Professional Perspectives

Freelance or In-house?

There are many different kinds of translation consumers.  Some companies need translation to reach diverse segments of the US population in order to sell products and services.  Typically, the two largest groups such a company wants to reach are speakers of Spanish and Chinese, with the former taking the lion’s share.  The size of a company is not necessarily an indication of the size of its translation need.  A company might employ a Spanish linguist to manage the entire translation operation while hiring contract linguists to work on other languages if the budget allows.  In many instances, all translation is contracted out to LSPs who, unlike freelance translators, have the means to carry the necessary insurance.  Contract linguists, when they are on the payroll, are asked to review returned translations for accuracy and ensure the translations comply with company standards.  When a budget does not allow for contract linguists, a company may divide the work between two LSPs and ask them to vet each other’s work.  The company may invest in a small number of translation tools to ensure terminological consistency.  The manager of the translation operation is then charged with maintaining the content of the tools, which may contain translation memories and terminologies in four or five different languages.  When the help of contract linguists is not available, the manager may have no choice but to extrapolate from the languages he or she knows to make updates to tool entries that are in languages the manager does not understand.

I don’t know if there are translators who have consistently been well-remunerated for their work.  That species, if it ever existed, has surely become extinct in this era of budget-cutting.  Companies shop around for cost-effective LSPs, while LSPs prioritize the hiring of freelance translators who satisfy their profit margin, not necessarily those capable of doing the work the company requires.  The company’s relationship with its LSPs may not be the typical employer-employee relationship that one may expect.  An LSP may not be reticent if it thinks that the compensation or volume of work it receives from a company is too low.  Sensing that the complaints of the LSP may not be unjustified, and cognizant of the time it requires to properly acclimate translators to house style and regulations, a company may do all it can to placate the LSP.  This can translate into the company doing work that should normally be done by the LSP, such as research for the translation that the LSP is contracted to do.

Chances are that the productive efficacy with which freelance translators go about all aspects of their profession will not find any admirers in the company, where consensus may very well be the order of the day.  My own experience with the corporate world is that creativity is rarely encouraged, except possibly at the highest echelon.  The manager of translation, anxious to preserve consistency across languages, will drill into LSP translators never to stray from the translation memories and translation tool terminologies, both of which are maintained by the very same extrapolating manager.  Being only bilingual, the manager will not be able to realize that files coming back from the LSPs not in Spanish are riddled with errors and read like machine translation.

Having two LSPs vetting each other’s work can be problematic as well.  Since the company most likely will have a grading system in place that punishes bad translation with monetary penalty, LSPs can get defensive and see any honest evaluation as criticism potentially damaging to their bottom line.  It is easy to see how this kind of mindset can lead to acrimonious contention between two LSPs.  A manager of translation and contract linguists who lacks diplomatic skills will have a difficult time.

With this litany of real and perceived negativity, I may seem to be steering freelancers away from in-house positions.  This is not at all the case.  Regular paychecks are nice, even if their duration is limited.  A good point to remember is that a regular paycheck, like everything else in life, has a price. 

Eric Chiang

Chinese <> English Translator and Interpreter

e-mail: chiang.eric@ymail.com

To charge by source word count or by target word count?

In Chinese to English translation, whether to charge by source word count or by target word count is a perennial question with clients and translators here in America.  The answer seems easier when it comes to English to Chinese translation: both clients and translators are willing to go by the source English word count, even it's averaged per page manually on a hard copy.  So why do we have a problem charging by source word count when translating from Chinese into English?

The reason may be two-fold. First, in the earlier days when the bulk of source files existed only on hard copy, it was simply not easy for clients and agencies in the U.S. to count the Chinese characters.  Out of necessity, it was agreed that we would go by the translated English words.  This became the accepted practice even when electronic files became available, because it was never certain if fledging computer programs such as WordPerfect and MS Word counted Chinese or other Asian words correctly. 

Second, it is a truth universally acknowledged that when translating from Chinese into English, the word count contracts quite a bit, sometimes by 40% or more.  This led some agencies to entice potential clients with a value proposition: it pays to go with the English word count rather than Chinese word count.

This proposition worked well until translators (Chinese or American) in Mainland China got into the picture.  Whether they are freelance translators or translation agencies, they charge per source Chinese word.  Seemingly stuck with this UN tenet that all languages were created equal, they would charge only by the word count calculated in the localized Chinese Microsoft Word.  No value proposition would persuade them otherwise.  Why would they translate more and get paid for less?

