# C'était un débutant



## astrantia

Hello,

What does it mean to refer to a doctor as a '*débutant*'? Is it used to refer to newly qualified doctors of perhaps doctors who are still training? 

The author in the text I am translating has tetanos and the doctor who examines her is unsure what's wrong and has to consult a colleague for confirmation. By way of explanation the author says of the doctor 'C'ètait un débutant'. What would be the best English translation?

'novice' and 'beginner' sounds wrong to me in English.

What about 'trainee' or 'newly qualified'? or simply 'inexperienced'?

Welcome your advice.


----------



## Saints22

astrantia said:


> C'_*é*_tait un débutant'.



I couldn't resist. I'm sorry


----------



## Saints22

And depending on context, 

Un {docteur} débutant
~ a newbie
~ a green horn
~ a fresh-out-of med school 
~ a young buck

and so on. I'm sure the other translators will find better translators


----------



## Itisi

'Inexperienced' that came to mind first...


----------



## Pauline Meryle

How about "intern"? This is widely used in hospitals for recently qualified doctors working under supervision. It does necessarily suggest a certain lack of experience but there's nothing derogatory about it, as with some of Saints 22's suggestions.


----------



## astrantia

Thanks for you help Itisi and Pauline GFG and for  confirming that Saints22 suggestions are somewhat pejorative as I had thought. 'intern' sounds good, though wonder if it's more specific than 'débutant' which feels more vague and general. I need to get the correct tone and nuance...
Welcome any more thoughts you have.
Thanks again


----------



## petit1

> How about "intern"? This is widely used in hospitals for recently qualified doctors working under supervision


Yes, but here we don't know if this inexperienced doctor works in a hospital or has a private practice.


----------



## astrantia

Just to add, I think 'intern' is more American English (my target audience is English). I think 'junior doctor' or 'foundation year doctor' is the British English equivalent for 'intern' but that takes the doctor in my text out of France and into a whole new cultural context...


----------



## Saints22

An intern is not a confirmed doctor. He is a trainee who is on placement until he gets his license

As for the suggestions, they all carry different connotations and they are slightly derogatory because that's unfortunately what people think when they hear that a professional is new. 

Pour ma part, je préfère utiliser l'expression: "*He's a novice.*" vu que c'est assez neutre. (Novice doctor is not right) or *he has just started*.

the other connotations
*Newbie *is very informal
*Green Horn *is colloquial, but nothing derogatory
*He's green.* Again colloquial but it would be widely understood
*He's fresh-out-of med school*. It insinuates that he is a bit too young and naive but not that he's bad
He's a *young buck*. Implies that he's uh... a young cowboy doctor. I admit that I was drunk on coffee when I wrote that one. Sorry

And uh... i'm not sure if you will agree with me but in my opinion, I always thought that *Inexperienced *was borderline condescending


----------



## astrantia

Good point petit1. It's not explicit in the text if it's a hospital doctor. He is called to the house, I think, which suggests he's not working in a hospital...


----------



## GerardM

In my humble opinion, in this context of a doctor asking for advice, the French "débutant is somewhat pejorative.
We have to keep the feeling and mockery (the doctor is perhaps experienced and simply detected a possible more serious case).
That's why I like 'Saints22 s suggestions.


----------



## wildan1

I like _fresh-out-of-med-school _here.

Or possibly: _a newly minted MD_


----------



## astrantia

1)I think 'inexperienced' is neutral and factual - a new doctor is unquestionably lacking in experience. I don't think this is condescending. 

2) In UK English an 'intern' is usually someone getting work experience in any context, not necessarily medical.

3) My translation has to reflect what the author thinks and not 'what people think when they hear that a professional is new', which is why I am keen to use the right tone of language in translation and not one which reflects a poor view of beginners!

Thanks again!


