression available to convey the meaning that the recession has broken the back of people in terms of financial crises. ST line 31, In a note of irony was translated literally, showing no cohesion with the remaining text. It is highly important to understand the meaning of the STt before conveying its meaning into the target language. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Problems occurred in cohesion whenever there was a deliberate attempt was made to translate the source language literally and this resulted in weak sentence structures. For example: In a note of irony was translated without using any cohesive device to relate it to the rest of sentence, thus, resulting in an alienated phrase in the target language. ST, line 32: The word championed was transliterated, whereas an appropriate alternative is available. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Both the scripts were legible and most of the technical points were handled skilfully. Some punctuation mistakes could have been avoided as they were of a very basic nature. One of the candidates failed to separate paragraphs in line with the source text for no good reason. Some typos could have been avoided, and commas and inverted commas were not used when required. Proof reading could have avoided many such problems in the final piece of work produced. Recommendations to candidates: It is highly important to understand the SText before actually translating into the target language. Due to the difference in the written forms of the source language and the target language, such mistakes, can lead to weaker translation. Therefore, it is important to read the ST very carefully and try to identify key phrases, hidden “traps” and complicated clauses. Never attempt to start translating without this “workout” first. Transliteration should be avoided, wherever possible, if an actual translation exists for that word. If the work is produced with scrupulous care the result is a better translation and the impression is thereby created of the candidates’ potential to work at a professional level. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 50% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Three scripts were entered for this option. Candidates showed their specific skills in translating the ST. One candidate has performed more strongly than the other and one script conrtained an abundance resulting from translating literally without focussing much on the paraphrasing skills which are sometimes required to convey the best possible meaning in the target language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). Examples of literal translation can be found in one of the candidates’ work throughout the translation. One example is as follows: ST, line 4 to 9, paragraph This is a particularly…..in Britain. The candidate has failed to show the skill of paraphrasing in order to convey the true message of the ST. The sentence structure of the target language is not always same as the source language. It is best to read out the sentences to oneself before actually translating them quite literally in writing.

117

Candidates should not offer alternative translations: the examination calls for a finished translation. Transliterating the word and transcribing the word after that shows uncertainty. Examples are: proposal, funding, attainers, target, levels etc… Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Weak sentence structure was a failing and too much closeness to the ST did not convey the meaning accurately. Problems of cohesion occur when the focus is too much on literal renderings from the original text. Examples: Each paragraph began in the same manner as the source language rather than using the cohesive devices to correlate with the rest of the text. Words were quoted from the source language although the appropriate options are present in the target language. And also further explanation was given of many words to confuse the meaning of the text even further: Examples of such words were: Proposal, attainers, funding, insight, efficacy, levels, difference, study, target, follow-up letter, data, non-academic, central etc. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The scripts were legible and well-presented. Some spelling mistakes could have been avoided if proof reading had been properly carried out. The punctuation was handled carefully in most of the work. Spelling mistakes led to deduction of marks in an otherwise very good piece of work produced by the candidate. There were omissions of certain symbols which are there in Urdu to present the correct letter. Recommendations to candidates: It is important to remember that that the translation of each and every individual word is not necessary; rather it is the message of the text that needs to be conveyed accurately. In order to accomplish that paraphrasing may be required in order to produce the closest meaning of the ST. It is also important to avoid transliteration when the actual alternative is present in the target language. It is important for the candidates to demonstrate that they have as good a knowledge of the target language as of the source language. It is also important to remember that in Urdu many Science terms are taught in English therefore, at times, a fine balance is required to understand whether certain terms/words should be transliterated, translated or described. It would be very useful for the candidates to study past examination reports to avoid mistakes such as literal translations where paraphrasing is required, inappropriately giving descriptions in brackets and losing marks as a result, common punctuation slips and spelling mistakes. It is also recommended to leave some time for proof reading as lack of editing led to some very common punctuation mistakes. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 33% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance Overall, the performance was of very high quality. The output was of a professional standard. Candidates showed good knowledge of both languages as well as the subject matter. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The translation showed excellent comprehension and very good and clear renderings fit for the purpose. Accurate and idiomatic writing was evident throughout. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence)

118

The candidates followed the correct word order of the Urdu structure and, as a consequence, their translations read fluently. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) No technical slips were found and proper care appears to have been taken by the candidates. Technical points were sound. Recommendations to candidates Make intelligent use of dictionaries ensuring the definition found makes sense and fits the context. Read the ST through before starting to translate. When you finish work, detach yourself form the ST, read your translation for any errors or omissions and amend and complete as necessary. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)


119


FINNISH INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates had no problems in fully understanding the source text (ST). They were particularly good at decoding the Finnish ST and encoding it into English. Although the translations were good, there were some inaccuracies including omissions, but all of them minor or dealt with in such a manner that the target reader was able to follow the meaning of the ST. Candidates were good at dealing with the translation of the Finnish sentence structures into English. The structural differences between Finnish and English are great and the candidate showed professional skill in transferring the meaning of the Finnish into fluent and readable English, this is particularly difficult with issues of word order, but the candidate produced a translation which showed that s/he has this skill. Candidates appeared to have rushed towards the end of the translation, but this didn’t greatly affect the quality and accuracy of the translations. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any)

Candidates had no problems with comprehension of the ST. There were some minor omissions and inaccuracies, but as a whole the translations were of professional standard. Candidates were very good at conveying very Finnish concepts well in English. On many occasions theycame up with good solutions to very Finnish issues e.g. vapaa-ajan asuminen (ST literally leisure/freetime living) rendered as “holiday homes” by the candidate covers the term in English and makes sense to the target audience. Candidate showed good understanding of the cultural problems present in the text. Candidates had some difficulty in translating the word kunta: local authority/municipality into English. Kunta can be an urban or a rural local authority. In the context of the summer houses, it is likely that this basic Finnish term refers to a rural location as summer houses are usually in the countryside. The candidate grappled with this and used the word “town” where a neutral local authority/location/municipality would be more correct. Candidates managed to convey the sense adequately, and indeed often the mergers of local authorities into larger units has meant that the summer houses are in fact in urban authority areas as these new super size kunta are in fact towns with large local rural authorities annexed to them. Therefore the use of the word town in this translation is not a serious error and the resulting translation makes sense to the target audience. There was a small addition in the sentence starting Ihmiset muuttavat työn perässä maalta kasvukeskuksiin which was translated into “People move after work opportunities from rural areas to urban growth centres”. The word urban has been added by the candidate and it is not in the ST. Growth centre can be a rural or urban centre, usually urban, but strictly speaking here the word urban is not mentioned. Again this is a very minor inaccuracy. The omissions are all minor e.g erittäin very in erittäin vilkasta very: vibrant and yhä enemmän: increasingly. In the context of the whole these omissions didn’t lead to any misunderstandings. There are some choices of words which could have been better. “alluring” was used when attractive would have been better. Vesistöjä was translated as “waters”, a better translation is waterways. Kesälomien aikana was translated as “during the summer months”, should be during summer holidays.

120

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates handled the grammar of Finnish extremely well and had produced translations which are faultless. The pages were numbered clearly and although the candidate appears to have rushed towards the end of the task, the grammar and organization of the work didn’t suffer. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Candidates had dealt very well with the technical aspects of the text. The word order in Finnish is often very different from the English and the candidate demonstrated acute awareness of this and encodes the text in such a way that it makes fluent reading in English. The spelling is correct throughout. As for the punctuation, it is correct except inone case for lines 18-20 where one candidate used punctuation which is unnecessarily complicated: “The size of summer cottages is seeing strong growth: the size of new summer homes; depending on how size is measured, is between 65 and 75 sq metres.” A better solution would have been to say: The size of summer cottages is seeing strong growth with the average size of new summer homes being between 65 and 75 sq metres depending on how the size is measured. The candidate has omitted average from keskipinta-ala (average size). Figures and dates have been correctly transferred. The name of the municipality of Kustavi caused a minor problem: Line 46: Kustavissa rendered as “in towns like Kustav”, should have been in municipalities like Kustavi. When an ending is added to a proper noun in Finnish, the link vowel –i- is used to link a word ending in a consonant to the ending, but in fact in this case the name of the municipality is Kustavi and it ends in an –i, though it would appear to be a Swedish-speaking word by the appearance here and the candidate must have made that assumption and left out the name. A good dictionary or access to Google would have remedied this error. Recommendations to candidates It would be advisable for candidates to look at their time management when completing a task. The task was completed and the pages where numbered so that it was possible to see the completed work. Even though the translations appears rushed towards the end, the quality of the translation itself has not suffered. Checking the basic forms of proper nouns in a good dictionary is advisable e.g. Kustavi. Candidates would do well to study Finnish local administration terminology and the vocabulary and terminology involved, especially as the British and Finnish systems of local administration are so different. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance Although the text is complex and contains structures typical to Finnish, which is an inflectional language, candidates produced excellent translations which werew of professional standard. Candidates understood the Finnish structures well and conveyed them in English in such a way that the resulting text reads well in the target language. The target audience will have no difficulty understanding the message. There were a few minor errors and inaccuracies and therefore the mark awarded is a Merit. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidates’ translations showed full understanding of the ST and an accurate translation of it. There were no errors to impede comprehension. All the errors listed below are minor.

121

The register is entirely appropriate to the subject matter and to the spirit and intention of the original. There were some minor errors: Title: Seitsemän askelta viherbisnekseen was translated as “Seven steps to a greener business”. Strictly speaking viher means green not greenerbut the candidate’s intention is evident: t one looks at improvements in making businesses greener, the logic for the comparative is there, but the ST does talk about green not greener business. This is a minor inaccuracy in the context of this text. The context note does not help here as it refers to change direction towards a greener model. Line 14: “green tech” should read clean tech Line 19:”their own values…” should read their own ethical and ecological values, omission of the two adjectives defining values Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The quality of the candidates’ writing in the target language was excellent with a few minor errors. Candidates produced a text which was grammatically almost 100% accurate (see use of definite article below), coherent, cohesive and well-organised. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) On the whole candidates dealt with technical aspects very well with the exception of the examples below. The spelling was correct except for one word (see below). There was a minor error with a comma, but on the whole the punctuation was excellent. The paragraphs were faithful to the ST. The handwriting was legible except for the word “their”, see below. Figures have been correctly transferred. Line 2: Vihreys: Being green was translated correctly by the candidate, but the word green was placed in quotation marks Being “green”, this is unnecessary as the first sentence states that green issues are in the mainstream. Line 11: “ther lobbyists” should read “their lobbyists”, in fact every time the candidate writes “their” it looks like ther Line 13: clean tech has been put in quotation marks by the candidate. I t should be without quotation marks as in the ST Line 38: “Halton, Vacon, and Outotec”, the comma after Vacon should not be there.

Line 51:”boicot” should have been spelt boycott

Line 57: no quotation marks needed for “greenness”.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates should make sure that they check their translation carefully at the end. They should continue to keeping up with Finnish current affairs in the areas they wish to specialise in. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Although the text contains structures typical of Finnish, candidate produced an excellent translation which was of professional standard. They understood the Finnish structures well and conveyed them in English in such a way that the resulting text read well in the target language. The target audience would have no difficulty understanding the message.

122

The only slight problem area was the Finnish local administrative term kunta (see the notes under section 1). Candidates produced very good English with no grammatical errors. The translation was well organised, coherent and cohesive. The candidates demonstrated accurate understanding of the Finnish grammar and content and conveyed it well into English. The technical aspects of the translation were faultless. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The message of the ST was conveyed with great accuracy. There were no serious errors that would impede comprehension. Candidates made good choices of vocabulary and language. The register was entirely appropriate and in line with the ST. The spirit and the intention of the ST were conveyed very well. The target audience were treated to a good and readable rendering of the original. There were some minor errors: Line 4: Väestötasolla was translated as ”at the population level”, which is acceptable, but it would have been better to say either taking the population as a whole or at the level of the whole population. Line 5: Keskimääräisten tietojen alle kätkeytyy... was translated as “The data hides…” omitting keskimääräisten average, a more accurate translation would have been The data showing averages hides… Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates wrote very good English. The candidate understood the Finnish grammar and syntax well with only a couple of grammatical errors. The translation was well organised, coherent and cohesive. There were only two errors/inaccuracies: Line 4: sukupolvi generation was translated as “generations”; strictly speaking the candidate should have used the singular as in the ST, but of course in English the plural is commonly used in this context. Line 24: the particle to is missing from in front of the verb measure, should be to measure. This would appear to be just a careless omission, not an indication of a grammatical error as such, judging by the rest of the translation. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Candidates dealt with technical aspects faultlessly, spelling, and punctuation were correct throughout the text. They adhered to the structure of the ST very accurately. There were no figures or dates in the ST. Recommendations to candidates . It would be good for the candidate to read and familiarise themselves with the local and regional administration terminology and to keep an eye on any reforms happening in Finland such as the current trend for merging local authorities into larger units to save costs in the recession. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)


123


FRENCH TO GERMAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance All candidates understood the source text (ST)as a whole though they had problems with the terminology, some idiomatic expressions and figures of speech. The tone of irony was not always understood by all candidates and this resulted in both misunderstandings and inappropriate style. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) In the first paragraph (line 6) the exclamation Pas de vin, malheureux! caused a translation problem for almost all candidates. The malheureux with an exclamation mark has a long tradition in French literature and is a stylistic device used by the author to boost the ironic flavour. This makes us laugh in the text, the difference between the histrionic tone and its subject, the defence of wine. Most of the candidates translated “Kein Wein, was für eine Schande!/wie bedauerlich”, even the dictionary proposes, such solutions but this is a misinterpretation, although well expressed. There are several possible translations such as Bloß keinen Wein, Unglückselige! or Bloß keinen Wein, wenn man sich nicht todunglücklich machen will! It is so obviously an exaggeration which “Leider keinen Wein!” does not express. The paragraph ends again with irony, using a historical sentence and changing the set phrase appeler un chat un chat to appeler un chat un chien. Some candidates translated literally what is already funny “indem es eine Katze einen Hund nennt” and this proposed as the solution of all problems makes us laugh – resolving problems by fraudulent labelling. But nobody used this solution. The dictionaries propose das Kind nicht beim Namen nennen, a solution which was adopted. One candidate wrote “wir leben in einem Jahrhundert, in dem alle wahren Probleme der Menschheit gelöst wurden, indem uns ein X für ein U vorgemacht wird.” It is an excellent idea, only the repetition in dem and indem, one shortly after the other, is not so nice. This quotation is important as also appears as the last sentence of the article. The next problem was the grille de lecture pour les vins (lines 20/21), translated as “Leseschema”, “Definitionsschlüssel” or “Auslegungsschema für die Qualitätsklassen der Weine”, which were not such good solutions. The third one is understandable with a little good will, but the “Leseschema” is unacceptable. One candidate translated as “die gleiche Art der Kennzeichnungen für Weinsorten”, in this way making it easier for the consumers to decide. Some other idiomatic phrases followed. So En version française, c’était aussi l’occasion de faire le ménage, de clarifier l’offre, pour parler comme dans les nombreux rapports qui s’empilent sans être suivis d’effet. (lines 27-29) A very good solution was“In der französischen Fassung war dies auch die Gelegenheit, zum Großputz anzusetzen, das Angebot transparent zu machen, um in der Sprache der zahlreichen Berichte zu sprechen, die sich aufstapeln, ohne dass ihnen Auswirkungen folgen“. Dealing with AOC (Appelation d’Origine Contrôlée) was not easy. One candidate translated “Herkunft aus einem bestimmten Anbaugebiet” which is correct. Others spoke of a “Bezeichnung” or “Auszeichnung”, which might be a problem because the second has a special sense for the wine. It is not the label with all that is written on it, for example AOC or AOP, but a prize, such as the “Silberne Kammerpreismünze” (a seal), awarded to this or that wine and the vintner by the Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry in Germany, to assure the quality of German wine. It is the same for French wine, they also have their prizes. The terminology was special and difficult, terroir for example, which was translated as “Gebiet” and “Region” (line 43), but has to be Lage or Anbaugebiet. No candidates seemed to know this word, although the wine merchant told me that they use it themselves, here in Hamburg, northern Germany where no wine is grown. One candidate used Lage, but not for terroir.

