RE: Errors in original text
The following two posts of mine received no comment and/or response from either a moderator or a colleague. I am interested to know if when a grammatical error is perceived is it incumbent upon one to translate the message in its improper form or is it recommendable to simply translate it in a proper grammatical context. Also, I would like an opinion on the following. I assert that the reference below is to a single fact consequently, these statements are true. [That there are two types of farmland is a fact (singular). It is a fact (singular) that there are two types of farmland.] None of the other posts seem to have given consideration to the error and proceeded to translate the statement in its improper state. Is that appropriate or acceptable? I am simply trying to determine whether the most precise translation possible is the desired end or whether mistakes in the text to be translated are to be processed unedited.
Quiero ofrecer lo siguente para su consideracion:
In the real world there are more than two types of farmland (“there are more than two types of farmland” comprises one fact).(Consequently “this fact complicates…" is the appropriate assertion) All these facts complicate what happens in reality; (Ditto for, ”it slows…”)they slow down the shift in bargaining power, alter the absolute numbers involved, and put a brake on sudden movements in rents.
ERGO:
En el mundo real hay más de dos tipos de tierras de labranza. Este hecho complica lo qué sucede en realidad; retrasa la fuerza de regatear, altera los números absolutos implicados, y enfrena los súbitos movimientos de alquileres.
Una Pregunta
Estoy interesado en su opinión. Quero saber si el énfasis está en la traducción o en la interpretación y si hay una distinción entre los dos. ¿También, es la representación apropiada del singular o del plural apropiada o necesaria al evaluar el texto inglés para transformarlo en español? Mi discusión se basa en la premisa que la copia inglesa debe estar de una naturaleza correcta, si no un error tal como la aplicación errada de un adjetivo plural a un sustantivo singular dará lugar al texto que sigue para ser también incorrecto.
should translators correct grammar mistakes?
"I am interested to know if when a grammatical error is perceived is it incumbent upon one to translate the message in its improper form or is it recommendable to simply translate it in a proper grammatical context"
As a rule, the MESSAGE in an informative/technical text is of utmost importance. I would translate the message, rather than the grammatical inconsistancy. The grammar mistake made in English is minor and does not cause the reader to infer the wrong meaning, so the Spanish should convey the same message in the correct grammar. The only time I carry over a grammatical error is when the MESSAGE is clouded by the grammatical mistake in the original language. Then, as a translator, it is my job to transfer the same change in meaning to the target language.
"Also, I would like an opinion on the following. I assert that the reference below is to a single fact consequently, these statements are true. [That there are two types of farmland is a fact (singular). It is a fact (singular) that there are two types of farmland.] None of the other posts seem to have given consideration to the error and proceeded to translate the statement in its improper state. Is that appropriate or acceptable? I am simply trying to determine whether the most precise translation possible is the desired end or whether mistakes in the text to be translated are to be processed unedited"
Same as above. Translate it into correct Spanish because there is no change in meaning and the text is informative in nature. If it were a novel, and the author was trying to show that the narrator was not the best speaker, then I would maintain the error in the Spanish. But this is not the case here.
"In the real world there are more than two types of farmland (“there are more than two types of farmland” comprises one fact).(Consequently “this fact complicates…" is the appropriate assertion) All these facts complicate what happens in reality; (Ditto for, ”it slows…”)they slow down the shift in bargaining power, alter the absolute numbers involved, and put a brake on sudden movements in rents"
Actually, "they" in this case is Ok because it is refering to "facts". The only real error is in the sentence that starts with "All these facts" because more than one fact was not mentioned. It is more of a style error. Maybe the person who wrote the original text was not a completely fluent writer. In any case, I would just suggest keeping the same regisiter but not transferring the mistake into Spanish. .
"Una Pregunta
Estoy interesado en su opinión. Quero saber si el énfasis está en la traducción o en la interpretación y si hay una distinción entre los dos"
You must be faithful to the text, first, and should not interpret from the text more than is mentioned. It is the reader's reponsibility to interpret the text. In the case you mentioned, it seems to be a pretty straightforward text, so there isn't too much "reading between the lines" anyway.
"¿También, es la representación apropiada del singular o del plural apropiada o necesaria al evaluar el texto inglés para transformarlo en español? Mi discusión se basa en la premisa que la copia inglesa debe estar de una naturaleza correcta, si no un error tal como la aplicación errada de un adjetivo plural a un sustantivo singular dará lugar al texto que sigue para ser también incorrecto"
I think you are focusing too much on grammatical form, when the translation should be faithful to the original MESSAGE, not necessarily the grammatical structure. I am not saying to change all the words completely, or distort the message with new grammar. It is just important to have the translation flow, while being as faithful as you can to the original text.
