Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
一位经常合作的口译器材租借商说：“口译员很难搞的，好像大牌明星一样。”她所说的‘难搞’，是指价钱高，规矩多，不容易伺候。其实，我也认同他们有很多与明星相似的地方。比如说，明星要靠天生本钱，口译员也得靠本身卓越的语言条件，不但语言功力要深厚，双语精通程度得达到炉火纯青的境界，而且天生反应要灵敏，在‘卖相’上也必须让人有信心。
我所说的‘卖相’，倒不是指‘俊男美女’，而是打扮体面，谈吐大方，而且能于人亲切的印象。这是因为口译员是不同国籍人士之间的桥梁。他们必须在商业会议中的短短数小时内，帮助客户良好地表达看法，最终达到‘成交’或让对方‘满意’的终极目标，确实是像明星的现场直播节目。
有些客户听到口译员每小时收费从$100到S$200，无不吓得魂飞魄散。但就像我在前一篇文章所说的，真正了解行情的客户，都愿意付这个钱，只要质量好。因为相较于数十万甚至数百万的交易来说，几千块钱的口译费绝对值得。尤其像是新加坡这种国际大都会，各大跨国公司总部云集，经常举办大型的国际会议（最近的APEC峰会就让我们忙得团团转），高层次的商务会议、名人专访，跨国公司的董事会议等。这些汇集各国人士的交流场面，都需要口译员扮演沟通桥梁的角色。
但是根据我的体会，演员或歌星要成为炙手可热的超级巨星，除了‘演技’或‘歌喉’要好之外（唯一不同的是，口译行业只有实力派而没有偶像派），更重要的关键在于EQ （就像红遍中港台的志玲姐姐）。口译员也一样。翻译公司和口译员的关系，就像经纪人和明星。唯一较不同的是，翻译公司并不局限于非得要找某个口译员完成口译项目，口译员也可自由地和任何一家翻译公司合作，两者之间的关系较为松散无约束。正因如此，那些EQ超好、没有架子又好商量的口译员（尤其是价钱或者配合客户的要求），相信都会受到翻译公司的垂青。
作为‘经纪人’，让我最有成就感的，并非和那些‘红牌’或‘资深’口译员合作，而是能挖掘到具有潜质的口译人才，并将他们一手捧成能够胜任同步传译的优秀口译员（译力旗下就有这样一位从交替口译提升到同步口译的大将）。只要手中握有这些王牌，不但能够为公司赚到钱，也能承接多一些案子（因为红牌口译员的档期都很满，所以即使有生意上门，也不一定能配合到他们的时间）。我觉得这样不但能为市场注入更多新血，让新加坡的口译市场不被少数几位垄断，而且人才的辈出，也能更好地满足新加坡作为奖励旅游、商务会议以及博览会(MICE)举办首选地的需求，并让口译市场价格逐步调整至更多客户能够承受的水平。价钱趋于合理，也将让更多商家愿意付这笔钱任用口译员，最终达到大家开心的良性循环效果。
By
Hong Yin Yin | 方莺吟
Managing Director | 董事
Elite Bilingual Services Pte. Ltd
口译项目的管理秘诀 - （一）客户篇
Showing posts with label professional interpreters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label professional interpreters. Show all posts
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
口译项目的管理秘诀 - （一）客户篇
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
在我处理过的多种语言服务当中（笔译、口译、转录、撰稿），要数口译项目的挑战性最高，因为它和现场直播节目一样，不能有任何缺失或疏漏，更不能有任何“NG”。如此一来，后勤的准备功夫尤显得格外重要。口译项目也是最考功夫的，没有经验的项目协调员，若不严格遵照公司的服务原则行事，很容易就会答应客户一些做不到的事情，而往往得亏钱收场。译力两年前刚起步的时候，就曾接了一家大公司的案子，结果因为经验不足，无法坚持原则，而成了一次惨痛的教训。
做好口译项目的诀窍，在于‘知己知彼，百战不殆’。虽然译力在口译界里还只是个生力军，但是数十场的口译服务经验，也开始让我们总结出不同的客户类型，并能更准确地判断市场的需求和习性。今天我们就来谈一谈口译客户的基本类型：
1. 行家型：这一类懂行的客户通常都来自大公司或是活动策划机构，有接触过口译员的安排事宜，也了解专业口译员的一般价位。他们特别看重口译员的质量和经验，所以也通常会要求对口译员进行面试。
2. 智慧型：虽然这类客户没有接触过需要口译员的会议或活动，但是对质量要求仍然非常高，因为需要口译服务的会议对他们来说实在是太重要了，所以绝对不能有任何纰漏。为了确保一切顺利，他们在各种细节上都会尽量配合。
3. 一无所知型：对什么是交替口译(Consecutive Interpreting)和同步口译(Simultaneous Interpreting)都分不清楚。幸好，一些较有诚意的客户，都会谦虚地请教你该怎么做。在这个时候，我们都会好好把握机会向他们说明各种需要注意的细节。
4. 逛街型：这类客户通常爱货比三家，搜集各家翻译机构的价格。每次我们向口译员查问他们的时间时，他们都会说：“这个case 另一家翻译公司也有问过我咧！”
5. 火烧屁股型：明天需要口译员，今天才打电话来。接这种案子无疑是惹火上身，尤其是口译员比较少的语种，如西班牙语。好处是我们可以多收加急费。只要有十足的把握能安排到最优秀的口译员，还是可以做的。最近我们就为一家知名的服装品牌公司安排口译员，采访韩国著名影星元斌。下午两点钟的采访，早上九点钟才打来的电话！幸好我们的首席口译员高度配合，才能在短短一个早上轻松安排好一切，顺利完成任务。
接出不同类型的客户之后，我给自己总结了一个心得。所谓‘真金不怕红炉火’，只要我们所精挑细选的口译员的质量够硬，在安排后勤事宜上规划周详，在坚守一些行规和原则时毫不妥协，尽量保护我们最宝贵的资产 – 口译员，而且知道什么类型的客户会耍什么招数，成功的个案也会越来越多。
换句话说，成功安排口译项目的重点不在客户，而是我们背后的一张张王牌 – 口译员。这也将是我下一周的分享重点。
口译项目的管理秘诀 - （二）口译员
在我处理过的多种语言服务当中（笔译、口译、转录、撰稿），要数口译项目的挑战性最高，因为它和现场直播节目一样，不能有任何缺失或疏漏，更不能有任何“NG”。如此一来，后勤的准备功夫尤显得格外重要。口译项目也是最考功夫的，没有经验的项目协调员，若不严格遵照公司的服务原则行事，很容易就会答应客户一些做不到的事情，而往往得亏钱收场。译力两年前刚起步的时候，就曾接了一家大公司的案子，结果因为经验不足，无法坚持原则，而成了一次惨痛的教训。
做好口译项目的诀窍，在于‘知己知彼，百战不殆’。虽然译力在口译界里还只是个生力军，但是数十场的口译服务经验，也开始让我们总结出不同的客户类型，并能更准确地判断市场的需求和习性。今天我们就来谈一谈口译客户的基本类型：
1. 行家型：这一类懂行的客户通常都来自大公司或是活动策划机构，有接触过口译员的安排事宜，也了解专业口译员的一般价位。他们特别看重口译员的质量和经验，所以也通常会要求对口译员进行面试。
2. 智慧型：虽然这类客户没有接触过需要口译员的会议或活动，但是对质量要求仍然非常高，因为需要口译服务的会议对他们来说实在是太重要了，所以绝对不能有任何纰漏。为了确保一切顺利，他们在各种细节上都会尽量配合。
3. 一无所知型：对什么是交替口译(Consecutive Interpreting)和同步口译(Simultaneous Interpreting)都分不清楚。幸好，一些较有诚意的客户，都会谦虚地请教你该怎么做。在这个时候，我们都会好好把握机会向他们说明各种需要注意的细节。
4. 逛街型：这类客户通常爱货比三家，搜集各家翻译机构的价格。每次我们向口译员查问他们的时间时，他们都会说：“这个case 另一家翻译公司也有问过我咧！”
5. 火烧屁股型：明天需要口译员，今天才打电话来。接这种案子无疑是惹火上身，尤其是口译员比较少的语种，如西班牙语。好处是我们可以多收加急费。只要有十足的把握能安排到最优秀的口译员，还是可以做的。最近我们就为一家知名的服装品牌公司安排口译员，采访韩国著名影星元斌。下午两点钟的采访，早上九点钟才打来的电话！幸好我们的首席口译员高度配合，才能在短短一个早上轻松安排好一切，顺利完成任务。
接出不同类型的客户之后，我给自己总结了一个心得。所谓‘真金不怕红炉火’，只要我们所精挑细选的口译员的质量够硬，在安排后勤事宜上规划周详，在坚守一些行规和原则时毫不妥协，尽量保护我们最宝贵的资产 – 口译员，而且知道什么类型的客户会耍什么招数，成功的个案也会越来越多。
换句话说，成功安排口译项目的重点不在客户，而是我们背后的一张张王牌 – 口译员。这也将是我下一周的分享重点。
By
Hong Yin Yin | 方莺吟
Managing Director | 董事Elite Bilingual Services Pte. Ltd
口译项目的管理秘诀 - （二）口译员
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Simultaneous Interpreting
Simultaneous Interpreting (sometimes referred to as Simultaneous Translation, or SI) is used to provide an audience made up of individuals speaking different languages with a facility to understanding the exact nature of what is being communicated to them. The information is interpreted, as spoken, from the speaker's source-language; the interpreter then conveys the translated message into a microphone which is, in turn, delivered to the target-listeners via their headsets.
This method of translation entails the interpreter to relay communications in the appropriate target-language efficiently and with a high degree of accuracy.
Events such as conferences and seminars often carry with them a requirement for highly skilled linguists. These individuals are required not only to have a good command of different languages, but also to understand and communicate the numerous relevant terminologies that will, in all likelihood, be referred to throughout the duration of such events.
As is the case with any conference, the effective communication of ideas, plans and proposals is optimum. Indeed, the primary function of a conference is to reach out to your client base in a manner that is concise, clear and not overstated; to present your message in a way that demonstrates sensitivity to your audience.
In the case where there is a multi-lingual presence, the need for simultaneous communications to be made effectively is of paramount importance.
Translation service providers offer simultaneous interpretation, providing their clients with the facility to be able to achieve a smooth, concurrent level of communication between their clients' customers. In this way, business needs are met with minimal attention being drawn to the language barrier.
Supplying the client with the right individuals for the task will empower them with the means to impart their message to their target audience in a professional and inclusive manner. With the addition of organising travel arrangements for its translators, as well as offering the facility to provide the necessary audio equipment, a translation service provider can potentially provide complete end-to-end language solutions for its clients needs.
The obvious benefits SI brings to the industry are manifold. To take one example, let's make the analogy that a company is in the market to supply a generic product for which its exportation potential is boundless. The product, at the time however, may only be aimed at a particular market. Without the facility to express the products advantages, a major obstacle is created that will inevitably prevent growth. The product itself might be of the utmost relevance for that particular audience, but without the means to convey this, the possible benefits will go completely unnoticed.
The key advantage to providing SI is that companies can now reach audiences that they would not have had access to before, whilst also freeing-up the possibility for an easy discourse between partners on products and their suitability.
The technical expertise that language specialists provide help make such events as conferences and seminars a success. When an audience is equipped with the facility to fully understand the message that is being conveyed to them, the language barrier is rendered practically non-existent. This allows discussions to flow freely and helps achieve a high standard of clarity.
As we move forward into an ever culturally diversifying future, requirements such as these can only grow in scope and specification as new business communities continue to develop, making the need to communicate more and more imperative. By creating an arena for easy and clear discourse, simultaneous translation bridges a gap that allows communications, and therefore business, to flourish.
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
This method of translation entails the interpreter to relay communications in the appropriate target-language efficiently and with a high degree of accuracy.
Events such as conferences and seminars often carry with them a requirement for highly skilled linguists. These individuals are required not only to have a good command of different languages, but also to understand and communicate the numerous relevant terminologies that will, in all likelihood, be referred to throughout the duration of such events.
As is the case with any conference, the effective communication of ideas, plans and proposals is optimum. Indeed, the primary function of a conference is to reach out to your client base in a manner that is concise, clear and not overstated; to present your message in a way that demonstrates sensitivity to your audience.
In the case where there is a multi-lingual presence, the need for simultaneous communications to be made effectively is of paramount importance.
Translation service providers offer simultaneous interpretation, providing their clients with the facility to be able to achieve a smooth, concurrent level of communication between their clients' customers. In this way, business needs are met with minimal attention being drawn to the language barrier.
Supplying the client with the right individuals for the task will empower them with the means to impart their message to their target audience in a professional and inclusive manner. With the addition of organising travel arrangements for its translators, as well as offering the facility to provide the necessary audio equipment, a translation service provider can potentially provide complete end-to-end language solutions for its clients needs.
The obvious benefits SI brings to the industry are manifold. To take one example, let's make the analogy that a company is in the market to supply a generic product for which its exportation potential is boundless. The product, at the time however, may only be aimed at a particular market. Without the facility to express the products advantages, a major obstacle is created that will inevitably prevent growth. The product itself might be of the utmost relevance for that particular audience, but without the means to convey this, the possible benefits will go completely unnoticed.
The key advantage to providing SI is that companies can now reach audiences that they would not have had access to before, whilst also freeing-up the possibility for an easy discourse between partners on products and their suitability.
