Journalistic Exaggeration?

[louis]

I'm trying to translate a Kyodo news editorial centering around a
speech made by President Medvedev recently.

Here is the first paragraph of the article:

ロシアのメドベージェフ大統領が、ウランバートルで開かれたノモンハン事件７０周年に参列し「第２次大戦の勝利の本
質をすり替える議論は許し難い。断固として対抗する」と語った。

Here is the only part of the translation on the Kremlin website which
seems to correspond:

I am very pleased to take part together with you in these celebrations
marking the seventieth anniversary of the
victory in the battle of Khalkhin Gol. This anniversary is very
clearly an event of equal significance for Russia and
Mongolia. We both remember this brief but cruel war, and the heroic
events it inspired. We remember how Soviet
and Mongolian forces fought for a just cause, selflessly defending
their own peoples’ freedom. It is for this very
reason that, as the President of Mongolia said just now, we consider
unacceptable attempts to falsify history and
change this victory’s essence.

http://eng.kremlin.ru/speeches/2009/08/26/1525_type82914type84779_221232.shtml

It seems clear that the Kyodo journalist has exaggerated. Medvedev is
referring to the Nomonhan incident itself, a
battle which took place (just) before the beginning of the second
world war. Further, I cannot see which part of the
president's speech should correspond to 断固として対抗する. ('we consider
unacceptable' is presumably 許し難い)

I have something of a translator's dilemma - I'm meant to be
translating what the Kyodo journalist wrote, but doing
so would seem to represent Medvedev unfairly! The rest of the piece
is something of a warning about the dangers
of Russian historical revisionist tendencies.

Does anyone have experience of these kinds of cases? Any advice warmly
appreciated!

Louis Barson

[jmarc...@comcast.net]

Louis,

It seems to me you may be jumping to an unwarranted conclusion here. Is the speech and English translation on the Kremlin website itself an accurate representation of what Medvedev said? Or has it been toned down for official reasons? Anyone who has followed the career of Vice President Biden - or Prime Minister Berlusconi, for that matter - is well aware that some politicians shoot from the hip or say some embarrassing thing in public, and then the government is forced to scurry around afterwards downplaying or rephrasing the controversial or offensive remarks for long-term public consumption. 

It could well be that the Kyodo journalist has more accurately related what Medvedev actually said on the spot. 

Not sure if this helps, but it is worth considering as a prior question.

John Marchioro

[Mika Jarmusz]

のみばかりでなく→のみならず

Mika Jarmusz 清水美香
English to Japanese Translator
http://inJapanese.us

[Kirill Sereda]

Louis, I looked at all the related Russian materials on Medvedev's website (the joint press-conference, the reports on the talks, various addresses at the commemorative events, telegrams sent by Medvedev, what was said during meetings with veterans, etc.) and could only find this sentence, which corresponds to what you have found on the English webpage:

"И именно поэтому мы также считаем недопустимыми фальсификации, разговоры, которые меняют суть этой победы, о чём сейчас очень точно сказал Президент Монголии."
("And that is exactly why we too consider falsifications and pronouncements that alter the essence of this victory as unacceptable, as the Mongolian President has just so rightly said.")

There is no "断固として対抗する" on the Russian side. Obviously, considering the general tenor of the editorial, the editors either had no competent translators or decided to lay it on a little thicker. In this case, I wonder why the editors did not write something like: "Banging his shoe on the table in protest, Medvedev yelled...". That would be even more dramatic :))

Anyway, I would simply add a note saying that while there is a corresponding phrase in official Russian materials related to the Mongolian visit, the Japanese rendering of the Russian is inaccurate.

Kirill

-----Original Message-----
From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of louis
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 10:22 AM
To: Honyaku E<>J translation list

[Laurie Berman]

On Sep 7, 2009, at 12:21 PM, louis wrote:

>
> I have something of a translator's dilemma - I'm meant to be
> translating what the Kyodo journalist wrote, but doing
> so would seem to represent Medvedev unfairly! The rest of the piece
> is something of a warning about the dangers
> of Russian historical revisionist tendencies.

I would say that how you approach it depends on the purpose of the
translation. If the piece is going to be published in an English-
language media outlet of some sort, then I think one must place top
priority on representing the speaker accurately. Translating a
translation is not a good way to ensure accuracy, and I avoid it
wherever possible.

