COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

What does it hint?

gxnn

gxnn

Really Really Experienced
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Posts
471
Having attending a number of international conferences with many attendees from various countries, I find that there is actually no need for the language interpreter (translator) because most of the time people (audience) at front row do not listen to what the speakers say, or even they look attentive, they are thinking other things, those sitting at the back even play with their mobile phones or do other things.

My friend is working as an interpreter for such conference, once he translated a sentence from Chinese into English as " Verdant trees and gurgling springs herald a vibrant season" at a political oriented meeting, but the original text, if not presented in printed words and checked with dictionaries, could not be understood by average native listeners, and the same might be true for that English version. If it is read out in English for just one or two seconds by an interpreter whose mother tongue is Chinese, do you, as a native speaker of English, really understand the words and the hint?

You are welcome to tell your true feeling and give comment, thank you.
 
"Verdant trees and gurgling springs herald a vibrant season"
Click to expand...

Can I understand it, reading it? Yes.

Would I understand it if somebody read it to me? Maybe, but less certain. Read by somebody who is not a native speaker in my language? Possibly, but again still less likely.

Would I understand it in context, in particular in a political context? Almost certainly not.

Most languages, most cultures have certain understandings which are inherent in their discourse. The same conference might have heard the translator say, "Let one hundred flowers bloom." The Chinese listeners would know instantly that the statement was not about horticulture, but rather about political expression. Non-native listeners would not pick that up. In the same way, if your original 'verdant trees' statement was a political metaphor, only a dedicated Sinologist would understand it as intended.
 
TarnishedPenny said:
Can I understand it, reading it? Yes.

Would I understand it if somebody read it to me? Maybe, but less certain. Read by somebody who is not a native speaker in my language? Possibly, but again still less likely.

Would I understand it in context, in particular in a political context? Almost certainly not.

Most languages, most cultures have certain understandings which are inherent in their discourse. The same conference might have heard the translator say, "Let one hundred flowers bloom." The Chinese listeners would know instantly that the statement was not about horticulture, but rather about political expression. Non-native listeners would not pick that up. In the same way, if your original 'verdant trees' statement was a political metaphor, only a dedicated Sinologist would understand it as intended.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

What I wanted to know is that if without the aid of the printed material a listener in a meeting could catch the meaning of the sentences within a very short time. The original text is in an old-style Chinese most of average Chinese people cannot understand without seeing the words, and since it has been put into English, could it have been done with easier words used for better understanding?

"Verdant" is not a word often heard, right? In the vocabulary for English language major of Chinese colleges, this word is not included. Of course we should not judge the proficiency of native speakers by the standard of non-native speakers, but the international conferences have many English listeners who are not native speakers but who can understand normal or not so difficult words and expressions. They (the listeners) should be given consideration when the translation is done.
 
gxnn said:
Thanks.

What I wanted to know is that if without the aid of the printed material a listener in a meeting could catch the meaning of the sentences within a very short time. The original text is in an old-style Chinese most of average Chinese people cannot understand without seeing the words, and since it has been put into English, could it have been done with easier words used for better understanding?

"Verdant" is not a word often heard, right? In the vocabulary for English language major of Chinese colleges, this word is not included. Of course we should not judge the proficiency of native speakers by the standard of non-native speakers, but the international conferences have many English listeners who are not native speakers but who can understand normal or not so difficult words and expressions. They (the listeners) should be given consideration when the translation is done.
Click to expand...
If you say the original Chinese text is old-style Chinese rather than a modern vernacular, then it seems to me that the translator is keeping within the spirit of that older style, translating using an older, more formal English language.

You're right, "verdant" is not a common twenty-first century word - there would be many readers, especially younger readers, who might not know its meaning. It's more nineteenth century poetic, I would say - Tennyson, that kind of poet.

But what we don't know is the subject of the conference - that would influence the translation approach a lot, I would have thought.
 
gxnn said:
They (the listeners) should be given consideration when the translation is done.
Click to expand...

Ultimately, unless consideration is given to the listener being able to understand, then the whole thing is just an academic exercise.


A native English speaker, provided acoustics were good, provided that the speaker did not have a thick accent and provided that the listener had, say, read a lot of classic literature, would probably be able to understand the words. If there is a cultural meaning to them, then almost certainly not.

English is a language undergoing almost constant revision. France has a formal organization to prevent that, we seem to revel in it. A major trend, for bedtter or for worse, is towards simplification, shorter sentences, simpler words.