The technical expertise that language specialists provide help make such events as conferences and seminars a success. When an audience is equipped with the facility to fully understand the message that is being conveyed to them, the language barrier is rendered practically non-existent. This allows discussions to flow freely and helps achieve a high standard of clarity.
As we move forward into an ever culturally diversifying future, requirements such as these can only grow in scope and specification as new business communities continue to develop, making the need to communicate more and more imperative. By creating an arena for easy and clear discourse, simultaneous translation bridges a gap that allows communications, and therefore business, to flourish.
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
Sunday, March 1, 2009
An Interpreter’s Perspective
By Annmarie Fox,
Translator and interpreter at the Medical Foundation,
Member of the Foreign Office interpreting team
(Hungarian and French freelance),
United Kingdom
sebfox@aol.com
http://www.foreignword.biz/cv/1212.htm
At the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture more than 75% of communication with clients relies on the use of an interpreter. Given the intricate interaction between clinician, client and interpreter, the dynamics of the work involved are rather complex.
When I started work at the Medical Foundation, my 'outside' professional colleagues were mostly concerned whether I would be able to cope with the emotional content of the interpreting. Graphic descriptions of torture, intense emotional distress, loss, rape, bereavement and displacement are very difficult subjects to listen to and then to find appropriate and adequate words to render them into another language. Then there are the associative images - the more eloquent and articulate the narrator, the more powerful and intrusive are the images. Dealing with the subject matter has not become easier over the last five years that I have worked at the Foundation.
Another factor to take into account is that, although interpreter and therapist both would describe language as their main professional tool, we come from completely opposite disciplines. Normally, the intimate practice of analysis does not involve an outsider, let alone an outsider as the carrier of words. Interpreting, on the other hand, by its nature, requires three or more people. In my 'outside' interpreting life the duration of the assignments is short-term, temporary and factual. Most of my work at the MF is long- term, emotionally complex and requires close co-operation with clinicians. Consequently, I had to modify my working practice.
Boundaries with clinicians
This for me meant establishing a different set of boundaries from those I use in my other work. A close and trusting relationship often develops between clinician and interpreter, especially in long-term therapy, and this inevitably places the interpreter in a co-therapist position. Whilst this can be a very seductive process, I often have to remind myself that I neither possess the tools nor the structure to assume a role for which I have no training or professional know-how. Nor do I want the responsibility. My responses in pre- and post-session discussions are based on instinct, common sense, life experience and gut-reaction - and not on qualified clinical contributions.
My work boundaries are largely shaped and defined by the relationships that exist between the participating individuals. Some clinicians are tactile and effusive and we greet and say goodbye to our clients with lengthy and warm hugs and kisses. Others are formal and reserved, avoiding any body contact beyond a handshake. Most of the time I try to align my body language to that of the clinician as in most cases my relationship to the client is similar to the one the clinician has with the client. Successful therapy is often determined by a smooth and open teamwork between all concerned in which the bonds and boundaries are well defined. Ideally, in these settings the clinician does not feel threatened and the interpreter does not feel excluded. Trust is paramount - the clinician's trust of the interpreter with the language, the interpreter's trust of the clinician understanding of the cultural issues and taking the right clinical direction and the client's trust in both by simply opening up.
Sometimes, I feel, quite unrealistically in the context of working at the Foundation but not in my 'outside' work, that notebook and pen during sessions would be very useful implements. I have to make instant decisions as to how a question will make sense to the client (and vice-versa) and my translation may vary from what had been asked by the therapist.
Boundaries with clients
Interpreter-client boundaries are more difficult to define because often the client comes from the same sociocultural or ethnic background as the interpreter and their lives might he intertwined outside the Foundation. There could be feelings of envy, jealousy, admiration and expectation that place the interpreter in an entirely different position from that of a linguist facilitating communication. The client might want the interpreter to act as advocate and problem-solver for matters entirely unrelated to their visit to the Foundation. Alternatively, the client may wonder whether the interpreter will keep confidence and not betray him/her.
Because I share no common culture or skin colour with my client group, I might often be considered by them an adjunct to the therapist. This has advantages as well as disadvantages: on the plus side, I feel that my presence is reassuring to the client in as much as I pose no danger or raise doubts of belonging to an enemy faction that could warn the client to withhold information or be on his/her guard. In many instances, my clients have deliberately and adamantly refused to he seen by clinicians or interpreters from their own culture. On the minus side, the client could find it embarrassing or impossible to explain tribal or local customs without the cultural input of his/her fellow country person. For this reason, I try to make myself as familiar as possible with background information, geographical and political details and latest developments in the country of the client.
In one particular case I forged very strong links with a family with whom I particularly identified. Apart from being their constant interpreter throughout their many comings and goings to the Foundation, I also saw them socially with my children. Having clearly overstepped my professional boundaries, I became privy to a great deal of information that could have furthered or hampered their therapy. When the family was referred to a family therapist with whom I had not worked before, I was very concerned about the therapist's perception of my bond to the family and the threat this might pose, to her and potentially to the therapy. I was worried that her attitude to the family might be coloured by my relationship with them, leaving her much as the outsider. My fears were unfounded, largely because of the therapist's skills and her recognition of the exceptional strength of the family. In the sessions I could distance myself sufficiently from the family to remain purely the professional and objective interpreter whilst at the same time giving them comfort, knowing that they had a strong alliance with me. The family has subsequently benefitted enormously from the therapy.
Empathy with the client
I have a profound empathy with some of the clients - this is because of my own family history of persecution, because in my time I have also been a refugee in another country and because my working language at the Foundation is not really the language I was brought up in. I can identify with and understand many of the problems and emotions.
Use of words and metaphors
Many clinicians often use metaphors, proverbs and idioms for which I have to find an approximation if the equivalent does not immediately spring to mind. To search for a literal meaning could completely backfire and cloud the waters if the interpreter breaks the momentum and flow of the session. Unless the issue is of a major importance, in which case I ask for further elaboration, the nuances often get lost during the session. In a recent session when I used the word 'pipe- dream', the therapist, perhaps wondering at the specificity of the word, halted and under her breath she asked 'Did he use that word?' Well, no, he had not, as he literally said 'future projection' but it fitted much better in the context of the meaning of the sentence. These are challenges we often wrestle with and while nuances may sometimes disappear, the meaning always prevails.
In long-term therapy sessions, where collaborations between all parties concerned have been well established, I tend to render the ideas and the meanings. In one-off sessions, such as those for medical report writing or psychological or psychiatric assessments, a verbatim interpretation is called for. For example, when a client says that he is frightened in a small, enclosed and dark space, I will interpret this exactly as it is said and leave it to the doctor whether he wants to term it 'claustrophobic'. Equally, if the client uses frequent repetitions or has difficulty in expressing him/herself, these have to be translated verbatim, as the client's verbal idiosyncrasy could he a valuable indication for the accuracy of the diagnosis. An interesting example of the dilemmas of interpreting appeared in an article in The Linguist, concerning the BBC Monitor Service in Caversham. A few days before he was overthrown in Romania, in December, 1989, Nicolae Ceausescu said 'At this big rally I would like to repeat what I said recently that the expectations of these gentlemen (Western observers) may come true when poplar trees bear apples and osier willows bear carnations.' The equivalent English folk idiom that would have captured the exact meaning and which the interpreter was tempted to use was 'when an orange grows on an apple tree'. Because the literal translation was clear and because of the importance of the historical speech the text remained unchanged. During the night hundreds of paper apples appeared in the poplar trees around the city and a few weeks later the apple and not the orange became the symbol of the revolution.
Annrnarie Fox was born in Transylvania, brought up in Israel and Germany and has been living in England for thirty years. She has been a translator and interpreter at the Medical Foundation since 1995, interpreting mainly for African Francophone countries.
© Annemarie Fox 2001
Reproduced with the kind permission of the author.
This article first appeared in Context (the magazine for family therapy and systemic practice), (54): 19-20, April 2001.
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
Translator and interpreter at the Medical Foundation,
Member of the Foreign Office interpreting team
(Hungarian and French freelance),
United Kingdom
sebfox@aol.com
http://www.foreignword.biz/cv/1212.htm
At the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture more than 75% of communication with clients relies on the use of an interpreter. Given the intricate interaction between clinician, client and interpreter, the dynamics of the work involved are rather complex.
When I started work at the Medical Foundation, my 'outside' professional colleagues were mostly concerned whether I would be able to cope with the emotional content of the interpreting. Graphic descriptions of torture, intense emotional distress, loss, rape, bereavement and displacement are very difficult subjects to listen to and then to find appropriate and adequate words to render them into another language. Then there are the associative images - the more eloquent and articulate the narrator, the more powerful and intrusive are the images. Dealing with the subject matter has not become easier over the last five years that I have worked at the Foundation.
Another factor to take into account is that, although interpreter and therapist both would describe language as their main professional tool, we come from completely opposite disciplines. Normally, the intimate practice of analysis does not involve an outsider, let alone an outsider as the carrier of words. Interpreting, on the other hand, by its nature, requires three or more people. In my 'outside' interpreting life the duration of the assignments is short-term, temporary and factual. Most of my work at the MF is long- term, emotionally complex and requires close co-operation with clinicians. Consequently, I had to modify my working practice.
Boundaries with clinicians
This for me meant establishing a different set of boundaries from those I use in my other work. A close and trusting relationship often develops between clinician and interpreter, especially in long-term therapy, and this inevitably places the interpreter in a co-therapist position. Whilst this can be a very seductive process, I often have to remind myself that I neither possess the tools nor the structure to assume a role for which I have no training or professional know-how. Nor do I want the responsibility. My responses in pre- and post-session discussions are based on instinct, common sense, life experience and gut-reaction - and not on qualified clinical contributions.
My work boundaries are largely shaped and defined by the relationships that exist between the participating individuals. Some clinicians are tactile and effusive and we greet and say goodbye to our clients with lengthy and warm hugs and kisses. Others are formal and reserved, avoiding any body contact beyond a handshake. Most of the time I try to align my body language to that of the clinician as in most cases my relationship to the client is similar to the one the clinician has with the client. Successful therapy is often determined by a smooth and open teamwork between all concerned in which the bonds and boundaries are well defined. Ideally, in these settings the clinician does not feel threatened and the interpreter does not feel excluded. Trust is paramount - the clinician's trust of the interpreter with the language, the interpreter's trust of the clinician understanding of the cultural issues and taking the right clinical direction and the client's trust in both by simply opening up.
Sometimes, I feel, quite unrealistically in the context of working at the Foundation but not in my 'outside' work, that notebook and pen during sessions would be very useful implements. I have to make instant decisions as to how a question will make sense to the client (and vice-versa) and my translation may vary from what had been asked by the therapist.
Boundaries with clients
Interpreter-client boundaries are more difficult to define because often the client comes from the same sociocultural or ethnic background as the interpreter and their lives might he intertwined outside the Foundation. There could be feelings of envy, jealousy, admiration and expectation that place the interpreter in an entirely different position from that of a linguist facilitating communication. The client might want the interpreter to act as advocate and problem-solver for matters entirely unrelated to their visit to the Foundation. Alternatively, the client may wonder whether the interpreter will keep confidence and not betray him/her.
Because I share no common culture or skin colour with my client group, I might often be considered by them an adjunct to the therapist. This has advantages as well as disadvantages: on the plus side, I feel that my presence is reassuring to the client in as much as I pose no danger or raise doubts of belonging to an enemy faction that could warn the client to withhold information or be on his/her guard. In many instances, my clients have deliberately and adamantly refused to he seen by clinicians or interpreters from their own culture. On the minus side, the client could find it embarrassing or impossible to explain tribal or local customs without the cultural input of his/her fellow country person. For this reason, I try to make myself as familiar as possible with background information, geographical and political details and latest developments in the country of the client.
In one particular case I forged very strong links with a family with whom I particularly identified. Apart from being their constant interpreter throughout their many comings and goings to the Foundation, I also saw them socially with my children. Having clearly overstepped my professional boundaries, I became privy to a great deal of information that could have furthered or hampered their therapy. When the family was referred to a family therapist with whom I had not worked before, I was very concerned about the therapist's perception of my bond to the family and the threat this might pose, to her and potentially to the therapy. I was worried that her attitude to the family might be coloured by my relationship with them, leaving her much as the outsider. My fears were unfounded, largely because of the therapist's skills and her recognition of the exceptional strength of the family. In the sessions I could distance myself sufficiently from the family to remain purely the professional and objective interpreter whilst at the same time giving them comfort, knowing that they had a strong alliance with me. The family has subsequently benefitted enormously from the therapy.
Empathy with the client
I have a profound empathy with some of the clients - this is because of my own family history of persecution, because in my time I have also been a refugee in another country and because my working language at the Foundation is not really the language I was brought up in. I can identify with and understand many of the problems and emotions.
Use of words and metaphors
Many clinicians often use metaphors, proverbs and idioms for which I have to find an approximation if the equivalent does not immediately spring to mind. To search for a literal meaning could completely backfire and cloud the waters if the interpreter breaks the momentum and flow of the session. Unless the issue is of a major importance, in which case I ask for further elaboration, the nuances often get lost during the session. In a recent session when I used the word 'pipe- dream', the therapist, perhaps wondering at the specificity of the word, halted and under her breath she asked 'Did he use that word?' Well, no, he had not, as he literally said 'future projection' but it fitted much better in the context of the meaning of the sentence. These are challenges we often wrestle with and while nuances may sometimes disappear, the meaning always prevails.
