[Vocabulary] Translate or Interpret???

[ddablo]

He _________ for the foreign investors at the meeting.

1. translated
2. interpreted

Which one should I use?

Can anyone tell me the difference between "translate" and "interpret"?

I think they look similar....

 

[riquecohen]

He translated for the foreign investors at the meeting.

1. translated
2. interpreted

Which one should I use?

Can anyone tell me the difference between "translate" and "interpret"?

I think they look similar....

Search this forum for a thread called "translate or interpret." (Last post was entered on Nov. 4, 2010.) You'll find your answer there.

 

[TheParser]

He _________ for the foreign investors at the meeting.

1. translated
2. interpreted

Which one should I use?

Can anyone tell me the difference between "translate" and "interpret"?

I think they look similar....

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


(1) Those two words confuse me, too, so I really learned a lot from the

link that Senior Member Riquecohen suggested.

(2) I found something that may be helpful. It's long. I shall give

full credit at the end.

"Written translation can be distinguished from oral translation

or interpreting, which came first .... However, because of its

relative permanence and lasting influence ... written translation

has traditionally been considered more important. Whereas such

translation usually allows time for reflection and redrafting,

professional interpreting does not usually allow time to think

about alternatives. It takes two forms: simultaneous interpreting

(at international conferences, etc.) [My note: President X speaks and

an interpreter translates her words AT THE SAME TIME.] and consecutive

interpreting (in court, at diplomatic gatherings, in business

transactions, etc.) [My note: Mrs. X speaks. Then she waits until the

interpreter orally translates her words to the audience.].

Source: The Oxford Companion to the English Language edited by

Mr. Tom McArthur (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press,

1992), page 1052.

***


Being an interpreter is very difficult work. One of our former

presidents (of course, I shan't mention his name) about thirty

years ago visited country X. When he got off the airplane, he

said in English, "I have come to learn your opinions and understand

your desires." His interpreter did not understand the language of

country X very well, so the interpreter said in the language of country

X something like: I have come to have a romantic relationship with

the people of country X.

 

[Allen165]

Search this forum for a thread called "translate or interpret." (Last post was entered on Nov. 4, 2010.) You'll find your answer there.

Could you provide the link please? I couldn't find the thread. (Yes, I am computer illiterate.)

I've read TheParser's post, but I don't get the difference between oral translation and interpreting.

Thanks!

 

[5jj]

A very basic response to the OP is that I translate the written word and interpret the spoken word.

 

[Verona_82]

https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/134011-translate-interpret.html

 

[ddablo]

I've read all your replies and the link you offered.

First of all, thank you for your responses but I still have a little coufusion

about the usage of them.

You don't usually say the following sentence??

" Can you interpret this letter written in French into English for me? "

" Can you tranlate this letter written in French into English for me?" is more natural ??

I'm not sure I understand correctly...

 

[freezeframe]

I've read all your replies and the link you offered.

First of all, thank you for your responses but I still have a little coufusion

about the usage of them.

You don't usually say the following sentence??

" Can you interpret this letter written in French into English for me? "

" Can you tranlate this letter written in French into English for me?" is more natural ??

I'm not sure I understand correctly...

See fivejedjon's response above. Letters are translated.

 

[TheParser]

Could you provide the link please? I couldn't find the thread. (Yes, I am computer illiterate.)

I've read TheParser's post, but I don't get the difference between oral translation and interpreting.

Thanks!

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


Apparently, the word "interpreting" is just another word to describe

"oral translation."

 

[TheParser]

He _________ for the foreign investors at the meeting.

1. translated
2. interpreted

Which one should I use?

Can anyone tell me the difference between "translate" and "interpret"?

I think they look similar....

Could either verb be used in ddablo's example?

I am confused -- as usual.

My dictionary says that "interpret" = to translate orally.

So would it be good English to say:

He interpreted for the foreign investors at the meeting.

Thank you

 

[freezeframe]

Could either verb be used in ddablo's example?

I am confused -- as usual.

My dictionary says that "interpret" = to translate orally.

So would it be good English to say:

He interpreted for the foreign investors at the meeting.

Thank you

See Wikipedia:

Despite being used incorrectly as interchangeable, interpretation and translation are not synonymous. Interpreting takes a message from a source language and renders that message into a different target language(ex: English into French). In interpreting, the interpreter will take in a complex concept from one language, choose the most appropriate vocabulary in the target language to faithfully render the message in a linguistically, emotionally, tonally, and culturally equivalent message. Translation is the transference of meaning from text to text (written or recorded), with the translator having time and access to resources (dictionaries, glossaries, etc.) to produce an accurate document or verbal artifact.

