Does translation affect?

What are your opinions about the effect of translation on the valence of intended message. For example if translate a french sentence into English or Urdu language, would it change the intensity of the latent emotions in the sentence or not? My opinion is yes it does affect negatively most often. 

There are some things you can't just translate because they end up losing their original meaning or intention. In my opinion, this does not happen always but I've been forced to speak Spanglish sometimes because I can't find the word or frase that would match what I'm trying to say. I support your opinion.

Yes and i feel it becomes more troublesome when one has to express his emotions, one can not feel released unless he communicates in his native language.

If the two translations were the same wher even the essence could be captured when translation from one language to another then it could be possible. But in most cases the answer is no.

When we studied the craft of translation, I remember being introduced to metaphrase and paraphrase, as techniques in translation. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphrase. 

Metaphrase is a word by word translation, literal translation, while a paraphrase is using different words to convey a message. However it is, the literal translation can sometimes be used in specialized, technological translations, but the translator needs to be very familiar with the technical terminology and hence effectively pierce through the meaning of the sentence/segment and produce a reliable translation. However, successful and professional translators nowadays never use metaphrase only, since it is really amateur and not professional. It is exactly when you lose the valence of the intended message, "valence" being a word here I had to make a thorough research on and still don't understand why and in what context you used it here. 

The literal translation is a superficial translation, very inapt, but useful too, and that fact is commonly familiar so it is prevalently important to understand the meaning and context of the message and rather convert THAT into another language, to pierce through what is being said and the emotions and thoughts behind it, and deliver a credible translation, WITH the same respective register in the target language. If you want to play with words on the other hand, sure, use literal translation and see how the whole meaning change, since a word has many different meanings and translations depending on the context. I am talking about written translations here most of the time. Translations of litterature, especially poetry, is especially subject to misconceptions and mistakes in translation.

On the other side, the consecutive and simultaneous techniques of translation/interpretation, can sometimes succumb to literal translation, since you are been asked to make instant translation and if the translator is not well prepared, or has simply missed something, he or she can lose themselves in translation. But when one is not finding the equivalent word for the given context while interpreting, paraphrasing is always recommended over omitting that sentence/message or using a calque ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calque ) or a inventing your own loanword (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loanword ). I am referring to professional translations here and higher level of knowledge of a language. That's what I have learned. 

I feel like one of the problems with translation is that it can't always explain the cultural use of the phrase. For example, I assumed that the translation for "How are you?" and "What's new?" in Indonesian is what I would use to greet people there, since that's what I use to greet people in English. However, it turns out that no one says that as a greeting unless you are fairly close and haven't seen each other for a long time. Instead I should have been learning to ask "Where are you going?"

With literature, such as English translations of Homer's Iliad or Dante's Inferno, you'd get a mostly literal translation, and then a footnote explaining why a certain thing was said and what it meant at the time, thus providing context for the meta. But you can't exactly do that for conversation, so if you just go with an expression or simple phrase that conveys what was meant to be said, then I think you're fine.

A funny example comes from the 90's movie "Mr. Baseball" (yes, I'm that old, sue me) where Tom Selleck plays an arrogant baseball player who has to play in the Japanese league for a while. He tells his Japanese team manager that he doesn't do bunts (he was instructed to bunt for a certain play). The manager basically scolds him in a long, threatening harangue in rapid Japanese and then walks off. The interpreter stares wide-eyed and then just says in a panicked tone, "I suggest you bunt! I suggest you bunt!" Man that scene kills me.

Now go get some old person culture and watch the movie. It's not too dated. I promise you'll like it. :P

I have noticed that the English translation of some languages does not follow the exact sequence. For instance; habitez-il can mean he lives not lives in. 

I have also noticed that this pattern in local Nigerian dialects. 

What do you think about this?

Jess.PWinkler wrote:

There are some things you can't just translate because they end up losing their original meaning or intention. In my opinion, this does not happen always but I've been forced to speak Spanglish sometimes because I can't find the word or frase that would match what I'm trying to say. I support your opinion.

Smartchiny wrote:

I have noticed that the English translation of some languages does not follow the exact sequence. For instance; habitez-il can mean he lives not lives in.
I have also noticed that this pattern in local Nigerian dialects.
What do you think about this?

There can be many differences between two languages that make it difficult to follow an exact sequence.

For example, some languages follow a simple subject-verb--object pattern like "I love you"

Others might do subject-object-verb like "Mujhe tumse pyaar hai." ("I you love")

Some languages have gender-specific words like "brother" and "sister" while others use non-gender specific words like "kapatid" ("sibling").

So yes, the sequence can be a real pain.  

Smartchiny, can't quote on phone, did you mean habite-t-il ? This reverse order/place of words is used in French when there is a question to ask. You also say in English: Does he live? You change the place of the words, in difference to confirmative sentences. Is this what you meant? 

Mai, I understand the questions part but what i meant was in regards to normal statements.

Mai wrote:

can't quote on phone

Really? Is anyone else having this problem?

leosmith wrote:

Mai wrote:

can't quote on phone

Really? Is anyone else having this problem?

Not me

Ok, I just figured it out, the quotation marks are for that. I was only looking at reply and the other symbols 

Ok, thank you 

And I didn't quote again :)) ... 

Smartchiny wrote:

Mai, I understand the questions part but what i meant was in regards to normal statements.

What are normal statements? 

By normal statements, I mean a sentence that is neither a question nor an instruction/ command. It is a regular expression of thoughts and opinions. 

Like I said earlier, I noticed this change of sequence in other African languages too. The translation should be for instance, 'go there we may' but the natives claim the translation is 'we may go there'.

Such things can make learning a language cumbersome and tiring.

Another thing that I find difficult in languages in when one word means several things and the only difference to them is the pronunciation. French language also makes has this de, ce and la/le confusion. 

For instance, if i am to translate to french 'break plates', I don't see a need for le/la, some people may put the le/la before 'plate' though.