"Verdant trees and gurgling springs herald a vibrant season" as noted, uses the sort of language commonly used 150-200 years ago. It remains in use mainly for poetry.

Today, we might instead say, "Green trees and running streams foretell a bountiful harvest." Even that might be a bit florid. 'Bountiful' and 'foretell' are on the edge of common usage.
 
There are some "standard" translations for common phrases, especially proverbs and idioms. They have been around for a long time, thus are stilted (relative to contemporary usage) wording.
 
Thanks, all of the answers are very instructive.

Here is another problem that I want your help. "I'm very happy that you will come to my house". The that-clause, what is its part of speech here? As an object clause? but it seems there is no verb that needs an object here. Might it be the omission of "to see" that is placed before the that-clause? I have checked the grammar books that I have in hand and have not found the answer satisfying.
 
gxnn said:
Thanks, all of the answers are very instructive.

Here is another problem that I want your help. "I'm very happy that you will come to my house". The that-clause, what is its part of speech here? As an object clause? but it seems there is no verb that needs an object here. Might it be the omission of "to see" that is placed before the that-clause? I have checked the grammar books that I have in hand and have not found the answer satisfying.
Click to expand...

Use of "that" is usually not necessary but in certain cases sounds as if you are taking care to link a subordinate phrase to whatever it is that it is subordinate to.*

The sentence is awkward because you would likely address what you are happy about (their visit) rather than the location it will occur.

*Use of "that" is usually not necessary but in certain cases sounds as if you are taking care to link a subordinate phrase to whatever it is subordinate to.

Essentially, as long as your sentence is constructed in such a way that the antecedent of whatever pronouns you are using are quite clear it usually does not become entangled.

Essentially, as long as you take care that your sentences is constructed in such a way that the antecedent of whatever pronouns that you are using are quite clear, it usually does not become entangled.
 
When greeting each other, we are often taught the cliche in China that we can say "How are you?" "Fine, thank you and you?" but in real life of the US or the UK or other English-speaking countries, people do not speak like that?

Our teacher also said that you can variate your answer to show that you are an advanced learner of English, like "It cannot be better", which means "I am very good", but the mentality behind such expression often troubles us, we have to pause to give it a thought.

If "it cannot be better" or "it cannot be more wrong" to mean positively, what does "it cannot be less good" or "it cannot be less wrong" mean? Are there such expressions in rhetoric? Do they mean the same with the ones using "more", because either "more" or "less" means difference, so with a negative attached to it, it means the exact same thing? In other words, "it cannot be better" equals to "it cannot be less good"? Hahah, I seem to get myself into a pit, but I hope you get my point or you can give your instruction.
 
Don't overthink things, sir. Idiom is always hard.

English-speaking people do indeed ask, "How are you doing?" or "How is it going?" as a polite indication of caring about the other's well-being.

Responses like, "Just fine," or "Couldn't be better," or "Great," or "Good, thanks," simply indicate that the one responding is happy with their situation. (One can get subtle, in that some societies or people consider that any other response would be whining and thus impolite, but that's post-grad stuff. By and large, such responses simply indicate that one's life is satisfactory.)

It's all a simple courtesy. Don't get lost in the detail.
 
gxnn said:
When greeting each other, we are often taught the cliche in China that we can say "How are you?" "Fine, thank you and you?" but in real life of the US or the UK or other English-speaking countries, people do not speak like that?

Our teacher also said that you can variate your answer to show that you are an advanced learner of English, like "It cannot be better", which means "I am very good", but the mentality behind such expression often troubles us, we have to pause to give it a thought.
Click to expand...

This sometimes happens even between different varieties of English.

In Australia or the UK, if I am not interested in something, I might say: "I couldn't care less." (It's impossible to care less than somebody who doesn't care at all.)

However, in US English, the same attitude is sometimes expressed as "I could care less". Some discussion here on where that comes from.

Australian English often favours humorous understatement. "Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick" is mild praise. On the other hand, describing something as "pretty average" or "pretty ordinary" is a criticism. I expect these would be hard to interpret for somebody who wasn't familiar with the Australian idiom.

If "it cannot be better" or "it cannot be more wrong" to mean positively, what does "it cannot be less good" or "it cannot be less wrong" mean? Are there such expressions in rhetoric?
Click to expand...

Yes, they exist, though we would usually say "couldn't" rather than "cannot" for these expressions. (Don't ask me why, just an idiom.)

So "couldn't be better" = "as good as it can be", and "couldn't be worse" = "as bad as it can be".

"Couldn't be more wrong" would be a negative expression - it's as wrong as it could possibly be.
 