In long-term therapy sessions, where collaborations between all parties concerned have been well established, I tend to render the ideas and the meanings. In one-off sessions, such as those for medical report writing or psychological or psychiatric assessments, a verbatim interpretation is called for. For example, when a client says that he is frightened in a small, enclosed and dark space, I will interpret this exactly as it is said and leave it to the doctor whether he wants to term it 'claustrophobic'. Equally, if the client uses frequent repetitions or has difficulty in expressing him/herself, these have to be translated verbatim, as the client's verbal idiosyncrasy could he a valuable indication for the accuracy of the diagnosis. An interesting example of the dilemmas of interpreting appeared in an article in The Linguist, concerning the BBC Monitor Service in Caversham. A few days before he was overthrown in Romania, in December, 1989, Nicolae Ceausescu said 'At this big rally I would like to repeat what I said recently that the expectations of these gentlemen (Western observers) may come true when poplar trees bear apples and osier willows bear carnations.' The equivalent English folk idiom that would have captured the exact meaning and which the interpreter was tempted to use was 'when an orange grows on an apple tree'. Because the literal translation was clear and because of the importance of the historical speech the text remained unchanged. During the night hundreds of paper apples appeared in the poplar trees around the city and a few weeks later the apple and not the orange became the symbol of the revolution.
Annrnarie Fox was born in Transylvania, brought up in Israel and Germany and has been living in England for thirty years. She has been a translator and interpreter at the Medical Foundation since 1995, interpreting mainly for African Francophone countries.
© Annemarie Fox 2001
Reproduced with the kind permission of the author.
This article first appeared in Context (the magazine for family therapy and systemic practice), (54): 19-20, April 2001.
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
Friday, February 20, 2009
Six Phases in Teaching Interpretation
as a Subject at Universities and Colleges in Indonesia
By Izak Morin,
Translator and Interpreter, the LNG Tangguh Project (BP)
izakmorin@yahoo.com
Abstract
This article discusses six phases in teaching interpreting in a classroom atmosphere using semi-authentic and authentic teaching materials to bring the students close to both English and Indonesian real-life environments and exposed to different discourse genres and different English dialects and accents. Phases 1 and 2 are warm-up activities for preparing students to move up to phases 3 and 4. Up to this level students are exposed to a semi-real life situation where they are listening to different English native speaker dialects and non-native speaker accents through the prepared tapes/CDs and VCDs and they are also listening to different Indonesian discourse genres. The last two phases are the most challenging ones for the students because each student will demonstrate his/her strategies and capabilities in performing an interpreting work in a set-up real-life situation using electronic devices.
1. Introduction
The Department of National Education of Indonesia has put 'Translation Theory' in the higher education curriculum as a compulsory subject taught at all English Programs in universities and colleges in Indonesia. However, Interpreting is only one side of the same coin; therefore most universities and colleges teach it alongside with Translation Theory as an additional subject. Interpreting, basically, is a process of transferring the meaning of the source language into the receptor language in a verbal way. This process may only occur when someone acts as an interpreter to transfer the meaning of a message directly from the mouth of a speaker, from a tape player, from a radio, from a CD/VCD player, from a television, or from other sources of verbal messages in a source language to a listener or an audience of a receptor language.
In order to perform such a challenging job professionally and responsibly, a person has to have an adequate understanding of the source language and an adequate command of the receptor language in their linguistic and non-linguistic aspects. Such capabilities can be acquired consciously and unconsciously through a process of learning, training, and experiencing in a formal learning-teaching classroom, in a set-up situation, and in a real-life situation. For a formal learning-teaching classroom I would like to present the six phases in teaching interpretation as a subject at my university and universities and colleges in Indonesia.
2. Discourse Genre
One of the first things the students have to know is how to identify the discourse genre of the talk to be interpreted. There are seven basic contrasting genres that will be discussed: narrative, procedural, expository, hortatory, descriptive, repartee, and dialogue. The differences between these genres can be best seen by thinking of the purpose of the speaker. The following descriptions are quoted and adapted from 'Meaning-Based Translation' pp 365-381 by Mildred L. Larson.
(a) The purpose of a narrative discourse is to recount events, usually in the past. The backbone of the narrative is a series of events which are usually actions. The agent of the events is usually Third Person or First Person, that is, the speaker tells about the things which happened to someone else or to himself.
(b) The purpose of a procedural discourse is to prescribe, to give the steps on how to do something. It consists of a sequentially related series of steps within each procedure. The agent is not usually specified, and it is characteristic of procedural discourse that most of the actions will have an affected
(c) The purpose of an expository discourse is to explain or to argue. The non-chronological communication relations (orientation, clarification, logic) are typical of expository discourse. It consists of information logically related to a theme.
(d) The purpose of a descriptive discourse is to describe. It is not basically chronological; instead, a topic is developed.
(e) The purpose of a hortatory discourse is to propose, suggest, or command. The backbone of the structure is a series of actions which are commands. The second person agent throughout is characteristic of this genre. Like the expository discourse, the non-chronological communication relations are also typical of this genre.
(f) The purpose of a repartee discourse is to recount speech exchanges. The structure is that of a series of speech exchanges. Each speech is a small discourse, however, these small discourses are related to one another. The content of the exchanges may be narrative, expository, hortatory, procedural, or even dialogue if the speaker is recounting another set of speech exchanges.
(g) Dialogue discourse is a combination of narrative and repartee. The purpose is to recount events, usually in the past, as for narrative. The difference is that many of those events are speech events; that is, there is a repartee structure also
3. Features of Each Phase
Each phase consists of three parts, first, teacher's or students' preparation outside the classroom. Either the teacher or the student must prepare in advance written texts and verbal scripts for presentation as well as supporting electronic devices such as a laptop computer, a projector (LCD) set, a tape/cassette player, a CD/VCD player, an OHP, a radio, a television set, and a tape/cassette recorder. Second, preparation in the classroom before the presentation / the broadcasting. Before a presentation the teacher or the student has to make sure that everything is in place and in good condition to start. Third, interpreting practice. This is a learning, training, and experiencing part in which each student must fully participate. There are two sections in this part: interpreting from English into Indonesian and interpreting from Indonesian into English.
In Phase One the teacher acts as a speaker and a selected student as an interpreter, whereas in Phase Two each student plays a double role as a speaker and as an interpreter.
In Phase Two there are two activities: (a) interpreting a talk from a set-up formal table; and (b) interpreting a speech from a podium. Materials are selected from descriptive and expository discourses for both phases either in English or in Indonesian.
In Phase Three each student is assigned to interpret a message directly from a speaker in a tape/cassette or in a CD. Both English and Indonesian recording materials are selected from narrative, repartee, and dialogue discourses. Apart from the main English dialects spoken in Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, the USA, and Canada, English accents heard in Asia, the Pacific area, Africa, the Middle-East, and Europe are taken into account when selecting the materials.
In Phase Four each student has a turn to interpret a message directly from a speaker in a VCD viewed through a TV monitor or through a projector (LCD) larger screen. Hortatory and procedural discourses are selected for interpreting purposes in this phase. English dialects and accents are also considered when selecting the materials.
For Phase Five and Phase Six all discourse genres are no longer practiced in a regular order as done in the previous phases because these are direct broadcastings, not recorded, so it is impossible to predict what kind of genre comes out first and which one is the next and so on (This is a spontaneous talk or a real-life talk). Each student has to interpret directly from radio and TV announcers by making a note of the main points. Each broadcasting is recorded for replay later on for further discussion and feedback purposes. Radio and TV broadcastings are selected from Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), and Voice of America (VOA) for radio and CNN for television.
4. Six Phases To Teach Interpreting
In order to build an interpreting capacity regarding skill, knowledge, and experience for the students, the six phases below are strongly recommended. These phases are intentionally designed to offer various exercises from the easiest to the most challenging ones. However, before each phase is begun, a teacher has to have in mind the following: (a) an interpreting class should be a group of at least ten with a different teaching schedules. By having this small number, each student has time to learn, practice, and experience interpreting during the class session. But, such a division totally depends on the number of students applying for the course and the available time a teacher may have; (b) in Phase One each student has to perform twice as an interpreter either from English into Indonesian or from Indonesian into English. In Phase Two A each student has to perform four times : twice as a speaker and twice as an interpreter from a well-arranged table, while in Phase Two B each student has to deliver two speeches from a podium as a speaker; one is in English and another is in Indonesian; he must also perform two interpreting jobs in English and in Indonesian. For Phases Three, Four, Five, and Six each student only acts as an interpreter twice in each; (c) First Person Singular Personal Pronoun 'I' in English and 'Saya' in Indonesian are used in Phase One, Phase Two, Phase Three, and Phase Four because the interpretation is conducted after each short statement conveyed throughout the presentation, whereas the Third Person Personal Pronoun 'He', 'She', and titles and names such as 'Mr.X', 'Mrs.Y', 'Ms.Z, Dr. John, Professor Jane in English and 'Beliau', 'Ia', 'Dia', and titles and names such as 'Bapak X', 'Ibu Y', Dr. Mansoben, Profesor Kambuaya in Indonesian are used in Phase Five and Phase Six because the interpretation is made in the form of a summary or note-taking of the main points right after a long talk. The common phrases used are Mr. X said that... Profesor Jane concluded that.... Bapak X mengatakan bahwa..... Profesor Kambuaya menyimpulkan bahwa....etc.
PHASE-ONE: Teacher — Student acting as Speaker — Interpreter
1. Teacher's preparation outside the classroom
1. Student's preparation outside the classroom.
1. Student's preparation outside the classroom.
1. Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
1. Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
Students do not sit for a final exam like for most other subjects. Each student is assessed during his/her performance in the classroom throughout the semester. It is an on-going assessment. Each time a student performs a task, s/he is assessed by both teacher and peers using a designed assessment format.
This format is distributed to the students before an interpretation is done and, after the class, the filled-in assessment sheets are collected and the teacher summarizes the result and makes a copy for the students who perform a task in order to keep in their own portfolio as a performance record. Teacher also keeps the same assessment format in each student's file for his/her final assessment at the end of the semester.
Each student is told on how to assess a peer's performance in the classroom. The following are the descriptions of assessed items and a grading system used:
Assessed Items
Accuracy : - pronounce each word correctly using right stress and intonation;
- use good grammatical structures with correct tenses;
- choose appropriate words relevant to the topic;
Clarity : - talk loudly with a clear voice;
- convey a meaning in a clear and natural way;
- use appropriate communicative body language to make a meaning clear and understandable;
- improvise a message correctly
Fluency : - express the meaning easily with a normal speed, no hesitation and no excessively long pauses;
- convey the message smoothly using familiar concepts, examples, and other matters relevant to the topic;
Eye-Contact : - maintain eye-contact with the audience by looking across the whole class;
Self-Confidence : - convey the correct meaning with full confidence and no hesitation;
- talk confidently even when a mistake was made regarding the meaning, the grammatical structures and tenses, and word choices.
Grading Systems
Excellent 4 A 80 - 100
Good 3 B 70 - 79
Fair 2 C 60 - 69
Poor 1 D 50 - 59
Fail 0 E < 50
6. Summary
Interpreting is a language skill that a student can acquire consciously or unconsciously through an intensive process of learning, training, and experiencing in a formal classroom, in a set-up situation, or in a real-life situation. Six phases in teaching interpreting are designed intentionally to assist the students to be skillful prospective interpreters after graduation. The six phases benefit the students in some ways: (a) students are trained to be familiar with different English dialects and accents; (b) students are trained to be anticipative with different idiolects both in English and in Indonesian; (c) students are exposed to different genres both in English and in Indonesian; (d) students are trained to be familiar with human voices and the normal speed of speakers from a tape/cassette player, a CD/VCD player, a radio, and a television; (e) students are trained to make quick decisions on what to omit and what to convey only by hearing without looking at the speaker and/or by hearing and looking at the speaker and supporting background pictures; (f) students are trained to be quick and skillful writers in writing a summary of the main points from both radio and television broadcastings; (g) students are trained to improvise and speak from the main points written down; (h) students are trained to keep the Short-Term Memory system in their brain working properly; (i) students are trained to keep their self-confidence in front of the audience; (j) students are trained to keep their eye-contact with the audience; and (k) students are trained to judge and give comments on an interpreting performance.
References
Dulay, H., M. Burt & S. Krasen. 1992. Language Two. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Ellis, Rod. 1997. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larson, Mildred L. 1984. Meaning-Based Translation: A Guide to Cross-Language
Equivalence. Lanham: University Press of America, Inc.
This article was originally published at Translation Journal (http://accurapid.com/journal).
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
By Izak Morin,
Translator and Interpreter, the LNG Tangguh Project (BP)
izakmorin@yahoo.com
Abstract
This article discusses six phases in teaching interpreting in a classroom atmosphere using semi-authentic and authentic teaching materials to bring the students close to both English and Indonesian real-life environments and exposed to different discourse genres and different English dialects and accents. Phases 1 and 2 are warm-up activities for preparing students to move up to phases 3 and 4. Up to this level students are exposed to a semi-real life situation where they are listening to different English native speaker dialects and non-native speaker accents through the prepared tapes/CDs and VCDs and they are also listening to different Indonesian discourse genres. The last two phases are the most challenging ones for the students because each student will demonstrate his/her strategies and capabilities in performing an interpreting work in a set-up real-life situation using electronic devices.