----------



## petit1

I agree with  astrantia. This doctor is "still inexperienced", which we all are one day when we start. So it is not unreasonable to think that he needs a colleague's advice in such a rare case. It is not every day that a patient has or may have tetanos. He just wants to be sure of his diagnosis.


----------



## astrantia

Reading everyone's helpful posts the correct translation seems to hinge on whether we think that the term 'débutant' has a pejorative undertone here or not. I think it probably doesn't but am happy to be corrected by natives!

I'm not convinced that the French word 'débutant' is as informal as, for example, 'newbie' or as colloquial as 'green horn'. 'Fresh-out-of med school' is more neutral but might be too American-English for my audience...

Welcome any further thoughts and thanks to all for the interesting discussion.


----------



## Itisi

I don't see why the _author_ would use 'débutant' in a disparaging way. It must be factual...


----------



## astrantia

That's what I think, Itisi - to me, it sounds like a statement of fact.


----------



## astrantia

Thanks Saints22 for your correction - it was a typo, honest! And for all your helpful suggestions. Although my text needs something less informal than the terms you suggested, it's really interesting to see how differently people can interpret one word and the impact that can have on the tone of a text, so thanks again for your help.


----------



## Mauricet

Désolé, mais je n'ai pas compris pourquoi le littéral _He was a beginner_, qui a des centaines de milliers de citations sur Google, ne conviendrait pas dans ce contexte si l'original dit _C'était un débutant_ ...


----------



## Itisi

C'est vrai,  *Mauricet*, en fait, pourquoi chercher midi à quatorze heures !


----------



## Dogfever

Beginner doesn't sound right to me. I can't imagine one doctor calling another a beginner. For example, "beginners French" is French for someone who doesn't speak a word. Can you imagine the patient's face if you told them the doctor treating them was a beginner? It confers a sense that the guy is a novice who has just started to learn, as opposed to a person who has (hopefully) completed some years of training and is nearly a qualified or just lacks a little experience.

"He's newly qualified"
"He's still training"
"He's a junior"

These are terms which I would be maybe not happy but not horrified to hear used to describe my doctor.


----------



## petit1

Well, we did our best to find something else because astrantia wrote:


> 'novice' and 'beginner' sounds wrong to me in English


----------



## Dogfever

It wasn't criticism, sorry if it came across as such. I was more amused by the image of the patient than anything else. Many of the intervening suggestions work well too (hence why I didn't comment previously) but the return towards "beginner" inspired comment.


----------



## Mauricet

Ma perplexité ne fait qu'augmenter ! Déjà ce n'est pas un docteur qui en qualifie un autre de _débutant_, c'est l'auteur du texte, qui a le tétanos. Et s'il dit _c'était un débutant_, c'est sans doute que ce médecin commençait son exercice, pas qu'il n'avait rien appris en médecine. Quelqu'un qui commence à travailler dans une profession, ce n'est pas _a beginner_ ?? Si c'est vrai, c'est à encadrer, parce que comme faux-ami, on fait difficilement pire ...


----------



## Dogfever

In the original post the doctor who is a _d_é_butant_ is examining someone so we may assume that he has received some level of training. It is likely that he is a _beginner_ in the sense that he has just begun working in the hospital. But to say "he's a beginner" without further context implies he has just started learning medicine because _beginner_ is more associated (in this context and to my mind) with study/education rather than work.

Also, there is a question of usage. It is highly unlikely that a professional would ever describe another as a _beginner_ it would likely be considered pejorative because it implies a state of considerable ignorance. It just isn't the terminology which the medical profession tend to use. A big part of medicine is, arguably, to maintain an illusion of superiority and professionalism. To this end they adopt what could be termed euphemistic terminology so as not to undermine the confidence of their patients by being seen to admit fallibility.


----------



## petit1

> It is highly unlikely that a professional would ever describe another as a _beginner_


In post 24, Mauricet explained that the person who said "_C'était un débutant_" is the patient himself, not a professional.


