# Can a monolingual be a good translator?



## amikama

By "monolingual" I mean a person who speaks only one language fluently --namely, his/her mother tongue-- but (s)he can also speak at least one foreign language to some degree of fluency.

So, what do you think? Can a monolingual be a good translator? Can (s)he produce fairly good translations from/to the foreign language, even if his/her command in this language is not perfect?


----------



## GenJen54

I think it depends upon the need and the situation. 

If you are talking about high-level politics or professional translation, then no, someone who can only speak "to some degree of fluency" is probably not adept enough to pick up on small nuances and/or translations of a highly technical nature. 

That's not to say the person's skills would not be useful in emergency or other situations, when no other translators are available. 

I speak very passable French.  I used to speak French much better than I do now, but I could easily go to any French speaking country and find my way around without any complications.  I could also (and have) translated between friends who did not share a common language.  I would by no means try to pass myself off as a professional translator, or ever try to work in an official capacity with my current fluency level. 

True translation is about much more than just "translating" the words from one language to another.  It is about using intuition and intellect to understand, and in some instances, infer what a speaker of the original language is saying before he actually says it.


----------



## Random1

I think the translation can be very good if the person translating is going from the foriegn language to his/her native tongue. But if they tranlate their native language to one they are not fluent, it will not sound right.


----------



## emma42

I totally agree with Genjen.  But then we have the argument about what constitutes "fluency", which I think has been discussed in another thread.  Also, it is extremely rare to meet a "taught", rather than "nurtured" fully bi-lingual person.


----------



## fenixpollo

emma42 said:
			
		

> Also, it is extremely rare to meet a "taught", rather than "nurtured" fully bi-lingual person.


 I don't know about that, emma... I think this forum is _full_ of "taught" bilinguals.  

For me, the idea of referring to a person who is proficient in a second language as "monolingual" is oxymoronic.  By definition, anyone who speaks a second language is not monolingual.

As to the question, I agree with Random that a person who is _proficient_ (rather than _fluent_) in their second language could be good at translating into their first language, but not usually from their first language.

Saludos.


----------



## ireney

For professional translation, a person must know both languages (source and target so to speak) fluently. If not, then he/she may produce a text which is perfect in the source language (or the target one- depends) but does not convey the exact meaning, style, feeling of the text it's supposed to be a translation of.

Hope that makes sense!


----------



## Random1

Makes perfect sense ireney, and I do agree, but some tones in a different language can not be expressed in another language without blunty saying "a sad tone" or "deceptive." Some moods and ideas don't translate that well.


----------



## ireney

Random,

Oh I DO agree! Wholeheartedly! The same can be also said about more 'simple' matters such as puns (good or bad doesn't matter mind you)

Still, the more fluent in both languages a person is the better.


----------



## Lucyernaga

I do better in translations from English to Spanish.  I learned English at College and never spent time in an English speaking country.  
Whenever I need to translate from Spanish to English I look for someone (well educated English native) to check the final document to see if it makes sense.


----------



## aleCcowaN

In spite of the fact I'm not good at English (see and judge) I manage twelve years ago to get some translation job. I did it with a "parter", an American woman who lives in Argentina teaching English. We got many jobs, including international regulations about dairy industry that would be used in our country, the speeches given in an international meat conference, the manual of a device for insulin dependents, and more.

I dared to do this thinking I was very good in all the subjects involved and relaying in my partner to avoid my likely misinterpretation of the original texts. It came up that I had no problem with the task, and the lack of knowledge of my partner about the subjects and Spanish began to be not a burden but an obstacle to complete the task.

Though today I read English fluently, still I'm not able to understand spoken English (it is just a written language to me). I learnt something from that year, before 90,000 words translated. You don't need to be fluent at all to make good translations. You need to know the subject, the style used in that subject, and very very well your own language.

