Search results for 'tag:Translation tag:Language schools' matching tags 'Translation' and 'Language schools'

People fought in a Chinese translation forum

Lafingn — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:25:09 GMT

Hi, everyone! Happy New Year!

But I'm trying to be happy. I'm pulled into a debate over "the very English standard" in a Chinese translation forum. A "sensible" lad who crammed in China's New Oriental Language School asserts that many usages, including those in nytimes.com, economist.com, native speakers' blogs and more, are actually non-stardard and thus wrong. Even some in Oxford dictionaries now become "obsolete" or "unacceptable". One of his examples is about "which" used as relative pronoun:

A student who talks about 'strong rain' may make himself understood, but possibly not without provoking a smile or a correction, which may or may not matter.

He says which, referring a circumstance here, is a misuse. The original sentence is from the introduction to an Oxford dictionary. By the way, he also laughs at the part "but possibly not without provoking a smile or a correction" because he thinks it's bad English (maybe not very smooth for his limited reading), while I don't agree.

Also denied is another example from American Traditional Dictionary:

He left early, which was wise.

He says every teacher in New Oriental would frown on this because they were taught in school that the relative pronoun "which" should in no way substitute a foregoing sentence in the proceeding non-restrictive attributive clause.

Is that true, or the dictionary wrong?

My next question is what's your opinion about education New Oriental offers, if you happen to know. Since I really doubt about it.

He posted his comments(sorry for his dirty words)ï¼

Should any native English speaker look at what you put down here, he or she will definitely go to see a doctor as this foreigner will not only be amused, but also be suffering from a nausea and vomiting disease. Such trashy and junk words were put together to display how poor and messy your so-called English (in fact, even worse than typical Chinglish) is . You can certainly regard me as stinky because I have been so unluckily gotten into contact with you, a piece of ***. You can rest your mind that I am far inferior to you in this regard. How funny a stupid idiot like you could have an idea of building up a team! Do you believe that there are many other people on this world, who can be as similarly asinine as you are. Just go to the hell and kiss your mom's ass! Your so-called dream ( actually a kind of deliria) will never come true. Otherwise, our society as a whole will run into an overall catastrophe of deterioration of our population quality. BTW, you shall never compare yourself with violinqq, as doing so is like comparing a piece of *** with a brillant piece of jade.

My reply and comments on his English (he says he can't read because "it's a mess"):

while "poor" is my guts feeling to your lanugage, a second thought is carefully given to the reasoning why it should look so awkward. considering the paragraph Aurorean offered as a prototype in many aspects, a thorough examination helps to identify some factors that are about the language per se and that can be quickly wiped off upon notice; the rest factors, however, extend far beyond language due to their much deeper roots in thinking habits upon which words and patterns are selected.

Generally the language in question features lengthy and humdrum, which is often the lesson of Chinese English. On the whole, Chinese tolerates more repetition than English does. Oftimes parallel words and phrases, or structures of like meanings in Chinese break out powerful rather than demolish the strength. But in English, it's the other way around. Silimar elements piled on can be worse than grammar mistakes with their lower efficiency in conveying meaning and the breakup in reading, for it distracts readers, even annoys them. And Chinese is a more detailed languge. While many elements in English are self-evident and can be safely left out, doing so in Chinese is risky and would give an abrupt sense, though it can still be understood with a little extra effort. Chinese English is humdrum not just for a considerable amount of repetition, but also for a lack of lively vocabulary, sentence patterns, and other forceful expressions.

The above mentioned, it becomes apparent why and how literal translation, or writing English from Chinese structures, is problematic.

Let's proceed to the problems packed in the following paragraph, by courtesy of our Mr. Aurorean, the personality of amusing grudges and grievances, not thoroughly denied though could have been, thanks to the benevolence of the translation industry and many open-minded people. Thanks to Mr. Aurorean, for his unabashed display of his self-styled good english, which may otherwise help to benchmark many translators' work.

Should any native English speaker look at what you put down here, he or she will definitely go to see a doctor as this foreigner will not only be amused, but also be suffering from a nausea and vomiting disease.
Comments: very low efficiency. Simply put it like this: Any English native speaker at your words will... Well, "what your put down here" is self-evident in the context so it's needless. Should..... is a relatively big structure here but we don't like it to do a small job. "not only be amused, but also be" is childish logic, it's dull, not interesting, not funny.

Such trashy and junk words were put together to display how poor and messy your so-called English (in fact, even worse than typical Chinglish) is .
comments: just select one between trashy and junk, since either repeats the other here. We know such words "were put together", you don't have to speak it out, which means to emphasize. So it's needless too. poor and messy, just choose the latter, because messy conveys "poor". so-called is not a good word; the meaning is not ironic enough translated from chinese literally. So see my changes:
The bundle of words makes a valueless display of the english of yours. One won't think futher if it's chinglish or not.

See? You don't have to look sissy by shouting words like "such", "how poor", "how messy". You may have never been praised as a sense of humour by females. Well, that's okay. But you should at least know how to say barbed words in a polite manner. Or how you dare to pick up english as a gun?

