Topics in Language Resources for Translation ... - ymerleksi - home

Chapter 7. CAT tools in international organisations 109readers. The sentence starting with (1) should not be translated into French by (2)no matter how common that phrase is but by (3):(1) the report shows(2) le rapport montre que(3) il ressort du rapport queSimilarly the structure in (4) should be avoided and replaced by (5) or (6) butpractice may be quite inconsistent in documents:(4) the law says(5) the law provides(6) the law stipulatesNo matter how carefully texts are prepared and processed, variation slips in thatlimits the usefulness of CAT tools, which would propose ad infinitum less acceptableconstructions found in document corpora. Translators in haste may only keepthe first instance proposed by CAT tools and disregard other instances of the samephrases found subsequently, knowing that phrases in (2) and (4) look correct froma grammatical point of view. In (2) the use with a non-animate subject of a verb inFrench which requires an animate subject is non-grammatical, though the mistakeis quite common in every day speech; in (4) usage prevails though (5) and (6) arerecognised by native speakers of English as preferred in a United Nations context.The same would apply in this particular case in French.2.1.2 Resistance to standardisationTranslations serve the purpose of a specific communication need and should notbe considered as models for translators to replicate across the board. Such is alsothe case for terminology in any target language. Mere electronic bilingual dictionariesor glossaries cannot satisfactorily capture variation, not only in the originallanguage but also in the target language, if based upon the assumption that anotion corresponds to a term in English and one or several terms in French,for instance. Names given to human rights are a case in point. A terminologistwould very happily collect the names of all rights, starting with the right to food,to adequate housing, and to education, while a translator would resent it. Suchrights are indeed referred to under different names by different speakers, and atoo rigid list of rights would miss the needed subtleties while discussions are stillunder way. Should “adequate housing” be rendered in French by “logement convenable,”“logement adéquat,” “logement suffisant,” or “logement satisfaisant,” allfour equivalents being found in United Nations legal instruments or resolutions,and not by “bonnes conditions de logement” or “se loger convenablement” whenthe context allows or requires it? Translators want to preserve flexibility, when