If I had had Internet and WR twelve years ago, it would had been a party, and I had avoided lot of quarrels with my partner who didn't understand why we had to use certain words in Spanish given the contexts and the subjects involved. I learnt a lot from that experience, the regulations are in use and no-one complained about something wrong or obscure, no patient had any trouble to understand the manual and get his insulid as expected. I needed to know biochemistry, medical science, laboratories, political issues, technology, lots lots of Spanish and perhaps, only perhaps, some English.


----------



## SofiaB

The title surprised me. Then I remembered that in Japan they had people bilingual in EN and JA do translations for manuals and other instructions.They then had monolinguals English, Americans and Australians proofread and rewrite what had been written.


----------



## Etcetera

I think it also depends on what kind of translation we mean.
It seems to me that translation of written texts does not require full mastery of language, especially of those texts which aren't too complicated, are written in an easy languages, etc. Besides, the translator may look into he dictionary as often as they need.


----------



## danielfranco

I'm a bit confused... I've checked the dictionary and it seems a monolingual person is someone who speaks only one language. Fine. Good. But, but, but...
If you do not speak (say the words) the language and only read and write the language and understand the meaning of the words, shouldn't that push you a bit into the "bilingual" status at least?

Regardless, I believe the translator has to be well aware in how culture influences the author of the source text in how he uses the language, because sometimes some texts have to be translated almost *in spite* of what the author wrote!!
A quick example:
"The purpose of the physical exam is to check for injuries, and to answer any questions you may have..."
...
What?
So, I don't know about other languages, but in Spanish this would end up as a rather truncated sentence. I think it'd be difficult for someone who is not used to these non-sequiturs that plague some American English speakers to make sense of what in the blazes is going on...
I think.


----------



## Etcetera

danielfranco said:
			
		

> I'm a bit confused... I've checked the dictionary and it seems a monolingual person is someone who speaks only one language. Fine. Good. But, but, but...
> If you do not speak (say the words) the language and only read and write the language and understand the meaning of the words, shouldn't that push you a bit into the "bilingual" status at least?


I think that good understanding of what is _written_ in the language and good knowledge of the culture and history of the country make you able to translate texts. Why not?


----------



## moodywop

aleCcowaN said:
			
		

> In spite of the fact I'm not good at English... I managed twelve years ago to get some translation jobs. I did it with a "parter", an American woman who lives in Argentina teaching English...relying on my partner to avoid my likely misinterpretation of the original texts


 
Actually I think that in some cases that's a good idea.

In Italy we are plagued with mistranslations in dubbed films and in subtitles. Here are a few funny examples.

The trouble is that "dialoghisti" are often people who are very good at writing dialogues but who are not fully proficient in the original language. If they had a native speaker working with them then mistakes like the ones mentioned in the thread at IE would be avoided.


----------



## natasha2000

I'm also confused with the title, but also with what other foreros say.

As far as I know (or at least I see it this way), monolingual person is a person who has only one mother tongue, and bilingual is who has two mother tongues, like for example, the most of Catalans around here.

I have never understood the terms monolingual or bilingual referring to foreign languages... And I also think it is very hard to become bilingual no matter how good you speak the foreign language... I think this is possible only if you go to live abroad, and many times not even that....
Maybe I am too strict, but I don't consider myself bilingual or trilingual, I consider myself a person with one mothertongue and a pretty good knowledge of two other, for me, foreign languages - Spanish and English...

As far as the question from the title, I think that I should hear that person first in order to tell if this person is able to be a good translator or not, since this is a very subjective thing... what is ok for me, it doesn't have to be ok for other person, and viceversa. But in general, I do agree with GenJen... A person with acceptable knowledge of a foreign language can be useful in certain situations, but for sure cannot earn money as a professional translator. A language is not only words... It is not only placing words one after another. Many times it is more important the feeling and the meaning the words transmit, and this is what is to be translated, not words....


----------



## moura

A monolingual in the sense Amikal refers may be an excelent translator. 

The fundamental and main capacity of a good translator is the knowledge of the mental structure, the surroundings and the several sensibilities of the target language. He has to write this language extremely well. 