Also, if the text is politically sensitive, you want to be especially
careful about leaving yourself open to finger pointing ("it's the
translator's fault"). So, unless this is a special case (for example,
you are helping someone gather intelligence on trends in the Japanese
media), and unless using the Kremlin's translation destroys whatever
point the writer is making, I would advise using the Kremlin's
translation, appending a note to explain why you did so. If it the
sort of special case I mentioned, be as faithful as possible to the
original and append a note directing the reader to the Kremlin's
English translation.

Laurie Berman

[Alan Siegrist]

Louis writes:

> ロシアのメドベージェフ大統領が、ウランバートルで開かれたノモンハン事件
> ７０周年に参列し「第２次大戦の勝利の本質をすり替える議論は許し難い。
> 断固として対抗する」と語った。
>
> Here is the only part of the translation on the Kremlin website which
> seems to correspond:
>
> I am very pleased to take part together with you in these celebrations
> marking the seventieth anniversary of the victory in the battle of

> Khalkhin Gol. ... we consider unacceptable attempts to

> falsify history and change this victory’s essence.
>
> http://eng.kremlin.ru/speeches/2009/08/26/1525_type82914type84779_221232.s
> html
>
> It seems clear that the Kyodo journalist has exaggerated. Medvedev is
> referring to the Nomonhan incident itself, a battle which took place
> (just) before the beginning of the second world war.

I don't know about any exaggeration, but I am concerned that in the English
text, Medvedev is referring to victory in the Nomohan incident (Battle of
Khalkhin Gol), but in the Japanese translation of the quote, Medvedev is
quoted as referring to victory in the Second World War.

This appears to be some sort of error. I wonder what he said in the original
Russian.

Regards,

Alan Siegrist
Carmel, CA, USA

[Laurie Berman]

On Sep 7, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Laurie Berman wrote:

> If it the
> sort of special case I mentioned, be as faithful as possible to the
> original

[by which I meant, faithful to the Japanese]

However, as I said, for journalism purposes, you want the quotation
to be accurate, and in this case
I can't see how going with the Kremlin's English is going to cause
you any problems.

(As a general pointer, one can sometimes fudge quotations of dubious
accuracy by leaving the dubious parts outside of the quotation marks.)

Laurie Berman

[Kirill Sereda]

Alan, you are absolute right, 第２次大戦の勝利の本質をすり替える is definitely an error. The Russian speech specifically refers to attempts at re-interpreting the Battle of Khalkhyn Gol, not to the victory in WWII.

Kirill

[Minoru Mochizuki]

I suppose this discussion should have been initiated by a
Russian-to-Japanese translator.
It is futile to compare a Japanese translation with an English translation
of a statement made in Russian.
If the president is as good in English as the previous Russian president, I
would have considered that the president made his speech in English. I would
say no English-to-Japanese translator should have any place in such a
discussion.

Minoru Mochizuki

----- Original Message -----
From: "louis" <louis....@gmail.com>

[Carl Freire]

Hi Louis,

At 9:21 AM -0700 9/7/09, louis wrote:
>I'm trying to translate a Kyodo news editorial centering around a
>speech made by President Medvedev recently.

><snip>

>It seems clear that the Kyodo journalist has exaggerated. Medvedev is

><snip>

>I have something of a translator's dilemma - I'm meant to be
>translating what the Kyodo journalist wrote, but doing
> so would seem to represent Medvedev unfairly! The rest of the piece

<snip>

While you have received numerous useful comments and confirmation of
your suspicion that Kyodo's writer exaggerated, everyone so far has
missed the point. You are translating _what the Kyodo journalist
wrote_, and if s/he exaggerated in his/her own translation of
Medvedev then so be it (equally possible: the writer was working off
of someone else's translation and did not know any better). That
perhaps deliberate mistranslation will be equally revealing to those
who examine the record in the future and compare the evidence.

That said, someone some where along the line has already suggested
footnoting it and indicating Kyodo's version of the remark may be
off; that's probably the best approach since you do want to "correct"
the Japanese. The editorial writer worked with that version of the
quote for whatever reason and shaped all or part of his/her piece
around that version of the quote, and so it has to stand for the
article to maintain consistency. Your client can decide whether or
not to keep the footnote.

Cheers,
Carl
--

**********

Carl Freire
cfreire /[@]* ix.netcom.com
Tokyo, Japan

[Carl Freire]

At 9:13 AM +0900 9/8/09, Carl Freire wrote:
>off; that's probably the best approach since you do want to "correct"
>the Japanese. The editorial writer worked with that version of the

ARGGGHHH!!!! That should read, "since you do NOT want to 'correct'
the Japanese."