124

The last problem (line 48) was the gestion in a sentence where it is not so clear who is meant. One candidate translated gestion as “Führung”, another “Lenkung”, although Management or Verwaltung is meant. “Führung” or “Lenkung” are really serious errors in this context. Dommage, car la première partie de la réforme engagée depuis trois ans semblait plutôt positive : davantage d’exigences pour les AOC/AOP et une gestion plus orientée vers le respect du consommateur et celui du terroir. A better solution might be Schade, denn der erste Teil der seit drei Jahren begonnenen Reform schien eher positiv: mehr Anforderungen an die AOC/AOP - Weine und ein Management, das sich mehr am Respekt vor dem Kunden und vor dem Anbaugebiet orientiert. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Nearly all candidates chose the wrong case for the admonition (line 6), the nominative instead of the accusative because the verb was two sentences before “Es ist wichtig Wasser zu trinken, vor allem wenn es heiß ist.” Keinen Wein, Unglückselige/oder Ihr macht Euch todunglücklich! Problems with grammar occurred when candidates chose the wrong tense when translating. It seems that the tense mistakes could have been avoided by proofreading. The last but one paragraph begins with C’était donc le moment de prendre son courage politique à deux mains (au moins) et de modifier le paysage. The candidate used the conditional (all other candidates used the past tense); perhaps this candidate just forgot one word because the imperfect subjunctive would best express the ironic style of the author. “Dies wäre also der Augenblick (gewesen), seinen politischen Mut in beide Hände (mindestens) zu nehmen und die gesamte Landschaft zu verändern”. The sentence in itself doesn’t present a difficulty and the thought is that those being in charge of the project did not do enough, therefore a simple past tense is not so ironic. Almost all translations were cohesive and coherent. It was important for the irony of the text that enlightenment about the harm wine can do to people was delivered at a press conference for which the press officer (a woman) of Coca-Cola France issued the invitations. One candidate had a problem with the word order, and it was no longer clear that she sent the invitations. The sentence (lines 1-13) Encore plus curieux, l’invitation à la conférence de presse où furent dévoilées ces passionnantes découvertes était envoyée par la directrice de la communication de Coca-Cola France was translated as “Noch erstaunlicher die Einladung zur Pressekonferenz, bei der die von der Leiterin der Presseabteilung von Coca-Cola Frankreich übersandten faszinierenden Entdeckungen enthüllt wurden.” This reads as an incomplete sentence, and is incomprehensible. The fascinating finds were not sent by the press officer of Coca-Cola, but the invitation to the meeting where they were published. A better alternative would be: Noch erstaunlicher ist, dass die Einladung zu der Pressekonferenz, auf der diese faszinierenden Entdeckungen enthüllt wurden, von der Leiterin der Presseabteilung von Coca-Cola Frankreich übersandt wurde. This may be a mistake caused by the computer, not corrected because of lack of time. Some candidates thought that the “Ansehen des Verbrauchers” or “der Respekt des Verbrauchers” would be the same thing as “der Respekt vor dem Verbraucher und dem Anbaugebiet”. With the genitive it is the respect the consumer feels but what was meant is that the consumer and the site were more respected because of the new regulation. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) All translations were perfectly legible. Only some commas were forgotten, but this no longer matters since the spelling reform. I would have preferred the five Euros, the price for a bottle of wine (line 31), written in words in a non-technical translation.

125

Recommendations to candidates Try to have some time for proofreading – only as a text in the target language. Perhaps translate first as well as you can and leave the difficulties for later, and then look at the difficulties and then concentrate on the text without thinking of the original – only go back if there is something strange. Is every thing cohesive and coherent, the right word in the right place? How does the text sound? Is it a bit odd or as it were an original in the target language? Ten minutes to a quarter of an hour is probably required for this. Unit 01: Pass Rate 80% (2011); 33% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Both candidates had rather the same problems with the text. It has to do with the terminological difficulties of the subject. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The first problem with this text is in the third sentence. Les informations nécessaires au contrôle du niveau de courant et de tension one candidate translated as “die notwendigen Informationen zur Steuerung der Strom- und Spannungsstärke”, the other as “für die Kontrolle des Stromniveaus”. For a layman it does not make a difference but the specialist sees it differently. These are die notwendigen Informationen zur Kontrolle des Zustandes von Strom und Spannung. Both candidates had a problem with the autorités de standardisation conventionnelles (ISO, IEC), one called them the “konventionelle Normungsbehörden”. The adjective conventionnel has not to be understood as the German konventionell, which means customary (clothing), traditional (weapons), but as in German konventional, concerning the agreement. These are organisations created by conventions, contracts. As the ISO is the International Organization for Standardization, and the IEC is also not a Normungsbehörde, but the International Electrotechnical Commission, they might be referred to as normierende Organisationen and not “Normungsbehörden”. Both candidates translated more or less in the same way: “Parmi les plus avancés sur le projet, Renault et Better Place étudient une solution d’échange de batterie” as “Unter denjenigen, die bei diesem Projekt am weitesten fortgeschritten sind, erforschen Renault und Better Place eine Quick-Drop genannte Lösung für den Batteriewechsel”.(lines 24/5) It is a rather word-for-word translation; a more authentic rendering could be: Zwei von den Firmen, die bei diesem Projekt die größten Fortschritte gemacht haben, nämlich Renault und Better Place, arbeiten an einer Lösung für den Batteriewechsel, die. The last sentence contained a terminological difficulty, la bobine émettrice should not be translated as “Voratsspule” but Sendespule and the bobine réceptrice is not an “Aufwickelspule” but the Empfangsspule. The relationship between these coils is that of an emitter and a receiver. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Both texts are well organised, coherent and cohesive. The candidates made only slight grammatical mistakes such as misreading an adjective as an adverb. Le principe, simple, utilise l’induction électromagnétique entre deux bobines was translated as “Das Prinzip nutzt ganz einfach die elektromagnetische Induktion zwischen zwei Spulen”. Yes, it does, but it is a simple principle, ein einfaches Prinzip. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The texts were perfectly legible, no mistakes or errors in spelling, punctuation etc. were made. Recommendations to candidates Choose a semi-specialised text only if you know the terminology quite well. Familiaris yourself with the relevant terminology. The only way to achieve this is by regularly reading good quality

126

specialised magazines of both source and target languages. Since candidates are not allowed to “google” any unfamiliar terms as in a real-life situation, have up-to-date specialised glossaries to hand during the examination. Remember that specialised terminology is strict and synonyms cannot be substituted for scientific terms. And do not forget to think. Sometimes logic may help to clarify what sort of relationship it is and which vocabulary is appropriate in this special situation. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance The candidates had to fight with the language of the article which was not always easy to render and there were several good opportunities to be go astray. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were at least two unavoidable stumbling blocks on the way to a good translation. The first was la relation de service in the second paragraph (line 10). It was the latest fashion in the last decade of the last century in sociology going back to Irving Goffman to rethink the relationship of producers to their clients, to understand their work as a service. Therefore this relation de service may be translated as Dienstleistungsverhältnis or even Dienstleistungsverständnis and not as Dienstverhältnis which normally in German means not only a contractual relationship but being a public employee. The next is the verb, capturer which was translated as “einzufangen”. It comes from nautical language, to capture, seize which could be conveyed by anzueignen. In the dictionary aufbringen can be found, which means to seize a ship on the ocean, actually by an authority (a ship in the hands of pirates) or the military. One candidate used it in a positive sense “Kompetenzen aufbringen” (summon up competences) which is the opposite and completely wrong. There was also a problem with the term contrôle de processus which means quality assurance, also by monitoring. One candidate translated is as “Verfahrenskontrolle”, the other as “Prozesskontrolle” which is really wrong; it is not only one process which is controlled but the whole manufacturing process and it has become an accepted term. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The whole paragraph (lines 26-30) is not easy to understand: A l’inverse, chez d’autres sous-traitants qui opèrent dans un milieu d’innovation intensive, le maintien de pratiques informelles de transmission des savoirs, mieux adaptées à un renouvellement rapide des produits, permet de réduire la dépendance aux donneurs d’ordres, lesquels sont toujours prompts à capturer les compétences stratégiques. Ce qui est plus facile dès lors qu’elles sont formalisées. It was translated as: “Demgegenüber steht der Erhalt von informellen Praktiken des Wissenstransfers, die besser an schnelle Veränderungen von Produkten angepasst sind, [das] erlaubt es bei anderen Unterhändlern [Zulieferern], die in einem Milieu [mit] hoher Innovation arbeiten, die Abhängigkeit von den Auftraggebern zu verringern, die immer schnell [bereit sind,] strategische Kompetenzen aufbringen [an sich zu bringen].” This says precisely the opposite of what was meant. I propose: Bei anderen Zulieferern hingegen, die in einem Umfeld von intensiver Innovation tätig sind, erlaubt die Aufrechterhaltung von Praktiken des informellen Wissenstranfers, die den schnellen Erneuerungen der Produkte besser angepasst sind, die Abhängigkeit von den Auftraggebern zu verringern, die immer schnell bereit sind, strategische Kompetenzen an sich zu bringen. In the last but one paragraph (lines 34/5) Enfin, … ont confirmé que l’organisation interne de la formation accompagne les manœuvres stratégiques plus qu’elle ne les déclenche was translated

127

as “haben bestätigt, dass die interne Organisation der Ausbildung das strategische Lenken mehr begeleitet als sie einzuleiten” instead of dass die interne Organisation der Weiterbildung strategische Manöver eher begleitet als auslöst. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The texts were perfectly legible, the candidates made no mistakes of spelling, in the transfer of names, figures etc. Recommendations to candidates Familiarise yourself with with relevant terminology. The only way to achieve this is by regularly reading good quality specialised magazines of both source and target languages. And refer to a style guide of the kind issued to journalists writing for the national press of both source and target languages. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 50% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Only one candidate chose this subject. The result is the dream of all examiners, an excellent performance, nothing to grouse about and nothing to write. The whole translation is well done, it reads like an original in the target language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) I should quote the whole article but there is, nonetheless, a small amendment to make. The sentence (line 25) reads: Ils l’ont laissé s’exprimer avec l’idée de bloquer ou non le blanchiment. The candidate had made a second note as she/he did for ‘expression’ because without internet she/he was unable to verify. The solution could be Sie haben sie exprimieren lassen, in der Absicht das Ausbleichen zu blockieren oder nicht zu blockieren. But for a non specialist it could also read: Sie haben sie wachsen lassen, um zu prüfen, ob sie ausbleicht oder nicht. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) All comprehensible, cohesive and coherent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The text is perfectly legible. The candidate dealt very well with all the terms, DNA, RNA, iRNA – no error. Or s’agit-il d’ARNi ou de l’ARN viral lui-même qui, une fois dans toutes les cellules, sera clivé en en RN ? (lines 14/15) was translated as: “Handelt es sich dabei nun um die iRNA oder um die Virus-RNA selbst, die, sobald sie in allen Zellen ist, in iRNA gespalten wird?” Recommendations to candidates To do as this candidate did. Familiarise yourself with relevant terminology. The only way to achieve this is by regularly reading good quality specialised magazines of both source and target languages. Since candidates are not allowed to “google” any unfamiliar terms as in a real-life situation, have up-to-date specialised glossaries to hand during the examination. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010)

128

UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance No serious errors were made, likely to impede comprehension. The performance of the candidates was rather good. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Candidate translated in the first sentence inaugurer as “eröffnen” but one pities the French health minister who had to inaugurate 26 Agences Régionales in France on the 1st of April last year. It is hard to find another solution which fits well; perhaps: gründen because the process still seems to be incomplete. In the fifth paragraph (line 30) the candidate translates réduction de la mortalité prématurée évitable as “Reduzierung der vermeidbaren vorzeitigen Sterblichkeit” which is completely comprehensible and there is nothing else to find in the dictionaries but it reads really like German bureaucratic speech. A more authentic version would be: Reduzierung der Risiken, die zu einem vermeidbaren vorzeitigen Tod führen können. In the last paragraph (line 37) the candidate translated Le rôle politique des Agences régionales de santé s’inscrit dans la durée as “Die politische Rolle der regionalen Gesundheitsagenturen steht im Zusammenhang mit der Dauerhaftigkeit”. There are several possibilities for translating this in a way that is easier to understand, for example as Die politische Rolle der regionalen Gesundheitsagenturen ist von der Dauer ihrer Existenz abhängig/Die politische Rolle der regionalen Gesundheitsagenturen wird sich mit der Dauer ihres Bestehens entwickeln. These are, for sure, also interpretations. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There was nothing to mention, no grammatical mistakes, the work is well organised, cohesive and coherent. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The texts were perfectly legible. No commas forgotten, no spelling errors. But there was a little problem with a sort of interministerial task force called ministères sociaux in the ST. There are not several ministries of social affairs, only a number of ministries concerned with social issues. Recommendations to candidates Candidates/Translators must "read" the translated text with the eyes of a third party, without reference to the source in order to assess their translation in an objective way. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance The text required a high level of accuracy in the choice of terminology and authentic phraseology: this was not always achieved. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The candidate understood the ST quite well but made terminological and logical mistakes. Already in the first sentence candidates did not realise that a bill cannot be adapted to a court of justice – this is impossible in reality and in the language. Yet the bill or legislation can reflect that there is another court with its own competences. An acceptable version could be to translate Le projet de loi adaptant le droit pénal français à la Cour pénale internationale (CPI) a été adopté définitivement mardi par le Parlement … as Der Gesetzentwurf, der das französische Strafrecht

129

dahingehend ändert, dass es die Existenz des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofes (IStGH) berücksichtigt, wurde am Dienstag vom Parlament endgültig verabschiedet … The candidate translated “Der Gesetzentwurf, der das französische Strafrecht an den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof (CPI) anpasst, ist am Dienstag definitiv verabschiedet worden”. The sentence could have been ‘saved’ by writing der das französische Strafrecht an die Gründung des IStGH anpasst, but the candidate did not realise that it is impossible to translate as she/he did. Candidates also made serious terminological mistakes. They translated the same word, incrimination, twice with a wrong term. Admittedly, in English, incrimination has the sense in which the candidate used it, that means Beschuldigung. Candidate translated the first time crée en droit français une incrimination de l’'incitation publique et directe à commettre un génocide’ et intègre les définitions de crime de guerre et génocides telles que définies par la Convention de Rome as “Der Text, der am Dienstag vom Parlament verabschiedet wurde, schafft im französischen Recht einen Tatverdacht der ‚öffentlichen und direkten Anstiftung, einen Völkermord zu begehen und übernimmt die Definitionen von Kriegsverbrechen und Völkermord so wie sie im Vertrag von Rom definiert wurden.” The “Tatverdacht” (suspicion of a criminal act) is something other than the definition of a crime). The translation of principe de la double incrimination as “Prinzip des doppelten Tatvorwurfs” is again a serious mistake although the translation of incrimination in line 6 was another. Here it should be translated as Prinzip der doppelten Strafbarkeit which means in the country where the crime was committed and in France. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The translation is well organised, cohesive and coherent. Texts were on the whole grammatically accurate but once (line 23) one candidate translated tous les doutes sont permis sur la réelle détermination du gouvernement à permettre à la France de juger les crimes les plus graves as “dass alle Zweifel erlaubt sind über die tatsächliche Entschlossenheit der Regierung, es Frankreich zu ermöglichen, Schwerverbrecher zu richten.” The candidate used a wrong preposition, translating sur literally as “über”. Although normal usage in German is Zweifel an, that means: dass alle Zweifel an der tatsächlichen Entschlossenheit der Regierung erlaubt sind, es Frankreich zu ermöglichen, … Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Texts were perfectly legible. No spelling or punctuation mistakes. It was only the transfer of the name of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that was problematic. In the first line the Cour pénale internationale (CPI) was mentioned, correctly translated by the candidate as “Internationaler Strafgerichtshof” (IStGH) but then one candidate continued to use the French abbreviation (CPI) in the whole text. This court has its own abbreviation in the languages of the states that signed the convention and even in Basque and Esperanto. Recommendations to candidates Remember that specialised terminology is strict and legal terms all have their specific definition. They cannot be replaced by another one. A specialised dictionary is a condition sine qua non.

Perform logic checks: is the supposed relationship of two things really possible or does it sound awkward? Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010)

-*-


130


FRENCH INTO SPANISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance While there were no major problems with Aspect 1, it was obvious that a number of details in Aspects 2 and 3 would require special attention. In the event that attention to detail was absent. Also the line of irony running through the apparently informative nature of the subject matter was missed by candidates, with the resulting loss of personal voice in the target text (TT). Instead of a call for action, candidates produced a merely informative text. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The many idiomatic expressions in the ST were a challenge for the candidates. Translators usually take pride in finding good equivalents for idioms knowing that an idiom encapsulates an idea and can put the finishing touch on a paragraph. Pas de vin, malheureux!, line 6, rendered as “A partir de ahora ¡nada de vino!” is good, and un verre de rosé frais, l’été, sous une tonnelle, line 7, finds a good echo in “esa copita de rosado fresco a la sombra estival de una parra”. But the ST demanded even more and when the translation for nous vivons dans un siècle qui a resolu tous les vrais problèmes humains en appelant un chat un chien (line 15), is “vivimos en un siglo que ha resuelto los verdaderos problemas del hombre dejando de llamar al pan, pan y al vino, vino” something essential has been changed, maybe due to the addition of “dejando de”, which turns a positive phrase into a negative one. Perhaps that Spanish idiom could have been worked into vivimos en un siglo que ha resuelto los verdaderos problemas del hombre llamando al pan, vino y al vino, pan. Similarly the symbolic meaning of the phrase Ce qui devrait couronner la richesse du vignoble français en constitue l’infanterie (line 30), was completely lost when en constitue l’infanterie was translated as “poniéndola a los pies de los caballos”. Such a serious error makes the reader question the accuracy of any opinion or information coming afterwards. Candidates tended to overtranslate. When this happens a TT reads more like a written explanation of a ST e.g. rénover notre système d’appellations contrôlées (line 18) translated as “la actual reforma de las denominaciones de origen (AOC, por sus siglas francesas)”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates provided good grammatical choices when translating verbal tenses, such as En mars, ….le Centre présentait, lines 1 and 2, as “El pasado mes de marzo,… el organismo presentó”, but we found others that were decidedly wrong, such as on continuera, Françaises, Français, d’appeler un chat un chien (line 50) rendered as “ Los franceses y las francesas seguirán sin llamar al pan, pan y al vino, vino”. Paraphrasing and over-elaboration become serious errors when 8 words of the ST become 28 in translation, as in place aux AOP (line 22) which was translated as “y bienvenidas las denominaciones de origen protegidas (Appellations d’origine protégée, AOP)”. Equally, On remplace “contrôlée” par “protégée” (line 22) becomes “En el sistema de las denominaciones de origen se sustituye pues la palabra “controlada” (contrôlée) por “protegida” (protéegée)”.