He has to put himself inside - completely - in  the head of the future reader (Is this natural for him? Does this image the original author transmits makes any sense to him? This word is the correct translation of the original, but has it the same strengh? etc.). 
He has to make all these questions, giving the reader a transparent text, that on the other side can never be unloyall to the original one.

Of course a good knowledge of the foreign language is fundamental. The translator may not kwow it perfectly and the non-betrayall of its meaning/sense is achieved through a lot of research, research, research and research.


----------



## amikama

Seems that the term I chose, "monolingual", confuses some of the foreros here, so I'll clarify it: 
I refer to a person who speaks only one mother tongue, which he/she learnt it from his/her parents since his/her birth. But in later stages of his/her life he/she learnt another language (say, in school/college/university, or after immigrating to other country, etc.) and managed to acquire some level of fluency in this language. 
Now that person speaks two languages -- the mother tongue and the foreign language -- I wonder whether he/she can make rather good translations between those languages, even if his/her command in both languages is not the same.

I hope it's clear now  
(Oh, and thanks to all who answered so far.)


----------



## french4beth

A good professional translator has to have an excellent grasp of his/her mother tongue (Language A), and also be outstanding in his/her second language (Language B). A good translator will only translate from B (source language) into A (target language), unless this person is part of an extremely small percentage of truly bilingual people.
Here's an excerpt of an excellent article about translation (found here:
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/Articles.asp?ArtID=25)


> Fundamentally, however, translation is a specialized form of _writing_. Merely knowing two languages does not make one a translator; uncommonly good writing skills are also necessary.


More about 'target languages' and 'source languages' (_ibid_):


> People lack the detachment and the expertise to assess their own skills in a non-native language. They should not conclude from good marks in language courses, long years of residence in other countries, or flattering but probably exaggerated comments from natives that they are prepared to translate into that language. Translating into the native language only is a good policy.


More here (article on interpreting vs. translating found here http://world.std.com/~ric/what_is_int.html):



> The key skill of a very good translator is the ability to write well, to express himself or herself clearly in the target language. That is why professional translators almost always work in only one direction, translating only into their native language... The key skills of the translator are the ability to understand the source language and the culture of the country where the text originated, and using a good library of dictionaries and reference materials, render that material into the target language.


----------



## french4beth

If I may make some suggestions:


			
				aleCcowaN said:
			
		

> In spite of the fact *that* I'm not good at English (*read*see and judge *for yourselves*)*,* twelve years ago*,* I manage*d* to get some translation job*s*. I did it with a "part*n*er", an American woman who lives in Argentina teaching English. We got many jobs, including international regulations about *the *dairy industry that would be used in our country, the speeches given in *at* an international meat conference, the *a* manual of *for* a device for insulin dependent *patient*s, and more.
> 
> I dared to do this thinking *that *I was very good in all the subjects involved and relaying in *relied on [?]* my partner to avoid my likely misinterpretation of the original texts. It came up  *happened *that I had no problem with the task, and my partner*'s* the lack of knowledge of about the subjects and Spanish began to be not a burden but an obstacle to complete the task.
> 
> Though today I read English fluently, I'm still [not] *un*able to understand spoken English (it is just a written language to me). I learnt something [from] that year, before *after* translated*ing* 90,000 words. You don't need to be fluent at all to make *do* good translations. You need to know the subject, the style used in that subject, and your own language very*,* very well .
> 
> If I had had Internet and WR twelve years ago, it would had been *much easier* a party, and I *could* had avoided lot of quarrels with my partner*; she* [who] didn't understand why we had to use certain words in Spanish given the contexts and the subjects involved. I learnt a lot from that experience,*:* the regulations are in use and no-one complained about some*any*thing *being* wrong or obscure, no patient had any trouble to understand*ing* the manual and *everyone* get *got* his insulid*n* as expected. I needed to know biochemistry, medical science, laboratories, political issues, technology, lots *and* lots of Spanish and perhaps, only perhaps, some English.