You can certainly regard me as stinky because I have been so unluckily gotten into contact with you, a piece of ***.
Comments: a master of english don't end a long sentence with "***." the logic is baby level too. not attractive at all. Well, try some Shakespeare way:
What's in the name "Aurorean"
that we don't call by ***
but smells at well

You can rest your mind that I am far inferior to you in this regard. How funny a stupid idiot like you could have an idea of building up a team!
Comments: you know why you look sissy? because you tag and cap others with boorish lore. now calm down and check back your words, you were being so desperate. God won't tag you with "idiot", because he's merciful. We won't too, because it's overtly evident what a kind of thing before us. Your words reflect yourself. you are your words.

Do you believe that there are many other people on this world, who can be as similarly asinine as you are. Just go to the hell and kiss your mom's ass!
Comments: really childish logic. i'm so sorry but your imagination is so flat. You just hurt your mother. You are 30 something. So your mother is a senior now. God bless her. hope she survives you 'cause you two are to split into different ends of the world in the long run. Cherish the rest time.

Your so-called dream ( actually a kind of deliria) will never come true. Otherwise, our society as a whole will run into an overall catastrophe of deterioration of our population quality. BTW, you shall never compare yourself with violinqq, as doing so is like comparing a piece of *** with a brillant piece of jade.
Comments: Yuk, instead just say "I'm worried about your dream" to avoid sissy impression and create gentleman image. don't say "our society as a whole" because you are not supposed to be one of the leadership level right? "an overall catastrophe of deterioration of our population quality" sound lousy: words are too long. simply try "the end of the world", and it's more vivid and impressive. by the way, i'm not that great, and the world won't collapse for my individual existence. I'm so worried about your state of health. check your family tree and see if one or two cases of Alzheimer's disease or mongolian exist. by the way, who grants you the big position to compare? look at yourself, even a far cry from a botched creature by god.

Whose English is more acceptable? I'm in want of your opinions.

Thank you all in advance.

Newguest — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 09:55:23 GMT

This is an advertisement of one of the language schools. Translation is mine.

"Sign up for X(it stands for the name of the school)-languages will not be foreign any more."

IS IT CORRECT?

Re: Present perfect continuous in negative sentences

Mowgli — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 10:13:31 GMT

Hello,

excuse me. It shouhd have been: My grammar book says PRESENT PERFECT SIMPLE is usual with all verbs in negative sentences. I have written PP continuous which was an accident. I try to translate exactly what this book says (ItÂ´s a Czech book for language schools - AngliÄtina pro jazykovÃ© Å¡koly, II, s. 30, 1988, but there are also new editions):

The present perfect simple is usual with the verbs to be, to have to know and all verbs in negative sentences instead of the present perfect simple. explanation if you canÂ´t understand my translation: in the context where we usually use with other verbs the PPcontionuous (The PPsimple in negative sentences expresses that the acction hasnÂ´t occured at all.):

examples from the book for the verbs to have, to be and to know : "IÂ´ve known him for ten years. ItÂ´s been hot since Monday. IÂ´ve had this camera for more than a year"

and negative: "It hasnÂ´t rained since Monday. X affirmative: "It has been raining since Monday."

So, thatÂ´s why I suppose the following sentences should be wrong:

*** hasnÂ´t been raining since Monday.***

or the sentences from my previous post:

*** havenÂ´t been driving/smoking since 2000. ***???However, you have written: "These are OK, but would also be OK without the continuous".

I suppose the verbs which arenÂ´t usually used in the present continuos are also not used in the present perfect continous. So the list of the verbs {have, be, know} which are used in the the present perfect simple in the contexts where other verbs have present perfect continous isnÂ´t probably complete. (I mean not only: be, have and know. I would add other non progressive verbs / to hear, to see in the meaning of :with your eyes, to own and other)

I have a car now. (not *** I am having a car now.***)

so thatÂ´s why I say :

IÂ´ve had this camera for more than a year. and not: *** have been having this camera for more than a year.***

My example for the nonprogressive for the verb own: We have owned this house for ten years. (but: We have been rebuilding this house for ten years.) - both means to me: we still own the house, we are still rebuilding the house - own - nonprogressive verb

And now I am going to try how I understand the book of the Murphy (itÂ´s English Grammar in Use for Intermediate students, however, I donÂ´t have the book here and thatÂ´s why I cannot write it exactly, I am afraid. It concerns the verbs live and work:

It should be possible (according to Murphy) to use either PP simple or PP continuous in the same context with the verbs live and work:

An example from an other textbook (Enterprise III, Workbook, page 10, ex. 6, Express Publishing, 2000 (1997).

According to the key:

How long have you been working/worked there? (I suppose both means: You are still working/you still work there.)

One friend of mine says he knows the same rule for wait. So it should also be possible to say:

How long have you been waiting here/have yow waited here?