1. Introduction
The Department of National Education of Indonesia has put 'Translation Theory' in the higher education curriculum as a compulsory subject taught at all English Programs in universities and colleges in Indonesia. However, Interpreting is only one side of the same coin; therefore most universities and colleges teach it alongside with Translation Theory as an additional subject. Interpreting, basically, is a process of transferring the meaning of the source language into the receptor language in a verbal way. This process may only occur when someone acts as an interpreter to transfer the meaning of a message directly from the mouth of a speaker, from a tape player, from a radio, from a CD/VCD player, from a television, or from other sources of verbal messages in a source language to a listener or an audience of a receptor language.
In order to perform such a challenging job professionally and responsibly, a person has to have an adequate understanding of the source language and an adequate command of the receptor language in their linguistic and non-linguistic aspects. Such capabilities can be acquired consciously and unconsciously through a process of learning, training, and experiencing in a formal learning-teaching classroom, in a set-up situation, and in a real-life situation. For a formal learning-teaching classroom I would like to present the six phases in teaching interpretation as a subject at my university and universities and colleges in Indonesia.
2. Discourse Genre
One of the first things the students have to know is how to identify the discourse genre of the talk to be interpreted. There are seven basic contrasting genres that will be discussed: narrative, procedural, expository, hortatory, descriptive, repartee, and dialogue. The differences between these genres can be best seen by thinking of the purpose of the speaker. The following descriptions are quoted and adapted from 'Meaning-Based Translation' pp 365-381 by Mildred L. Larson.
(a) The purpose of a narrative discourse is to recount events, usually in the past. The backbone of the narrative is a series of events which are usually actions. The agent of the events is usually Third Person or First Person, that is, the speaker tells about the things which happened to someone else or to himself.
(b) The purpose of a procedural discourse is to prescribe, to give the steps on how to do something. It consists of a sequentially related series of steps within each procedure. The agent is not usually specified, and it is characteristic of procedural discourse that most of the actions will have an affected
(c) The purpose of an expository discourse is to explain or to argue. The non-chronological communication relations (orientation, clarification, logic) are typical of expository discourse. It consists of information logically related to a theme.
(d) The purpose of a descriptive discourse is to describe. It is not basically chronological; instead, a topic is developed.
(e) The purpose of a hortatory discourse is to propose, suggest, or command. The backbone of the structure is a series of actions which are commands. The second person agent throughout is characteristic of this genre. Like the expository discourse, the non-chronological communication relations are also typical of this genre.
(f) The purpose of a repartee discourse is to recount speech exchanges. The structure is that of a series of speech exchanges. Each speech is a small discourse, however, these small discourses are related to one another. The content of the exchanges may be narrative, expository, hortatory, procedural, or even dialogue if the speaker is recounting another set of speech exchanges.
(g) Dialogue discourse is a combination of narrative and repartee. The purpose is to recount events, usually in the past, as for narrative. The difference is that many of those events are speech events; that is, there is a repartee structure also
3. Features of Each Phase
Each phase consists of three parts, first, teacher's or students' preparation outside the classroom. Either the teacher or the student must prepare in advance written texts and verbal scripts for presentation as well as supporting electronic devices such as a laptop computer, a projector (LCD) set, a tape/cassette player, a CD/VCD player, an OHP, a radio, a television set, and a tape/cassette recorder. Second, preparation in the classroom before the presentation / the broadcasting. Before a presentation the teacher or the student has to make sure that everything is in place and in good condition to start. Third, interpreting practice. This is a learning, training, and experiencing part in which each student must fully participate. There are two sections in this part: interpreting from English into Indonesian and interpreting from Indonesian into English.
In Phase One the teacher acts as a speaker and a selected student as an interpreter, whereas in Phase Two each student plays a double role as a speaker and as an interpreter.
In Phase Two there are two activities: (a) interpreting a talk from a set-up formal table; and (b) interpreting a speech from a podium. Materials are selected from descriptive and expository discourses for both phases either in English or in Indonesian.
In Phase Three each student is assigned to interpret a message directly from a speaker in a tape/cassette or in a CD. Both English and Indonesian recording materials are selected from narrative, repartee, and dialogue discourses. Apart from the main English dialects spoken in Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, the USA, and Canada, English accents heard in Asia, the Pacific area, Africa, the Middle-East, and Europe are taken into account when selecting the materials.
In Phase Four each student has a turn to interpret a message directly from a speaker in a VCD viewed through a TV monitor or through a projector (LCD) larger screen. Hortatory and procedural discourses are selected for interpreting purposes in this phase. English dialects and accents are also considered when selecting the materials.
For Phase Five and Phase Six all discourse genres are no longer practiced in a regular order as done in the previous phases because these are direct broadcastings, not recorded, so it is impossible to predict what kind of genre comes out first and which one is the next and so on (This is a spontaneous talk or a real-life talk). Each student has to interpret directly from radio and TV announcers by making a note of the main points. Each broadcasting is recorded for replay later on for further discussion and feedback purposes. Radio and TV broadcastings are selected from Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), and Voice of America (VOA) for radio and CNN for television.
4. Six Phases To Teach Interpreting
In order to build an interpreting capacity regarding skill, knowledge, and experience for the students, the six phases below are strongly recommended. These phases are intentionally designed to offer various exercises from the easiest to the most challenging ones. However, before each phase is begun, a teacher has to have in mind the following: (a) an interpreting class should be a group of at least ten with a different teaching schedules. By having this small number, each student has time to learn, practice, and experience interpreting during the class session. But, such a division totally depends on the number of students applying for the course and the available time a teacher may have; (b) in Phase One each student has to perform twice as an interpreter either from English into Indonesian or from Indonesian into English. In Phase Two A each student has to perform four times : twice as a speaker and twice as an interpreter from a well-arranged table, while in Phase Two B each student has to deliver two speeches from a podium as a speaker; one is in English and another is in Indonesian; he must also perform two interpreting jobs in English and in Indonesian. For Phases Three, Four, Five, and Six each student only acts as an interpreter twice in each; (c) First Person Singular Personal Pronoun 'I' in English and 'Saya' in Indonesian are used in Phase One, Phase Two, Phase Three, and Phase Four because the interpretation is conducted after each short statement conveyed throughout the presentation, whereas the Third Person Personal Pronoun 'He', 'She', and titles and names such as 'Mr.X', 'Mrs.Y', 'Ms.Z, Dr. John, Professor Jane in English and 'Beliau', 'Ia', 'Dia', and titles and names such as 'Bapak X', 'Ibu Y', Dr. Mansoben, Profesor Kambuaya in Indonesian are used in Phase Five and Phase Six because the interpretation is made in the form of a summary or note-taking of the main points right after a long talk. The common phrases used are Mr. X said that... Profesor Jane concluded that.... Bapak X mengatakan bahwa..... Profesor Kambuaya menyimpulkan bahwa....etc.
PHASE-ONE: Teacher — Student acting as Speaker — Interpreter
1. Teacher's preparation outside the classroom
- Teacher prepares twenty topics of discussion in descriptive discourse. One-half are in English and the other half are in Indonesian. S/he may use some selected slides to support the presentation.
- A table with two chairs are well arranged in front of the class.
- A unit of computer and a projector set are well set up in the class
- The first five students are randomly selected for the first session. Each student spends 5-10 minutes to practice including the teacher's and peers' comments.
- The students are told to give comments and raise questions after the talk. This practice is conducted in the form of Presentation-Discussion.
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: presentation (by the teacher) à Interpreting (by the student) à Speaking: comments and questions (by the students as audience) à Interpreting (by the student) à Speaking: responses to the comments and questions from the audience (by the teacher) à Interpreting (by the student).
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- Teacher speaks on a particular topic in English / Indonesian
- Student interprets into Indonesian / English
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, and note down things to give comments and questions on in Indonesian / English.
- Teacher and the students give comments on the student's performance regarding strategies and language use.
1. Student's preparation outside the classroom.
- Students are assigned to prepare two topics of discussion one is in English and the other is in Indonesian. Both are expository (argumentative) discourses.
- A table with two chairs are well arranged in front of the class
- The students are told to form pairs. Each pair spends 5-10 minutes to practice including the teacher's and peers' comments.
- The students are told to give comments and raise questions after the talk. This practice is conducted in the form of Presentation-Discussion.
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: presentation (by the student speaker) à Interpreting (by the student interpreter) à Speaking: comments and questions (by the students audience) à Interpreting (by the student interpreter) à Speaking: responses to the comments and questions from the audience (by the student speaker) à Interpreting (by the student interpreter).
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- Student speaker speaks on a particular topic in English / Indonesian
- Student interpreter interprets into Indonesian / English
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, note down things to give comments and questions in Indonesian / English
- Teacher and the students give comments on the student interpreter's performance regarding strategies and language use.
1. Student's preparation outside the classroom.
- Students are assigned to prepare two speeches one is in English and the other is in Indonesian. Both are expository (argumentative) discourses.
- A podium is well arranged in front of the class if available.
- The students are told to form pairs. Each pair spends 5-10 minutes to practice including the teacher's and peers' comments.
- The students are told to give comments on their peers' performance after the speech. This practice is conducted in the form of 'Lecturing' (one-way communication)
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: speech delivering (by the student speaker) à Interpreting (by the student interpreter).
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- Student speaker gives a speech on a particular topic in English / Indonesian
- Student interpreter interprets into Indonesian / English
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, and note down particular things to comment on.
- Teacher and students give comments on the student interpreter performance regarding strategies and language use.
1. Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
- Teacher selects particular short talks both in English and in Indonesian from various recordings. All are narrative, repartee, and dialogue discourses
- Teacher plays the tapes / CDs to ensure they are in good condition
- Teacher copies or records the selected topics from different tapes / CDs into a new tape / CD
- Teacher checks and tests the tape player / the CD player
- A table with a chair is well arranged in front of the class
- A tape player / CD player is put on the table and it is reachable for the teacher to operate.
- The students are told to give comments on their peers' performance after the talk. This practice is conducted in the form of 'Talk' or 'Lecturing' (one way communication)
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: presentation (through the tape player / the CD player) à Interpreting (by the student).
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- Teacher plays the tape / the CD of an English / Indonesian short talk with a pause each time to give the student a chance to interpret
- Student interprets into Indonesian / English
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, and note down particular things to comment on.
- Teacher and the students give comments on the student interpreter performance regarding strategies and language use.
- Teacher replays the tape / the CD to check the language used for a discussion and correction purpose.
Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
- Teacher selects particular short talks both in English and in Indonesian from the VCDs stored in the library / resource center or if permitted records from / through any websites. All are hortatory and procedural discourses.
- Teacher plays the VCDs to ensure they are in good condition
- Teacher makes a copy of the selected topics from different VCDs into a new VCD
- Teacher checks and tests the VCD player set or built-in VCD player in the portable computer
- Teacher tests the TV monitor or the projector (LCD) set and a screen
- A table with two chairs are well arranged in front of the class
- A VCD player and a TV monitor or a projector are well-arranged and they are reachable for the teacher to operate.
- The students are told to form pairs. Each pair (one interprets the interviewer's talk and the other one interprets the interviewee's) spends 5-10 minutes to practice.
- The students are told to give comments on their peers' performance after the talk. This is conducted in the form of 'Interactive Talk'
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: presentation (through VCD player) à Interpreting (by a pair of students).
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- Teacher plays the VCD on an English / Indonesian talk with a pause each time to give chance to the student to interpret.
- Student interprets into Indonesian / English
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, and note down particular things to comment on.
- Teacher and the students give comments on the student performance regarding strategies and language use.
- Teacher replays the VCD to check the language used for a discussion and correction purposes.
1. Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
- Teacher checks the condition of the radio and tests its sound quality
- Teacher prepares a blank tape to record the news and other programs broadcasted during the class for a discussion and feedback purpose
- A table with a chair is well arranged in front of the class
- A radio and a tape recorder with a blank tape in it to record the news and other programs are well arranged and are reachable for the teacher to operate.
- All students are told make notes of the main points of the news or talks from the radio programs and do the interpreting afterwards. Each student spends 5-10 minutes to do the job. The teacher and the peers also provide comments and questions.
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: presentation (through radio) à Interpreting (by each student in the way of noting down the main points or making a summary) à Conveying (by the student) the message based on the points or a summary made.
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- Teacher switches on the radio on an English / Indonesian news or talk show and presses the recording button at the same time
- Each student interprets into Indonesian / English by making a note of the main points or making a summary on a piece of paper
- Each student is randomly selected to speak to the class by elaborating on the main points written down.
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, and make notes of particular things to comment on.
- Teacher and the students give comments on the student interpreter performance regarding strategies and language use.
- Teacher plays the recording to check the language used for a discussion and correction purpose.
Teacher's preparation outside the classroom.
- Teacher checks the condition of the TV set
- Teacher prepares a blank VCD to record the news or other programs for a discussion and feedback purpose
- A table with a chair is well arranged in front of the class
- A ready-to-switch-on TV set and a blank VCD in the player to record the news program are well arranged and are reachable for the teacher to operate.
- All students are asked to make note of the main points of the news or talks from the TV programs. Each student spends 3-5 minutes to retell, from his notes, the points in the receptor language.
- The students are told to follow the process of interpreting in this practice such as Speaking: presentation (through TV) à Interpreting (by each student in the way of making note of the main points or making a summary) à Conveying (by the student) the message based on the points or a summary made.
- An assessment sheet is distributed to each student to assess the performance of their peer.
- eacher switches on TV on an English / Indonesian news and other intended programs then presses the recording button on the VCD player at the same time
- Student interprets into Indonesian / English by making note of the main points or making a summary on a piece of paper.