Harumph,

[louis]

Thank you all for the very useful comments.

John, thats a good point - unfortunately I don't have any way to check
this so I'm going to have to trust it. Journalists usually mention if
they were present at an
important event, and he doesn't, so I would guess that he didn't
attend. (Of course it is just an (educated) guess)

Minoru, I agree I should not have to do this - unfortunately I don't
have any choice in the matter!

Kirill, thanks very much for the confirmation!

Alan, I too was worried about two points - 1. the WWII\Nomonhan
incident issue (which I also took to be rhetorical exaggeration to
support the journalists argument,
namely that Russia is trying to use its good image from WWII to erase
its bad image from the Cold War.) and 2. The extra sentence.

Mika, I agree that the extra sentence could be construed as a (rather
lengthy) extrapolation of the meaning hiding behind the Russian, but
would you not agree that it
is unnecessary exaggeration? Why do you need all those words?
Considering something unacceptable does not necessarily mean that you
will actively oppose it -
just that you won't accept it! However I will include your point that
using the Kremlin translation is not necessarily a (totally)
unfaithful translation of the Japanese.

Carl, I think you are right - Ive recieved confirmation from the
editor that I should go with the Kyodo writer. I'll include the fact
that the translation is innacurate in the
notes and let them make the call.

Laurie, I defintely take your point. But my top priority has been
reconfirmed by the editor as translating the Japanese writer's words.
Here's hoping I don't get branded as an anti-Russian Japanese
nationalist from this piece;)

My estimation of Kyodo News has taken a severe battering from finding
this seemingly deliberate innacuracy. Thanks again to all who
contributed!

Louis Barson

[David Farnsworth]

My estimation of Kyodo News has taken a severe battering from finding
this seemingly deliberate innacuracy. Thanks again to all who
contributed!

Louis Barson

Me: I am not at all surprised. I used to work with wire services a lot when
I lived in Japan (back in the 80s and 90s), and Kyodo was, frankly, very
sloppy.

Just do the best you can...

David Farnsworth
Tigard OR 97224

[Carl Freire]

At 11:15 PM -0700 9/7/09, David Farnsworth wrote:
>>My estimation of Kyodo News has taken a severe battering from finding
>>this seemingly deliberate innacuracy. Thanks again to all who
>>contributed!
>

>Me: I am not at all surprised. I used to work with wire services a lot when
>I lived in Japan (back in the 80s and 90s), and Kyodo was, frankly, very
>sloppy.

And I used to work for one of the wire services, so I can tell you
that Kyodo's reputation, hmm, leaves something to be desired amongst
them as well.

Cheers,

[Mika Jarmusz]

I wrote:
> Simply going by the English quote <snip> I'd agree with Kyodo's translation.

Louis, sorry to have caused unnecessary confusion.
ロシアの大統領の言葉はモンゴルの大統領の見解に同調しているわけですから、皆さんが既にお書きのように「断固として対抗する」との補足はこの場合には逆効果で誤訳となります。すみません、一枚しかない座布団ですが、もう持ってっちゃてください。

[Laurie Berman]

On Sep 8, 2009, at 2:07 AM, louis wrote:

>
> Laurie, I defintely take your point. But my top priority has been
> reconfirmed by the editor as translating the Japanese writer's words.

Well, my main point was that what you do depends on the purpose of
the article. Obviously, it depends on the client as well. In the work
that I do, the expectations are different, so to suggest that one
should always translate the Japanese exactly as is is an
oversimplification. IMO, you did right to check the English
translation, and you did right check with your client. Now you are
completely covered.

> Here's hoping I don't get branded as an anti-Russian Japanese
> nationalist from this piece;)

If I worried about being associated with the views expressed in the
things I translate, I wouldn't be able to make a living. The main
thing is that I don't want to be blamed for inserting something that
wasn't in the original.

Even worse than translating a quote that's already been translated
from a third language is back-translating quotations, and I can't
believe how many times I'm asked to do this. I'm doing such a piece
right now, in fact. If you put it in quotation marks, you are
misquoting, and if you paraphrase everything, it falls flat.
Sometimes I fudge it by phrasing it like a direct quotation but
leaving out the quotation marks. Of course, in the final analysis you
do whatever the client wants, but I do consider it my duty to inform
him or her that back-translating quotations is not kosher, and if I
do it the quotation is not going to be accurate.

Laurie Berman