131

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) While the mistakes in Aspect 3 were not serious enough to carry a fail mark, they impaired legibility. Candidates tended to insert unnecessary explanatory words such as “francés”, “en Francia”, “galas”, and to use brackets and quotation marks when dealing with names and acronyms. Recommendations to candidates Please read the Diploma in Translation Handbook regarding translator’s notes. Make sure you use the appropriate register and respect the style of the ST. Produce a layout that corresponds to the original. Unit 01: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 50% (2010)

-*-

* Although great care has been taken in the compilation and production of this report, the IoLET cannot, in any circumstances, accept responsibility for errors, omissions or advice DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011

132

EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE

GREEK INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of performance ranged quite widely but, on the whole, candidates seemed to have few difficulties understanding the source text (ST), though this comprehension was not always translated into a coherent rendering in the TL. The best versions showed some knowledge of political systems and the relevant terminology (e.g. governments of national unity, one-party government etc.). Candidates lacking this arguably somewhat specialist knowledge were at a distinct disadvantage. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Lexis and terminology were the greatest stumbling blocks. A "Gallup poll", for example, is surely a term with very specific connotations and should not be used for an opinion poll carried out by some unofficial body/bodies in Greece - and in any case where it occurred it was misspelled. Some cultural references were misidentified or not altogether accurately identified (e.g. Real News, described by some as a newspaper and by others as a radio station, when it actually performs both functions). And some names of political parties were slightly inaccurately rendered (e.g. LAOS actually stands for Popular Orthodox Rally, not Popular Orthodox Party even though this makes more sense). Only one candidate used translator's notes and arguably they were not used appropriately in this instance. However, there was at least one area of ambiguity in the ST, which might have been pointed up; instead candidates opted for different interpretations. The quote from Alexis Tsipras (ll. 34-38) was quite ambiguous and raised a number of questions. A literal translation would be something along the lines of: If the government refuses a/rejects the referendum and does not seek the people's backing, then one thing is for sure: they will not escape the ballot box in the local elections. But, as there was no referendum in summer 2010 (nor apparently was one on the cards), it may be that this term is being used loosely - though for what is not clear to me. Similarly, candidates who translated the second half of the sentence "it will not be able to avoid regional elections" or "it will not be able to avoid the call for district elections" or "regional elections will almost certainly be unavoidable" were proved wrong by the fact that the local elections were due in a few months anyway. One must deduce a meaning along the lines of the government will not be able to avoid the issue in the local elections or will be forced to listen to the voice of the people in the local elections. But none of the candidates was sufficiently au fait with Greek current affairs to pin this down, though some (wisely in this case) stuck more closely to the wording of the ST and gave an equally ambiguous translation. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were too many basic grammatical mistakes for this level in almost all papers. Prepositions were a constant stumbling block (e.g. "On the government camp" and "discontent towards" etc.) The need to keep relative pronouns next to the nouns they are substituting for was also overlooked, leading to structures such as: ""... caused by the Kastanidis' declarations, who stated ...". Errors in sequence of tenses were found in more than one script. Above all the tendency to stick too closely to the Greek syntax accounted for much awkward phraseology (e.g. "PASOK still heads the polls ... having a large margin from the opposition" and "against early elections was LAOS ..."). Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

133

Spelling was mainly good, though there were occasional issues with transliteration (e.g. "Repas" for Reppas or "Karantsaferis" for Karatzaferis) and inconsistency in referring to politicians (both "George" and "Giorgos" Papandreou were used in one script). Punctuation was also unproblematic for the most part. Figures were accurately transferred in all cases. Recommendations to candidates Careful proof reading is absolutely vital in all forms of translation. A lot of errors are avoidable with a little more thought and checking! Unit 01: Pass Rate 43% (2011); 20% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Although there was ample evidence that the ST had mainly been well understood, errors in the target text (TT) across all three criteria undermined the effort. The technical terminology was well-rendered; more serious problems were the unusual collocations and spelling errors of the translation. A fluent translation requires natural English collocations, which often requires a move away from the literal Greek, even though this may be comprehensible. Translator’s notes were used, but consisted principally of alternative offerings, and were ignored. Notes should be for extra elucidation rather than hedging one’s bets. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Φυσικός is an unreliable friend rather than a faux ami. In the first paragraph, φυσική ένωση is a physical connection (of photovoltaic parks with the national grid), not a “natural connection”. Η σχέση ... είναι αμπίδρομη is it is a two-way process, process being the most natural word required by the context, even though it does not appear in the ST. “Complimentary” does not adequately describe the facts (that a photovoltaic array can feed into the grid as well as take electricity from it). Omissions of adverbial modifiers caused serious problems, where the reader of the translation would have a different understanding from the reader of the source text. Όταν όμως ισχύουν αρκετοί άλλοι παράγοντες “when other factors come into play” omits αρκετοί, a number of, enough (other factors). And η χρήση ... συστήνεται μόνο σε περιοχές που ... is their use is recommended only in regions where … - omitting the ‘only’ results in a totally different implication. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were some odd or unnatural collocations. “Xs have, as a basic characteristic, the fact that there exists a natural connection with Y”, is close to the Greek, but verbose. Xs are characterised by a physical connection … is more succinct, in the appropriate register, and loses nothing. “The network that distributes electrical energy” is more naturally and succinctly the electricity transmission/distribution network/grid. “[C]an … diffuse energy to the network” requires a different verb – supply would be more natural here. “The relationship between X … with Y “ should be between … and …

134

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling was an Achilles’ heel. “Complimentary” was wrong in the context of a two-way process; the word intended was complementary, though even this was not a good choice here. “This single fact comprises the basic criteria” should be …criterion. “Anual” should be annual. Recommendations to candidates Closer proofreading, or more time for proofreading would have eliminated some of the errors. While the technical vocabulary was fine, the subtechnical, particularly the verbs which describe processes, needs to be worked on. What are the verbs used to talk about the two-way process described here? We may feed into the grid, supply the grid, provide the grid, and so on; conversely, we consume energy, are supplied with energy, draw energy etc. This is the kind of language which is ‘under the radar’ for many people, and would-be translators sometimes need to raise their awareness of it. In reading scientific or technical articles, attention needs to be paid to this area as much as the technical. This should in turn reduce dependence on literal or dictionary equivalents, collocations being generally only superficially covered by most dictionaries, and varying, it hardly needs to be said, between languages. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance A very good performance in terms of fluency, with the appropriate register properly captured. Almost all errors were minor. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Δημοσιονομικά μέτρα are budgetary/financial measures, not “austerity measures”, although the context makes it clear that the measures do in fact involve cuts. Good translations included η χώρα μας as “Greece”, αναλυτές του Ινστιτούτου as “analysts working with the Institute …” Αspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a couple of errors relating to the use of “the”. It should appear before “Greek economy” and “public deficit”. Διαπιστώνει (penultimate paragraph) is present tense in Greek, and is better in English as notes or has noted. Past tense rather cuts it off from the rest of the present time narrative, and there is no time expression such as ‘last week’ or ‘in an interview’ that would justify the past reference. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Paragraphing is signalled simply by starting a new line. This results in a lack of clarity about the candidate’s intentions when there is a clear new paragraph in the original (signaled by leaving a blank line), but the previous sentence in the candidate’s translation runs to the end of a line A marker cannot make assumptions here either way, as an uncertainly has been created. A good feature not in the original was the spelling out in full of abbreviations of institutions, organizations, etc. Original: ΔΝΤ. Translation: “International Monetary Fund (IMF)”. This is in accordance with best journalistic practice. Generally good too was the splitting of sentences in the translation, although splitting the last sentence of the second paragraph, has the slightly unfortunate result of giving more prominence to

135

the last few words, especially when they are introduced by “nevertheless”, a contrast which is implied in the Greek but not foregrounded. Recommendations to candidates Minor errors could have been avoided with unhurried proofreading. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance The challenges posed by a literary text inevitably tested the candidates' overall knowledge of English and their sensitivity to register, style, irony and shades of meaning. Under these circumstances marking seems a particularly subjective affair but in my opinion one of the translations quite clearly fell short of the standards required for this sort of text, one was somewhat flawed but acceptable and the third fell only slightly short of a distinction, by dint of missing or misconstruing some of the ST's subtleties. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Translations tended to be overly literal and often word for word. The expression "Πλησίαζε η ώρα" (it was nearly time) in l. 1 of the ST gave rise to translations ranging from the unintentionally metaphysical "Time was drawing nearer" to the poetic (or incoherent, depending on your point of view) "The hour was drawing in...". The proverb at the beginning of para.2 may not have an obvious parallel in English, but "It's Judgement Day" (one candidate's solution) seems more appropriate than the other alternatives offered ("Today, every rascal gets their own" and "Everyone to his post today"). Most of the errors were errors of lexis (e.g. translating να παίξει στο θέατρο [l. 22] as "to play ..." rather than to act or "νομική" [l. 20] as "law" rather than law school). None of the candidates used translator's notes and, though literary texts often need some explanation of cultural constructs, this was not obviously the case in this instance. It might, however, have been helpful to describe the location of Psychiko (l. 14), identified by two candidates as a suburb, more precisely as an Athens suburb. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The issue of rendering the ST's tenses in the TL was a recurring feature in these translations. This is often because Greek uses the present tense for a variety of purposes where English would employ other tenses (e.g. past, conditional), leading to mistakes in sequence of tenses. For example one candidate wrote: "...his mother had come to a point where she grew tired of ..." However, some "tense" errors may be attributable to using the wrong preposition (e.g. "A. had gotten up since dawn"). There were very few straightforward grammatical or syntactical errors. Some incoherence can be (at least partly) blamed on lack of punctuation (see below). Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Spelling was impeccable in all the translations, though I the transliteration of the protagonist's name as "Aggelos" is inappropriate when Angelos is not only more recognizable but also a better phonetic equivalent. Figures and dates were not an issue. Arguably lack of punctuation contributed to the incoherence in the phrase: "... the fiery spirit that slipped out of his shrewd eyes with which he would interpret the various roles ...", though even

136

without commas after 'spirit' and 'eyes' the addition of 'and' before 'with which' might have clarified the fact that it was the fiery spirit and not the shrewd eyes which helped him interpret the roles. The way the ST indicates direct speech is quite distinct from our use of inverted commas and contributed to one or two errors in this respect. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should be more aware of the demands of literary texts and make every attempt to capture the style and the spirit of the original. Unit 2C: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance A fluent performance with many successful features. The register used is both consistent and appropriate. There were only a few errors. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were omissions of modifiers, which made the translation less nuanced. Τον προηγούμενο μόλις αιώνα is as recently as the previous century – without μόλις it would just be “during the last century”. And δεν έχουν κατανοηθεί πλήρως is have not been fully understood, as distinct from “have not been understood”. Κατά κανόνα τα όρια αυτά καθορίζονται από ... is better translated as these limits are determined by … rather than “… are fixed by …”, which is rather more ambiguous. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were many good examples of Greek syntax being grammatically converted to natural English – one such is αυξάνοντας την τοπική ροή αίματος [lit: increasing the local flow of blood] being rendered as “by locally increasing blood flow rate”. Another is – “from an exact sciences perspective” for από την οπτική γωνία των θετικών επιστημών. “expansion of electrical power grid installations” for εξάπλωση των εγκαταστάσεων τροφοδoσίας ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας (lit. the expansion of-the installations of-supply of-electrical energy). Among the few problems were the second the in “the expansion of the electrical power grid installations”; in the context (developments over the past 50 years), this is general and does not refer to any specific known set of installations, making the article much less likely to occur. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The only potential problem here was the paragraphing. Paragraphs should be clearly indicated by either indenting or leaving a line. Simply starting on a new line risks ambiguity if the previous sentence runs to the end of the line. Recommendations to candidates Careful re-reading against the ST could well have revealed the omissions which marred otherwise excellent work. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE

137

General Report on Candidate Performance Not a difficult piece in general, but there are aspects of the Greek educational system which, if the terminology is translated word-for-word do not make sense. For the “social issues section of a similar newspaper” to Ελευθεροτύπια, we have to think of a paper located in the UK/US etc. the interested audience needs to be given recognisable or comprehensible terms. Greek words with a semantic spread distinct from English caused problems. Μάστορας and παιδιά being the two principal ones (discussed below). The choice of terms in English has to be sensitive to the context. In general terms, all candidates showed an ability to produce a fluent text, though this was sometimes more sporadic than consistent. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Παιδιά was variously translated as “children”, “kids” and “youngsters”. As the age range of those attending the night schools is given earlier in the same paragraph as 16 to 50-something, none of these terms is appropriate. The nearest one might come is guys, which covers the age range, and is slowly spreading in the UK; otherwise one has to forgo the informality and use people or something similar. Μάστορας was the other problem word, although this was a little better dealt with. It can be a cover-all term for people who make things or fix things, in a domestic or building context – covering locksmiths, plumbers, glaziers, electricians, carpenters, etc. It also corresponds to craftsman, i.e. someone who is skilled at some kind of work using the hands. In the context, something like skilled craftsman would be a reasonable translation, since the person in question had clearly served a kind of apprenticeship. Φιλόλογος is generally not “philologist” (which might however be used within English-speaking circles in Greece and Cyprus). It is a category of secondary teacher characterised by having a degree in the humanities, and thereby qualified to teach a range of humanities subjects (not necessarily just those in which he or she qualified). As there is not a directly comparable term in English, then literature/Greek literature teacher and slight variations were deemed acceptable. Greek acronyms are another problem area. Greek journalists often do not spell them out in full, so they are sometimes opaque even to Greek readers. Dictionaries are getting better at recording them, but the internet is the best source of all for information on them. ΕΠΑΛ is Επαγγελματικό Λύκειο, or roughly vocational (senior) high school. Various translations of λύκειο were accepted, including lyceum, upper secondary and senior high. Επαγγγελματικό was best translated as vocational. Από κείνα που ανεβάζουν τον πήχη της δημόσιας παιδείας was translated by most candidates as “one of those that raise the standards of public education” (or slight variations), but this is not accurate. Ανεβάζω τον πήχη is raise the bar, and is used both literally, as in the high jump, and metaphorically as commonly in English. The sense is “present a challenge to others to reach the same or a higher standard”, which is distinct from the idea of a few schools raising the standards of public education generally. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were some problems with the definite article, or the lack of it. Lyceum in the sense of upper secondary school requires it. Professor, used as a title and followed by a name, does not. “The school is the extension of society”, as a translation of το σχολείο είναι προέκταση της κοινωνίας, does not require the second “the”. In paragraph 1, επειδή έμεινε δυο φορές στην ίδια τάξη because he stayed down twice in the same class, or had to repeat the same class twice [sc for failing to pass the end of year exams], has a

138

number of possible translations in English, but some that were offered were obscure in meaning or badly put – “he did not pass the same class twice” In paragraph 4, Ήρθα για να έχω ελεύθερα τα πρωινά μου, αφότου ξεκίνησα το διδακτορικό μου caused a few problems too. Literally, I came to have my mornings free after I started my PhD. The collocation came to have suggests an eventual resolution of a situation, which is not the sense of the Greek. The meaning is, slightly loosely, I came here [to work at the night school] so that I could have my mornings free, since I had started a PhD. The sentence which follows, Εδώ είναι πιο χαλαρή η παρουσία του καθηγητή που δημιουργεί ανθρώπινη σχέση με τους μαθητές also needed some reorganisation in order to become fluent. “The teacher is viewed here in a less formal manner and that builds a more intimate relationship with the pupils” captured the meaning nicely, though “pupils” might have been replaced by students, given that they were anything up to 50-something years old. Χαλαρός, literally slack, of a rope, has more recently, along with the verb χαλαρώνω, come to mean relax and relaxed, in the sense of not being busy, a relaxed atmosphere, etc.. This sense is not always clearly recorded in dictionaries. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were occasional spelling problems. Of these, the most persistent was “sought after” [sic] in attributive position without a hyphen, or in one case “sort after”. The English spelling of Αχμέντ (the name of a Kurd in the original) was a problem for some. The Greek itself is a transliteration of the Kurdish or Arabic, and the English should not be a third-generation rendering filtered through Greek. The spelling Ahmed should be well enough known at this level. Also acceptable would be spellings such as Ahmet and Achmed. Spellings ending in –nt or –nd are clearly under the influence of Greek, and were not accepted. Recommendations to candidates Dictionaries are always catching up, and tend to underrepresent features characteristic of spoken language as opposed to written. This text contained some direct quotes which caused a disproportionate number of problems. It is worth consulting translation sites like proz.com, and those dedicated to Greek translation as are lexilogia.gr and translatum.gr, since they often deal with terminology that is not yet in the dictionary, and insofar as the discussion takes place in Greek, it is often couched in an informal colloquial style that has much in common with speech. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 80% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance The ST is slightly muddly (the penultimate paragraph seems completely redundant), and presents particular problems in that the Greek and British legal systems are distinct from each other and translation of terminology becomes a problem in many instances. These problems were competently handled, with errors falling mainly under categories 1 and 2. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The Αυτόφωρο Μονομελές Πλημμελοδικείο is a case in point. The question of audience becomes important here. Is one translating for specialist readers (who mαy need to know precisely at what level the case was tried) or general readers (who would be more interested in the animal cruelty aspect of the story). The rubric ‘translate … for a similar widely-used electronic paper’ suggests the latter, in which case magistrate’s court would be enough. This approach (in effect, adaptation) is not generally recognised by dictionaries, and there was also considerable discussion on proz.com a few years ago about an acceptable English translation. The version “One-Member