- Each student is randomly selected to speak to the class by elaborating on the main points written down with a support of a replay recording.
- The rest of the students listen, fill in the assessment sheet, and note down particular things to comment on.
- Teacher gives comments on the student interpreter performance regarding strategies and language use.
Students do not sit for a final exam like for most other subjects. Each student is assessed during his/her performance in the classroom throughout the semester. It is an on-going assessment. Each time a student performs a task, s/he is assessed by both teacher and peers using a designed assessment format.
This format is distributed to the students before an interpretation is done and, after the class, the filled-in assessment sheets are collected and the teacher summarizes the result and makes a copy for the students who perform a task in order to keep in their own portfolio as a performance record. Teacher also keeps the same assessment format in each student's file for his/her final assessment at the end of the semester.
Each student is told on how to assess a peer's performance in the classroom. The following are the descriptions of assessed items and a grading system used:
Assessed Items
Accuracy : - pronounce each word correctly using right stress and intonation;
- use good grammatical structures with correct tenses;
- choose appropriate words relevant to the topic;
Clarity : - talk loudly with a clear voice;
- convey a meaning in a clear and natural way;
- use appropriate communicative body language to make a meaning clear and understandable;
- improvise a message correctly
Fluency : - express the meaning easily with a normal speed, no hesitation and no excessively long pauses;
- convey the message smoothly using familiar concepts, examples, and other matters relevant to the topic;
Eye-Contact : - maintain eye-contact with the audience by looking across the whole class;
Self-Confidence : - convey the correct meaning with full confidence and no hesitation;
- talk confidently even when a mistake was made regarding the meaning, the grammatical structures and tenses, and word choices.
Grading Systems
Excellent 4 A 80 - 100
Good 3 B 70 - 79
Fair 2 C 60 - 69
Poor 1 D 50 - 59
Fail 0 E < 50
6. Summary
Interpreting is a language skill that a student can acquire consciously or unconsciously through an intensive process of learning, training, and experiencing in a formal classroom, in a set-up situation, or in a real-life situation. Six phases in teaching interpreting are designed intentionally to assist the students to be skillful prospective interpreters after graduation. The six phases benefit the students in some ways: (a) students are trained to be familiar with different English dialects and accents; (b) students are trained to be anticipative with different idiolects both in English and in Indonesian; (c) students are exposed to different genres both in English and in Indonesian; (d) students are trained to be familiar with human voices and the normal speed of speakers from a tape/cassette player, a CD/VCD player, a radio, and a television; (e) students are trained to make quick decisions on what to omit and what to convey only by hearing without looking at the speaker and/or by hearing and looking at the speaker and supporting background pictures; (f) students are trained to be quick and skillful writers in writing a summary of the main points from both radio and television broadcastings; (g) students are trained to improvise and speak from the main points written down; (h) students are trained to keep the Short-Term Memory system in their brain working properly; (i) students are trained to keep their self-confidence in front of the audience; (j) students are trained to keep their eye-contact with the audience; and (k) students are trained to judge and give comments on an interpreting performance.
References
Dulay, H., M. Burt & S. Krasen. 1992. Language Two. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Ellis, Rod. 1997. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larson, Mildred L. 1984. Meaning-Based Translation: A Guide to Cross-Language
Equivalence. Lanham: University Press of America, Inc.
This article was originally published at Translation Journal (http://accurapid.com/journal).
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Hermes—God of Translators and Interpreters
The Antiquity of Interpreting: Distinguishing Fact from Speculation
By Alex Gross
http://language.home.sprynet.com
This paper was originally commissioned by the Chair of the NYU Translation Studies Department as part of a book to be published by John Benjamins.
It was intended to be a more concise and more conventionally academic version of the paper I presented at the NYU Translation 2000 Conference.
This entire book project was later abandoned by the Chair.
What follows is an attempt to present the evidence that interpreting was relatively common during prehistory and that interpreters had a fairly important role to play during that long and necessarily undocumented era, though differing in some respects from the role they play today. By interpreting I define those acts of serving as oral intermediary either between two separate languages or between two less than perfectly comprehensible variants of the same language. From the outset I shall do my best to distinguish probable facts from speculations based on those facts and to demonstrate precisely how I have arrived at these speculations about an era that is otherwise quite closed to us. Although one occasionally encounters semi-serious references to interpreting as the "second oldest profession," the following account endeavors to provide what may prove to be a reasonable basis for showing that such an assertion might just possibly be justified.
It should be obvious from the outset that interpreting is necessarilly the prehistory of translation—in fact the ancient Romans and Greeks made no major differentiation between the words "interpreter" and "translator." Where no knowledge of written languages existed, the only way to mediate between two language forms was necessarily interpreting. It also ought to be obvious that interpreting had to exist during prehistory—the main obstacle to this thesis lies in the nature of modern scholarly procedure, which requires written records and footnotes to bolster any major claim, when clearly neither can exist for the earliest days of interpreting. I shall nonetheless present three different kinds of evidence combining to suggest the validity of this statement.
1. Verbal evidence springing from the earliest words for "translating" and "interpreting."
2. Inferential evidence pointing towards a continuity in language processes during both prehistory and history.
3. Perhaps most remarkably, surviving evidence from the past, to be found in preliterate social groups today, replicating to some extent the conditions prevelant in prehistoric social groups.
Examples of verbal evidence are fairly abundant. Perhaps the most persuasive is the ancient Greek word hermêneus, which the Liddell-Scott lexicon renders as both "interpreter" and "translator." But these are by no means the only two translations provided by this most authoritative reference work on Greek studies. Here are some of the other possible translations presented by its editors:
hermêneus:
Interpreter, especially of foreign terms
dragoman
court interpreter
matrimonial agent
go-between
broker
commissionaire
Furthermore, Liddell-Scott provides the following possible choices for the related verb form:
hermêneuo:
interpret foreign tongues
translate
explain
expound
put into words
express
describe
write about (Note 1)
From the outset it is useful to reflect on why so many other possible definitions of both the noun and verb forms—aside from “translate” and “interpret”—are listed. It is of course no secret that the word "interpret" has two major meanings even in modern usage: interpreting the address of a foreign ambassador as opposed to interpreting the meaning of a trend, an omen, a change in a friend's personal behavior. But the many meanings provided by Liddell-Scott for the noun, especially "go-between," "broker," and "matrimonial agent," would seem at first glance to open up entirely new territory. And as we shall see, the word "dragoman" has its own ramifications, indeed its own history. It is by explaining how these subsidiary meanings—or at least what appear at first glance to be subsidiary meanings—connect with the "main" meaning of hermêneus that the first glimpse into prehistory may become feasible.
Furthermore, there is one other crucial clue connected with the Greek use of this word that is simply not present in the way we use the word "interpreter" in English. As Lidell-Scott, along with Plato and other ancient authors make more than clear, the Greek word hermêneus is intimately tied up with several of the attributes of the Greek god Hermes. Basically, what the ancient Greeks were saying when they used this verb, hermêneuo, hermêneueis, hermêneuei could be duplicated in English only if our verb for to translate or interpret went "I hermese, you hermese, he or she hermeses." Or more collloquially, "I make like Hermes, you make like Hermese, etc." In the author's opinion, we are under an obligation to ask one simple, searching question: precisely what is going on here in terms of actual meaning?
Several historical and cultural prerequisites must be satisfied before an adequate answer may emerge. First of all, it is necessary to visualize the full nature of the divinity of Hermes among the Greeks and how they understood his attributes and duties. For the Greeks, Hermes epitomized quick-wittedness, ready improvisation, and the deft management of clever solutions. This alone goes towards explaining his connection to language and interpreting. Among other duties he also acted as divine messenger, presided over commerce and travel (both clearly linked to translation), and was the tutelary god of all the arts and crafts, including magic and matrimonial match-making. It can perhaps be forgiven if he was also regarded as the god of thieves and deceit, since such attributes may spring somewhat naturally from some of his other functions. But precisely how do all these traits fit together into a single image of the interpreter during both historic and prehistoric times?
Here's what Plato had to say about Hermes in Cratylus, one of his principal dialogues on language:
SOCRATES: Well, the name ‘Hermes’ seems to have something to do with speech: he is an interpreter (hermêneus), a messenger, a thief and a deceiver in words, a wheeler-dealer—and all these activities involve the power of speech. (Note 2)
If this seems too negative a view of interpreting, Plato expresses a more positive view in his dialogue Theaetetus, where he also provides us with a hint of the role played by interpreters in ancient Athens. Attempting to distinguish knowledge from perception, Socrates teasingly asks Theaetetus whether people truly know a foreign language merely by seeing it in writing or hearing it spoken. In a reply praised by Socrates, Theaetetus states that we can only know what its letters look like and what its spoken form sounds like...
but we do not perceive through sight or hearing, and we do not know, what the grammarians and interpreters teach about them. (Note 3)
If anything, Plato grants interpreters a slight advantage over grammarians in this passage, for he assumes that grammarians can only be of use in describing the letters or written form of the language (and of the two ancient Greek words for grammarians, both closely related to the word for "letters," the one Plato uses here is the more demeaning one, usually meaning merely a "schoolmaster,"), while only interpreters can tell us what is truly being said.
It has often been observed that the myths of a culture can record or encode very real historical or even prehistorical knowledge, and the Greek linkage of the god Hermes to the act of interpreting can perhaps be regarded as an instance of this. It is also important to recall how international and multicultural this figure of a trickster god who creates language truly is and how widely recorded it is in the world's mythology. Hermes was of course known in ancient Egypt as Thoth, but as Lewis Hyde points out in his book Trickster Makes This World, he can also be found in various guises as the African Eshu, as any number of figures such as Coyote or Raven in Native American folklore, as Loki among the Norse, the child Krishna in Indian tradition, or even China's Monkey King, (and in the latter case we have an example of a tale about a god being inspired by the travels of a real-life translator, the seventh century Xuanzang, immortalized in the Ming Dynasty novel Journey to the West.) (Note 4)
Now let's take a look at the Latin word for translator and interpreter. At first glance it looks quite familiar: interpres. But as soon as we look at the definitions provided by Charlton Lewis' standard An Elementary Latin Dictionary, we rediscover much of the same terrain previously covered by "hermêneus:"
interpres:
[derived from inter, meaning between, and pres, a form of prehendo, prendo, meaning
to catch, lay hold of, grasp, take Literally: Caught in between]
A middle man
mediator
broker
negotiator
Interpres divum
messenger
Mercury
Explainer
expounder
translator
interpreter
(Note 5)
Mercury is of course the Roman name for Hermes, and almost all the definitions found for the Greek word recur for the Latin one, except for "matrimonial agent," (perhaps a custom that had died out by Roman times).
The final word for "interpreter" to be examined is not only the most ancient of the three but has also been in continuous use in various forms over at least the last five thousand years and exists in English even today. As we have seen, Liddell-Scott provided it as one possible English translation for hermêneus:
Dragoman:
Spanish: Trujamán, Triujimán
French: Trucheman, Truchement
Latin: Dragumannus
Greek: Dragoumanos
Arabic: Targuman
Aramaic: Turgemana
Mishnaic Hebrew: Targum
Akkadian: Targumanu
Its meaning:
about 50% interpreter
about 50% go-between, mediator,
middle-man, broker (Note 6)
This word alone takes us back to the very demarcation between written history and the prehistory which must have preceded it. It is a time that clearly predated even the composition of the Bible, and our tale of Eve being created from the rib of Adam, as Kramer points out, is almost certainly based on the world's first recorded untranslatable pun, involving Hebrew and Sumerian, where the word for "rib," ti, also meant the word for "life-giving." (Note 7) From such a remote point in time we need only press the slightest bit further into the past to securely locate interpreters as present and actively working during prehistory.
At this juncture our two other forms of evidence also have some light to shed, first among these being simple inference based on the present. We know for a certainty that the process of recorded history has been one of slow, painstaking amalgamation and growth, often against considerable resistance. Tribal speech gradually broadened and changed across extended clans, distinctly local dialects merged with larger civic or regional ones or at least yielded to them for purposes of trade and culture, pidgins turned into creoles (at least according to Bickerton), (Note 8) regional speech forms have developed into broader structures shared by entire provinces, and provincial languages have been to some extent dominated by official national languages, each with its own pedigree and history. And almost equally important during this merging and blending process has been the dogged resistance which accompanied it at every stage. In fact, many parts of the world, as we are well aware, still have not surrendered to this process. These are areas where tribal, clan, and even family loyalties still remain the most powerful force, where even modern methods of communication have failed to penetrate.
Both this evolution—and its many pockets of resistance—provide at least some idea of what cultural and linguistic developments are likely to have been during prehistory. If anything, the process must have been even slower and more painful in moving from stage to stage, when it managed to move at all. Only families, at best extended families or "tribes," are likely to have truly and completely shared a "language" to any sufficient degree, and even here new speech forms could have readily grown up between estranged relatives of the same age group or even among members of the same family separated by a single generation. Whenever members of such families moved to a new location, they took their form of the language with them to develop independently, necessarily leaving the older variant to do the same. All forms of modern communication were of course totally absent. And by the very definition of prehistory, there could be no writing.
This view of the past is also supported by our third form of evidence—while prehistoric societies are behind us, preliterate societies still exist. They can be found in numerous areas of the globe, but there is no longer any real need to travel to those areas to encounter their inhabitants. The reason for this is that members of these societies have now come to live among us and can often be found only a stone's throw from our secure modern dwellings. Sometimes possessing only a rudimentary knowledge of the national language spoken in their homeland, they have come legally or otherwise to cities like New York, London, and Amsterdam to seek work and improve their condition.