I have been waiting since eight oÂ´clock. / I have waited since eight oÂ´clock. - Is there any difference in meaning of those two sentences? (PPcontinous is probably more usual in this context - "since eight oÂ´clock", isnÂ´t it? - I would have said before: I have waited since eight oÂ´clock is wrong.- You have written : "ItÂ´s fine. In fact, since "wait" usually refers to a period of time, IÂ´d say continous is the more common form of the perfect tense of this verb. Does it (also) concern this special context, these two sentences, or is it probably meant in general?

(- You have also written: It is possible to use any verb in these two tenses. Does it also concern the non progressive verbs (have, be, know, own, see, hear, ...)? Can I also normally use them in the PP continuous? - for example: ???I have been having this camera for more than half a year.????

Thank you for your reply Mowgli

Re: THE MOST POIGNANT STORY THAT I HAVE EVER READ

Anonymous — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:13:29 GMT

I am Rob Whitehurst and have been fortunate that one of my correspondents has let me know about this forum. I have read the postings and the translation here and am delighted to "get a take on" another effort to bring Thuy's journals into English. I will post the URL to the Vietnam Project: http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/ which can be used to view the original and my translation-to-date. Just click on the first entry about the diaries of Dang Thuy Tram and you can access all of it.

In short, as you have read here Fred put together with help a very rough and literal translation over the years when he first held the diaries. We were able to read part of them as long ago as 1970 when he first kept them out of the "burn barrel". He spent some time with me in the southern part of Viet Nam on a couple of "in-country R and Rs (rest and recreations) and we spoke then of their importance, but of course at that time there was still war between the U.S. and North Viet Nam, so for many years he held them. We would speak about them often and I watched his efforts to find Thuy's family continue without success. Truthfully, though her parents' names were given in the longer journal, Thuy had noted them after several empty pages towards the end of the book. Fred doesn't read Vietnamese, so he didn't realize the significance of the note. I came across it while counting pages to see how many were left in the book when she lost it in December of 1969, but this was in 2004 when I had decided to "tackle" the task of bringing the translation into a version easily read in English. The research for that was primarily on-line with reference to the scans of the original which we kept on a disc. I am not a native speaker of Vietnamese but went to language school in the US Army for a year. When in Viet Nam during 1970-72 I read very little, but became quite fluent in spoken Vietnamese...unfortunately, a lot of that ease has disappeared in the 33 years since I left Southeast Asia. My efforts have been a labor of love, support for a brother, and then increasingly admiration for the young doctor during her time in war. The many people who contributed to the final location of her family all have my deepest appreciation, and the help which I have continued to receive in my efforts to come to know Thuy and her place in time keep me in a state of delight and facination. Her family was not "lost" in truth, but the challenge of locating them for Fred and me was daunting. Two years ago Dang Thuy Tram was a sad and closely held old memory for her mother, family, and friends. For me she was "whispers and smoke" as I worked to make a connection between the small upstairs room where my computer sits and a then very obscure society on the other side of the world. The translation progressed as slowly as the increase in knowledge about the original. Today, after a very remarkable and wonderful correspondence, a hard-to-believe trip to Ha Noi with the meeting of her large family and many, many people too wonderful to imagine...it seems that it was easy, simple, and only natural, but I have to write that I need just to read the correspondence file which is close to 200 pages long to recall the difficulties wanting to be faced in order to get my translation to its present state. Of course now I have been helped by Thuy's youngest sister, many other members of her family, and many newcomers to the effort. Just for instance Thuy recalls Chu Van An twice in her journals: two years ago the only immediately available note about Chu Van An on the internet was the listing of a commemorative postal stamp honoring the school's 100 years. I would have otherwise not known what exactly she referred to. With the knowledge that it was a school I found a couple of sites for graduates, but nothing else. I now see in my mind's eye the dignified collection of old school buildings beside West Lake in Ha Noi and the gathering of her classmates there one morning when we visited in August, also the climb to the second floor classroom where they all took the seats at the desks they used almost 50 years ago, and I can picture the quiet conversation with a number of her friends from that time when I heard of their memories of Thuy. Today Chu Van An is a place clear to me, and hopefully it will be clear to the readers of the English translation.

I continue to work on my translation, now with the attention of Kim Tram to various of my wordings. I have started a section of foot-notes to explain things and people not immediately known to the reader, and I welcome any attention to my efforts. If I didn't spend a lot of my time at work and at sea I would love to get involved in a "round-table" discussion of the translation where anyone with knowledge could contribute to the most correct final version. Just now I am particularly interested in all of the place names in the Duc Pho district where all of Thuy's service took place. I want to note here that during the time covered by the two journals, she served in an area of approximately 15 miles east to west, and 20 miles north to south. I have located some of the intelligence reports from the US forces stationed in the area, and gradually a larger picture of the environment in which she worked has emerged.

I encourage anyone who can read the original text, or the book which the Tram Ladies have published, to do so, and anyone who can correct my efforts at a clear translation will be met by me with enthusiasm.

Regards....