Nonnative speakers of English often find it difficult to fully understand some English expressions. Sometimes, they fail to catch subtle nuances, and at other times they are unable to grasp the underlying meaning. For example, the English expression “I’ll see what I can do” almost always means “yes,” whereas “Let me think about it” is most likely to mean “no.” Another colloquial expression, “It’s OK,” often causes confusion, for it can mean “No thanks” or “I like it” depending on the situation. Likewise, “I’m good,” which means “No thanks,” can be interpreted differently in non-English speaking countries.
Therefore, when a nonnative speaker of English translates an English text into Korean, he will surely encounter such obstacles and consequently find a translator’s task quite challenging. Naturally, questions arise. Is a literal, word-for-word translation necessary? Is a translation secondary and inferior to the original? Are translators traitors? And can the beauty of a literary work be preserved in a foreign language? Perhaps the answer is “no.”
As for the first question, I agree with what Tracy Fisher from the literary agency William Morris Endeavor said: “We recognize that a literal, word-for-word translation is not what is needed. We believe a translator must truly understand and feel a text in order to translate it properly.” I also agree with Andres Felipe Solano, professor of Spanish at the LTI Translation Academy, who said, “the mission of a translator is far from focusing on searching for sentences that are exactly same as the original, or fighting with syntax or catching the rhythm of a paragraph.” Indeed, faithfulness to the original text does not necessarily mean a literal, word-for-word translation.
As to the second question on the value of a translation, Umberto Eco provides a good answer. In the author’s preface to his celebrated novel “The Name of the Rose,” he writes that his work is an Italian translation of a French translation of the original work written in Latin in the 14th century. Here Eco implies two things; first, a translation is by no means inferior to the original work and, second, the act of writing is already an act of translating, metaphorically speaking. In an interview, David Bellos of Princeton University says, “We translate all the time. If we refuse to translate, refuse to listen to what other people have to say to us, whichever language it is in, we’re not living as fully as human beings as we could be.”
Therefore, we no longer call translators “traitors” in the literal sense of the word these days. Instead, we call them “cultural mediators” because they bridge two worlds, two cultures and two languages. In addition, I believe that the beauty of a literary work can also be preserved in a foreign language as long as the translation is good. When I was a teenager, for example, I was deeply moved by James Joyce’s “Araby,” Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird” and Goethe’s “The Sorrows of Young Werther,” which I read in translation. A good translation can magically capture the delicate nuances of the original text and make a profound impression on the reader.
Who, then, makes an ideal translator? At the 2014 International Workshop for Translation and Publication of Korean Literature held at Coex last week, foreign publishers and translators came up with some illuminating ideas. For example, John O’Brien, publisher of Dalkey Archive Press said that translators should be “competent, language-sensitive, daring and culturally immersed.” Solano’s presentation was also enlightening. He wrote, “A translator should understand the world of the writer and translate it.
It is like you disassemble a house, go through the ocean with those materials and reconstruct on another shore a new house which reminds (you) of the original, without being just a copy of it.” If translation is like reassembling a house in another place, the two houses cannot and do not have be exactly the same; the reconstructed house could and should be modified to make it more suitable to the new place.
Then Solano presented a good metaphor, saying, “For this, a translator should read first with a passion like when a soldier in love opens a letter from his girlfriend who waits for him from months ago. After that, he should read again with an obsessive mind like when a physicist looks for an equation to explain the world he discovered.” He continued, “And finally, after only these two readings, he should get started to translate it with the ears of a musician. The work of a translator, as the one of a musician, is to tune the instrument, wait for the string vibes, until it resounds.”
Solano described a translator’s task splendidly, answering the question “Why do we need quality translators?” We need competent translators because languages are different and they render the world differently. As Anthony Burgess said, “Translation is not a matter of words only: it is a matter of making intelligible a whole culture.”
By Kim Seong-kon
Kim Seong-kon is a professor of English at Seoul National University and president of the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. ― Ed.