 

[TheParser]

See Wikipedia:

Despite being used incorrectly as interchangeable, interpretation and translation are not synonymous. Interpreting takes a message from a source language and renders that message into a different target language(ex: English into French). In interpreting, the interpreter will take in a complex concept from one language, choose the most appropriate vocabulary in the target language to faithfully render the message in a linguistically, emotionally, tonally, and culturally equivalent message. Translation is the transference of meaning from text to text (written or recorded), with the translator having time and access to resources (dictionaries, glossaries, etc.) to produce an accurate document or verbal artifact.

Thank you for the great answer.

But I am a VERY slow learner.

So could you tell me:

Is it good English to use "interpreted" in the thread starter's

sentence?

Thank you

 

[freezeframe]

Thank you for the great answer.

But I am a VERY slow learner.

So could you tell me:

Is it good English to use "interpreted" in the thread starter's

sentence?

Thank you

Yes that is the correct choice.

However, you can conceive of situations where translation is more appropriate. For example, the translator is given some documents beforehand. These documents are presented during a presentation to the foreign investors. Here, he translated for the foreign investors at the meeting. But, without such convoluted scenarios, "at the meeting" implies he was translating "on the spot" -- that is, interpreted.

 

[TheParser]

Yes that is the correct choice.

However, you can conceive of situations where translation is more appropriate. For example, the translator is given some documents beforehand. These documents are presented during a presentation to the foreign investors. Here, he translated for the foreign investors at the meeting. But, without such convoluted scenarios, "at the meeting" implies he was translating "on the spot" -- that is, interpreted.

Thank you very much!!!

 

[ddablo]

Finally, your posts have cleared up any confusion I had.

Thank you so much!!! :-D:-D:-D

 

[TheParser]

He _________ for the foreign investors at the meeting.

1. translated
2. interpreted

Which one should I use?

Can anyone tell me the difference between "translate" and "interpret"?

I think they look similar....

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


(1) I was reading a magazine article this morning when I was reminded

of your post.

(2) Here is what Mr. Tim Parks wrote on page 84 in the April 8, 20ll, issue

of The New Yorker:

"A common but untransalatable [my emphasis] Italian idiom, un

gioco al massacro (literally, "a game to the massacre"), is telling; it

refers to conflicts where both parties are destroyed because of their

obstinate determination to win an argument."

(3) You notice that Mr. Parks (a British gentleman who is a translator and

lives in Italy with his Italian wife) says it is "untranslatable," yet he

translates it for us. I guess that he meant it is impossible to translate the

"feeling" that an Italian has when he uses that idiom. In other words,

when an Italian says that idiom, all kinds of thoughts come to his/her

mind, including -- perhaps -- reminders of the country's history.

(4) Translation is truly an art. And very difficult. For example, take the

word "yeah." Most dictionaries simply say it means "yes." But you need

to live with Americans to understand that it can mean many things --

depending on how you say it and under what conditions:

The boss: I have to fire you.

Tom: What? I have been working here for five years. I have done

an excellent job.

The boss: Your're right. You're my best employee.

Tom: Then why are you firing me?

The boss: I want to force you to get a better job where they will pay

you more money than I can. I am firing you because I love you.

Tom: Yeah!!!

That "yeah" means something like:

You know that you are lying to me; I know that you are lying to me;

what you are saying is a bunch of ____; do you think that I am stupid

enough to believe that?

 

[Allen165]

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


(1) I was reading a magazine article this morning when I was reminded

of your post.

(2) Here is what Mr. Tim Parks wrote on page 84 in the April 8, 20ll, issue

of The New Yorker:

"A common but untransalatable [my emphasis] Italian idiom, un

gioco al massacro (literally, "a game to the massacre"), is telling; it

refers to conflicts where both parties are destroyed because of their

obstinate determination to win an argument."

(3) You notice that Mr. Parks (a British gentleman who is a translator and

lives in Italy with his Italian wife) says it is "untranslatable," yet he

translates it for us. I guess that he meant it is impossible to translate the

"feeling" that an Italian has when he uses that idiom. In other words,

when an Italian says that idiom, all kinds of thoughts come to his/her

mind, including -- perhaps -- reminders of the country's history.

(4) Translation is truly an art. And very difficult. For example, take the

word "yeah." Most dictionaries simply say it means "yes." But you need

to live with Americans to understand that it can mean many things --

depending on how you say it and under what conditions:

The boss: I have to fire you.

Tom: What? I have been working here for five years. I have done

an excellent job.

The boss: Your're right. You're my best employee.

Tom: Then why are you firing me?

The boss: I want to force you to get a better job where they will pay

you more money than I can. I am firing you because I love you.

Tom: Yeah!!!

That "yeah" means something like:

You know that you are lying to me; I know that you are lying to me;

what you are saying is a bunch of ____; do you think that I am stupid

enough to believe that?

NOT A TEACHER.

I think he meant that the expression cannot be translated idiomatically. The translation he provided is a literal one. "A game to the massacre" is not something you would say in English, at least I don't think you would.