And not surprisingly, today's interpreters, especially those working in our hospitals and courtrooms, are often the first to become aware of their presence and the need to deal compassionately with them. These visitors frequently encounter legal and health problems in our world, since their knowledge of modern medicine and social customs does not always coincide with our own. In fact, they often arrive on our shores still following their own traditional healing methods and social hierarchies, which may include chieftains, priests, and marriage brokers.
And with those last two words perhaps the circle begins to close, since the phrase "matrimonial agent" appeared in Lidell-Scott as one of the meanings for hermêneus. As recently as a century ago national governments would still cement peace treaties with a marriage between royal offspring of the two nations. How much more important the arrangement of such marriages must have been for the countless generations of small families, tribes, and clans of prehistory, desperately competing in many environments for perceived advantages in dwelling places, hunting rights, and the cultivation of crops.
Both of these methods, inference and the survival of comparable groups today, afford us at least some means of visualizing the lives of these peoples. Merging these two tools with our knowledge gained from our dictionaries, perhaps we can begin to see how important someone skilled in the crucial nexus of deal-making, marriage brokering, and language skills would have been, and all the definitions provided by the Greek lexicon begin to converge as a single comprehensible entity.
Such skills were not without their dangers for those possessing them. Returning to the historic era, the following account, taken from Plutarch’s Life of Themistocles, demonstrates just how dangerous being an interpreter could be:
Themistocles, by the consent of the people, seized upon the interpreter, and put him to death, for presuming to publish the barbarian orders and decrees in the Greek language; this is one of the actions Themistocles is commended for..."
(Note 9)
Merging some speculation with our facts here, it is probably fair to state that similar events could have happened repeatedly throughout the countless centuries of prehistory, as tribes and clans moved in all directions, and the struggle for survival remained paramount. The motives of interpreters could easily be misunderstood, even by their own people, nor would we expect such figures to be enormously popular with members of an opposing group. Not all interpreters and/or go-betweens succeeeded in their missions, not all attempts at peace-making prevailed, any more than they do in modern times. In a very real sense, today's interpreter at the UN remains a direct descendant of the followers of Hermes.
At this point it is fair to ask how far back into prehistory we may project the existence of such interpreter-intermediary roles. Even though it may seem that we are now leaving facts behind entirely and entering the realm of pure speculation, something resembling a lucid reply to this question is nonetheless possible. We may at least posit the thesis that such linguistic middle-men are likely to have existed as long as there have been human languages, following the impeccable logic that language would have been necessary for human survival?or at least for those families, clans, or tribes that managed to survive.
At this juncture we have come as far as facts—and reasonable projections drawn from them—can bring us. Any further investigation into the history of interpreting necessarily leads us into the domain of speculation. Quite simply, as soon as we have allowed that proto-interpreters may have existed coterminously with the history of humanity itself, we have also opened up a hotly debated issue: the origins of language itself.
Is it possible that the very earliest of proto-interpreters could have actually witnessed these origins, indeed could possibly have played some form of midwife role in such a process? It should be obvious that merely by asking such a question we risk entering the domain of "cavemen epics" with scantily clad actresses, concocted "primitive" languages, and anachronistic saurians. So steeped in speculation is such a realm that no reputable scholar should risk entering it, though as we shall see this has not deterred quite a few highly credentialed scholars from doing so.
Let there be no mistake concerning how long a period we may be discussing here—archaeologists and paleoanthropologists agree that it may measure, depending on our definition of humanity, anywhere between two hundred thousand and four million years. Not only do books on this subject abound, but an entire scholarly organization, the Language Origins Society, has held annual conferences on this topic since 1985. Based on the amassed literature surrounding this subject, it would appear that representatives from almost every discipline—including many quite distant from language—have not hesitated to come forward with their theories.
Some recent views have concentrated on the shape of the vocal chords over time, some have built grandiose theories on infinitely small details of neuroscience, others have focussed on so-called logical languages. Most recently an Oxford anthropologist has suggested that human language came about quite suddenly and all at once a mere 10,000 years ago as the result of a single mutation in our genes. Other authorities insist that it can only have occurred far earlier when we developed a larynx capable of producing the many sounds of modern language and a hyoid bone ideally situated to support it. And many of these experts assume that there had to be some truly momentous event, some great divide, some magical, decisive, and defining moment in which human language suddenly took flight and completely separated itself from those horribly rude and base noises made by animals.
Other papers on this topic, all supposedly aimed at discovering the origins of language, have been concerned with communication in the womb, gesture as proto-language, proto-indo-european root forms, Gestalt psychology, the possible influence of bird songs, paleolaryngeology, echolocation, Chomskyan linguistics, and assorted symbolist, postmodernist, and other literary approaches. Some of these papers have managed to avoid the topic of language origins altogether. (Note 10) So what is about to be suggested here by a humble historian of translation is perhaps no more speculative than much of what has gone before.
This author is emboldened by the views of Jacques Guy, (Note 11) an authority on Austronesian languages, who has recently pointed out that there is no reason why language had to develop all at once nor even why it had to possess its full panoply of vowels and consonants from the very beginning. In his words:
..the lowering of the larynx, supposed to have brought the phonetic range necessary for language, is humbug. Our much pooh-poohed cousins, Homo neanderthalensis, could have made do with just two consonants (a cough and a retch for instance), two vowels (an aarrrgh and a hey), and eight tones, which assuming the simplest syllable structure, left them way ahead, with 48 different syllables, when Rotokas (a sound-impoverished Papuan language of New Guinea) manages only 35 with its six consonants, five vowels, and no tones.
Such observations provide at least some measure of support for a theory on language origins, possibly connecting proto-interpreters to this process, discussed by the present author in two previous publications. (Note 12) What follows is an excerpt from the first of these:
As human beings we frequently congratulate ourselves as the only species to have evolved true language, leaving to one side the rudimentary sounds of other creatures or the dance motions of bees. It may just be that we have been missing something.
On countless occasions TV nature programs have treated us to the sight of various sleek, furry, or spiny creatures busily spraying the foliage or tree trunks around them with their own personal scent. And we have also heard omniscient narrators inform us that the purpose of this spray is to mark the creature's territory against competitors, fend off predators, and/or attract mates. And we have also seen the face-offs, battles, retreats, and matings that these spray marks have incited.
In an evolutionary perspective covering all species and ranging through millions of years, it has been abundantly shown time and time again—as tails recede, stomachs develop second and third chambers, and reproduction methods proliferate—that a function working in one way for one species may come to work quite differently in another. Is it really too absurd to suggest that over a period of a few million years the spraying mechanism common to so many mammals, employing relatively small posterior muscles and little brain power, may have wandered off and found its place within a single species, which chose to use larger muscles located in the head and lungs, guiding them with a vast portion of its brain?
Thus, language may turn out to be something we have created not as a mere generation or nation, not even as a species, but in Von Baer's sense as an entire evolutionary phylogeny.
Such a theory obviously raises as many problems as it purports to solve, and some of these are addressed to some extent in the original treatment. In the absence of any conclusive evidence from so remote an era, it must be clearly labeled as speculative in nature, though perhaps no more so than some other solutions proposed. Recent animal studies, particularly those in ornithology, suggest that sounds and other signals emitted for a specific purpose even among the same species may vary from band to band. (Note 13) Such differences could lead to confusion whenever two different bands were obliged to meet or merge for an extended period. Perhaps early hominids encountered comparable difficulties, and it could be that by resolving them that the earliest proto-interpreters may have arisen.
As promised in our introduction, we have presented an account of interpreting during prehistory, limiting ourselves to the factual record in so far as it is available, and extending our treatment into more or less reasonable speculations only where the factual record is missing and where others have not hesitated to speculate as well. Springing from such a perspective, it is hoped that at least something resembling a reasonable treatment can now fill a noticeable lacuna in the history of translation and interpreting.
Notes:
(1) Liddell-Scott, 1964/1889, 315; Liddell-Scott, 1961/1843, 690.
(2) Cratylus, 43 (Translated by C.D.C. Reeve).
(3) Theaetetus, 83 (Translated by H.N. Fowler).
(4) Hyde, 9, 17-38, & passim.
(5) Lewis, 436.
(6) Many widely available dictionaries, including the Houghton Mifflin American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language provide this derivation. In our first two examples, as we have seen, the same word served for both "interpreter" and "translator," but this was apparently not the case for the Sumerians. From both Black and Meissner & Von Soden we learn that an additional word, sepiru, was in use to denote a "translator-scribe."
(7) Kramer, 149.
(8) Bickerton, 1—135.
(9) Plutarch, 18-19. (Translated by Bernadotte Perrin)
(10) The Language Origins Society published the four volumes referenced below (listed under Wind and von Raffler), and its on-line presence provides at any time access to papers from one to three of their conferences. It has in more recent years been succeeded by EVOLANG, an organization with similar aims.
(11) Guy, personal correspondence and THES piece referenced above.
(12) Gross, 1993a, 9-10 & 1993b, 254-255.
(13) Welty and Baptista, 234-38, on bird song dialects. This is a standard university text on ornithology.
References:
Bickterton, D. 1981. Roots of Language. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
Black, J, George, A., and Postgate, N. 1999. A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Gross, Alex. 1993a. MT and Language: Conflicting Technologies? Ariadne's Endless Thread. Sci-Tech Translation Journal, October: 8-10, 16. Poughkeepsie, NY: American Translators Association.
———1993b. Selected Elements from a Theory of Fractal Linguistics. In Scientific and Technical Translation, ATA Scholarly Monograph Series, Vol. VI, Wright, S.E., and Wright, L. (eds), 225-263. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Guy, J. 1973. A grammar of the northern dialect of Sakao, a Melanesian language of Espiritu Santo (New Hebrides) . Canberra: Australian National University.
Guy, J. 2000. It Was the Larynx, Guv. (review of The Origins of Complex Language by Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy) Times Higher Education Supplement, February 11: 29.
Hyde, L. 1998. Trickster Makes this World. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Kramer, Samuel. 1963. The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lewis, C. 1918. An Elementary Latin Dictionary. New York: American Book Company.
Liddell, H.G. and Scott, R. 1961/1843. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon; 1964/1989. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon.
Meissner, B. and Von Soden, W. 1966. Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Plato. 1998. Cratylus. Translated, with Introduction and Notes, by C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett.
Plato. 1921/1966. Theaetetus. [Loeb Classical Library] Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
Plutarch. 1914/1997. Lives: Life of Themistocles. [Loeb Classical Library] Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
Von Raffler-Engel, W., Wind, J. and Jonker, A. (eds) 1991. Studies in Language Origins, II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Welty, J.C. and Baptista, L. 1988. The Life of Birds. Fort Worth: Saunders College and Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Wind, J., Pulleyblank, E.G., de Grolier, E., and Bichakjian, B.H. (eds) 1989. Studies in Language Origins, I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1989.
Wind, J., Jonker, A., and Rolfe, R. (eds) 1994 Studies in Language Origins, III. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wind, J., Bichakjian, B.H., Nocentini, A.,and Chiarelli, B. (eds) 1992. Language Origin: A Multidisciplinary Approach. (Papers from the joint 1988 LOS Meeting and the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Language Origin). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Wu, Chen-En and Kherdian, D. 2000. Monkey: A Journey to the West. New York: Random House.
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
By Alex Gross
http://language.home.sprynet.com
This paper was originally commissioned by the Chair of the NYU Translation Studies Department as part of a book to be published by John Benjamins.
It was intended to be a more concise and more conventionally academic version of the paper I presented at the NYU Translation 2000 Conference.
This entire book project was later abandoned by the Chair.
What follows is an attempt to present the evidence that interpreting was relatively common during prehistory and that interpreters had a fairly important role to play during that long and necessarily undocumented era, though differing in some respects from the role they play today. By interpreting I define those acts of serving as oral intermediary either between two separate languages or between two less than perfectly comprehensible variants of the same language. From the outset I shall do my best to distinguish probable facts from speculations based on those facts and to demonstrate precisely how I have arrived at these speculations about an era that is otherwise quite closed to us. Although one occasionally encounters semi-serious references to interpreting as the "second oldest profession," the following account endeavors to provide what may prove to be a reasonable basis for showing that such an assertion might just possibly be justified.
It should be obvious from the outset that interpreting is necessarilly the prehistory of translation—in fact the ancient Romans and Greeks made no major differentiation between the words "interpreter" and "translator." Where no knowledge of written languages existed, the only way to mediate between two language forms was necessarily interpreting. It also ought to be obvious that interpreting had to exist during prehistory—the main obstacle to this thesis lies in the nature of modern scholarly procedure, which requires written records and footnotes to bolster any major claim, when clearly neither can exist for the earliest days of interpreting. I shall nonetheless present three different kinds of evidence combining to suggest the validity of this statement.
1. Verbal evidence springing from the earliest words for "translating" and "interpreting."
2. Inferential evidence pointing towards a continuity in language processes during both prehistory and history.
3. Perhaps most remarkably, surviving evidence from the past, to be found in preliterate social groups today, replicating to some extent the conditions prevelant in prehistoric social groups.
