I’ve just come back from a conference in sunny Portsmouth where I gave a keynote on the subject of “the translator as writer“. Of course you can never be completely happy with your performance at conferences but overall I think my presentation went down pretty well. It was quite unnerving though that it was recorded on video so hopefully I won’t find it too painful when I get to watch it back. My topic was “Are technical translators writing themselves out of existence” and at some point over the next few days I’ll write something about it here.
The conference itself was excellent as usual with a good variety of topics presented by practitioners and academics from all over the world. The Portsmouth translation conference is, I have to admit, my favourite not just because of the topics discussed or the friendly, relaxed atmosphere but because it draws practising translators as well as researchers. For me, conferences that are solely for academics can be quite dull so to have presentations from the word-face too is quite refreshing. Sometimes academics can lose sight of what translation is about and focus on obscure issues far removed from the actual process of translation.
There were some hits and one or two misses at this year’s conference. I won’t name and shame the misses because that’s not nice but I will point out some of the highlights for me. First up was Arvi Tavast from Talinn University who gave a really interesting and really useful look at how translators view their roles and whether they should correct errors in the source text. Backed up with empirical research, Tavast showed that there was quite a significant difference in how translators approached, for example, errors in source texts. He also showed that opinion is divided among agencies as regards expectations for translations and translator behaviour. For me, this was one of the most relevant pieces of research I have come across in quite a while.
I also went to a workshop by Janet Fraser which looked at how we teach writing skills to translation students although the activities, she stressed, could be used by professional translators as a “warm-up” exercise. Normally I run a mile whenever someone mentions workshop but this one was actually useful and fun. The activity involved giving participants several trigger words and asking them to write an advertisement aimed at tourists. The upshot of it all was that without exception everyone knew how to write texts like this. We all knew that particular linguistics structures and strategies were expected and we all produced quite similar texts. The challenge, then, is getting students to unlock these skills when translating.
Other highlights were Stephen Crabbe’s talk on the development of controlled language as well as the other keynote, entitled “Inspiration” by director and translator Neil Bartlett. Neil managed to persuade a room full of people to act out some bizarre circular arm movements to illustrate the need to be mindful of punctuation in translation. From the back of the room the result looked like the national air guitar championships. Classic stuff!
One theme which cropped up a lot over the course of the various presentations was that the public doesn’t fully understand what translation involves. Some of the examples of how this manifests itself included vague instructions for translation jobs, unrealistic expectations as regards the type of translation, unreasonable deadlines etc. This is probably true and it might suggest that there is a need to educate the general public and raise awareness among non-translators of what it is we do. But the thought also occurred to me that this might come across as some sort of cheap and desperate attempt to make people respect us, maybe even love us poor misunderstood translators. After all, do we fully understand what it is doctors, architects or pilots do? Nope! But we still respect them and trust their judgement. I don’t know. What I do know is that I’m still exhausted from the drive back from Portsmouth and could really do with a nap.