139

Court of Misdemeanours for Arrestable Offences” was considered acceptable in the circumstances. There were some misinterpretations of the ST, and some choices which were not as accurate as they could have been. Τυπικές προϋποθέσεις is formal requirements (rather than “standard conditions”, which is vaguer) - note the opposite άτυπος, informal, usually in collocation with words like talks, contacts, meeting, etc. Sometimes non-adjacent clause constituents need to be taken together rather than in the order in which they come: νόμιμοι τίτλοι are legal entitlement(s) rather than “non-pedigree” animals. The phrase belongs not to the immediately preceding word ζώα animals, but to the verb preceding that, εξέτρεφε bred. Among the less accurate choices were “tried” for καταδικάζεται condemned, found guilty (though in the particular context this did not cause misunderstanding), and ... το κόστος ... είναι μεγάλο για να το αναλάβουν εξ ολοκλήρου οι εθελόντες is the cost … is too high to be borne in its entirety by (the) volunteers, rather than “the cost … is extraordinary for the volunteers”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were a number of more minor problems in this category. “It should be reminded” should be it should be remembered. “It is the first time that a case … finds its way to the justice system” – the problem here is the tense of “finds” – perfect would be more usual in a careful text. “a temporary order by which the tormented animals were to be handed over to the Society …” would be more fluently put as … order for the … animals to be handed over … . Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were almost no errors in this category, although the Greek placename abbreviation Ν. for forms of νέος [= new] cannot be simply lifted into English for a readership outside Greece; Ν. Δάφνη is Nea Dafni Paragraphs 4 onwards are a quote from the press release by stray.gr. As such, in the Greek text they have only introductory and final quotation marks for the whole piece. English practice would normally require the quotation marks to be repeated at the beginning of every paragraph. Recommendations to candidates Time for proofreading is important. Many of the errors noted could have been avoided by a careful re-read of the text. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 33% (2010)

-*-



140

HUNGARIAN INTO ENGLISH

UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION

General Report on Candidate Performance The standard of this year’s translation was high. The candidate’s performance was awarded a merit, because s/he provided an accurate and complete translation which faithfully reflected the meaning of the original. The register was appropriate but the style could have been improved.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The quality of the translation was high. However, in places it remained somewhat too close to the source text (ST). This resulted in a few awkward sentences and phrases, eg. “the worse someone’s health condition, the more likely it is that he or she will pay for treatment.” A sentence beginning something like The willingness to pay more increases... would have been more elegant. Similarly “county seats”, where county towns and cities would have been more appropriate.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates provided an accurate translation, with generally good sentence structures. There were some minor ‘Hunglish’ grammatical mistakes that appeared throughout the whole of the translated text. These included some redundant plural forms, e.g. “Experiences show” (p. 1., para 1., line 2.) should have been Experience shows; “Patents’ incomes” (p. 2., last para., line 1.) which should have been Patients’ income, and some redundant “what”, e.g. (p. 1., para 5., line 6) one candidate wrote “the population assumes a higher occurrence of gratitude payments than what they are willing to admit...”, whereas this should have been the population assumes a higher occurrence of gratitude payments than they are willing to admit...; and elsewhere (p. 2., para 4., line 3.) s/he put “...payments... than what others assumed they received”, instead of ...payments... than others assumed they received.

These mistakes however are only minor and have no major effect on the coherence and cohesion of the work.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The standards were very high in this Aspect. This included fully accurate spelling, punctuation and transfer of figures, e.g. “20,000 forints”.

Candidates typed his/her answer which s/he organised very neatly and professionally.

Recommendations to candidates Candidates should leave time to read through their translation at the end, without reference to the original, to see if it reads well as a piece of English. Sometimes their work remains close to the logic of the ST. Do not think that translating allows you to use awkward expressions you would never use as a native speaker. Care should be taken to avoid this.

If possible, ask an English native speaker to read your translations into English to check for nuances and correct usage. Try to learn common examples (e.g. Experience shows rather than “experiences show”) and as a result they will develop a much more natural style when translating into English.

Reading different types of texts in English should also help the candidate to develop a more refined appreciation of different styles in English.

Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010)

-*-



141

JAPANESE INTO ENGLISH

UNITS 01, 2B AND 3E: General, Business and Science

General Report on Candidate Performance The Fail marks in Unit 1 (General Translation paper) were largely caused by comprehension and accuracy problems. These marred what was otherwise a good performance in the General and Science paper. The rather poor performance in the Business paper was unexpected ─ perhaps this was due to being tired or unfamiliarity with the subject matter. Other reasons for poor performance in comprehension and accuracy seemed to be due to difficulties disentangling Japanese syntax or providing a reasonable translation of Japanese vocabulary.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were problems with understanding the last sentence of the General Translation paper. Another comprehension mistake was in the second sentence of the first paragraph where the subject is wrongly identified (it is at the end with the preceding words attributive to it, common Japanese syntax). Many other mistakes were made in accuracy translating Japanese words e.g. in line 5 of the first paragraph on page 3 of the General Translation paper where “the twinkle of a secretive language” should be, say, the effect of a secret language. Other examples included mistranslating rules as “regulations” on p.3 line 12, as well as failing in the subsequent sentence to translate several important Japanese words which seem to be listed in normal Japanese-English dictionaries.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidate performance was reasonably good under this Aspect of performance, though not without mistakes such as “adding to the record breaking heat wave” instead of Added to …. Another mistake occurred in the General Translation paper where “confusing Japanese” (which might mean “confusing Japanese people”) should be, say, throwing the Japanese language into confusion.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Generally speaking, this Aspect was handled reasonably well. The transfer of names is always a problem because, if written in Chinese characters, their pronunciation, on reading, is unpredictable. All candidates failed with Kichyooji in the General Translation paper, although some candidates got nearer to its full name, whilst failing to get Joojl night , the abbreviation that appeared earlier in the Japanese text. Candidates would be well advised to include a dictionary of Japanese names in their works of reference for the exam.


Constant wide reading of Japanese in order to be able to read Japanese texts fluently;

Read translations of Japanese to see how experts perform, and be ready to disagree with their work;

Translate often and be scrupulous in assessing your own efforts in all three ‘Aspects’ but do not translate when reading Japanese texts to gain fluency;

Keep up to date with the issues of the day, including those of Japan.

Unit 01: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) Unit 3D: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

-*- * Although great care has been taken in the compilation and production of this report, the IoLET cannot, in any circumstances, accept responsibility for errors, omissions or advice DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION 2011 EXAMINER’S REPORT ON CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE

142

POLISH INTO ENGLISH

UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Whereas some translations showed good understanding of the source text and were encoded with the correct register, some other candidates either failed to decipher the underlying meaning of particular parts of the text, or did not use accurate terminology. Lexical mistakes were found in some of the scripts. Familiarity with discursive style of writing and attention to detail must be improved in the less successful cases. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators' notes, if any). The candidates found a number of phrases used in the ST difficult to understand, perhaps because they are somewhat sarcastic and implied, rather than straightforward. For instance, the introductory U Orwella/ln Orwell's (fiction/world) was translated as "according to Orwell", which doesn't really reflect the original meaning. In one instance it was even rendered as "Orwell's legislature", which is a complete distortion. The phrase poddaje rodzinę samowoli specjalnej struktury urzędniczej (which could, for instance, be rendered as making families subject to whims of a particular bureaucratic structure) was mistranslated as "making a law-breaking family a subject of special services scrutiny" (a complete distortion and numerous serious vocabulary problems and a gr. mistake), or "puts lawless families to the test by its particular official framework". It seems the candidates thought "samowola" (mistranslated as "lawless") refers to the families, while the ST says it the bureaucratic framework that is uncontrolled/capricious (which mean the candidates missed the point, as the ST is critical of the lawmakers). Technical term umocowania prawne/assignment of powers to the new structures was translated as "strengthening of the new structures", or "making sure new structures are strengthened" which calqued the original, but the meaning of this technical term is completely lost, child smacking was translated as "child abuse"; not much attention was/has been given to/it has gone unnoticed was rendered as "has gone unrepeated", or "there was no reaction whatsoever". Translations of public-funded/state run education restricting parents' rights to direct the upbringing of their children were, e.g. "national education, which limited the parental rights" (what makes it more serious is the fact that the technical term "parental rights" used inappropriately) or, "National education limiting the parental rights of methods of childcare". A few candidates failed to translate prawa correctly, which either means "laws" or "rights, depending on the context; The candidates confused them, e.g. "this was part of private or religious rights", or "a breach of law or personal interest; "act (...) with intent or relinquishing infringement of laws". There were numerous problems with style and word choice: "it is up to parents to decide on their choice" - this is redundant, it would be sufficient to say it's up to parents, or its parents' choice, or it's parents who decide; "threatening these persons' safety for their own life" - sounds very awkward; "walking a little one home by force"; "refusal of pocket money or not going ahead with a computer", "violating their pride" - instead of, for example, infringing on/threatening their dignity, Some expressions are not of appropriate register, e.g. "a Government cannot dream of providing" - too colloquial, or "the aforementioned" - too formal. "the family (...) the foundation of human society and the State of secondary importance and only really for the more (...) developed civilisations." - mistranslation of "secondary importance", "only really" - too informal and imprecise; a hyphen after "the state" would facilitate comprehension (A3) "in short they considered the Government to be the manager of the family unit" - change of tense in the first phrase (A2), the style and content hardly reflect the ST, which says in short, they consider the state a superior reality. In two instances alternative terms are provided in parenthesis, which is unacceptable, ("and stopping (giving) pocket money") and "would be to condemn (abolish).)". Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Linking devices were not always used appropriately: "in reality the act forbids..." - this seems to introduce some contrasting idea, while the meaning of the ST is rather development of what has just been said, something like indeed should be used; "in the meantime the legislation may affect the lives of Poles..." - it is a

143

mistranslation, it could in fact be replaced by In fact/The point is/As it happens; "For a young child a little pain is a signal it has done something bad, for example, the principle of warning it not to touch anything hot" - it's difficult to see how the second part relates to the first one; the same phrase was translated by another candidate as: "... that their action was wrong, on the basis that pain warns against touching something hot, for example."- again, it is not really coherent; "It used to be understood that families create a Nation as they give birth to, nurture and educate the future citizens that will propagate it." - the style, punctuation, tenses and word choice would all need to be improved to make it coherent To avoid repetition, pronouns can be used: "there are other damaging points in the act. The act also...." - {it also), or "their duty to raise their children until their children reach the age of maturity" - again, unnecessary repetition (until they). There were grammatical mistakes that shouldn't happen at this level. They mostly involve tenses, syntax, and prepositions: "media does not mention it often" ("does" + word order); "family codes are being left to the secularised countries of past centuries" (tense + word choice). Some candidates used wrong structures, e.g.: "The same view took our Sejm when announcing a legislation" here, either the passive voice or a different structure should be used; "causing these persons to be in danger of death, health, loss of dignity" - it sounds as if the "to be in danger of refer not only to "death", but also "health", which is very awkward; "despite of human imperfections" - preposition; "Meanwhile a family is and always was" - should be is and always has been; also "everywhere" is omitted in the phrase; "you will give a smack,., the court can throw you out to the street" - calqued from Polish + incorrect preposition is used; in fact it says Smack a child... and a court can throw you out in the street, "it has not yet been fully reported" - both style and tense should be change; "smacking and similar punishments will not lead to..." - wrong tense used. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Please give examples to support your comments Commas are use used sparingly, making long sentences difficult to follow. There were some problems with transfer of names of institutions, e.g. in one case Sejm was translated as "Parliament", which is not specific enough, as it the lower chamber of the Polish Parliament. A few candidates misunderstood Krajowa Rada Kuratorów / the National Council of Probation Officers and rendered it as "National Guardianship Council" or "National Council of Education" (which probably comes from the fat that kurator used to be mainly understood as an inspector of educational services, rather than "probation officer", as used more commonly nowadays). One candidate decided not to transfer names of institution in the body of the text, but provided translation of them in the translator's notes. While it is appropriate in the case of "Sejm" (as it's a conventional, fixed name, I think the other names should have been transferred into English in the actual translation (as they are relatively straightforward) rather than making the reader go to the back to check the meaning of the terms given in Polish. Some candidates used incorrect capitalisation of terms (which seems random and unnecessary): "Kings", "Political and Church officials", "Marriage Registration", "Nation". There were some editing problems - no space after/before a hyphen, no colon before a quotation. One candidate wrote on both sided of sheets of paper, which is not allowed, as clearly stated on the cover. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should remember that even general-interest texts will include some technical terminology (e.g. legal or medical) so they are expected to have a solid foundation of at least basic technical terms to discuss a wide variety of topics. It is also crucial to spot sarcastic or implied meaning to avoid any miscommunication. Being familiar with current topics, issues and buzz words should help candidates maintain better control over style, collocations and structures used specific types of utterances. While translators need to accurately convey the meaning, they do not need to slavishly follow the structure of the original. On the contrary, to make one's translation sound natural, one needs to apply linguistic skills to make it good in the target language which may involve using altered structures and phrases. Use translator’s notes only as you would use them in a professional capacity. Unit 01: Pass Rate 44% (2011); 67% (2010)

144

UNIT 02B: Business General Report on Candidate Performance The source text, generally speaking, was understood by the candidates. However, there were a few traps that candidates fell into, either because they failed to decipher the underlying meaning of particular parts of the text, or due of inaccurate use of technical terminology, which, at this level should not pose difficulties. The text gave the candidates a fair chance to use a number of collocations and phases typical of business English and some candidates applied very good expressions to facilitate the appropriate style. Unfortunately, numerous lexical mistakes made most of the translations not fit for professional purposes, which seems to suggest that candidates need to improve their knowledge of the subject matter and attention to detail. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). All candidates mistranslated revenue, rendering it as either “income” or “profit”. Although certain dictionaries may suggest all these terms as translation of Polish przychody, however, candidates taking this option should be aware of the fact that they are not the same, especially when discussed by a bank’s CEO. Some candidates calqued Polish kredyty and used the word “credits” rather than “loans”. When the text discusses the process in which a bank branch is to get detached from its foreign base and constitute itself as an entity operating under the Polish legislation, some candidates translated it as “in accordance with Polish law” which gives an impression that so far the bank didn’t operate in accordance with the Polish law, which was not the case. Another tricky part turned out to be the final quotation, when the CEO uses the word pozyskujemy, which literally translates as we gain. Each candidate interpreted it slightly differently: “we make”, “we make monthly profits of”, we win” or “our income is”. All these terms are incorrect as what was meant was money coming into the business in the form of deposits or monthly payments so cash inflow, or possibly, we gain would convey the meaning appropriately. This was another example of somewhat careless use of technical terms. Examples of good terminology included: “a major player”, “rapid growth”, “market expertise”, “undergo restructuring” or “our sources reveal”. Register used by the candidates was largely appropriate. Only one candidate used translator’s notes and, unfortunately, they were not of professional standard, as they mostly discuss the candidate’s uncertainty of which term to use, which is not the purpose of such entries. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Most candidates were able to organise their work adequately. However some parts of the text sound disjointed, e.g.: “We wish to service medium-sized companies. The aim is that in 4 years, the corporate department will bring in a third of the bank’s income”. (– the first sentence has also got a lexical error - “service”, and the second – wrong tense/structure is used). A couple of candidates mistranslated linking then/at which point as “by which time” and “in the meantime” which does affect the meaning as it confuses the order of things to happen. Another mistake was overusing linking expressions, e.g. “hence, this is why an application...”. A few syntactic problems appeared impacting on the style e.g. “talks will soon begin with potential partners” – the sentence would have a better flow if the whole subject talks with potential partners was kept together; Another grammatical problem: no inversion applied in: “only then we will be able to withstand...”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were very few spelling mistakes (e.g. “campagne” for campaign). With regards to punctuation, most candidates seem to disregard the importance of commas. Although in English, unlike in Polish, in a lot of cases commas are not obligatory, they should be used to facilitate clarity, especially in complex sentence, e.g. “to withstand large marketing costs which are crucial to winning clients” – “which” should be preceded with a comma and the verb should be in singular,

145

so the relative clause would refer to the first phrase, and not the “costs”, as it implies (it’s not the costs that are crucial, but “withstanding them”). There were some problems with transfer of figures, e. g. million was translated as “m” after the figures, and then, when the ST says: 2,8mld (– in English: 2.8 billion), the candidate put “2.8m”, which is a serious overlooking. Another candidate mistranslated billion as “milliards”. The candidates handled transfers of names of institutions well. The only problem was a slight diversion in translation of Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego; the candidates rendered it as, e.g. The Financial Supervisory Committee, which is not exactly the official version of the name of this institution, but it conveys the meaning correctly. Recommendations to candidates: Candidates should remain vigilant when using technical terms; because they are so specific, when used inaccurately, they distort the meaning seriously, and make the translation sound very unprofessional. Use of commas and linking words can facilitate clarity of utterances. Candidates should seek to cross-reference applied terminology, as the first term given by one’s dictionary may not be appropriate in particular context. Extensive reading of press materials in both source and target languages will help candidates incorporate a large stock of useful expressions typically occurring in certain types of texts, e.g. business writing. Being familiar with current topics, issues and buzz words in the domains one wants to specialise in is crucial. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 25% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance All candidates translating the Literature option displayed a high level of ability in their translation of Polish Literature into a convincing rendering of English Literature. A high standard was maintained by all candidates taking this option and all papers were of an acceptable level to submit with only the necessity of some minor editing. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Comprehension, accuracy and register were appropriate in most of the papers marked. However, a few amendments in the completed translation could be suggested. For example, in the opening line of the original text, the author uses the word smierc. This would have been more accurately translated as Death within the context of the original script, and not as, in the script of one of the candidates, “passed away”. The latter has a less dramatic and more modern intonation, which is less appropriate than the original register. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Overall, all candidates displayed a high standard of grammar, organisation and cohesion of translated papers within this option. Identical words should be avoided in the same sentence. For example, one candidate used two adjectives to describe one word “In his youth, childhood…” in the same sentence. One would have been sufficient - from the Polish w wczesnej mlodosci. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) All technical points, spelling, punctuation etc, were appropriately conveyed and translated by all candidates in the Literature option. There were no serious errors. One spelling mistake was noted in the translated word lightening which read as “lighting” from the Polish piuruny. Recommendations to candidates Candidates need to check their completed papers for omission of commas and minor spelling mistakes, such as the example above. However, a high standard of work was submitted by the candidates marked in this option.