Examples of verbal evidence are fairly abundant. Perhaps the most persuasive is the ancient Greek word hermêneus, which the Liddell-Scott lexicon renders as both "interpreter" and "translator." But these are by no means the only two translations provided by this most authoritative reference work on Greek studies. Here are some of the other possible translations presented by its editors:
hermêneus:
Interpreter, especially of foreign terms
dragoman
court interpreter
matrimonial agent
go-between
broker
commissionaire
Furthermore, Liddell-Scott provides the following possible choices for the related verb form:
hermêneuo:
interpret foreign tongues
translate
explain
expound
put into words
express
describe
write about (Note 1)
From the outset it is useful to reflect on why so many other possible definitions of both the noun and verb forms—aside from “translate” and “interpret”—are listed. It is of course no secret that the word "interpret" has two major meanings even in modern usage: interpreting the address of a foreign ambassador as opposed to interpreting the meaning of a trend, an omen, a change in a friend's personal behavior. But the many meanings provided by Liddell-Scott for the noun, especially "go-between," "broker," and "matrimonial agent," would seem at first glance to open up entirely new territory. And as we shall see, the word "dragoman" has its own ramifications, indeed its own history. It is by explaining how these subsidiary meanings—or at least what appear at first glance to be subsidiary meanings—connect with the "main" meaning of hermêneus that the first glimpse into prehistory may become feasible.
Furthermore, there is one other crucial clue connected with the Greek use of this word that is simply not present in the way we use the word "interpreter" in English. As Lidell-Scott, along with Plato and other ancient authors make more than clear, the Greek word hermêneus is intimately tied up with several of the attributes of the Greek god Hermes. Basically, what the ancient Greeks were saying when they used this verb, hermêneuo, hermêneueis, hermêneuei could be duplicated in English only if our verb for to translate or interpret went "I hermese, you hermese, he or she hermeses." Or more collloquially, "I make like Hermes, you make like Hermese, etc." In the author's opinion, we are under an obligation to ask one simple, searching question: precisely what is going on here in terms of actual meaning?
Several historical and cultural prerequisites must be satisfied before an adequate answer may emerge. First of all, it is necessary to visualize the full nature of the divinity of Hermes among the Greeks and how they understood his attributes and duties. For the Greeks, Hermes epitomized quick-wittedness, ready improvisation, and the deft management of clever solutions. This alone goes towards explaining his connection to language and interpreting. Among other duties he also acted as divine messenger, presided over commerce and travel (both clearly linked to translation), and was the tutelary god of all the arts and crafts, including magic and matrimonial match-making. It can perhaps be forgiven if he was also regarded as the god of thieves and deceit, since such attributes may spring somewhat naturally from some of his other functions. But precisely how do all these traits fit together into a single image of the interpreter during both historic and prehistoric times?
Here's what Plato had to say about Hermes in Cratylus, one of his principal dialogues on language:
SOCRATES: Well, the name ‘Hermes’ seems to have something to do with speech: he is an interpreter (hermêneus), a messenger, a thief and a deceiver in words, a wheeler-dealer—and all these activities involve the power of speech. (Note 2)
If this seems too negative a view of interpreting, Plato expresses a more positive view in his dialogue Theaetetus, where he also provides us with a hint of the role played by interpreters in ancient Athens. Attempting to distinguish knowledge from perception, Socrates teasingly asks Theaetetus whether people truly know a foreign language merely by seeing it in writing or hearing it spoken. In a reply praised by Socrates, Theaetetus states that we can only know what its letters look like and what its spoken form sounds like...
but we do not perceive through sight or hearing, and we do not know, what the grammarians and interpreters teach about them. (Note 3)
If anything, Plato grants interpreters a slight advantage over grammarians in this passage, for he assumes that grammarians can only be of use in describing the letters or written form of the language (and of the two ancient Greek words for grammarians, both closely related to the word for "letters," the one Plato uses here is the more demeaning one, usually meaning merely a "schoolmaster,"), while only interpreters can tell us what is truly being said.
It has often been observed that the myths of a culture can record or encode very real historical or even prehistorical knowledge, and the Greek linkage of the god Hermes to the act of interpreting can perhaps be regarded as an instance of this. It is also important to recall how international and multicultural this figure of a trickster god who creates language truly is and how widely recorded it is in the world's mythology. Hermes was of course known in ancient Egypt as Thoth, but as Lewis Hyde points out in his book Trickster Makes This World, he can also be found in various guises as the African Eshu, as any number of figures such as Coyote or Raven in Native American folklore, as Loki among the Norse, the child Krishna in Indian tradition, or even China's Monkey King, (and in the latter case we have an example of a tale about a god being inspired by the travels of a real-life translator, the seventh century Xuanzang, immortalized in the Ming Dynasty novel Journey to the West.) (Note 4)
Now let's take a look at the Latin word for translator and interpreter. At first glance it looks quite familiar: interpres. But as soon as we look at the definitions provided by Charlton Lewis' standard An Elementary Latin Dictionary, we rediscover much of the same terrain previously covered by "hermêneus:"
interpres:
[derived from inter, meaning between, and pres, a form of prehendo, prendo, meaning
to catch, lay hold of, grasp, take Literally: Caught in between]
A middle man
mediator
broker
negotiator
Interpres divum
messenger
Mercury
Explainer
expounder
translator
interpreter
(Note 5)
Mercury is of course the Roman name for Hermes, and almost all the definitions found for the Greek word recur for the Latin one, except for "matrimonial agent," (perhaps a custom that had died out by Roman times).
The final word for "interpreter" to be examined is not only the most ancient of the three but has also been in continuous use in various forms over at least the last five thousand years and exists in English even today. As we have seen, Liddell-Scott provided it as one possible English translation for hermêneus:
Dragoman:
Spanish: Trujamán, Triujimán
French: Trucheman, Truchement
Latin: Dragumannus
Greek: Dragoumanos
Arabic: Targuman
Aramaic: Turgemana
Mishnaic Hebrew: Targum
Akkadian: Targumanu
Its meaning:
about 50% interpreter
about 50% go-between, mediator,
middle-man, broker (Note 6)
This word alone takes us back to the very demarcation between written history and the prehistory which must have preceded it. It is a time that clearly predated even the composition of the Bible, and our tale of Eve being created from the rib of Adam, as Kramer points out, is almost certainly based on the world's first recorded untranslatable pun, involving Hebrew and Sumerian, where the word for "rib," ti, also meant the word for "life-giving." (Note 7) From such a remote point in time we need only press the slightest bit further into the past to securely locate interpreters as present and actively working during prehistory.
At this juncture our two other forms of evidence also have some light to shed, first among these being simple inference based on the present. We know for a certainty that the process of recorded history has been one of slow, painstaking amalgamation and growth, often against considerable resistance. Tribal speech gradually broadened and changed across extended clans, distinctly local dialects merged with larger civic or regional ones or at least yielded to them for purposes of trade and culture, pidgins turned into creoles (at least according to Bickerton), (Note 8) regional speech forms have developed into broader structures shared by entire provinces, and provincial languages have been to some extent dominated by official national languages, each with its own pedigree and history. And almost equally important during this merging and blending process has been the dogged resistance which accompanied it at every stage. In fact, many parts of the world, as we are well aware, still have not surrendered to this process. These are areas where tribal, clan, and even family loyalties still remain the most powerful force, where even modern methods of communication have failed to penetrate.
Both this evolution—and its many pockets of resistance—provide at least some idea of what cultural and linguistic developments are likely to have been during prehistory. If anything, the process must have been even slower and more painful in moving from stage to stage, when it managed to move at all. Only families, at best extended families or "tribes," are likely to have truly and completely shared a "language" to any sufficient degree, and even here new speech forms could have readily grown up between estranged relatives of the same age group or even among members of the same family separated by a single generation. Whenever members of such families moved to a new location, they took their form of the language with them to develop independently, necessarily leaving the older variant to do the same. All forms of modern communication were of course totally absent. And by the very definition of prehistory, there could be no writing.
This view of the past is also supported by our third form of evidence—while prehistoric societies are behind us, preliterate societies still exist. They can be found in numerous areas of the globe, but there is no longer any real need to travel to those areas to encounter their inhabitants. The reason for this is that members of these societies have now come to live among us and can often be found only a stone's throw from our secure modern dwellings. Sometimes possessing only a rudimentary knowledge of the national language spoken in their homeland, they have come legally or otherwise to cities like New York, London, and Amsterdam to seek work and improve their condition.
And not surprisingly, today's interpreters, especially those working in our hospitals and courtrooms, are often the first to become aware of their presence and the need to deal compassionately with them. These visitors frequently encounter legal and health problems in our world, since their knowledge of modern medicine and social customs does not always coincide with our own. In fact, they often arrive on our shores still following their own traditional healing methods and social hierarchies, which may include chieftains, priests, and marriage brokers.
And with those last two words perhaps the circle begins to close, since the phrase "matrimonial agent" appeared in Lidell-Scott as one of the meanings for hermêneus. As recently as a century ago national governments would still cement peace treaties with a marriage between royal offspring of the two nations. How much more important the arrangement of such marriages must have been for the countless generations of small families, tribes, and clans of prehistory, desperately competing in many environments for perceived advantages in dwelling places, hunting rights, and the cultivation of crops.
Both of these methods, inference and the survival of comparable groups today, afford us at least some means of visualizing the lives of these peoples. Merging these two tools with our knowledge gained from our dictionaries, perhaps we can begin to see how important someone skilled in the crucial nexus of deal-making, marriage brokering, and language skills would have been, and all the definitions provided by the Greek lexicon begin to converge as a single comprehensible entity.
Such skills were not without their dangers for those possessing them. Returning to the historic era, the following account, taken from Plutarch’s Life of Themistocles, demonstrates just how dangerous being an interpreter could be:
Themistocles, by the consent of the people, seized upon the interpreter, and put him to death, for presuming to publish the barbarian orders and decrees in the Greek language; this is one of the actions Themistocles is commended for..."
(Note 9)
Merging some speculation with our facts here, it is probably fair to state that similar events could have happened repeatedly throughout the countless centuries of prehistory, as tribes and clans moved in all directions, and the struggle for survival remained paramount. The motives of interpreters could easily be misunderstood, even by their own people, nor would we expect such figures to be enormously popular with members of an opposing group. Not all interpreters and/or go-betweens succeeeded in their missions, not all attempts at peace-making prevailed, any more than they do in modern times. In a very real sense, today's interpreter at the UN remains a direct descendant of the followers of Hermes.
At this point it is fair to ask how far back into prehistory we may project the existence of such interpreter-intermediary roles. Even though it may seem that we are now leaving facts behind entirely and entering the realm of pure speculation, something resembling a lucid reply to this question is nonetheless possible. We may at least posit the thesis that such linguistic middle-men are likely to have existed as long as there have been human languages, following the impeccable logic that language would have been necessary for human survival?or at least for those families, clans, or tribes that managed to survive.
At this juncture we have come as far as facts—and reasonable projections drawn from them—can bring us. Any further investigation into the history of interpreting necessarily leads us into the domain of speculation. Quite simply, as soon as we have allowed that proto-interpreters may have existed coterminously with the history of humanity itself, we have also opened up a hotly debated issue: the origins of language itself.
Is it possible that the very earliest of proto-interpreters could have actually witnessed these origins, indeed could possibly have played some form of midwife role in such a process? It should be obvious that merely by asking such a question we risk entering the domain of "cavemen epics" with scantily clad actresses, concocted "primitive" languages, and anachronistic saurians. So steeped in speculation is such a realm that no reputable scholar should risk entering it, though as we shall see this has not deterred quite a few highly credentialed scholars from doing so.
Let there be no mistake concerning how long a period we may be discussing here—archaeologists and paleoanthropologists agree that it may measure, depending on our definition of humanity, anywhere between two hundred thousand and four million years. Not only do books on this subject abound, but an entire scholarly organization, the Language Origins Society, has held annual conferences on this topic since 1985. Based on the amassed literature surrounding this subject, it would appear that representatives from almost every discipline—including many quite distant from language—have not hesitated to come forward with their theories.
Some recent views have concentrated on the shape of the vocal chords over time, some have built grandiose theories on infinitely small details of neuroscience, others have focussed on so-called logical languages. Most recently an Oxford anthropologist has suggested that human language came about quite suddenly and all at once a mere 10,000 years ago as the result of a single mutation in our genes. Other authorities insist that it can only have occurred far earlier when we developed a larynx capable of producing the many sounds of modern language and a hyoid bone ideally situated to support it. And many of these experts assume that there had to be some truly momentous event, some great divide, some magical, decisive, and defining moment in which human language suddenly took flight and completely separated itself from those horribly rude and base noises made by animals.
Other papers on this topic, all supposedly aimed at discovering the origins of language, have been concerned with communication in the womb, gesture as proto-language, proto-indo-european root forms, Gestalt psychology, the possible influence of bird songs, paleolaryngeology, echolocation, Chomskyan linguistics, and assorted symbolist, postmodernist, and other literary approaches. Some of these papers have managed to avoid the topic of language origins altogether. (Note 10) So what is about to be suggested here by a humble historian of translation is perhaps no more speculative than much of what has gone before.
This author is emboldened by the views of Jacques Guy, (Note 11) an authority on Austronesian languages, who has recently pointed out that there is no reason why language had to develop all at once nor even why it had to possess its full panoply of vowels and consonants from the very beginning. In his words:
..the lowering of the larynx, supposed to have brought the phonetic range necessary for language, is humbug. Our much pooh-poohed cousins, Homo neanderthalensis, could have made do with just two consonants (a cough and a retch for instance), two vowels (an aarrrgh and a hey), and eight tones, which assuming the simplest syllable structure, left them way ahead, with 48 different syllables, when Rotokas (a sound-impoverished Papuan language of New Guinea) manages only 35 with its six consonants, five vowels, and no tones.
