maxiewawa

I’ve been reading Chinese language newspapers a lot recently. I’m keen on becoming an interpreter/translator so I thought I’d try to translate a story in today’s newspaper.

Most of the stories are actually just translations of English language stories so I’m able to compare my English translations of Chinese stories with the original translations. Confused? Just have a look at this paragraph. It’s in English, and is from the Daily Telegraph.

THE NSW Government is fast-tracking the $8 billion West Metro to be completed within six years in a bid to salvage credibility ahead of the election.

Here’s the Chinese translation, which I found in a newspaper:

新州的政府正努力加快孩子亿元的West Metro的建设步伐，以期在六年内完工，从而在大选前挽回信誉。

And here’s my English translation of the Chinese. Keep in mind that I wrote this without referring to the original English.

The NSW government is doing its best to quicken the pace of construction of the West Metro, hoping to complete work within the next six years, thereby winning back the trust of voters.

I think I was pretty close. Things are out of order,  but I think I got all the info in there. It doesn’t flow as well as the original English but that’s bound to happen I think.

The next paragraph. First, the original English story.

The botched $5 billion CBD Metro project is also going ahead but will no longer extend to Rozelle, instead taking commuters as far as Pyrmont, according to a Government source.

Next the Chinese.

耗资50的商业中心区的Metro工程也在继续进行当中，但是根据政府的最新消息，这一工程将不会扩展到Rozelle,相反，至多只能到达Pyrmont.

Now my translation of the Chinese.

The $5 billion CBD Metro project is continuing, but according to recent reports the new line will not extend to Rozelle, but will in fact only go to Pyrmont.

A few boo-boos. I mentioned “recent reports”; the original, “a Government source”. I missed that.

Also, the original mentions that the project has been “botched”; I don’t mention that information. This is because the Chinese doesn’t translate “botched”. Not my fault! But what does that mean anyway? Wikitionary says:

To perform (a task) in an unacceptable or incompetent manner; to make a mess of something; to ruin; to bungle; to spoil; to destroy.”

But if the project was botched/spoiled/made a mess of, why is it still going ahead? Surely if something has been botched it’s completely beyond salvage? If something is botched doesn’t that mean that no one is able to fix it? I don’t know why the writer put “botched” in there, and I suspect  that the confusion is why the Chinese translator left it out.

The original mentions “taking commuters as far as Pyrmont”, where I say that “[the line] will in fact only go to Pyrmont”. The Chinese doesn’t mention commuters, which is why I don’t. *shrugs* The important info, that the line isn’t going to Rozelle, is maintained.

The third paragraph:

Premier Kristina Keneally plans to use money from the privatisation of the state’s energy assets to help fund the $8 billion underground rail express to Westmead, which the Government previously admitted had no funds, no start date or completion time.

The Chinese:

Keneally计划动用新州能源资产私有化得来得资金，投资80亿元修建直达Westmead的地铁。此前，政府宣称因没有足够得资金，因此无法确定动工期和完工期。

And my English. Once again, I wrote this without looking at the original English.

Keneally plans to use the funds earned from the privatisation of NSW energy to invest in an $80 billion metro line to Westmead. But before construction began, the NSW government said that due to lack of funds it couldn’t confirm when work would start or finish.

Obviously the worst error is the number. A bad miss, I’d rather not dwell on it. The original says “rail express”, the Chinese says 地铁 which is why I say “metro”. But what exactly is a “rail express”? Isn’t an “express” a train that goes directly to a certain station without stopping at all the stops in between? Are they building a train or a train line?

The rest of the paragraph is a little wonky. The Chinese translates “previously” as 此前, which I translated as “before construction began”. Oops. The original doesn’t say what “previously” is “previous” to, the Chinese maintains that ambiguity, but I didn’t. I also say that the reason that the government “couldn’t confirm when work would start or finish” was “due to lack of funds”. The original doesn’t say this, but the Chinese does. The Chinese translation has added something not in the original, which I have maintained.

Most of this analysis I’ve done is subjective though; perhaps I’ve been understanding “botched” wrong all this time, maybe “train line” isn’t as weird as I think. Maybe I’ve made errors that I haven’t picked up on.

If you’ve found something I haven’t, please leave a comment!