On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 11:19:42 +0000 (UTC),
Uncle Davey <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>
> news:slrnc2to36.18c.mightymartianca@namibia.tandem...
>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 02:23:22 +0000 (UTC),
>> Uncle Davey <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > news:slrnc2tjks.1ak.mightymartianca@namibia.tandem...
>> >> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 00:29:13 +0000 (UTC),
>> >> Uncle Davey <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > news:slrnc2stmj.170.mightymartianca@namibia.tandem...
>> >> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 18:02:49 +0000 (UTC),
>> >> >> Uncle Davey <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > news:hens209vg2g72vedir0cpcdeuauumfssak@4ax.com...
>> >> >> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:00:37 +0000 (UTC), "Uncle Davey"
>> >> >> >> <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >U?ytkownik "Mujin" <baka@hornedking.com> napisa? w wiadomo?ci
>> >> >> >> >news:bgfs20li5pnobgeaub6l0bfdpvt2fkuh2h@4ax.com...
>> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:41:14 +0000 (UTC), "Uncle Davey"
>> >> >> >> >> <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >U?ytkownik "Mujin" <baka@hornedking.com> napisa? w wiadomo?ci
>> >> >> >> >> >news:2ttq2099jts2u65hin31nbethpibnv30qv@4ax.com...
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 01:13:35 +0000 (UTC), Cheezits
>> >> >> >> >> >> <cheezits32@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >[etc.]
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> He said "Alexey, you didn't translate what I said". To
>> > which
>> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> translator said. "No, I translated what you OUGHT to
> have
>> >> > said."
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sometimes good translation is like that.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >That is not good translation. That is lying.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> That's not any kind of translation, actually. It's the
> kind
>> > of
>> >> >> >> >> >> distortion that can lead to a professional association
>> > certified
>> >> >> >> >> >> translator suddenly becoming an uncertified translator, if
> you
>> >> > take
>> >> >> > my
>> >> >> >> >> >> meaning. Clients aren't paying for paraphrasing.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >In what country?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> In any country in which I have worked as a translator.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >You obviously haven't heard of 'dynamic equivalence'.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I certainly have - but paraphrasing isn't dynamic equivalence.
>> > In
>> >> >> >> >> your "parable" the intended message of the client was
> drastically
>> >> >> >> >> changed as a result of paraphrase. The point of dynamic
>> > equivalence
>> >> >> >> >> is to replace highly idiomatic or culturally specific (and
>> > therefore
>> >> >> >> >> poorly interchangeable) terms with terms which, while having
>> >> > different
>> >> >> >> >> literal meanings, carry roughly the same nuance. Thus, one
> would
>> >> > not
>> >> >> >> >> translate the Japanese term "kusojiji" as "stinky grandfather"
> in
>> >> >> >> >> English - although the literal meaning is obviously intended
> as
>> > an
>> >> >> >> >> insult, it doesn't have any particular meaning. "Old fart"
> would
>> > be
>> >> >> >> >> closer to the intended meaning - and of course would not be
>> >> > translated
>> >> >> >> >> as "furui he" in Japanese since it doesn't really mean
> anything
>> >> >> >> >> (although the intent is obvious).
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Naturally, dynamic equivalence can be applied to larger
>> >> > constructions
>> >> >> >> >> as well, but the intent of the original author should never be
>> >> >> >> >> changed. This is why interpreters often serve as cultural
>> >> > consultants
>> >> >> >> >> for their clients - cutting off inappropriate modes of
>> > communication
>> >> >> >> >> before they start. I have on more than one occasion advised
>> > clients
>> >> >> >> >> on the most culturally appropriate approach to a meeting, and
> of
>> >> >> >> >> course I always use dynamic equivalence to properly render the
>> >> >> >> >> client's idioms where I think it's appropriate.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> But actually changing the client's meaning? That would be a
> lie.