*A person* *only need to know 'some' English to translate well?!? *


----------



## Papalote

french4beth said:
			
		

> A good professional translator has to have an excellent grasp of his/her mother tongue (Language A), and also be outstanding in his/her second language (Language B). A good translator will only translate from B (source language) into A (target language), *unless this person is part of an extremely small percentage of truly bilingual people.*
> Here's an excerpt of an excellent article about translation (found here:
> http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/Articles.asp?ArtID=25)
> 
> More about 'target languages' and 'source languages' (_ibid_):
> 
> More here (article on interpreting vs. translating found here http://world.std.com/~ric/what_is_int.html):


 
Hello,

Although I don`t doubt that most bilingual people translate from source to target language, I have seen thousands of examples where it would`ve been preferable if they hadn`t. Especially if they trusted MT as being a perfect substitute for fluency in both languages.

Translation isn`t a question of replacing one word from one language to its equivalent in another. Dictionaries do that. Professional translators *rewrite* the *thoughts *expressed in the source language and then *explain *those thoughts in the source language, preserving as much as possible the author`s intent, style, register, etc. So, in order to produce a good translation, the translator must be able to write well, know his culture, understand to perfection the source language, i.e., its nuances, its slang, as well as knowing the culture of the source text.

 More often than not, a term in the source language has several meanings. When a `translator`ignores this, mainly because s/he lacks first-hand knowledge of the culture s/he is `translating` funny things happen, as in the term `liner`. I read this on the packaging of a plastic shower curtain: `Must be used with a liner.` The French text read: `À utilisez avec un paquebot de ligne.`  More than one mistake was made there  !

Usally, technical translators are either experts in the field which they are translating or they rely on an expert, engineer, mechanic, woodworker, etc., to provide the correct terminology and/or to revise the final translated text.

Legal translators are a breed apart and very rare. They command all my admiration.

Excuse me if I lump all other types of translation into one bag, I have to get back to work  . All the translation agencies I know, hire revisers and technical adviser to go over all translations. Most free-lance translators use the services of a reviser, especially on lengthy translation projects. i would see Amikama`s «monolingual» person doing this kind of job. But not as a translator.

Gotta go, thanks for reading me,

P


----------



## Lucyernaga

Papalote has a point! Translation is more than a bunch of words in two different languages. A whole history lives inside the word to be transalted. 

I'll never forget being in this store where they write the product description and price in a board. I couldn't stop laughing when I read:
"Teléfono General Eléctrico". They translated literaly the trademark General Electric!!!


----------



## Hakro

I have seen many opinions in this thread. But how many of you have earned  your living on translating?
I have done it for forty years, for the last ten years as my main business. For the last three years I made more than a hundred thousand euro every year. That's not so bad, isn't it?
And I'm monolingual. My only really fluent language is my mother tongue, Finnish. But I translate into Finnish fluently from Swedish, German, English or French, and a bit less fluently from Norwegian, Danish, Dutch, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese - as long as the text is about my speciality, the automobile technology.
So after all, how do you define "a good translator"?


----------



## ireney

I have earned my living from translating. Not of automobile technology though. It's books of literature I have been translating to and from Greek/English. I know French too. Not fluently. I can and have translated the odd sentence here and there, given the general meaning in good Greek of any number of directions of use but I cannot and will not ever try to translate a lit book from or to French.


----------



## sjofre

I'm native from Portuguese, and have a fluent level of english. I cannot speak Spanish, but I understand it very well, even better than english (that I can speak and write). I'm a translator with superior studies of English, from English and Spanish (that I did not study at all) into Portuguese. I believe that I am a better translator from Spanish (that I can't speak or write) into Portuguese, than from English into Portuguese...


----------



## Lucyernaga

"A good translator" knows his/her responsibility in translating for others. Definitively one will do better in a mother tongue, but it is possible to have enough knowledge of another language to be able to translate without making mistakes that would jeopardize others bussiness. 

Experience is important, but everytime you make a new translantion you have to be careful. Don't take things for granted, because people depend on your *honesty*.


----------

