Menu

Proyecto Visión 21

What is the point of having translations if we do not understand the original message?

Francisco Miraval

 

In 1984, I attended in Buenos Aires, Argentina, a seminar about how to translate the Biblical text into modern languages. At that meeting, my mentor, Dr. Armando Vivante, asked a question that, ignored at that time by the seminar’s participants, receives new meaning almost three decades later, because last week it was announced the invention of a real universal translator.

Vivante, with his peculiar loud voice, asked to the dozens of “experts” gathered by the seminar this question: “What is the point of talking about translations when we still have not understood the meaning of the original text?”

I was thinking about that question -that since then remains in my mind- when a few days ago I read a news report saying that Microsoft is almost ready to launch a real “universal translator.” In fact, it is not that “universal,” because it translates only 26 languages and the translation is focused on the English language.

According to the story, the user of the universal translator only needs to speak to the translator in his or her native tongue and the device will translate what the user just said into English, using the user’s own voice.

The goal, according to the story published by Mail Online, is for non-English speaking persons to community with English-speaking persons. This technology could be used by language-students and later incorporated into navigation systems and smart phones.

The universal translator translates complete sentences and not only isolated words. It also manipulates the voice of the user to sound natural in the target language.

At first, this new device looks as an extremely useful and promising technology. However, some intriguing questions emerge.

For example, since the universal translator first appeared in the well-known science-fiction series Star Trek, is the new translator an indication that all aliens (both from other countries and from other planets) should only communicate in English?

Is the new universal translator a way to validate the monolinguism in this country? Is this new technology a way of highlighting the “superiority” of the English language?

One more question: Is it right to depend on technology when we communicate with others? I believe that in the same way that, due to our own dehumanization, we now depend on some web sites to find the proper companion for our dimensions of “compatibility,” in that same way we now need a device to communicate with other human beings.

Also, I am not so sure a machine will be able to translate emotions, feelings, desires, aspirations, double-entendres, deceptions, malice, or goodness. Perhaps the only reason why an universal translator will work is because we assume our language lost its multi-dimensionality and it is just a tool we use to express almost meaningless sentences.

Translations always keep us away from the original text, because they keep us in the language we know. For that reason, what is the point of having a translation, even a universal and instant one, if we do not know the original meaning of the message?

Go Back

Comment

Blog Search

Blog Archive

Comments

There are currently no blog comments.