>> >> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> >> K
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >In this case, it involved the use of higher skills. Would you
>> > rather
>> >> > lie
>> >> >> > or
>> >> >> >> >be an accessory to murder?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I would rather stop interpreting and recommend to the client he
>> >> >> >> moderate his language as the terms he is using are likely to
> provoke
>> > a
>> >> >> >> violent reaction in his audience than violate my contract (and
>> >> >> >> possibly commit fraud depending on local laws) by presenting a
>> >> >> >> translation that is not true to both the literal meaning and
> intent
>> > of
>> >> >> >> the original.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> But then I require clients to provide me with a precis of
>> >> >> >> presentations/speeches ahead of time, followed by a consultation
> on
>> >> >> >> appropriate modes of delivery for the audience. I don't
> personally
>> >> >> >> know a translator who doesn't follow this procedure for public
>> >> >> >> speaking engagements.
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> K
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > This guy worked for the factory. What could he do?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Since your little parable has nothing at all to do with the lies and
>> >> >> distortions produced by Philip Johnson or spread by Jason Gastrich,
>> > what
>> >> >> difference does it make?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Well, I know. Christians like yourself fear the truth. You fear
> that
>> >> >> those foolish enough and small enough in self-worth that they
> actually
>> >> > look
>> >> >> up to you as some sort of spiritual guide will find out that
> evolution
>> > is
>> >> >> not anti-god, and that evolutionary researchers and theorists do in
>> > fact
>> >> >> accept what they write.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In a way, I feel sorry for people like you, Jason and Johnson.
> You're
>> >> > world
>> >> >> view is dying, and I guess like the guy at the factory, rather than
>> > facing
>> >> >> reality, you will spread lies and distortions, because that's all
> that
>> > is
>> >> >> left to you. Science started leaving your type behind centuries
> ago,
>> > and
>> >> > I
>> >> >> figure there's not much more than a century or so left before the
> few
>> >> >> Biblical literalists are curiousities on the same order as the
> Amish.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But make no mistake, Davey, you are producing apologetics for lies.
>> > The
>> >> >> early Christian martyrs didn't pretend to worship Roman gods so as
> not
>> > to
>> >> > be
>> >> >> executed. They had the convictions of their beliefs.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Aaron Clausen
>> >> >>
>> >> >> tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @)
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Since when was Amish a major force in US politics?
>> >>
>> >> Evasion noted. Don't you ever get tired of running?
>> >
>> > I just made a point which you evaded by saying 'evasion noted'.
>> >
>> > You then go on about morals and ethics and honesty, and all the time I'm
>> > wondering whether anyone can make an ironymeter tough enough to
> withstand
>> > the extreme conditions imposed by Mr Clausen.
>>
>> Again you question my integrity. Do you have any reason to doubt my word?
>> And even if I were the biggest liar on this newsgroup, how would that make
>> Jason and Philip Johnson any less liars?
>>
>> But why are trying to impune my character, Davey? When I have been
>> dishonest with you?
>
> Dishonesty is something you are very sensitive too when you perceive it on
> our side, and virtually oblivious to when it happens on your side.
MY side? You're impuning my character for no good reason.
>
> Now I am basically an intellectually honest person,
You mean someone who utilizes sexually perverted sockpuppets and forges
posts is intellectually honest?
>so I have to admit that
> almost no-one, including myself, is free of bias. But you still rant on
> about lies every time one of us does something you don't like, and overlook
> your own side's dishonesties,
Even if everyone here is a liar, why does that make the lies on Jason's
website good?
> such as Lenny saying I haven't answered his
> questions when all but the coral one was answered the best I can.
Your answers simply do not fit any evidence. You have just made them up to
fit your preconceptions.
>
> I think that makes you less intellectually honest than you think you are,
> and it might be good for you to take a look in the mirror too.
You called me a liar and I demand to know why you think *I* am. I'm not
talking about Lenny or anyone else. Why did you call me a liar?
>
> I say this in a friendly way, for your own good as well as mine.
Fuck off, Davey. Answer the question or retract your accusation. Be a
Christian for once.
--
Aaron Clausen
tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @)
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 |
| 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 |
| 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 |
| 180 | 181 |
|