Now we need to review and re-assess our accepted practice on this side of the globe.  It would actually work in the interest of translators and translation agencies to adopt the policy of charging by the source word count, regardless of whether the direction is from English to Chinese or vice versa.  To do otherwise would seem not only contradictory but also detrimental.  Translators may be particularly vulnerable under the old value proposition, as they may be double-crossed by the agencies.  If they want, they can still build in value by charging less per word.  The method of calculating a Chinese source document is simple: just open it in MS Word, go to Tools>Word count and check the digits after "Words." The words as calculated in the Word count tool include both full Chinese characters and English words. I believe this is a fair and objective method that should be embraced by translators and clients alike.  And where are the clients with the increasing need to have Chinese translated into English?  They are coming in troves from China, expecting you to charge by the source word count. 

Bin Liu, ATA Chinese Language Division Administrator (2010-2012)

English to Chinese Translator

e-mail: acumen@acumentransmedia.com

English Translation of Chinese Dish Names

[Editor’s Note: A version of this article originally appeared in the December 2010 issue of the Translation Journal.  It is reprinted here with permission.]

Introduction

With the opening-up and reform policy in China, Shanghai has attracted a great number of foreign tourists, many of whom are interested in Chinese culture, especially Chinese food. However, it is a big concern that poor translations of the names of Chinese dishes give those visitors a bad impression. What is worse, it is reported that few restaurants provide English menus such that foreign visitors feel embarrassed when they order a certain dish. Before long the Huang Pu District government, required all restaurants to prepare translated menus for the convenience of foreign customers (Zhang 2009). On the one hand, many restaurants are unaware of the importance of translated menus. On the other hand, many translated menus are not accurate or are even incorrect. Therefore, this paper aims to explore English translations of Chinese dish names, focusing on a native English speaker's understanding of the translation of Chinese dish names collected from local restaurants. It discusses the features of Chinese dish names, examines some problems in their English translation, and proposes possible solutions.




Features of Chinese Dish Names

Chinese food has its own profound and extensive culture. Due to the variety of natural ingredients and preparation methods employed, Chinese food enjoys unequaled fame. Each of China’s eight cuisines has its own characteristics. The three essential factors by which Chinese cooking is judged, are "color, aroma, and flavor." These elements are achieved by the ingredients themselves, the mixing of flavors, well-timed cooking, appropriate heat control and presentation. Many dish names are historical in nature. For example, 东坡肉 (Dongpo Rou) is named because Su Dongpo (1037-1101), a famous poet of the Northern Song Dynasty (960-1127) who liked eating this kind of specially-cooked meat.

Translation of Chinese dish names is complicated. The translator should attempt to produce the same effect on the target language readers as is produced by the original on the source language readers. Chinese readers seldom have difficulty in understanding the original name due to a shared cultural background with the writer. However, cultural discrepancies hinder foreign readers from such understanding. Therefore translators should adjust to improve a target-language reader experience. Otherwise, target-language readers are likely to expend the necessary energy, unless they are very highly motivated (Jin and Nida 1984: 102). Moreover, a knowledge of Chinese culinary culture improves translation. Without this knowledge, the dish names may be translated incorrectly, confusing and misguiding readers.

Functional Equivalence Theory

Corresponding with the features of Chinese dish names, Nida's functional equivalence theory is invoked as the theoretic basis for explaining English translation of Chinese dish names. According to Nida (2001), no translation is ever completely equivalent. A number of different translations can in fact represent varying degrees of equivalence. This means that equivalence cannot be understood in its mathematical meaning of identity, but only in terms of proximity, i.e. on the basis of degrees of closeness to functional identity (He 2010: 131). Functional equivalence implies a different degree of adequacy from minimal to maximal effectiveness on the basis of both cognitive and experiential factors. A minimal, realistic definition of functional equivalence means that the readers of a translated text share a similar understanding of the source text with the original readers. Anything less than this degree of equivalence is unacceptable. A maximal definition means the readers of a translated text have the same comprehension as that of the original readers. (Nida 2001: 87). The maximal definition implies a high degree of language-culture correspondence between the source language and the target language (He 2010: 131).

Translating involves four major parameters: source text, translator, reader, and target text. Each involves many variables that may exercise different effects on the act of translating (Nida 2001:131). The source text, for example, demands adequate consideration of style, language, time of writing, and culture. The target text attracts a similar array of considerations. The translator has his or her particular purpose and psychology, a unique and habitual style of writing and other characteristics, while the reader may similarly be classified along various scales such as education level, gender, and age (Nida 2001: 117).

