Skip to main content

Translation Process

Any translation goes through several stages before it is published:
  1. Drafting
  2. Team check
  3. Exegetical check
  4. Test & Review
Lastly a consultant meets with the team and discusses any translation issues, making suggestion for changes before it is published.

I'm now going to unpack why each stage is needed and what happens during each stage.

  1. Draft: the translator studies the passage, preferably in the original language, but if not, s/he compares several different versions in several different languages, and makes an oral draft (or sometimes they listen to several different audio versions instead). They do this by closing all their books, if they have any open, then speaking the passage into a recording device (like a smartphone). At least 2-3 verses are drafted at a time, then the translator listens to their recording, and checks they haven't left anything out. They might then keyboard it into their computer, using a program called 'Paratext'. Why do we draft orally? Because a) many cultures are oral in their preference (and much of Scripture was oral too) b) it results in a much more natural translation than other methods, and means that discourse analysis of the receptor language isn't so necessary.
  2. Team Check: the other translators listen to (or read) the translation and make comments on it. This helps make sure that the translators are all using the same key terms, and are reasonable consistent in terms of style and level of their translation. They also need to be on the same page in terms of when to insert footnotes, what kind of glossary entries are needed, and so on. In fact at this stage it's a good time to work on all those para-textual helps. The other translators can also help with naturalness of the translation at this stage, of course.
  3. Exegetical check: if the translator doesn't work from the original languages, then someone needs to carefully read the translation and compare it with the Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek Scriptures to make sure the translation is accurate and communicates the correct meaning. The exegetical advisor may also comment on any key terms and consistency issues, as in stage 2.
  4. Test & Review: the 3rd draft is sent to reviewers, who may be experts in the language or pastors/believers, for them to comment on the draft. This makes the translation more acceptable, both in terms of its orthography, and its theological appropriateness, as well as usefulness for the purpose it was intended for, whether use in church or outreach. It is also taken out into the community for 'testing' - this is where the translation is checked for clarity and comprehensibility. The more testing that can be done the better, and this is great Scripture engagement as well as being an important checking stage. Some hearers may comment on parts of the translation that sound unnatural, or where the translation is woodenly literal, and such problems can be fixed at this stage. The 4th draft is the final draft that is consultant checked...
Finally a consultant meets with the team, whether face-to-face or by Skype, and helps the team improve the translation to the point where it is publishable. This means that before the consultant visits the introduction needs to be written, the glossary updated, and all the maps and pictures got ready. Also the consultant may not know the language, in which case someone (not a translator, preferably), makes a fairly literal back-translation into English, Russian, French, or another language of wider communication, so that the consultant can see where there are idioms and metaphors and ask what those communicate, and also comment on issues of accuracy, good communication (clarity), and so on. After this the translation is published digitally (audio recordings, Bible apps, etc.) and also sometimes in print format.

There are those who say that this can all be sped up in some way, but this usually involves missing out one or more of the above stages, which I hope you can see are all important for good quality translations. How many translators are needed? Probably 2-3 is an ideal number. If you have more then the discussions during the team check stage can take for ever, and lead to a lot of arguments about key terms issues. One organisation I know of is experimenting with using 30 or so translators, which is great for buy in to the translation, but a nightmare in terms of consistency.

The pastors/believers involved in the reviewing process may or may not be members of the translation committee, which meets periodically to decide issues like which portions/passages of Scripture to work on next, how to raise funds to pay the translators, testers, and other team members, and discuss important key terms issues. The exegetical advisor and/or consultant will have input regarding key terms, as its important to know the various ideas communicated in Hebrew/Greek before translating them.

I mentioned discourse analysis above. This is a study of the phrase order used in the language, and of various particles and words that might communicate something at a high level in the language. An example in English is the word 'well' when it begins a sentence. e.g.

   What do you think we should do tomorrow?

   Well...

An example in Hebrew is the word hine, often translated 'behold' in older translations. It is a discourse marker, highlighting something important about to be said (or seen).
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current
Post a Comment
Read more

A Flow Chart for Bible Translation (a Relevance Theory Approach)

One of the current theories behind modern translation work is Relevance Theory. [1] Here is a flow chart that explains the process often used to produce a draft when using such an approach: *Make sure your translation committee makes the decision as to what kind of translation they want. A domesticated translation is one that submits to dominant values in the target language [2] whereas a foreignized translation is one that is happy to import foreign terms and ideas from Hebrew, Greek, or the language of wider communication such as the Greek term baptizo . The chart looks something like this: Text                                   Communicated Ideas                  Context A sower went out to sow  A farmer went out to sow grain   People scattered/threw seed etc. The text has very little information, but behind it is the idea that seed was scatted by throwing it from a bag carried round the farmer's shoulder. This could be explained in the para-
Post a Comment
Read more

Asking the Right Questions in Bible Translation and Scripture Engagement Planning

If you want to get useful answers you have to ask the right questions. Do you agree? Yes, of course you do. In the Bible translation world we often ask a very narrow question when planning for the next stage of work: 'What would you like to see translated next?' Now, if you simply want to translate, and that's it, that question is fine, but what if you want to see some kind of result from your translation work? What if, for instance, you want to see transformation occur? Then a more powerful question to ask the community and positive stakeholders in the project would be: 'What kingdom goals would you like to see reached?' These kingdom goals should meet felt needs of the community - they should solve problems that are apparent to most or all in the community. See below on how those can be met. If that's too abstract, then try, 'What kinds of things, in your extended family, do you tend to worry about?' This will help establish some felt needs, from which
7 comments
Read more