I understood both sentences with no problems.
'Verdant', although possibly archaic, should be understood by any well educated person.
As soon as one hears such terms, one can infer that the speaker has only a formal education in English, with very little experience of common American usage. Such an inference makes the rest of the translation more easily understood.
 
BertrandRussell said:
I understood both sentences with no problems.
'Verdant', although possibly archaic, should be understood by any well educated person.
As soon as one hears such terms, one can infer that the speaker has only a formal education in English, with very little experience of common American usage. Such an inference makes the rest of the translation more easily understood.
Click to expand...
So do you mean that American English is usually lower than its peer of Britain?

During the years when China began to shift its dependence on the former USSR to the West, English learning superceeded the learning Russian as a foreign language, and one of the hot books English learners used was "English 900" published by McMillam, but later CCTV the China's national broadcaster began its show of English teaching TV program by adopting the BBC's "Follow Me".

Now the textbooks used in China's primary and secondary school are the ones of Longman, focusing on British usage and the language tests of English proficiency in the society have changed from the previous TOFEL that uses American English to ILETS that is on the British and the commonwealth side.
 
I use to make a point of talking to the people doing simultaneous translation (generally two) before I spoke, gave them a list of technical terms I was going to use and discussed the general flow of my presentation.

The best translators would discuss the technical terms, ask questions, and write an agreed translation so, as they switched back-and-forth, there was consistency.

It also helps to see the translation booth from where you are speaking and wear a earphone so you can also hear the translation and adjust your pace if needed.

If you’re dealing with 5/5 professional translators it’s a seamless process, but rarely will you have that opportunity so you have to help as much as possible.

I don’t talk down to people but I use simplified English without cultural references in situations where I am being translated or speaking to someone that is ESL.

I personally wouldn’t use a sentence like the one the OP illustrated to a large group because it’s so open to interpretation.

Contrast that with a small group where an excellent translator is basically telling you what they said, and mean, at the same time.

In either situation it’s not really effective to ‘hint’.
 
Help understand

Can you help paraphrase the following in simple English? Thank you.

The conference was a major step forward on cyber issues in uncharacteristically quick terms for ASEAN. However, as the regional grouping looks to produce meaningful deliverables for its upcoming summit in November, it will be challenged by parallel developments in a domain that is continually being stress-tested in many ways.

Points confusing:
Does that mean ASEAN work quickly, unlike its usual working style?
What does parallel developments mean?
Domain means cybersecurity, right?
 
gxnn said:
Can you help paraphrase the following in simple English? Thank you.

The conference was a major step forward on cyber issues in uncharacteristically quick terms for ASEAN. However, as the regional grouping looks to produce meaningful deliverables for its upcoming summit in November, it will be challenged by parallel developments in a domain that is continually being stress-tested in many ways.

Points confusing:
Does that mean ASEAN work quickly, unlike its usual working style?
What does parallel developments mean?
Domain means cybersecurity, right?
Click to expand...
Yes, it means ASEAN worked faster than its usual response time.

"Parallel developments" means several things are happening at the same time.

They all relate to cyber-security (that's the "domain"), but the number of issues means there is much more work to be done than before, and that is difficult for the organisation to manage (so the organisation is "stressed").

"Stress testing" is usually used to find out what happens in a system (it could be a software system, hardware system or an organisation of people) when it is operating at its maximum capacity, or beyond its design capacity - to find out what happens when it starts to fail.

In this context, ASEAN is the organisation (made up from a number of member countries), it is working on more things than before (in the area of cyber-security), and it is doing so faster than it did before.

In the "domain" (subject matter) of cyber-security, this is now happening all the time, so the organisation is "under stress" - it is trying to do many things all at the same time.
 
It also means that whoever drafted this statement needs to get their head slapped until they can write a simple English sentence.

I took a minute and tried to translate 'bureau-babble' into common English. I didn't spend long at it and am by no means an expert, however consider the following:

The conference was a major step forward on cyber issues in uncharacteristically quick terms for ASEAN. However, as the regional grouping looks to produce meaningful deliverables for its upcoming summit in November, it will be challenged by parallel developments in a domain that is continually being stress-tested in many ways.
50 words, Flesch Reading Ease 22.4, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 16.3

​
The conference was a big step forward and took place very quickly for ASEAN. However, if they want to see any useful results before its November summit, they will have to deal with constant challenges in an area where new developments are common.

43 words, Flesch Reading Ease 53.1, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 11.1​
​

The corrected statement, while not quite as precise as the original, is much more readable. No doubt others can do better.