As the carrier of culture, language more or less controls the way people think. A way of speaking may reveal social status, education background, place of residence, gender, etc. (Liu 1999). Translating, i.e., rendering from one language into another, consists of confronting the challenge of restoring the source cultural reality in the target language. Because dynamic equivalence eschews strict adherence to the original text in favor of a more natural rendering in the target language, it is sometimes used when the readability of the translation is more important than the preservation of the original wording. Thus, a dish name might be translated with greater use of dynamic equivalence so that it may read well. The more the source language differs from the target language, the more difficult it may be to understand a literal translation. On the other hand, formal equivalence can sometimes allow readers familiar with the source language to see how meaning was expressed in the original text, preserving untranslated idioms, rhetorical devices, and diction (Nida, 2001).

Previous Studies

Although the work of Wen Yuee (2006) and Cai Hua (2003) explored approaches to dish name translation, no previous studies have investigated the English translations of Chinese dish names from the point of view of the readers, i.e. foreigners.

Methods

Case studies allow in-depth understanding replete with meaning for the subject, focusing on process rather than outcome, on discovery rather than confirmation (Burns 2000: 460). In addition, case study allows for the exploration of complicated social units composed of many variables of potential significance (Merriam 1988; Pasters 1995). These insights can be constructed as putative hypotheses thus advancing a field knowledge base (Merriam 1988). Case studies are also descriptive, dynamic, and rely upon naturally occurring data, and are therefore the most appropriate means for studying the reader's experience. The receiver of the translated text provides the most important data. These are relevant to discovering whether the translated text is acceptable to target language readers and suggests avenues for improvement.


Data Collection

Several three-, four- and five-star restaurants have been investigated for data collection. Twelve similar Chinese dish names are shared by the restaurants. Although they have the same Chinese names, their English translation varies. For example, 毛血旺 (Mao Xue Wang) is translated as "Sichuan Style" by the three-star restaurant, "Spicy Harslet" by the four-star restaurant, and "Sautéed Eel with Duck Blood Curd" by the five-star restaurant. Based on this data, an interview was conducted with an American lady who has lived in China for several years. The interviewee was asked to express and explain her opinion regarding the English translations of Chinese dish names.


Data Analysis

First, the data were categorized based on their similar Chinese dish names to facilitate comparison of the English translations. Problems with each translation are identified, analyzed and compared with interview transcripts.

Six dish names were selected from the data collected on the basis that they are representative of typical translations of Chinese dish names.

	Three-star restaurant	Four-star restaurant	Five-star restaurant
毛血旺 (Mao Xue Wang)	"Sichuan" Style	Spicy Harslet	Sautéed Eel with Duck Blood Curd
水煮牛肉 (Shui Zhu Niu Rou)	Sauted Beef in Sauce	Spicy Beef	Poached Sliced Beef in Hot Chili Oil
怪味猪手 (Guai Wei Zhu Shou)	Pig's Knuckle		Braised Spicy Pig Feet
四喜东坡肉 (Si Xi Dongpo Rou)	Four Braised Songpo Meats		Braised Dongpo Pork
桂花冰糖藕 (Gui Hua Bing Tang Ou)		Sweet Lotus with Osmanthus	Steamed Lotus Root Stuffed with Sweet Sticky Rice
八宝辣酱 (Ba Bao Na Jiang)	Mixed Chicken with PeanutS shrimp Bamboo	Eight Kinds of Food

In the table above, three translations of 毛血旺 (Mao Xue Wang) are shown. The three-star restaurant translation of "Sichuan Style" confuses readers unfamiliar with the taste and ingredients of the dish. "Spicy Harslet", is preferable in that it conveys that edible viscera are the primary ingredients. However, this translation does not specify which organs are used. Perhaps, the five-star restaurant provides the best translation providing the flavor, "spicy," and the exact ingredients in the dish. It may be easier for the English readers to understand.

The translation of 水煮牛肉 (Shui Zhu Niu Rou) highlights another translation method. Comparing "Sautéed Beef in Sauce," with "Poached Sliced Beef in Hot Chili Oil", the former provides the ingredients and cooking method of the dish, while the latter paints a more vivid picture of the food, including the ingredients, the cooking method, and color - the three essential elements of Chinese food. Thus, the second translation makes the dish sound truly appetizing.

怪味猪手 (Guai Wei Zhu Shou) also has two translations: "Pig's knuckle" and "Braised Spicy Pig Feet." The former presents some problems in that it presents the primary ingredient without further description of the essential elements of Chinese food.