146

Unit 2C: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The source text did not seem to pose difficulties for the candidates. However, as it uses technical terminology the candidates were not always specific enough in their translations. There are some lexical and stylistic mistakes, which seems to suggest that candidates need to improve their familiarity with technical style of writing and attention to detail. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The text was understood by the candidates, with only a couple of misunderstandings. Some parts of the translation are very proficient. The candidates used appropriate register. However, a number of phrases were inaccurate. For instance, in the last sentence: instead of “which complete it” it should say as they go through it/during their transfer; what is translated as: “will allow scientists to report live” should in fact say: will allow scientist to have a live broadcast from; biomolecules was translated as “molecules”; accompanying numerous synchrotrons – omission of accompanying; hyper-transmitting instead of “superconducting”; brightness translated as “luminosity”; coherence translated as “cohesion”; chemical processes translated as “chemical reactions”; omission of maximum in “the impulses will be emitted 27,000 times per second”; Some stylistic improvements could be applied e.g. in “it’s easy to compare this laser to...” or “there is a lack of practical benefits from it”; “outrage” – slightly exaggerated translation; “you can consider this laser as a gigantic... camera” – poor style. There are two translator’s notes. The first one concerns two separate terms translated correctly as “collective processes and “magnetic memory media”. The way it’s put it is not really clear whether s/he would want to check the term or s/he is suggesting that the reader should do it, in any event, as it is a generic term, rather the specific to this particular device, pointing out to the host institute as a source of confirmation may not be the best reference. More general scientific source could be given. The second one is just to inform the reader that the heading is in bold – which is unnecessary; Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The standard of grammar and cohesion varied. Some problems noted concern linking phrases. For instance, there seems to be overinterpretation here “for testing chips and magnetic memory, in the search for pathways to further minaturization”. In the ST there is no linking between the phrases, so they sound as a list (testing chips and searching for...), rather than subordinate clauses. Cohesion of the text could be improved in a few parts, e.g.: “it’s a kind of giant slalom – electrodes faced with it will spontaneously emit radiation..., which will then be amplified... and result in a laser beam” the last phrase sounds disjointed; There are a few basic grammatical mistakes, and some less serious ones, including articles, number, Saxon genitive and syntax: “a biggest”; “an almost a three-kilometres long”, in theory similar range of...”; “in a two-kilometres long”; “processes of so called collective processes”; “cellular membrane” and “fundamental particles accelerator”– should be both plural. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) A spelling mistake, which changes the meaning of the word “laser will also shade some light on”, another spelling mistake appears in the name of a town; There is unnecessary capitalisation in “Materials Science”. Commas should be used in complex sentences to facilitate readability (e.g. see above); In one translation the order of numbers is changed: “from 0.1 to 6 billionths of a meter” (in original from 6 to 0.1 billionths of the meter) Mistranslation and inconsistency in translation of figures (which is unacceptable): first it’s translated as “milliard” and then as “billiard” (which is completely incorrect). There is an editing error (unnecessary space before period).

147

Recommendations to candidates: Candidates should remember that precision is paramount. As texts hardly ever focus only on a narrow domain, translators are expected to have a solid foundation of at least basic technical terms to discuss a wide variety of topics. Although translation needs to accurately convey the meaning, it does not need to slavishly follow the structure of the original. In modern science a lot of terms are first coined in English, and then become borrowings in other languages. To certain extend, it may be helpful for the translator, but it should also be noted that such terms are fixed and one needs to get them right, otherwise, the reader will be confused. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 50% (2011); 0% (2010) Unit 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Both of the candidates completed papers marked in this option, demonstrated a sufficiently high standard of translation to enable them to be awarded a merit and a pass mark respectively. The candidates showed a sufficient grasp of the meaning conveyed by the original article to ultimately produce translations which capture the essential message. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Both papers demonstrated that sufficient comprehension, accuracy and register, which remained appropriate to the original article and the message that it intended to convey. Although the subject matter in the Social Science’ option was of a technical nature, both candidates produced appropriately worded translations which did not detract from the original language (Polish). Candidates dealt competently with the use of vocabulary, which sometimes included medical terminology. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Organisation of the subject matter was rather messy and this distracted the reader from the fluency of the subject matter. However, the scripts were legible. A few grammatical errors were made in the translation into English. For example “emotional behaviours are” instead of translating the original into the singular human behaviour is. From the Polish ludzkie zachowania emocjonalne. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Overall, there were no technical errors, such as spelling, punctuation, transfer of dates, etc. Legibility, however, could have been much improved in both papers marked in this option. Attention also needs to be given regarding the use of commas within the sentences translated into English. Several commas were omitted. For example, in the sentence “neurological structures which are similar to those of animals”, a comma should have been inserted after the word “animals”. Recommendations to candidates Candidates need to improve in respect of legibility and presentation of their completed papers. They need to check for the omission of punctuation marks. However, the overall understanding of this difficult paper demonstrated a good knowledge of the subject matter. Candidates would be advised to read clinical journals such as ‘New Scientist’ to perfect their style in this difficult subject. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 100% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance The translation of this paper posed difficulties for candidates and, unfortunately, they made it sound unnatural and it did not meet the required standard. Numerous examples of inaccurate use

148

of technical terminology was the biggest problem. The text used a fair amount of legal (but not too technical) terminology and a number of collocations and phases typical of legal English could be used and, indeed, some candidates applied very good expressions to facilitate the appropriate style. Lexical mistakes and confusing complex structures made the translations not fit for professional purposes. Some inaccuracies seem to suggest that candidates were not familiar with more obscure Polish legal terms. There were examples of inconsistent or illogical translations. One sentence in the source text clearly does not make sense, but no candidate thought it appropriate to make a note of it, which means they either didn’t notice it, or didn’t feel confident enough pointing it out; instead, they came up with some peculiar translations of it (e.g. “He cannot be reprimanded for fighting for justice where it may result in punishment”.) Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). The source text is about mobbing. This key term was problematic as, the original term looks like an English word, but is in fact used in the meaning intended here mainly in Continental Europe, while in the UK term bullying in the workplace is preferred. Two candidates translated the term as “bullying”, which is the best option, one candidate used the term “harassment”, which is acceptable (but it is accompanied by an awkward translator’s note), and one candidate decided not to translate it at all, which may be confusing for an English-speaking reader; to make things worse the candidate was inconsistent, as the word “bullying” was used once (when the term was defined in the body of the text), which makes the reader guess whether “mobbing” is the same as “bullying”. The candidates struggled with a number of legal terms: kara porządkowa (here: disciplinary penalty as it doesn’t concern disturbing the order but rather breaching disciplinary regulations), which was translated as e.g. “breach of order”; kodeks pracy (the Labour Code) was mistranslated as “The Penal Code”, and in one instance, its abbreviation k.p. was not deciphered and instead was preceded with “subsection”; skarga kasacyjna (motion for revocation of judgment) was translated as “plea of nullity”, “appeal”, “cassations claim” or “last resort appeal” – all these are not exactly wrong, but they are unclear and would benefit from further explanation, e.g. in the form of a translator’s note, as this a typically Polish phenomenon. Other inaccuracies included: infringement on his/her personal rights(naruszenie dóbr osobistych) rendered as “an interference with his personal property”, “injury to personal well-being” or “breach of personal interest”; health problems/disorder (rozrój zdrowia)– was rendered as “personal injury”, “physical breakdown” or “breakdown of health”. The candidates maintained appropriate register. Style, however, was not always good due to the fact that the candidates followed structures of the source text too closely. Only one candidate used translator’s notes and, unfortunately, they were not of professional standard, as they mostly discuss the candidate’s uncertainty of which term to use, which is not the purpose of such entries. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The organisation of work was poor in some places, mainly because of inconsistencies in terminology or tenses and lack of appropriate linking. Questionable use of tenses: “the court of first instance had dismissed the employee’s petition” or “and had therefore decided that compensation should be made” “where a fight for justice will lead to a punishment” “He decided that the boss’ bullying was a form of repression used by him for defending his interests. Bullying is forbidden by law”. – it sounds disjointed without a linking phrase; also, the referential use of “him”/”his” makes it unclear. The candidates did not dare to change structures of the source text, which is often advisable in translation, as in another language a different structure/phrase may sound more natural. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There were very few spelling mistakes. With regards to punctuation, most candidates seem to disregard the importance of commas.

149

Most candidates handled transfers of names of institutions well. (e.g. “the Employment Tribunal” or “the Supreme Court”. Recommendations to candidates: Despite the fact that law is different in different countries and one system may have procedures or institutions not known in another country, the translator should strive to make the text communicative (i.e. avoiding vague terms, providing extra explanation if required) and avoid calquing terms and structures as they won’t sound natural in the target language. Using technical terms requires close attention; when used inaccurately, they distort the meaning seriously, and make the translation sound very unprofessional. Use of commas and linking words can facilitate clarity of utterances. Candidates should seek to cross-reference applied terminology, as the first term given by one’s dictionary may not be appropriate in particular context. Extensive reading of press materials in both source and target languages will help candidates incorporate a large stock of useful expressions typically occurring in certain types of texts, e.g. legal writing. Being familiar with current topics, issues and buzz words in the domains one wants to specialise in is crucial. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 80% (2011); 33% (2010)

-*-


150


PORTUGUESE INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance Candidates needed to convey the very formal tone of the source text (ST), something which was by and large achieved. Those who did not do particularly well did so particularly because of their poor command of the target language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The main task here was to convey the formal register of the ST. While most of the candidates were successful, occasionally there were attempts to ‘overcompensate’, for example by translating a frequent word in the text, “necessidades” (‘needs’) by something either too formal, or even inaccurate (‘hardships’). Otherwise, there were no serious technical errors. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) For the most part, there were no problems in this Aspect. However, the two candidates who failed did so because of their lack of coherence in the target language (English), and by translating far too literally. Examples include ‘did’, for ‘made’; and phrases such as ‘to the extent one believes to be able to do it’. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Occasional errors of spelling and/or punctuation (e.g. the use of commas in relative clauses), but there were no major problems here. Recommendations to candidates For those who failed, it is recommended that they think very carefully before embarking on an exam involving translation into a language which is not their mother tongue. Unit 01: Pass Rate 71% (2011); 47% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance With one exception, the level was very high indeed, with marks as high as 98; however, the one failure was mainly due to poor performance under Aspect 2. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) All the candidates showed a complete understanding of the ST, including the specialised terminology involved, and this includes the one candidate who failed. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The one failure was due to a poor command of the target language, English, with the result that the translation lacked coherence. Examples include literal translations of “ouvidos” and “afirma”, and the phrase ‘sanctifying himself a prophet’. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.)

151

Names and titles – e.g. “General Motors (GM) do Brasil”; “professor do Departamento de Economia da ESPM” – were not always accurately translated (and one candidate translated “Economia” as ‘Economy’). However, there were no other problems under this Aspect. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should think very carefully before embarking on an exam involving translation into a language which is not their mother tongue. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 75% (2011); 83% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance A fairly mixed result, with marks ranging between 99 and 56, reflecting the fact that where the candidates fully understood the ST, they achieved high marks. The text did present a number of technical difficulties, but these were usually dealt with satisfactorily. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) By and large, the candidates coped with the specialised terminology (e.g. “codão”), and generally speaking showed a relatively clear understanding of the subject matter. However, at least one candidate was unable to translate terms such as “leucina” and “serina” correctly Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Those candidates who failed were unable to write coherently in the target language, and/or were too literal in their translation, with the result that the target text was sometimes quite meaningless Examples include such errors as ‘in and of themselves’, ‘in the beginnings’, ‘fateful’ (for ‘fatal’). Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Names and titles – e.g. “General Motors (GM) do Brasil”; “professor do Departamento de Economia da ESPM” – were not always accurately translated (and one candidate translated “Economy” as ‘Economy’). However, there were no other problems under this Aspect. Recommendations to candidates For those candidates who failed, it is recommended that they think very carefully before embarking on an exam involving translation into a language which is not their mother tongue. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 50% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The quality of translations varied. A number of candidates demonstrated excellent comprehension of the source language and subject matter but an inadequate grasp of good writing style in the target language. Other candidates had good writing skills, with texts reading like original pieces of writing in English, but made inaccurate vocabulary choices, which distorted or impaired the message. Other candidates managed to balance both factors, demonstrating strong professional translation skills overall. For the candidates who failed to achieve a pass, in the majority of cases it was rather due to weakness in English than lack of understanding of the ST. None of the candidates added translator’s notes, which was surprising because they would have been useful in this text for some candidates to explain that further research would be needed in a professional translation situation to accurately render some acronyms and terms.

152

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). There were three terms in the ST with which many candidates seem to have had difficulty: Licenciaturas (line 40) was translated by many candidates as “degree courses” or something similar. This term refers specifically to teaching and would have been better translated as, for example, teacher training degrees. The wrong translation here distorted the point of the message of the ST.

Very few candidates appeared to understand the meaning of the term carteira assinada (line 15). An appropriate translation here could be, for example, with formally registered employment. This term is specific to Brazil, so it could be that the translation was not recognised by candidates more used to Portuguese from countries other than Brazil. Renderings such as “designated workspace” and “signed diploma” were incorrect and made the translation incoherent. A Translator’s Note might have been appropriate here to explain that in a real life translation situation the meaning of the term would be checked.

A number of candidates wrongly translated the phrase professores que estavam em regência de classe (line 31), with inaccurate translations such as ”teachers on leave” and “teachers in class regency”. A correct translation for this phrase would have been, for example, teachers in charge of a class or classroom teachers.

Most candidates provided accurate translations for the Brazilian institutions and acronyms in the text, such as PME (line 9) and IBGE (line 9). Most candidates correctly translated the name of the institution and placed the Brazilian acronym in brackets: “The Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE)”. However, several candidates did not deal with these so well. One candidate left the acronym “IBGE” with no gloss or translator’s note, and another candidate rendered it as GIBE, neither of which examples would be understood by the average English reader.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) A few candidates demonstrated excellent, fluid writing style, with texts that read like original pieces of writing in the target language. This should be one of the highest objectives for all translators and in particular for texts aimed at publication. Other candidates had very weak writing skills in English, often causing a lower overall result even when the ST had apparently been understood. Weakness in writing was generally caused by too much adherence to the syntax of the ST. For example, “inequalities of gender” as a translation of desigualdades de gênero (line 1). Although the sense here is clear, a more authentic collocation in English would have been gender inequalities. “Scale of measurement” as a translation of escala de medida (line 4) where a more authentic collocation in English would have been simply scale. “Men of equal level of education” as a translation of homens com igual escolaridade (line 13) which is somewhat stilted in English. A common grammatical error was the use of the definite article in the translation where it is used in the ST. For example: “…the absence of participation by the teaching professionals in the public debates and in the making of the laws and policies…”. This collocation would sound more authentic with a fewer instances of the definite article

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most translations contained very few technical errors, and some contained none at all, demonstrating a generally high level in this Aspect.

