Peter:
I tried to download your file, and for some reason all I got was an error
message.
I see your point, I think.
For example, if I were to translate a Chinese sentence (used for neutrality in this discussion) "Fire
wagon yesterday day go across iron road upon" makes no sense to someone who does not know Chinese, so
a good translator then paraphrases the sentence to "Yesterday the train went down the tracks."
This is where paraphrasing is used as a tool to help with translation. I don't think you object to
"paraphrase" being used in this context.
To give another example, there was a "translation" of the Bible made by people who did not believe the stories contained
therein, therefore they at the beginning of one story "translated" WYHY as "Once upon a time..." which elicited mirth
among those who pointed it out to me. They, profs and fellow students, called that a "paraphrase" which, strictly speaking, is
a misuse of the term. That is not a restating into more understandable language, which is the strict definition of
"paraphrase", but adding to the text, in other words, a mistranslation. It is that misuse of the term "paraphrase" to
which you object. Am I right?
Further, my teachers taught that the more one paraphrases, the more likely one is to
pass from a legitimate use of paraphrasing as in the first example, to adding or
subtracting from the meaning as in the second example, therefore paraphrasing should be
done carefully and as sparingly as possible. The way they used "paraphrase"
came to mean untrustworthy to possibly incorrect translation, a rather specialized use
of the term. I was guilty in using the term in a manner that reflected this meaning,
and I think George meant it in this way as well.
Yes, my use of the term was somewhat sloppy, following the example givenI hope things are clearer now.
above. But does this post clear the question up, or is there further
clarification needed?
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.