----------



## Dogfever

Ah, I missed that, sorry. I would suggest that_beginner _still has something of a pejorative connotation for the other reasons in #25 but it makes _beginner _more likely. I would still expect something more like _he's new [here] _or _he's just starting out_

If I (not a medical doctor) referred to a doctor as a beginner I would expect him to raise an eyebrow at the very least. If the purpose in the original context was to be somewhat disparaging then beginner would fit fine.

Also to add: through the plethora of medical dramas and the (BE) national obsession with our healthcare service people without medical backgrounds are generally familiar with the terminology of medicine and this is often deployed in day-to-day conversation.


----------



## Mauricet

Merci, petit1. Dogfever croit-il qu'un médecin français qualifierait un jeune confrère de _débutant_ devant un patient, plus qu'un médecin anglais ou américain ne le qualifierait de _beginner_ ?? En d'autres termes, y a-t-il vraiment une différence de sens ou d'usage entre _un débutant_ et _a beginner_ ?


----------



## Itisi

The author, who is also the patient (or vice-versa!) is talking about the doctor, to the reader, not to the doctor!  S/he is most probably just stating a fact, not making a value judgment...


----------



## Dogfever

Ok. Even within all that context all I can say is that if I saw "he's a beginner" used to describe a medical professional I would consider it to be somewhat patronising. I would never describe anyone, even very close to the start of a professional training course or career, as a beginner unless I wanted to offend, to me it is associated strongly with informal education such as evening classes or swimming lessons. It just isn't associated with professional work and training.

I'll put my hands up and say that I could be wrong but in all my (non-medical) professional career I have never heard anyone described as a beginner when they were a new starter in a role.


Also, in case the OP is still reading I think s/he means tetan*u*s - not sure if anyone has corrected that.


----------



## astrantia

Thanks Mauricet for your suggestion. To me 'beginner' sounds odd in reference to a doctor and would not usually be used in this context. When I Googled 'beginner doctor', none of the hits I got had anything to do with inexperienced doctors. 'beginner' implies someone with no experience or knowledge at all. I really would be worried if I was being treated by a 'beginner' doctor!


----------



## astrantia

oops - had missed some of the previous discussion before posting my last message. Thanks again for the 'heated' discussion - it's very helpful, if a bit frustrating for some! I think the term 'débutant' is not intended pejoratively, it's not a judgement, it's a statement of fact. Agree that 'beginner' does have different connotations from 'débutant' in this context - not so much a false friend, as a significantly different shade of meaning, which is what makes it hard to translate. Languages are never direct mirrors of each other and in literary texts, nuance can make a huge difference... I think the best solution will be something neutral like 'inexperienced' or 'junior'. Thanks for the spelling correction Dogfever - was mixing up French and English spelling!


----------



## In Absentia

Why not just _young doctor_? It conveys that he/she lacks experience and is newly qualified but doesn't particularly sound pejorative. People (especially older people) use _young doctor_ all the time in a positive context i.e "Oh I was seen by a lovely young doctor. He had a terribly nice bedside manner."

If they trained later in life then it would have to be _junior doctor_, but in my opinion patients are less likely to use that language, whereas another doctor would evidently say _junior doctor_.


----------



## GerardM

I'm sorry but...
"Jeune docteur", "inexpérimenté", etc. do also exist in French; the term that was used was *"débutant", intentionaly*.

The only translation of "débutant" is "beginner"... Okay there might be a special tone.

According to me, said by the patient, the tone would show a criticism, not to say disapointment.


----------



## Dogfever

astrantia said:


> Thanks again for the 'heated' discussion - it's very helpful, if a bit frustrating for some! ... Thanks for the spelling correction Dogfever - was mixing up French and English spelling!



Hopefully not too heated or frustrating and sorry to anyone who saw it otherwise.

No problem for the correction - I hadn't actually noticed your native language setting!