153

Typographical errors and spelling mistakes such as “montly” instead of monthly; and “carreer” instead of career could have been avoided with more rigorous checking. A few candidates did not use the apostrophe correctly in English. For example, “teacher’s” where the meaning of the text indicates that the correct rendering should have been teachers’. An interesting observation is that word-processed scripts tended to have more spelling/typographical errors than handwritten ones. The handwritten texts contain more crossings out. This suggests that if the translator writes out the word and then sees it on paper, then it is then easier to spot errors than when reading on a screen. Recommendations to candidates: When Preparing for the examination, read widely in the target language. This is one of the best ways to improve translation skills and your style in the target language. Also read widely in the source language. Cultural knowledge is often cited as a must, but linguistic knowledge is also essential. There are different nuances of style specific to the many different countries where Portuguese is spoken. Ideally, a translator whose source language is Portuguese should have a general, if not in-depth, awareness of the different ways the language is used in each country. Make a careful choice about which reference books to take into the examination. Get used to how the books work before the day of the examination to avoid losing time on the day. Never guess an unknown term. An inaccuracy based on a guess is extremely bad practice in a professional translation situation. If you do not know the meaning of a specific word during the examination, try to paraphrase the entire sentence rather than introduce a concept that may not exist in the ST. Be wary of using words or terminology found in a bilingual dictionary. It is better to carefully consider the most appropriate word to use in the target language based on meaning, register and context, together with your knowledge of authentic discourse in the target language. The most useful reference books to consult during the examination, and whilst translating professionally, are good monolingual dictionaries. These are more useful than bilingual dictionaries for understanding the ST and producing a good translation. Check your text stringently. This is a vital skill for a translator. Ideally, check your work on a paper hard copy, as it is much more likely that errors will be picked up. For this reason it may be more prudent to write by hand in the examination scenario. If possible, choose a text for which you have background knowledge of the source country. If you are more used to reading Portuguese from Portugal, then avoid selecting a text from Brazil in the examination, as it is more likely to contain unfamiliar terms. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 69% (2011); 18% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance There was adequate comprehension of the source language and subject matter, but the translation would have been improved by a more fluid writing style in the target language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). There were no serious decoding errors or omissions in the transfer of information. The register was generally appropriate to that of the ST.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Although the information was accurately transmitted, the style of the text was sometimes awkward, with some lapses in grammar and coherence. For example, “It is no longer accepted” instead of it is no longer acceptable, which would be a more authentic collocation.

154

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Poor punctuation and spelling caused problems in this Aspect, though the errors tended to be minor and could have been avoided by careful checking. Recommendations to candidates: When preparing for the examination, concentrate on fine tuning your writing skills in the target language. During the examination, try not to adhere too closely to the word order of the source language. Think very carefully about whether collocations you use are appropriate and consider whether the text sounds as if it could have been originally written in the target language. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010)

-*-


155


RUSSIAN INTO ENGLISH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The majority of candidateswere very good, and there were no really poor translations. The two fails were largely caused by constant small errors, some careless, which could have been avoided, but which made the translations not professionally acceptable. The format of the passage for translation was, for the most part, conversation, which was naturally presented with punctuation and layout as accepted in Russian. This was quite challenging, because of the differences between Russian and English, but particularly so for the Fail candidates, affecting the punctuation used in English, but even more seriously, full comprehension of the passage. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) (line 23) – uchonogo zhuchka presented problems, with varying results for nearly all of the candidates. zhuchka is the diminutive of zhuk , meaning beetle, but has a secondary somewhat derogatory meaning – rogue, and the best translation in this context that was supplied, was probably “academic crank” and the worst “academic house-dog” which neither linked to the Russian actual meaning nor fitted the context. For other candidates, if the sense conveyed was close, it was treated as acceptable. (line 4) – kazalos’, tkni v nyego pokryepche pal’tsem presented most candidates with problems. It needed to be it seemed that if you poked him with your finger a bit more vigorously. It was not fully clear to some that the main conversation in the passage was between the Russian female journalist and a male Italian journalist, Julietto Chiesa, and there were translation problems, as well as of transfer of the Italian name in line 28 - K’eza needed to be Chiesa, whilst his title in line 42 gospodin needed to be Mr. or better Signor. An example of defective English phraseology occurred with the translation of line 9 Vavilonskuyu bashnyu, which has to be Tower of Babel, the accepted phrase in English, and not, for example, “a Babylonian tower”. Again, in line 11 vintikom has the meaning a little screw in another context, but in the context of in the global system of consumption it needs to be cog or little cog. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) All candidates performed acceptably, some very well, in this Aspect, with good organization and coherence with few grammatical errors. Even those who failed overall, because of failure in other Aspects, performed reasonably. One interesting area which caused minor problems for some was the interpretation of various verb forms. In line 20 otvyergnuv and sozdav are perfective past gerunds and therefore imply preceding action to the main verb of the sentence and need to be translated as having rejected and having created. In line 49 zakhvatili is perfective past which means the action is completed. As such it cannot be have been seizing as one candidate put it. It has to be translated as seized. In the same line kachayet is in the present tense, which means the action is still continuing, so has to be translated as have been pumping. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The differing use of capital letters in the two languages presented some problems. In line 6 katolicheskoy I pravoslavnoy tserkvyami clearly has no capitals in the Russian, but three are

156

needed in English – Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Similarly, in line 35 katolicheskoi tserkvi needs to be Catholic Church. In line 9 Vavilonskuyu bashnyu needs to be Tower of Babel. In line 15 Kul’t satany has a capital letter at the beginning of the sentence, but in English an article is required – the, so a capital is no longer required – The cult of Satan. In line 16 padre Pablo has to be Father Pablo in English. In line 20 Bozhiy sud has to be God’s Law or God’s Court. In line 26 one candidate used a capital wrongly to translate zhurnalist, presumably because it was followed by the journalist’s name – “Journalist Julietto Chiesa”. It needed to be the journalist Julietto Chiesa. Some candidates found difficulty in transliterating the Italian proper name K’yeza in line 27, which needed to be Chiesa. Recommendations to candidates Spelling can cause many errors. If you are unsure, a dictionary will quickly give you the accepted spelling. You should always have one available. Make sure you use the appropriate register at all times. This can only be established by reading through the whole passage. Your use of vocabulary must reflect the overall tone of the passage. Unit 01: Pass Rate 64% (2011); 54% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance Difficulties can be divided into two main areas: weakness in understanding technology in general and the type of language used to describe it, and syntax in either language. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The use of the extended adjectival construction posed problems. For example, the extended adjectival construction при одинаковом с классическим топливом ... выделении тепла эмиссия углекислого газа ... was incorrectly rendered as “compared to classic fuel … the output of heat emissions of coal gas” [inaccurate term]… . There is a syntactical/logic break between тепла and эмиссия. Candidates seemed to have difficulties in recognizing false friends or being brave enough not to use the ‘direct transfer’ word (granule/pellet; roll/bale). Weakness in understanding technology in general and offering a quite literal translation led to the production of sentences which failed to convey any meaning or lead the argument forward. For instance: “The direct burning of straw in rolls is impossible.” Or “… boiling enterprises and electro-stations work on granules at a communal level”. There were also problems with reducing more wordy Russian to simpler English: for instance, “technological preparation” rather than, for example, the technology for producing (Russian: технология изготовления) and “surrounding environment” for environment. The phrase прямое сжигание, rendered as “be burnt directly”, required elaboration, as “directly” is an ambiguous rendering. The candidate had to be aware of the need to make the translation understandable, as a stand-alone text, for a reader who might be learning about this technology. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) A typical problem for the candidates was the need for subject/verb inversion, to follow the more usual subject-verb-object pattern in English.

157

Another problem was the logic of sentences where the RU version begins he/she/it/they. The use of “they” etc as the subject of a sentence often gives no indication as to what “they” refers to, in the English version. In Russian, the gender provides the sense, but not in English. (One candidate wrote “Moreover they solve the problems…” which could have referred back to” alternative”, “manufacture” or “application” in the English rendering. The sense was lost. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There was some reliance on Russian punctuation, particularly the use of the long dash (—) which is used much more in Russian than in English. The handwritten scripts were legible and corrections were made clearly. Spelling mistakes could have been avoided by allowing time for proofreading (for instance, unnecessary/”uneceasary”). The use of the decimal point in English has to be understood, particularly for technical translation. Candidates should have mastered basic units of measurement (watts, volts etc) and abbreviations used. Recommendations to candidates Further reading of technical texts is recommended, to gain familiarity with the phrases and syntax commonly used. Candidates should also find the confidence to move away from direct and literal renderings. Sound technical knowledge, understanding of the syntax typically found in technical texts and an understanding of nuances in the target language are all required. Unit 2A: Pass Rate 67% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance With the exception of the candidate who obtained a Distinction, the other candidates were disappointing, making some careless mistakes and demonstrating some lack of knowledge of the current business situation. It needs to be stressed also that candidates’ English needs to be at a high level. Two candidates suffered as a result of basic grammatical errors. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There was a problem for nearly all the candidates with the Russian word kredit, which can mean both credit and loan in English, but the correct word needs to be chosen according to the context. In particular, in the plural it needs to be translated as loans, e.g. in line 9 – problyemnymi kreditami has to be problem loans not “problem credits”. Kredit appears in the source text (ST) eight times and so it was a significant problem. Also, it was important to distinguish between dolzhniki (debtors) in line 16 and zayomshchiki (borrowers) in line 15. The need for knowledge of specialist business terms is illustrated by line 6 – byezzalogovye kredity (unsecured loans) which was variously given as “tax-free loans”, “loans without mortgage” and “without collateral”. Similarly in line 5 – dokapitalizatsiya (recapitalisation) provided “topping up capital”, “pre-capitalisation” and just “capitalization”. It was important to make a correct translation of line 23 – dvizhimoye imushchestvo (movable property)which includes personal possessions, but not in this context where it referred to factory equipment or machines, and line 25 – nyedvizhimost’ (immovable property or real estate), because the author was stressing how the two could be treated differently by the law. A problem arose for some with line 45 – Vysshego arbitrazhnogo suda, because vysshiy means higher. However, in English it is normal to refer to the High Court.

158

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There was one excellent performance here by a candidate who failed in Aspect 1. Errors here were predominantly grammatical. The incorrect use of the definite and indefinite articles can mar an otherwise acceptable translation. Those who are non-native speakers of English have to be particularly aware of possible problems e.g. in lines 3-4 znachimoy dlya ekonomiki problemoy needed to be a significant problem for the economy and not “a problem significant for economy”. The meaning of economy (without an article) could be the act of being economical, but the economy, for instance, could be performing well or badly. There was a problem with English use of tenses: sequence of tenses in English means that in line 2 – stanut has to be would become not “will become” because it is sequential to pugali (feared). Similarly in line 21 – zalozhil needs to be had mortgaged not “has mortgaged”, because zalozhil is sequential to vyyasnilos’(it turned out). Lines 33-35 – Because the verbs otpravlyalsya, poluchal, vydaval are Imperfective Past, they are expressing regular or repeated occurrences in the past. To express this in English would send, would receive and would issue need to be used, not just normal past tenses. Line 15 revealed a rather strange usage: mnozhestvo is a singular noun in Russian, but if it is translated as a great many the usual verb following is in the plural – are not “is”. Line 24 – komu ugodno has to be to whomever not “to whoever” because who is not the subject of the sentence. Happily, only one candidate did not know this. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) All candidates performed well in this Aspect, with only minor punctuation errors - missing commas etc. One candidate gave autumn a capital letter – “Autumn” in the middle of a sentence. The only error in this Aspect for that candidate. Recommendations to candidates If attempting a semi-specialist option, it is important that candidates (i) read widely in that subject area, and (ii) have a specialist dictionary available. However, (ii) is not a substitute for (i). The problems in Aspect 1 with definite and indefinite articles and with tense usage in verbs can only be resolved by wide reading in English. It is recommended that newspapers and popular magazines are not the only choice, however, since they very often contain the same kind of grammatical errors and errors of usage that have been mentioned above. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 25% (2011); 80% (2010) UNIT 02C: LITERATURE General Report on Candidate Performance This text, taken from Dmitri Bykov’s novel Списанные, whilst not inordinately difficult, did contain a number of words/phrases which required a thoughtful and cautious approach to the task of translation. The ability displayed by candidates in this option ranged from good to outstanding. The most frequent failings were an inconsistent level of comprehension of certain parts of the ST which resulted in the inability to capture the most apposite wording, and also the tendency to adhere unduly to the syntactical structures of Russian which introduced a degree of clumsiness into the English of a number of candidates. Additionally, this being a literary translation, very few candidates dispalyed the courage to show their more creative side when faced with those parts of the text where literal translation was not possible. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any)

159

There were a number of words/phrases which were found difficult to negotiate by the majority of candidates, typically: всерьез уверял, что она платит ему взаимностью (line 9) mistranslated in once instance as “ he seriously believed that it would pay him in return” and which would be more correctly translated as, for example: he seriously believed it would return his affections. Почему, он не догадывался (line 18) was translated in one instance as “but he couldn’t suspect why” and which could be more appropriately rendered as but he couldn’t work out why. Отчаяния (line 26) is despair rather than “desperation”. The most challenging phrase for more or less all candidates was the proverbial sounding: больного хлебом не корми, дай поговорить именно с вольным (line 30/31). Indeed, some candidates appeared unsure as to whether or not this was a proverb, and thereafter, attempted to translate is as such. It is, in fact an idiomatic phrase, and as such, one which needs something of a creative rather than a literal approach. Words describing sounds (of the crow’s movements) were another source of difficulty: скреблась (line 20) is scratching rather than “grinding”: скрежетом scraping(sound), totally missed with “clicking”; and цоканем is clattering. Беспросветного (line 11) received varied renderings, for example “despondent”, “pitch dark”, “gloomy”. The word is used to describe the unremitting nature of an individual’s solitude and thus requires an English word which expresses the unending nature of that experience. An acceptable solution would be, for example relentless. Similarly, the phrase бесконечный пенсионный день (line 42/43) requires a phrase which captures the undertone of poignancy of the original which a number of candidates were unable to give. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The sentence structures of some candidates suffered occasional deterioration, typically where there were lapses in the level of comprehension and/or focus: “due to his gloomy and very lonely émigré existence” and “[it] scraped its claws along it stepping over and around the kitchen window”. The construction У Тэффи......описан tempted a number of candidates to adhere unduly to the syntactical structure of Russian producing the rather stilted: “in Teffi…..there is described” and in one instance, where the failure to comprehend becomes even more profound: “at Teffi’s….there was described”. Such lapses instance how vitally important it is for candidates, during the course of the examination, to maintain a self-critical and thoughtful approach to the task of translation and to check constantly the calibre of their writing in English. This, together with appropriate management of time, can go a long way towards avoiding the situation where there is insufficient time at the end for proofreading. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Most candidates had few or no problems in this Aspect. There were, however, one or two instances of candidates incorrectly transferring the hyphenation of собака-кошка-мышка (line 7) into English as “dog-cat-mouse”. Spelling was unproblematic for most with only one recorded instance: “loath” for loathe. Personal names were transferred without problem, with one exception, where the name Sviridov was given incorrectly throughout the translation as both “Svidorov” and “Svidirov”. Again this demonstrates the need for candidates to monitor what they write as they write. Recommendations to candidates In preparation for this examination the reading of a wide range of literary texts in both languages is essential, and in so doing candidates should constantly focus on the problematic aspects which the translation of literary texts from Russian pose for the translator, and should give due thought to how these might be solved. In literature especially, the translator is likely to encounter many allusions to both contemporary and classical culture. It is therefore vital that candidates be wholly familiar with the cultural, and indeed, historical traditions of Russia past and present. It is also vital that candidates work constantly on developing their knowledge of the registers of Russian and the range of subtleties and nuances which these are called upon to create. During the course of the examination candidates should ensure that they do three things:

160

read the text in its entirety before attempting any translation to ensure that they understand it and to identify any particularly problematic points in the text and to quickly formulate a strategy for handling them;

to monitor constantly what they write, as they write, to ensure that the translation is semantically, grammatically and technically correct and that sentence structures are cohesive and coherent;

to manage time appropriately allowing a sufficient window at the end to proofread the translation and make any corrections before handing in their script.

Unit 2C: Pass Rate 71% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The renderings offered would indicate that the meaning of the ST was not understood. There were many instances where the candidates seemed to have had difficulties in reading the source text accurately. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were problems with comprehension, accuracy and register. As regards terminology, the term строение in this context seemed to cause particular difficulty. The use of the extended adjectival construction was not recognised, as in, for example “which occurs continually in the cells of animals and plant organoids”. There were difficulties with transferring more figurative phrases, for example, the use of “power station” in the description of the function of mitochondria. Weakness in understanding technology in general and offering a quite literal translation led to the production of sentences which failed to convey any meaning or lead the argument forward. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were several instances of simple grammatical mistakes such as use of tense and singular/plural nouns. There was a tendency to stick close to the Russian; this resulted in stilted phrasing. Examples are “several tens of articles” and “within the framework of”. There were some odd phrases in the target language, and use of different levels of register, for example “to compete neck-to-neck” and “that which was dubbed”. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There was some reliance on Russian punctuation, particularly the use of the long dash (—) which is used much more in Russian than in English as is the comma before a subordinate (relative) clause. The handwritten scripts were legible and corrections were made clearly. Knowledge of the more usual UK surnames would also be useful, as part of general knowledge of the culture associated with the target language. Recommendations to candidates In-depth reading of basic science textbooks is recommended, to gain familiarity with the phrases and syntax commonly used. Books written for secondary school pupils are usually very clear, detailed and illustrated. Sound understandings of the basics of general science, understanding of the syntax typically found in scientific texts and an understanding of how to use more metaphorical language in the target language are all required.

