+0
I am doing a course on translation, and one of the sentences I must translate is driving me mad. What on earth do the two underlined verbs mean?

I have heard of the Irish thatching huts in the jungle of Cancun, maising sheep on the Steppes of Russia, tneding rice fields in East China, (...)

Could that be raising and tending? Two typos in the same sentence of a translation exercise that has been the same for years seem too much, but I cannot make sense of those verbs.

Thanks a lot in advance.
+0
Colombomaising sheep on the Steppes of Russia, tneding rice fields in East China, (...)
raising sheep and tending fields! Emotion: big smile

CJ
Comments  
They do appear to be typos. Maising is a place in Germany so could it be a breed of Sheep? Google came up with nothing but I guess you already knew that. Sorry I can't help.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
 CalifJim's reply was promoted to an answer.
Hmm -- if you're translating a passage that has misspelled words in the original language, should you misspell the appropriate words in the translation? Emotion: wink
Thanks everyone. I tended to believe what CalifJim says, that they were typos. But, as I said, this seemed to me too great a mistake in a text which is supposed to be there to teach you English and how to translate it. Besides, they've been using the same text for I don't know how many years, so I think that if they've not taken the trouble to correct them, then that's outrageous! This is why I wasn't too sure about those words being typos.

I had already considered the idea suggested by Dave that Maising sheep could be a breed of sheep from that place, but that meant changing everything, considering Irish thatching, maising and tneding as adjectives. That would also solve the issue of tneding as a particular type of rice (although, to me, it sounds more like Norse than like Chinese!). I don't really know whether Irish thatching huts would be right in this context (meaning that there's a typical kind of thatched huts in Ireland that, funnily enough, can also be found in Cancun), but anyway there was another part at the end of the sentence, that I didn't copy here, that didn't admit of such a solution.

khoff, your question is something I've already asked my teacher. Not in a case so extreme, though. In the last term, another of the texts I had to translate for this course had a jumble of a sentence of which it was difficult to make sense (I also started another thread for it). In my translation, I wrote what think was a nice right sentence and, in a footnote, an unintelligible one that, in my opinion, mimicked the clumsy style of the original. Well, my teacher told me that there was nothing wrong with the original sentence (judge for yourself*), and that if something like that ever happened, I should try to make the translation sound right in the target language. I don't completely agree with her. Things like that might, for example, make a run-of-the-mill writer seem a great genius in another language if his translator were a great writer himself, wouldn't it? Anyway, this was all to say that I imagine that my teacher's answer to your question would be to correct the typos (and, this time, I do agree with her Emotion: big smile).

* But the diversity in value between different cattle, the great size of the units, and the fact that they could not be divided, as well as the speculative element which entered into themthe (yet another typo!) cattle might deteriorate in keeping, they might also be productive while kept: all these qualities would make such a unit inadmissible in times when calculation is carried to a nicety.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Wow, that's a terrible sentence! ("The great size of the units" -- that means "cows are big," right?)

My daughter showed me her translation of a Spanish novella, and I mentioned that some of the sentences seemed vague or confusing -- she said she was trying to stay faithful to the style of the original.

Things like that might, for example, make a run-of-the-mill writer seem a great genius in another language if his translator were a great writer himself, wouldn't it?
You're right -- I suppose it's possible for some works to improve in translation!

Another interesting topic is sentences that cannot be translated without changing their true/false value. If you translate "This sentence is written in English" into any other language, you've turned a true statement into a false statement. Douglas Hofstadter has some interesting observations along these lines in his books.
khoffAnother interesting topic is sentences that cannot be translated without changing their true/false value. If you translate "This sentence is written in English" into any other language, you've turned a true statement into a false statement. Douglas Hofstadter has some interesting observations along these lines in his books.

Oh, I had never thought about that! What a great question to ask my teacher! Emotion: rock

Like your daughter, I think that trying to keep the original style (good or bad) is part of a translator's job. I've read so many bad translations that make one dislike a book that I'm sure it can happen the other way, too. And while enjoying a book is never bad, it can be misleading as to the author's quality.

By the way,

Things like that might, for example, make a run-of-the-mill writer seem a great genius in another language if his translator were a great writer himself, wouldn't they?

Yes? Emotion: embarrassed

P.S. What was that novella your daughter translated?

Yes, "wouldn't they". (I didn't notice it until you pointed it out.)

The book my daughter translated is Shiki Nagaoka by Mario Bellatin. Here's an article about the book --

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/10/books/10bellatin.html
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Thanks for that link. I'll try to find and read that book. Not that I'm fond of vague and confusing sentences, but any excuse is good to get to know a new writer.