This is, in my opinion, a problem plaguing every discipline. To make it look impressive to customers and peers, language is invented and inflated and you eventually wind up with indecipherable goo.
 
TarnishedPenny said:
It also means that whoever drafted this statement needs to get their head slapped until they can write a simple English sentence.

I took a minute and tried to translate 'bureau-babble' into common English. I didn't spend long at it and am by no means an expert, however consider the following...
Click to expand...
Yes, doing a plain English translation is hard, and actually takes a long time.

I'm not sure if my attempt to elaborate was helpful or more confusing - gxnn will tell us :).
 
electricblue66 said:
Yes, doing a plain English translation is hard, and actually takes a long time.

I'm not sure if my attempt to elaborate was helpful or more confusing - gxnn will tell us :).
Click to expand...
Of course, it is very helpful, you know I am now trying to translate it into Chinese, and with your help, things become easier. Earlier I thought "the domain" meant the organization itself because it has 10 members and it is not easy for all the ten members to have "parallel development" at the same time. Do you think my understanding makes sense?

TarnishedPenny said:
It also means that whoever drafted this statement needs to get their head slapped until they can write a simple English sentence.

I took a minute and tried to translate 'bureau-babble' into common English. I didn't spend long at it and am by no means an expert, however consider the following:

The conference was a major step forward on cyber issues in uncharacteristically quick terms for ASEAN. However, as the regional grouping looks to produce meaningful deliverables for its upcoming summit in November, it will be challenged by parallel developments in a domain that is continually being stress-tested in many ways.
50 words, Flesch Reading Ease 22.4, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 16.3

​
The conference was a big step forward and took place very quickly for ASEAN. However, if they want to see any useful results before its November summit, they will have to deal with constant challenges in an area where new developments are common.

43 words, Flesch Reading Ease 53.1, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 11.1​
​

The corrected statement, while not quite as precise as the original, is much more readable. No doubt others can do better.

This is, in my opinion, a problem plaguing every discipline. To make it look impressive to customers and peers, language is invented and inflated and you eventually wind up with indecipherable goo.
Click to expand...
Oh, sir, you are really amazing playing language as a toy and even provide index for reference.
 
I like to quote a linguist's prediction that by year 2050, 80% of Earth's people will think they speak English, and 80% of those will be unable to understand each other.
 
New question

Hi, all, once again I come to you as a learner of English.

Today in my reading of "Lady Chatterley's Lover" as recommended by warmed hearted mates of this forum, I came across a sentence: "Do you mean you'd rather I didn't fetch the doctor?" so my question is : you'd rather what? There should be a verb after the rather, right? Thank you for your answer.
 
In this case, ‘rather’ is being used as a synonym for ‘wish’, ‘desire’ or ‘prefer’.

In other words, it could also be written, “Do you mean that you do not wish me to get the doctor?” or “Do I understand that you would prefer that I not bring the doctor?”
 
"Rather" is one of those words in the English language that is called on to do many things, and it is hard to explain the subtleties:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/rather

In the context of Lady Chatterley, the use of "rather" is now a little old-fashioned (the book being close on a hundred year's old) but captures some of the mannerisms separating the classes through their speech. Mellors most probably would not have used the term because he's working class (it's many decades since I read the book so I may be wrong), whereas it would have been commonplace in Connie's upper class, aristocratic world.

That is one of the reasons why the book was considered so shocking when it was first published - not only did it use words that until then hadn't appeared in mainstream literature, but it also portrayed sexual activity across rigid class boundaries, "which rather shocked the English, because, darling, that never happened" - when in fact it happened all the time.
 
electricblue66 said:
That is one of the reasons why the book was considered so shocking when it was first published - not only did it use words that until then hadn't appeared in mainstream literature, but it also portrayed sexual activity across rigid class boundaries, "which rather shocked the English, because, darling, that never happened" - when in fact it happened all the time.
Click to expand...

‘Mrs Brown’ was but a malicious rumour. I mean that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gxnn
How to read out correctly the names you see for the first time
Replies
8
Views
430
munch2much
munch2much
gxnn
YYDS as initials of meaingful phrases or a sentence
Replies
2
Views
474
twister947
twister947
gxnn
Does "Beef Belly" Make Sense?
Replies
7
Views
1K
pplwatching
pplwatching
C
UK English, American English, how does it translate?
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
1K
KachinaDoll
KachinaDoll
gxnn
"I am like"
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
gxnn
gxnn
Back
Top