161

General background reading is recommended to improve use of collocations and link words. Meticulous proofreading is also recommended. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 33% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance Overall performance was poor for this option, with nearly all candidates displaying an inconsistent level of comprehension and producing translations which were marred by frequent inaccuracies which served either to obscure or distort the meaning and, in many cases, fatally jeopardised the integrity and potential usability of the translations in a professional context. Additionally, the majority of candidates displayed a lack of due thought in their approach to the task of translation which manifested itself repeatedly in poor wording choices and clumsy use of English. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) The text contained a number of words and phrases which, not being literally translatable, required careful negotiation in order to produce an acceptable and meaningful English version. Годичный вариант несения срочной службы, one of the more challenging phrases, received a number of literal renderings, the most palpably inaccurate of which was “an annual variant of performing service for a fixed period” which, for an English readership, would signify very little. Similarly, обязательное прохождение всеми студентами военной службы was given in one instance as “the obligatory passing by all students of military service”. In each of these cases the original phrase must be appropriately reworked in order to create a version which is as comprehensible to an English readership as the original was to Russian readers. Conversely, the text contained a number of significantly less complex items for which candidates, notwithstanding, were unable to find the most appropriate choice of wording. It would appear that this was the result of widespread unfamiliarity with general military terminology. Typical examples are: повестки which was mostly translated as “summons” or “notice” but which the context made clear was call-up papers. Here candidates needed to let themselves be guided by the context rather than cling to the dictionary. One candidate only was able to give the correct translation of the admittedly deceptive призывной возраст as “the maximum age for conscription”. Here again the context gave the clue that it was the upper age limit which was being referred to rather than simply the “call up age” (signified by the phrase alone), which was the mistake of many. The vast majority of candidates displayed lack of understanding of the functionality of уже as a modal particle in temporal adverbs. This occurs twice in the text in the phrases уже этой осенью and уже в сентябре 2010 года respectively. The presence of уже signifies that the point in time in question will come much sooner than one may reasonably expect: as soon as this autumn and as early as September 2010 and not “already this autumn”, as given by many. As with many Russian texts, the examination text contained a number of institutional names and personal titles which caused difficulty to a number of candidates. Комитет Совета федерации по обороне и безопасности was given with varying degrees of inaccuracy, for example: “the committee for the defence and security of the Council of the Russian Federation”. МГУ имени Ломоносова , better known to the world as simply Moscow State University, and acceptable as such in the examination context, was to confound a number of candidates who attempted to capture the full grandeur of the Russian title as given in the text, which is wholly possible but requires restructuring in order to achieve it. “Moscow State University by the name of Lomonsova” is unduly wide of the mark. Заместитель начальника Генштаба given in one instance as “the Deputy Chairman of the General Headquarters” highlighted some candidates’ lack of familiarity with military titles. The titles of many Russian laws begin with the words закон о which would not be translated as law on the subject of… Accordingly, закон о воинской обязанности would be acceptably translated

162

as the Military Service Law rather than “the law regarding military service” as given in one instance. None of the candidates was able to find a suitable translation for в минобрнауки это предложение «аллергии не вызывает», the most problematic phrase of all. This idiomatic phrase with its resonances of smugness and cynicism would not stand literal translation as this would lose the colour and flavour of the original. Here candidates needed to draw on their creative powers and think up an English version which would embody the expressive nature of the Russian. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The principal failing in this Aspect was the poor phrasing which arose as a result of: (a) the tendency of some candidates to adhere unduly to the syntactical structures of Russian; (b) imperfect levels of comprehension which resulted in poor choices of wording and (c) inability to write grammatically correct English. Literal translation of phrase and structure of являться на призывные пункты, не дожидаясь повестки will produce an incoherent and stilted phrase: “ to appear at conscription points, not waiting for notification” The differential in phrasal hierarchy between Russian and English is a vitally important issue for translators who must recognise and make the necessary reorganisations in transferring the source message to the target language. Literal translation of both word and structure will inevitably compromise the integrity of phrasing as in: “in this, in the opinion of the military, are guilty both a demographic crisis and…..” Here the candidate has slavishly followed the syntactical structure of the Russian and translated every word with its primary dictionary definition. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Minor spelling errors. Typical examples: past tense of verb to lead given as “lead” instead of led; “Their being too great a number” instead of There being…. . “deputy chief of General Staff” instead of Deputy Chief of General Staff. Some personal names incorrectly transliterated: “Ozyrov” instead of Ozerov; “Sadovichi” instead of Sadovnichii; One or two problems with punctuation: “there is not one country in the world which retains conscription that has such a number” instead of there is not one country in the world, which retains conscription, that has such a number. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should understand that this examination requires a very high degree of fluency in both source and target languages. Moreover, candidates are well advised to ensure that their writing skills in English are at their very best as this is an essential skill for translators. Appropriate preparation for this examination is vital. Candidates should ideally pursue a course of study where there is the possibility of receiving regular feedback from a teacher. They should work constantly to enhance their speed and writing so that they are able to work quickly and accurately in the examination. The reading of a wide range of texts in both languages is essential so that candidates become familiar with typical language usage both on a general level and on a more specialised level in a broad range of subject areas. During the course of their reading candidates should be constantly aware of the problematic aspects which texts pose for the translator and give due thought to how these might be negotiated. Candidates should also take time to read one or two of the many publications on translation theory which can give helpful insights into the many issues involved in the work of translation and how these may be addressed especially in relation to the translation of Russian. In the examination candidates should ensure that they pay careful attention to time management. Adequate time should be allotted to read the paper and to consider the various issues which the examination text presents. The translation task set in the examination requires a thoughtful and analytical approach and candidates should review their work throughout. An appropriate amount of

163

time should be set aside at the end of the examination for proofing of translation before candidates hand in their scripts. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 43% (2011); 67% (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance Since this is a semi-specialised examination in law, candidates needed to adopt the formality of legal expression. Some candidates were unfortunately too informal in some of their phraseology, which, although basically correct in meaning, had to be penalised under appropriateness of rendering and lexis. Some candidates’ knowledge of the finer points in English was insufficient. It is important to stress that to succeed in this examination the finished translation needs to be professionally acceptable, and accuracy is absolutely essential. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Line 1 – smysl i tseli (the heading) presented problems, and it was necessary to read the whole passage through to realise that the author was initially going to explain the meaning (smysl) of blagodeyatel’nost’ (charity), and then later to present the aims/objectives (tseli). Lines 15 and 16 – yuridicheskikh lits is correctly translated as juridical persons or legal entities but some found it difficult – “organizations” is incorrect. Lines 18 and 51 – the abbreviations st.1 and st. 2 were wrongly translated as “paragraph” or “page”, because st. stands for stat’ya (article), so they needed to be Article 1 and Article 2. Line 20 – kampaniy was mistakenly read as “kompaniy” by two candidates and given as “companies” instead of campaigns. Line 37 – ukryepleniya mira. It was important to know that mir can mean world or peace, and in the context it is clear that the correct translation is the strengthening of peace not “the fortification of the world”, particularly when followed by druzhby I soglasiya (friendship and harmony). Line 50 – kul’tovogo can have the meaning of cult but in the context it needed to be translated by its other wider meaning – religious. Lines 54-55 – rukovoditelyey i sotrudnikov. Both words have several meanings in English, but in the context of the passage they had to be managers and employees not, for example, “leaders and colleagues”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) One candidate had problems with the use of definite and indefinite articles in English, which could be the subject of an entire treatise, but some examples may be enlightening. Line 10 – zakonom RF has to be by the law of the Russian Federation not “by the law of Russian Federation”. Line 24 – Blagotvoritel’naya deyatyel’nost’ osushchestvlyaetsya does not need an article in English because it is charitable activity in general, so “The charitable activity is accomplished” is incorrect. Line 44 – propagandy zdorovogo obraza zhizni has to be promotion of a healthy lifestyle not “of healthy lifestyle”. Another problem arising from different usages in Russian and English is that when there is list of nouns, adjectives or verbs, English requires that the last one be preceded by and or or. For example, line 31 predotvrashcheniya nyeschastnyky sluchayev has to be and of accident prevention. The remaining candidates performed well in this Aspect.

164

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The different usage of capital letters between Russian and English regularly arises, but a problem arose where candidates carelessly did not register that the headings in lines 1 and 52 were deliberately all in capital letters for effect, and that effect needed to be maintained in translation, hence meaning and goals and the ethics of charity. A more typical example of the kind of normal divergence of practice is seen in lines 18 and 51, where stat’ya is abbreviated to st. 1 and st.2. These need to be Article 1 and Article 2. The use of hyphens in English spelling is extremely difficult to explain logically in many cases, and one can only recommend checking in a reputable dictionary when there is uncertainty. Examples to be found in this passage are: line 5, where pereraspryedeleniye dokhodov has to be redistribution of income not “re-distribution of income”; line 53 – nyekommercheskogo has to be noncommercial and not “non-commercial”; line 60 – nyeetichnym cannot be translated as “non-ethical”. It would have to be nonethical, although it is easier to use unethical. Most candidates performed acceptably in this Aspect. Recommendations to candidates Candidates should be sure to leave time at the end of the examination period to read the source text carefully, to ensure they have not misread anything and to capture the overall flavor of the text, and then to read through their own version to check that it reads well as piece of English. This is also an opportunity to pick up any careless errors or misspellings. A good English dictionary is absolutely necessary for checking on spelling or possible alternatives to suit the context. Unit 3F: Pass Rate 60% (2011); 67% (2010)

-*-


165


SPANISH INTO FRENCH UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The passage for the general translation was a straightforward informative passage, where the focus was on the clear and accurate transfer of information for the French reader and presented few stylistic problems, other than ensuring clear and accurate phrasing. As the passage was intended to present Mercosur to a readership which was assumed not to know about the subject, there were few problems of background and cultural knowledge – other than recognizing for instance that Brussels referred to the EU rather than the town itself. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) No problems of comprehension were apparent, though the occasional problematic use of prepositions led to inaccuracy. On the whole the content of the source text (ST) was conveyed accurately and clearly for the intended reader. All of the proper names were handled well, including the acronyms, as were the inversions which are characteristic of Spanish phrasing. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) A key criterion for a quality translation is that it should read as a text originally written in the target language, and it should not be possible to detect that the text is a translation. This was achieved fairly successfully, though there were exceptions, and in particular where quotes were introduced, with inappropriate phrasing and incoherent use of tenses: “a exprimé hier” and “ajoute-t-il” where both should have been in the past; “a exprimé” was also a rather awkward choice of wording, as was ”d’après les propos du président”. It is important to get this kind of detail right, and careful reading of appropriate French material would show how this kind of thing is normally dealt with – through an inversion starting with “Selon…”, or using words such as “a expliqué”, “a asséné” etc. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) This was on the whole good, though it is useful to remember that where figures with more than four digits are concerned, a full stop is normally used, in order to facilitate reading, ie 20.000, 30.000 (but 2000) Recommendations to candidates Careful reading of relevant French material is very important, in order to pick up standard vocabulary and turns of phrase. This involves, not reading for the gist, but reading with a view to noting how things are normally phrased Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 02B: BUSINESS General Report on Candidate Performance As a whole, the text was reasonably understood and the message was reasonably conveyed, although with a little difficulty for this option, it would seem. candidates: *used a register below the one expected; *took a literal approach, resulting in some awkward phrasing and word associations; *made a number of technical and accuracy mistakes. The ability to produce a text in fluent and appropriate French is important in meeting the requirement of professional acceptability. Understanding the ST is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success.

166

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). More work must go into writing more precise and thorough French. Candidates used a register below the one expected for a text to be included in the financial section of a quality newspaper. For example: the candidate used "Mais s'il y a bien un secteur" instead of "Toutefois, s'il est bien un secteur..." The candidate used a few calques that lead to accuracy errors. For example: he / she wrote "bénéfices" instead of "avantages" for "beneficios" (line 4) The candidate should be more thorough and accurate. For example: he / she wrote "emprunt" instead of "crédit hypothécaire," for in line 31 Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Some French sentences were put together badly: for example "qui rendront… à la fin du mois". (line 12) Candidates sometimes rendered the text in a very literal way that led to some awkward word associations such as: "l'inconnue commence à se dégager" (line 14). Another way of phrasing this would be: "le brouillard entourant… commence à se dissiper" Transfer of names errors (1 - In French, we refer to people in a more formal way than in Spanish, therefore the candidate should have either added "Mme" or the ministers' first names in two instances; 2-incorrect rendering of 2 acronyms). There were a few problems of coherence, whether because the rendering wasawkward ("qui rendront… à la fin du mois" -line 12) or because the Spanish syntax was kept while, simply by turning the sentence around, it could have been expressed in more authentic French ("voit s'afficher sur sa facture" - line 26) Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Some technical mistakes mean that the text reads like a translation in some areas. Recommendations to candidates: The candidate should work towards improving his/her French so as to produce a better quality of writing and have the necessary confidence to distance himself/herself from the ST. Candidate could also benefit from studying more translation technique and French writing rules. Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03E: SOCIAL SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance The text was reasonably understood and the message was reasonably conveyed. However, the candidate: *used a register slightly inferior to that of the ST; *took a literal approach, resulting in some awkward phrasing and word associations; *made some technical and accuracy mistakes. The ability to produce a text in fluent and appropriate French is important in meeting the requirement of professional acceptability. Understanding the ST is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any). More work must go into writing more precise and thorough French. The candidate used "important" 4 times and "augmentation/augmenté" 3 times while using synonyms would have made the text richer.

167

Candidate made a few accuracy errors. For example, they wrote "important" instead of "croissant" for "creciente" (line 1) Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates took a literal approach that often led to awkward phrasing. For example, the candidate wrote : "L'avalanche… a inondé les classes… d'une infinité de pays." (line 27). Although the sense can be understood, the French sentence has been put together badly. Some renderings did not show appropriate constructions or good mastery of French. For example:

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) There are few independent mistakes that contribute towards the feeling of insufficient mastery of French. Recommendations to candidates: Candidate should work towards improving his/her French so as to produce a better quality of writing and have the necessary confidence to distance himself/herself from the ST. Candidate could also benefit from studying more translation technique and French writing rules. Unit 3E: Pass Rate 0% (2011); no candidates sat this option% (2010)

-*-


a. "d'une part" (line 10)… followed by "en deuxième lieu" (line 11). In French this should be either "d'une part... d'autre part" or "en premier lieu... en deuxième lieu";

b. "la dépendance sur" (line11) that should read "la dépendance envers".

168


SPANISH INTO GERMAN UNIT 01: GENERAL TRANSLATION General Report on Candidate Performance The text was straightforward, well written and did not contain any particular linguistic challenges (e. g. hidden "traps", or unclear writing). The main challenge of this text was to encode it correctly and idiomatically in the target language. None of the candidates had problems in comprehending the message of the source text (ST). Overall, the use of the target language and structure was up to standard, although all candidates at times followed the Spanish sentence structure too closely, which resulted in cumbersome sentences or phrases. None of the candidates committed serious errors. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were no register problems and no decoding errors. In this Aspect of performance candidates committed a number of lexical errors, not because of totally wrong choices that distorted the meaning but because they chose the wrong option in context. Examples: Repetition of the same verb in three subsequent sentences, e. g. darstellen (see example in Aspect 2 below). Lines 18-22: Para el bloque sudamericano, que cuenta con más del 20% de todo el ganado vacuno del mundo, el 35% de la producción de soja y que es el segundo mayor exportador de maíz, el mercado europeo es la puerta de entrada de productos alimentarios de calidad y gran valor añadido. China les compra básicamente materias primas a granel. Both candidates failed to interpret les correctly. Because this did not distort the meaning here, it was only marked as a lexical error. Candidate: “Für den südamerikanischen Block, welcher über mehr als ... verfügt und welcher den zweitgrößten Exporteur von Mais darstellt, ist der europäische Markt das Eingangstor zu ... China kauft bei ihm im Grunde Rohstoffe in Riesenmengen.” The second sentence contains two lexical errors: a) bei ihm: The reader will ask “from whom” (Bei wem?). ihm could refer to both der südamerikanische Block and der europäische Markt. Here the translator should have stopped, thought about the information in the preceding sentence and interpreted it in context. From a logical point of view les must refer to el bloque sudamericano, because China does not buy a high volume of basic commodities from Europe. b) básicamente: im Grunde is one meaning of básicamente but it does not fit the context here. Correct choices here are im Wesentlichen or hauptsächlich. Example for wrong meaning in context: Sólo quedarían fuera Venezuela, Ecuador y Bolivia. Candidate: “Ausgeschlossen wären nur Venezuela, Ecuador und Bolivien.” Correct: Fehlen würden nur Venezuela, Ecuador und Bolivien. Or: Nur Venezuela, Ecuador und Bolivien wären nicht mit von der Partie.