@GerardM: My argument was on the pretext of earlier comments that_ d_é_butant _was not meant pejoratively - that it was of neutral register. If it was meant pejoratively then _beginner_ would be a perfectly apt translation. It is impugns the doctor's ability without stooping to gross offensiveness.


----------



## In Absentia

GerardM said:


> I'm sorry but...
> "Jeune docteur", "inexpérimenté", etc. do also exist in French; the term that was used was *"débutant", intentionaly*.
> 
> The only translation of "débutant" is "beginner"... Okay there might be a special tone.
> 
> According to me, said by the patient, the tone would show a criticism, not to say disapointment.



Yes and you can also use _young doctor_ in a critical way it would hinge on the context and the rest of the text, thus it's ambiguous. _Junior Doctor_ is an official term/rank there is less ambiguity.

There really is no such thing as _beginner doctor _in English it would sound jarring, the risk would be that the use of _beginner_ would say more about the patient than the doctor, especially in the UK where criticism of doctors and the NHS is increasingly political. _Beginner doctor _ could be viewed as childish political point scoring. There is a cultural nuance as well as a translation issue.


----------



## Nicomon

Just adding my five cents here...

I don't like_  beginner_  either in that context.   I'd say _beginner_ if the person had just started taking  dancing or piano lessons, for instance. 

As far as I know from nearly 20 years working in the staffing business - although we don't place doctors - the most common  translation of _ débutant _ when it comes to jobs/careers is indeed  _Junior.  _ _Débutant_ is in fact the term to be used to avoid _Junior,_ which is an anglicism. 

Here's a short extrat from *La langue des relations professionnelles* (coloring mine) 





> *débutant adj.
> * *Terme anglais : junior
> * *Définition : * Qualifie l'appellation d'emploi d'une personne qui fait ses premiers pas dans une profession.


----------



## Itisi

'Beginner' may or may not be the best word, but the author is just stating a fact to the reader, so perhaps _in that context _some of the considerations about status and politics and so on that have been mentioned are not so relevant...


----------



## Nicomon

My personal take has nothing to do with status and politics.   

I just happen to have translated or revised tons of job offers in the past 20 years, and the usual translation of _ debutant _ is... _junior._ 
That might help someone else looking to translate _ débutant  _in a job context other than the medical field. 

 I suppose, however, that a patient might say something like  "I think he's just a beginner" (without the added "doctor") when talking about a young/inexperienced physician.
But... I still prefer_ junior._


----------



## astrantia

Thanks again for the ongoing discussion. I would definitely not use _beginner_ in BE in relation to a doctor unless I meant it humorously or pejoratively. However, it seems that _débutant_ is more ambiguous and can be used critically or neutrally, depending on context, speaker's intentions, etc. Have I understood that correctly?

Perhaps I should have given more context to help convey the general tone of the piece:

The author is describing her traumatic experience of having tetanus as a child and of nearly dying (back in the forties). When the author's symptoms appear, her parents call a doctor: 'C'était un débutant. Après m'avoir examinée il est resté silencieux puis il a dit 'j'espère me tromper, je vais chercher un confrère_'_. C'était le tétanos'. 

The doctor behaves professionally by seeking immediate help in a case he cannot confidently diagnose by himself so I don't think the _débutant _doctor is being criticised or laughed at. He simply wasn't experienced enough to fully recognize the symptoms and responded appropriately. In light of this perhaps ‘junior’ is the best solution. 

I just want to avoid adding humour or criticism to the translation which simply isn't there in the original piece as this will change its meaning and the effect it has on the reader. Thanks so much for all your patience in helping me understand this 'innocent' little word!


----------



## Nicomon

In a nutshell... he was new to the profession. 

Other than "junior",  I think  that "He was still a novice"  could fit.  
"Novice" was suggested before and you didn't like it, but "still a novice" sounds less pejorative to my francophone ears than "just a novice".


----------



## astrantia

Thanks Nicomon, I think we've cracked it!


----------