四喜东坡肉 (Si Xi Dongpo Rou) has two translations: "Four Braised Dongpo Meats" and "Braised Dongpo Pork." "Four Braised" provides little information as we do not know which ingredients are used and by what method they are prepared. This translation fails to provide the basic information a foreign tourist may expect. The second translation provides both, but could be improved with further information regarding color or flavor.

桂花冰糖藕 (Gui Hua Bing Tang Ou), is translated as "Sweet Lotus with Osmanthus" and "Steamed Lotus Root Stuffed with Sweet Sticky Rice." The first translation neglects to describe the method of preparation, leaving the reader confused. The second translation is preferable, providing the materials, cooking method, and flavor.

Finally, 八宝辣酱 (Ba Bao Na Jiang) has been translated as “Mixed Chicken with Peanuts Shrimp Bamboo” and “Eight Kinds of Food”. The former provides more information, while the latter is too vague and may mislead readers. If the dish turns out not what they expected, they may feel cheated.

Interview Analysis

During the interview, the interviewee emphasized that the translations might be confusing for people who did not know Chinese food very well. She suggested the translation should be direct and clarify what foreigners want to know. She expressed the opinion that in western countries translations of Chinese dishes were more related to what was in the food than translations in China. She noted, however, that some dishes like "Kung Pao Chicken" are also popular in the United States.

When she was asked how she ordered dishes in the absence of an English menu she said, "I either know what I want to order or I can point at the pictures or point at the food of somebody else's table." and "I can use words to describe if I know what I want." She went on to describe an experience when, " they didn't have what I wanted and I didn't actually know what the meat was that they gave me in the end." This shows that an English menu is indeed necessary in Chinese restaurants.

During our conversation, the interviewee emphasized several times that additional information including raw materials and cooking methods should be provided in the English translation of Chinese dish names. Thus we can conclude that when foreigners ask for the menu and order the dishes, they will read the menu for more information regarding what is in the food or how it is cooked. Different methods of preparation conjure different images and flavors. To them, there is a big difference between deep-fried chicken and steamed chicken. They like to know what kind of food they can expect, especially if they are not familiar with Chinese cooking.

Thus, we can draw the following conclusions. First, a translation of dish names should sufficiently describe both cooking methods and raw ingredients. Secondly, the translation should illustrate the three elements of Chinese dishes: color, aroma, and flavor. Finally, including history and the culture gives added flair to the translation of Chinese dish names.

Discussion & Conclusion

Based on the data collected and the interview conducted, we have an improved understanding of the foreign experience of Chinese menu translations. Foreigners prefer to have a clear understanding of what they are eating. Thus, we should strive to make the names of Chinese dishes more clear and better inform foreign visitors. Wherever possible, precise information regarding cooking methods and ingredients should be included.

Bibliography

Burns, R. B. (2000). Introduction to research methods (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia Pty Limited.

He, S. (2010). "Lost and found in translating tourist texts domesticating, Foreignising or neutralising approach." The Journal of Specialised Translation (13).

Jin, D. and E. A. Nida (1984). On Translation. 北京：中国对外翻译出版公司.

Ko, L. (2010). "Chinese-English translation of public signs for tourism." The Journal of Specialised Translation (13).

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.

Nida, E. A. (2001). Language and Culture: Context in Translating. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Pasters, W. C. (1995). The narrative achievement of teaching practice: A phenomenological case study. Unpublished doctoral thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

Zhu, J. (2007). Translation as Intercultural Interpretation: A Mode of Philosophical Hermeneutics and Reception Aesthetics. Changsha: Hunan People Press.

蔡华 (2003). 中国菜谱的英译和饮食文化，北京：中国学术期刊电子出版社.

侯燚 (2004). "菜谱翻译的文化内涵."湖南医科大学学报(社会科学版)(6)4.

梁红卫 (1999). "中餐菜谱的英译名浅析." 福建行政学院福建经济管理干部学院学报(4).

刘宓庆 (1999). 当代翻译理论，北京: 中国对外翻译出版社.

谭载喜 (1999). 新编奈达论翻译，北京: 中国对外翻译出版社.

文月娥 (2006). "从功能对等论看中式菜谱的英译." 湘潭师范学院学报(社会科学版)(28)2.

张谷微 (2009). 黄浦区饭店将推广英文菜单. On line at http://www.news365.com.cn/wxpd/sh/hp/200903/t20090306_2227356.htm (consulted 06.03.2009).

Congjun Mu,

English to Chinese Translator

e-mail: congjunmu@gmail.com