169

Or (in connection with the preceding sentence): ... (Zugang zu allen Märkten des iberoamerikanischen Wirtschaftsraums, außer zu Venezuela, Ecuador und Bolivien. Note: These countries are not intentionally excluded. Europe does not have the same access to them because they are just not part of Mercosur. 3. Line 40: viven inmersos en un juego de cruz y raya Candidate 1: “... zeigen eine Nichtbereitschaft zum Zusammenspiel, ...” Candidate 2: “... leben versunken in einem Katz-und-Maus-Spiel, ...” Correct: ... sind in ein Katz-und-Maus-Spiel verstrickt, ... Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) The candidates' mos daunting challenge was to phrase the translation correctly and well in the target language. All candidates sometimes adhered too closely to the source sentence structure. That is why they were not able to produce a correct and good German sentence. Sometimes the translator has to take a step back from the ST and rephrase a sentence differently in order to produce an idiomatic target sentence. Example: Line 22: Para Europa, Mercosur es la llave para introducirse en uno de los grandes mercados emergentes del mundo, como es el brasileño, y en Argentina, segunda economía sudamericana y tercera de América Latina. Candidate 1: “Für Europa stellt Mercosur den Schlüssel dar für den Eintritt in einen der großen wachsenden Weltmärkte wie dem brasilianischen Markt oder Argentinien, das die zweitgrößte Wirtschaftsmacht in Südamerika und die drittgrößte in Lateinamerika ist.” Candidate 2: “Für Europa stellt der Mercosur den Schlüssel zu einem der größten Schwellenmärkte der Welt, dem brasilianischen, und zu Argentinien dar, der zweitgrößten Volkswirtschaft Südamerikas und der drittgrößten Lateinamerikas.” Possible better solution: Für Europa ist der Mercosur der Schlüssel zu einem der weltweit größten Schwellenmärkte wie z. B. Brasilien und zu Argentinien, der zweitgrößten südamerikanischen und drittgrößten lateinamerikanischen Volkswirtschaft. The main challenges here were el brasileño and Argentina. But let us start from the beginning: 1. Verb: All candidates chose darstellen as a verb although this verb here complicates an already long sentence unnecessarily because it must be split into two parts when conjugated (stellt ... dar) and makes a long sentence even more difficult to encode. It would have been much easier to choose ist. Furthermore, both candidates repeated darstellen, which they had both already used in the previous sentence, and both candidates used the same verb again in the subsequent sentence, i. e. the same verb in three subsequent sentences! 2. como es el brasileño: By imitating the adjective in German, the translation became cumbersome. 3. y en Argentina: Here, Argentina was not a second example for an emerging market, so it had to be preceded by a "connector" back to the translation of “llave” (key) such as the preposition "zu" (“der Schlüssel zu a) .... und zu b) Argentinien, ..."). 4. Argentina, segunda economía sudamericana y tercera de América Latina.

170

A relative clause like “Argentinien, das ..... ist” makes this sentence unnecessarily long and is not necessary here. (Note: This was not marked as an error but should be pointed out). Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) All scripts were perfectly legible. There were very few spelling and/or punctuation errors. No candidate transferred the unit of measure correctly into the target language. All maintained the Spanish spelling: Example. ES: 20% Candidates: "20%" Correct: 20 % OR 20 Prozent German always requires a space between the number and the unit of measure! Recommendations to candidates Practice good writing in German, study books on how to write good German (Deutsch fürs Leben/Deutsch für Kenner/Deutsch für Profis by Wolf Schneider etc.) Always consider whether the order of the source sentence should be modified in the interest of greater clarity and authenticity in the target sentence. Ask yourself how you would rephrase the information of the sentence in question to a friend or colleague. When finished translating, take a step back and read the text with the eyes of a third party, without looking at the ST, in order to assess the translation in an objective way. Look for and correct repetitions in subsequent sentences. Unit 01: Pass Rate 100% (2011); 0% (2010) UNIT 02A: TECHNOLOGY General Report on Candidate Performance The source text (ST) did not contain any particular linguistic challenges (e. g. hidden "traps" orunclear writing). The main challenge of this text was to encode the technical content correctly and idiomatically in the target language. Candidate had no problems in comprehending the technical content of the text. In part of the translation the use of the target language and structure was up to standard, but in other parts the candidate at times followed the Spanish sentence structure too closely, which resulted in cumbersome sentences or phrases. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) There were no register problems and no decoding errors. In this Aspect of performance Candidate committed a number of lexical errors, not because of totally wrong choices that distorted the meaning but because she/he chose the wrong option in context. Examples: 1. Line 5: ...generando una avalancha de electrones. Candidate: “... und eine Elektronenkaskade bewirken.” Better possible solution: ..., wodurch eine Elektronenkaskade erzeugt wurde. 2. Lines 18/19: En experimentos posteriores, los nanotubos fueron recubiertos por una capa de combustible altamente reactivo...

171

Candidate: “In Folgeexperimenten wurden die Nanoröhren mit einer Schicht eines hochreaktiven Brennstoffs bedeckt.” Better possible solution: In Folgeexperimenten wurden die Nanoröhren mit einem hochreaktiven Brennstoff beschichtet. Candidate translated the expression un antes y un después literally, which does not mean much to the German reader. Lines 7/8: Este fenómeno no era conocido previamente y podría marcar un antes y un después en la concepción que tenemos hoy en día de producir electricidad. Candidate: “... könnte ein Vorher und ein Nachher im Verständnis darstellen, dass wir heutzutage von der Stromerzeugung haben.” This can be translated in different ways. One possible solution: ... könnte unser heutiges Verständnis der Stromerzeugung entscheidend verändern. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Candidates’ biggest challenge was to phrase the translation correctly and well in the target language. She/he adhered too closely to the source sentence structure. Spanish is a language that elaborately describes even technical facts, which is not the case in German. Technical German is straight-forward and to the point, and requires clearly stated facts. Sometimes the translator has to take a step back from the ST and rephrase a sentence in order to produce an idiomatic target sentence. Example: Lines 32/33: En cuanto a las aplicaciones que podría tener este descubrimiento, son complicadas de predecir exactamente, pero el Dr. Strano señala que quizá podría ayudar al uso de microdispositivos electrónicos... Candidate: “Die Anwendungen, die diese Entdeckung ermöglichen könnte, sind nur sehr schwierig genau vorherzusagen, aber Dr. Strano weist darauf hin, dass sie vielleicht zum Gebrauch von elektronischen Mikrovorrichtungen beitragen ...”

This is a totally literal translation whose actual meaning will be difficult for the German reader to figure out.

Possible better solutions: a) Es ist noch zu früh für konkrete Aussagen über mögliche Anwendungsgebiete dieser neuen Technologie, die laut Dr. Strano eventuell bei elektronischen Mikrovorrichtungen eingesetzt werden könnte...

b) Es ist schwer konkret vorherzusagen, bei welchen Anwendungen diese Technologie praktisch eingesetzt werden könnte. Dr. Strano meint, sie könnte eventuell bei ... verwendet werden.

Alternative translations for descubrimiento are Entdeckung, Forschungsergebnisse etc.

Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The scripts werer legible. They contained two minor punctuation errors.

Example: Line 2: ...un artículo en la revista Nature Materials en el que explican rigurosamente su descubrimiento;

172

Candidate: “... einen Artikel in der Zeitschrift Nature Materials, in dem sie ihre Entdeckung ausführlich erklären; ...”

Correct: einen Artikel in der Zeitschrift „Nature Materials“, in dem sie ihre Entdeckung ausführlich erklären....

Sometimes candidates cannot adopt the punctuation of the source language because it is used differently in source and target language. In German a period is much better in this sentence, a semicolon would not be used.

Recommendations to candidates Practise good writing in German, study books on how to write good German (“Deutsch fürs Leben”/”Deutsch für Kenner”/”Deutsch für Profis” by Wolf Schneider etc.).

Read lots of technical magazines, manuals, and other documentation in the target language. Familiarise yourself with technical writing.

Always consider whether the order of the source sentence should be modified in the interest of greater clarity and authenticity in the target sentence. Ask yourself how you would rephrase the information of the sentence in question to a friend or colleague.

When finished translating, take a step back and read the text with the eyes of a third party, without looking at the ST, in order to assess the translation in an objective way. Look. for repetitions in subsequent sentences.

Unit 2A: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010)

UNIT 02B: Business General Report on Candidate Performance A severe problem was candidates’s unfamiliarity with how to put things in the appropriate kind of German, which is very important in order to meet the requirement of professional acceptability. Although the basic meaning of the Spanish original was conveyed this is not a sufficient condition for success.

Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes if any Although the basic meaning of the original was conveyed candidates had some problems with comprehension, for example, when in line 7 tijeretazo de Fomento is translated by “Kürzung von Beihilfen”, but Fomento is the name of the Spanish Ministerium für Wirtschaftsentwicklung and when the text speaks of Corredor (line 34) the Spanish Minister of Housing is referred to, but the candidate does not show that this fact is known to him/her nor he/she gives an explanation to the German reader, this shows a serious lack of professionalism. The beginning of the Spanish original is written in a florid style which is not typical of German journalistic texts on economics. Of course it is possible to express such ideas through the use of images but not by translating them literally from Spanish as the candidate did when translating, for example, vislumbró brotes verdes (line 1) by hat eine Vorahnung von grünen Knospen, a more appropriate rendering could have been sieht erste Knospen treiben.

Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) There were only a few real grammar errors but candidates very often followed the patterns of Spanish sentence structure, which in German sounds awkward and clumsy and leads to a lack of cohesion. This refers mainly to the infinitive clauses as the excessive use of such structures leads to a lack of cohesion which is from this point of view one of the candidate’s most serious problems. Instead of “während andere beschlossen haben, die Erhöhung zunächst mittels ihrer Handelsspanne aufzufangen” a more appropriate and much more authentic rendering would have been während andere die Erhöhung mittels ihrer Handelsspanne auffangen wollen (line 22, pero otras ...). The translation given to algunos no dudaron en asegurar (“Einige zögern nicht zu

173

versichern”) does not sound German at all. These are only two examples of many Spanish sounding structures throughout the translation. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The legibility of the text is acceptable, as well as spelling, punctuation, accents, as there are only very few mistakes. With reference to the transfer of names please refer to Aspect 1, as there are some cases where the candidate failed to transfer the names in an appropriate manner, i.e. by giving an explanation to the minister’s name (Corredor), not even realising that it was a proper name (Fomento). Recommendation to candidates Candidates should leave time to read and understand the original before starting translation, not to be constrained by the structure of the original sentences but to build new proper and authentic German sentences. This is of special importance when translating images and idiomatic expressions. After finishing the translation the candidate should read the German text without reference to the Spanish original and ensure that the German text he has produced is authentic. The reading of business sections of German newspapers is a must.

Unit 2B: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010)

UNIT 03D: SCIENCE General Report on Candidate Performance This was a demanding paper, full of technical terms (Radiofrecuencia de Alta Potencia, cámara anecoica, diplexores, multiplexores, guías de onda). A good general education and a technical background with basic knowledge of (astro-)physics would have been helpful, because “educated guesses” were indispensable. Many of the technical terms do not appear in dictionaries; that is why a good understanding of the text and the subject matter was indispensable for the translation. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes, if any) Radiofrecuencia de Alta Potencia, the name of the new laboratory the text is about, is quite a “brainteaser” and in a similar German text the use of the English term (High Power Radio Frequency) would be probable. The candidate decided to translate it as “Hochleistungs-Radiofrequenzen”, which is understandable and acceptable. A better rendering would have been: hochenergetische Hochfrequenz-Strahlung. line 5: soporte vital para astronautas was rendered as “lebenswichtige Unterstützung für Astronauten”, but it is: Lebenserhaltungssysteme für Astronauten. Line 20: impulsor de proyecto was translated as “Promoter des Projekts”, which sounds too colloquial for the person it refers to. A solution would have been a paraphrase in German like: der das Projekt über Jahre vorangetrieben hat. Line 22: imprescindibles … para recibir los datos generados was translated as “unentbehrlich … für den Erhalt der gewonnenen Daten”, but it should be “unentbehrlich … für den Empfang der gewonnen Daten” or even “unentbehrlich … für die Datenübermittlung”. Line 24: … desde el centro se destaca que el problema radica en… was translated by the candidate as “wird im Zentrum hervorgehoben, dass …” But, a “centre” was not mentioned before in the text (so you cannot refer to it), and the following statement does not emphasise (“hervorheben”) anything. Line 31: ESA será el cliente … que suministre trabajo a la instalación was translated literally as “ESA werde der … Kunde sein, der die Einrichtung … mit Arbeit versorgt” which sounds rather strange. More usual would be mit Aufträgen versorgt instead of “Arbeit“.

174

Line 32.: Sin embargo, posteriormente y dada la creciente demanda de satélites, recibirá encargos de firmas privadas… -- again, translated quite literally, as “Jedoch werde sie angesichts der steigenden Nachfrage nach Satelliten später Aufträge von Privatunternehmen erhalten…” A better choice would have been: Jedoch werden für die Zukunft Aufträge von Privatunternehmen erwartet. Line 40: Finalmente, y tras entregar el testigo a Valencia, … was translated as “Und zum Abschluss nach Übergabe der Sonde in Valencia” which is a serious misinterpretation: El testigo, in this context, is der Staffelstab. The sentence, in German, could be: Zum Abschluss, nachdem der Staffelstab an Valencia übergeben wurde… Line 41: Sentenció, in this context, is not “urteilen”, but rather formulieren (i.e. einen Sinnspruch) or zu dem Schluss kommen. The sentence it refers to, was: … sin estos laboratorios, el espacio no existiría which is an aphorism rather than a “judgement”. Aspect 2: Grammar, organisation of work (cohesion and coherence) Line 13: Será allí donde los investigadores prueben y certifiquen la fiabilidad, en el espacio exterior, de componentes como filtros, diplexores, multiplexores, guías de onda, circuitos y sobre todo antenas. was translated as: “Dort werden die Forscher die Zuverlässigkeit im Weltraum von Komponenten prüfen wie Filter, Diplexer, Multiplexer, Wellenleiter, Stromkreise und vor allem Antennen.” which sounds rather awkward because of the syntaxi.A better translation would have been: Dort werden die Forscher Komponenten wie … auf ihre Zuverlässigkeit im Weltraum prüfen. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) Punctuation, spelling etc. were faultless. Recommendations to candidates You should have a technical background or at least a certain interest of the subject matter if you choose the science option. Unit 3D: Pass Rate 100% (2011); no candidates sat this option (2010) UNIT 03F: LAW General Report on Candidate Performance When translating texts on foreign legal systems it is a must to give a short explanation to the reader of the legal institutions and concepts of this legal system or just by introducing the main concepts in this case, Argentinian. This is very important to meet the requirements of professional acceptability. Candidate did not follow this rule. Therefore and because of some mistranslated key concepts (e.g. analizar) the reader does not realise from the beginning what the text is dealing with. This reveals the candidate’s unfamiliarity with legal topics and concepts. Aspect 1: Comprehension, accuracy and register (appropriateness of rendering and lexis & translators’ notes if any Although the basic meaning of the original was conveyed candidate fails to use the correct German equivalents for concepts such as, for example, cámara, trabar, analizar, formalidades. The mistranslation of analizar, which is a kind of key concept in this text, (“auswerten” instead of prüfen) makes it very difficult for the reader to understand what the text is dealing with. The translation given would be correct in another context but here the only possible translation is prüfen. The legal expression sentar una doctrina is translated by “Doktrin festsetzen” which is not intelligible in a German text; the correct term is Rechtsprechung begründen. These two examples are right at the beginning of the text (line 1 and 2). Another mistranslated term is congreso, which is to be translated by Abgeordnetenhaus and not by “Kongress” which means conference or congress. Another mistranslation is “Vorführung als Kläger” instead of Auftreten als Kläger. An example of the wrong register is the use of “rächen” instead of the more appropriate revanchieren. It is not appropriate to use the pronoun es when referring to the court.


175

There are only a few real grammar errors but the candidate very often follows the patterns of Spanish sentence structure, which in German sounds awkward and clumsy. Furthermore, legal language is characterised not only by specific terms but also by a specific nominal structure. But the candidate follows Spanish sentence structures. The excessive use of German infinitive and relative clauses leads to a lack of cohesion of the text, which does not sound authentic. For example, “Hierbei handelt es sich um eine Entscheidungen, die dazu bestimmt sind [...] ausgewertet zu werden.”: The relative clauses and the following infinitive construction can be easily omitted in German by using the future tense: Hierbei handelt es sich um eine Entscheidung, die [...] werden wird. This is just one example of the lack of cohesion in the German translation. The wrong use of the tense in “wofür es keine andere Möglichkeit als die Aufhebung gegeben hat” instead of “die zu einer Aufhebung des Gesetzes führen würde” shows a slight misunderstanding of this part of the text. Twice the candidate uses the wrong tense in German indirect speech. Aspect 3: Technical points (spelling, punctuation, accents, transfer of names, figures, dates, legibility etc.) The legibility, spelling and accents are acceptable. The use of the colon and how to start the following sentence differs between Spanish and German, and the candidate follows the Spanish usage in the German text. With reference to the transfer of names please refer to General Report, as there are some cases where the candidate failed to transfer the names in an appropriate manner, i.e. by giving a short explanation of the foreign institutions. Recommendation to candidates Candidate should leave time to read and understand the original before starting translation, to not adhere too closely to the original sentences and their structure when translating but to build new authentic German sentences. After finishing the translation the candidate should read the German text without reference to the Spanish original and check to see whether the German text he has produced is authentic. It is very important to give a reference to the reader about the legal system the text is dealing with. It is important to respect the nominal structure in German legal texts as well as to use the correct names of legal concepts and institutions. There are plenty of examples online of German and Spanish court sentences and other legal documents and there are introductions to German legal language and style.

Unit 3F: Pass Rate 0% (2011); 0% (2010)

-*-


diptrans examiners' reports for small entry languages 2011

Documents