Such observations provide at least some measure of support for a theory on language origins, possibly connecting proto-interpreters to this process, discussed by the present author in two previous publications. (Note 12) What follows is an excerpt from the first of these:
As human beings we frequently congratulate ourselves as the only species to have evolved true language, leaving to one side the rudimentary sounds of other creatures or the dance motions of bees. It may just be that we have been missing something.
On countless occasions TV nature programs have treated us to the sight of various sleek, furry, or spiny creatures busily spraying the foliage or tree trunks around them with their own personal scent. And we have also heard omniscient narrators inform us that the purpose of this spray is to mark the creature's territory against competitors, fend off predators, and/or attract mates. And we have also seen the face-offs, battles, retreats, and matings that these spray marks have incited.
In an evolutionary perspective covering all species and ranging through millions of years, it has been abundantly shown time and time again—as tails recede, stomachs develop second and third chambers, and reproduction methods proliferate—that a function working in one way for one species may come to work quite differently in another. Is it really too absurd to suggest that over a period of a few million years the spraying mechanism common to so many mammals, employing relatively small posterior muscles and little brain power, may have wandered off and found its place within a single species, which chose to use larger muscles located in the head and lungs, guiding them with a vast portion of its brain?
Thus, language may turn out to be something we have created not as a mere generation or nation, not even as a species, but in Von Baer's sense as an entire evolutionary phylogeny.
Such a theory obviously raises as many problems as it purports to solve, and some of these are addressed to some extent in the original treatment. In the absence of any conclusive evidence from so remote an era, it must be clearly labeled as speculative in nature, though perhaps no more so than some other solutions proposed. Recent animal studies, particularly those in ornithology, suggest that sounds and other signals emitted for a specific purpose even among the same species may vary from band to band. (Note 13) Such differences could lead to confusion whenever two different bands were obliged to meet or merge for an extended period. Perhaps early hominids encountered comparable difficulties, and it could be that by resolving them that the earliest proto-interpreters may have arisen.
As promised in our introduction, we have presented an account of interpreting during prehistory, limiting ourselves to the factual record in so far as it is available, and extending our treatment into more or less reasonable speculations only where the factual record is missing and where others have not hesitated to speculate as well. Springing from such a perspective, it is hoped that at least something resembling a reasonable treatment can now fill a noticeable lacuna in the history of translation and interpreting.
Notes:
(1) Liddell-Scott, 1964/1889, 315; Liddell-Scott, 1961/1843, 690.
(2) Cratylus, 43 (Translated by C.D.C. Reeve).
(3) Theaetetus, 83 (Translated by H.N. Fowler).
(4) Hyde, 9, 17-38, & passim.
(5) Lewis, 436.
(6) Many widely available dictionaries, including the Houghton Mifflin American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language provide this derivation. In our first two examples, as we have seen, the same word served for both "interpreter" and "translator," but this was apparently not the case for the Sumerians. From both Black and Meissner & Von Soden we learn that an additional word, sepiru, was in use to denote a "translator-scribe."
(7) Kramer, 149.
(8) Bickerton, 1—135.
(9) Plutarch, 18-19. (Translated by Bernadotte Perrin)
(10) The Language Origins Society published the four volumes referenced below (listed under Wind and von Raffler), and its on-line presence provides at any time access to papers from one to three of their conferences. It has in more recent years been succeeded by EVOLANG, an organization with similar aims.
(11) Guy, personal correspondence and THES piece referenced above.
(12) Gross, 1993a, 9-10 & 1993b, 254-255.
(13) Welty and Baptista, 234-38, on bird song dialects. This is a standard university text on ornithology.
References:
Bickterton, D. 1981. Roots of Language. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
Black, J, George, A., and Postgate, N. 1999. A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Gross, Alex. 1993a. MT and Language: Conflicting Technologies? Ariadne's Endless Thread. Sci-Tech Translation Journal, October: 8-10, 16. Poughkeepsie, NY: American Translators Association.
———1993b. Selected Elements from a Theory of Fractal Linguistics. In Scientific and Technical Translation, ATA Scholarly Monograph Series, Vol. VI, Wright, S.E., and Wright, L. (eds), 225-263. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Guy, J. 1973. A grammar of the northern dialect of Sakao, a Melanesian language of Espiritu Santo (New Hebrides) . Canberra: Australian National University.
Guy, J. 2000. It Was the Larynx, Guv. (review of The Origins of Complex Language by Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy) Times Higher Education Supplement, February 11: 29.
Hyde, L. 1998. Trickster Makes this World. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Kramer, Samuel. 1963. The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lewis, C. 1918. An Elementary Latin Dictionary. New York: American Book Company.
Liddell, H.G. and Scott, R. 1961/1843. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon; 1964/1989. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon.
Meissner, B. and Von Soden, W. 1966. Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Plato. 1998. Cratylus. Translated, with Introduction and Notes, by C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett.
Plato. 1921/1966. Theaetetus. [Loeb Classical Library] Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
Plutarch. 1914/1997. Lives: Life of Themistocles. [Loeb Classical Library] Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
Von Raffler-Engel, W., Wind, J. and Jonker, A. (eds) 1991. Studies in Language Origins, II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Welty, J.C. and Baptista, L. 1988. The Life of Birds. Fort Worth: Saunders College and Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Wind, J., Pulleyblank, E.G., de Grolier, E., and Bichakjian, B.H. (eds) 1989. Studies in Language Origins, I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1989.
Wind, J., Jonker, A., and Rolfe, R. (eds) 1994 Studies in Language Origins, III. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wind, J., Bichakjian, B.H., Nocentini, A.,and Chiarelli, B. (eds) 1992. Language Origin: A Multidisciplinary Approach. (Papers from the joint 1988 LOS Meeting and the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Language Origin). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Wu, Chen-En and Kherdian, D. 2000. Monkey: A Journey to the West. New York: Random House.
Corporate Blog of Elite - Professional Translation Services serving ASEAN & East Asia
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
The Benefits of Using a Language Interpreter
English has rapidly become the major language of international politics, trade and commerce. However, this does not mean it is the world language. It still competes with other major languages such as Spanish, French and Arabic.
In the business world, using interpreters to overcome the language barrier is a necessity. Even if there are common languages between business people, interpreters are still preferred for a number of reasons.
Interpreters offer the following advantages:
- .Interpreters are trained professionals in specific languages, meaning they can ensure communication between sides is as clear as possible.
- Having an interpreter allows you to speak in your native language, ensuring you express yourself succinctly.
- Using an interpreter helps minimise possible costly misunderstandings.
- For tactical reasons in negotiations an interpreter can help you bide time to formulate responses.
- If properly briefed, an astute interpreter can help you with presentations and negotiations by working with you to achieve goals.
- Interpreters assist in overcoming cross cultural differences and can act as guides in cross cultural matters.
If you are planning to use an interpreter, the following guidelines should be considered prior to any business taking place:
- .Fully brief your interpreter - inform them of who you will be meeting, the issues that will be discussed, any technical language that will be used and any potential uncomfortable situations that may arise.
- Discuss your aims and objectives for any meeting or negotiations with the interpreter and your strategy.
- If you are using an interpreter for a meeting then provide them with an agenda and talk them through it.
- If you are giving a speech, provide a copy of the speech and ensure they understand any complicated language.
- Speak slowly and clearly as this gives the interpreter time to digest your words.
- Take breaks in your speech regularly, for example at the end of each sentence or statement.
- Avoid long and complex sentences.
- If you plan on making a joke, check it is culturally transferable with the interpreter.
- Avoid slang, metaphors and colloquial expressions.
- Try to let the interpreter finish before commencing the next point.
- Maintain eye contact with the audience or group and not the interpreter. However, periodically check your interpreter is keeping up and is comfortable.
Interpreters should not be viewed solely as language assistants. In addition to helping you overcome the language barrier they can also assist in many other areas such as organisation, formulating strategies and advising on cross cultural differences. It is critical to see interpreters as not working for you but with you.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Different Types of Interpreters
Language interpreters come in all shapes and sizes and also carry out interpreting in many different ways. Below we have provided a list of commonly used terms to describe interpreters and the work they do.
Ad hoc interpreting
Ad hoc interpreters are also known as consecutive interpreters or face-to-face interpreters. This is where a language interpreter will carry out translations of for people during meetings, court hearings, presentations or on site visits. What the interpreter does is listen to people speaking a few sentences, translate what has been said and then allow the speaker to continue.
Conference interpreting
Conference interpreters are arguably the most technically gifted and specialised of interpreters. You will conference interpreters working at major international conferences and organisations such as the U.N. or EU. Nicole Kidman made the role of a conference interpreter famous in her role as Silvia Broome in the 2005 film "The Interpreter". These specialists listen to what is being said through headphones and then in parallel to listening translate the speech to others through a microphone. Such interpreting is mentally exhausting and therefore conference interpreters work in pairs.
Consecutive interpreting
Consecutive interpreting is the same as Ad Hoc interpreting above.
Court interpreting
Court interpreters are language specialists qualified to work in legal courts. They assist witnesses if they do not speak the language of the court. They generally work consecutively.
Interpreting
Interpreting refers to the umbrella term to capture the jobs of anyone who provides assistance with oral translations. An interpreter needs to have excellent knowledge of their own native language and another foreign language. In recent years interpreters have had to become accredited in order to work.
Liaison interpreting
A liaison interpreter provides consecutive interpretation between two languages in both directions - similar to Ad Hoc and consecutive interpreting. Such an interpreter is usually someone that works in-house in a company and is responsible for looking after guests who do not speak to language.
Friday, October 31, 2008
I Love You Translated : How to say I love you in...
Afrikaans
— Ek is lief vir jou
— Ek het jou lief
Akan (Ghana)
— Me dor wo
Albanian
— Te dua
— Te dashuroj
— Ti je zemra ime
Alentejano (Portugal)
— Gosto de ti, porra!
Alsacien (Elsass)
— Ich hoan dich gear
Amharic (Aethiopian)
— Afekrishalehou
— Afekrischalehou
— Ewedishalehu (male/female to female)
— Ewedihalehu (male/female to male)
Apache
— Sheth she~n zho~n (nasalized vowels like French, '~n' as in French 'salon')
Arabic (formal)
— Ohiboke (male to female)
— Ohiboki (male to female)
— Ohibokoma (male or female to two males or two females)
— Nohiboke (more than one male or females to female)
— Nohiboka (male to male or female to male)
— Nohibokoma (male to male or female to two males or two females)
— Nohibokom (male to male or female to more than two males)
— Nohibokon (male to male or female to more than two females)
Arabic (proper)
— Ooheboki (male to female)
— Ooheboka (female to male)
Arabic
— Ana behibak (female to male)
— Ana behibek (male to female)
— Ahebich (male to female)
— Ahebik (female to male)
— Ana ahebik
— Ib'n hebbak
— Ana ba-heb-bak
— Bahibak (female to male)
— Bahibik (male to female)
— Benhibak (more than one male or female to male)
— Benhibik (male to male or female to female)
— Benhibkom (male to male or female to more than one male)
— Nhebuk (spoken to someone of importance)
Arabic (Umggs.)
— Ana hebbek
Armenian
— Yes kez si'rumem
— Yes kez gesirem (eastern Armenian dialect)
Assamese (Indian)
— Moi tomak bhal pau
Basque
— Nere maitea (means "my love")
— Maite zaitut (means "I love you")
Bassa
— Mengweswe
Batak (Nordsumatra)
— Holong rohangku di ho
Bavarian
— I mog di narrisch gern
— I mog di (right answer "i di a")
Bemba
— Ndikufuna
Bengali
— Aami tomaake bhaalo baashi
— Ami tomay bhalobashi
— Ami tomake bahlobashi
— Ami tomake walobashi
— Ami tomake vhalobashi
Berber
— Lakh tirikh
Bicol (Philippines)
— Namumutan ta ka
Bolivian Quechua
— Qanta munani
Bosnian
— Volim te
Braille
— : : ..: | ..: | |..-.. .: : ": .., : .: ;
Brazilian / Portuguese
— Eu te amo (pronounced 'eiu chee amu')
— Amo-te
Bulgarian
— Obicham te
— As te obicham
— Obozhavam te ("I love you very much")
Burmese
— Chit pa de
Cambodian
— Kh_nhaum soro_lahn nhee_ah
— Bon sro lanh oon
Canadian French
— Sh'teme (spoken, sounds like this)
— Je t'aime ("I like you")
— Je t'adore ("I love you")
Catalan
— T'estimo (Catalonian)
— T'estim (Mallorcan)
— T'estime (Valencian)
— T'estim molt ("I love you a lot")
Cebuano (Philippines)
— Gihigugma ko ikaw.
Chamoru (or Chamorro)
— Hu guaiya hao
Cheyenne
— Nemehotatse
Chichewa
— Ndimakukonda
Chickasaw (USA)
— Chiholloli (first 'i' nasalized)
Chinese
— Goa ai li (Amoy dialect)
— Ngo oi ney (Cantonese dialect)
— Wo oi ni (Cantonese dialect)
— Ngai oi gnee (Hakka dialect)
— Ngai on ni (Hakka dialect)
— Wa ai lu (Hokkien dialect)
— Wo ai ni (Mandarin dialect)
— Wo ie ni (Mandarin dialect)
— Wuo ai nee (Mandarin dialect)
— Wo ay ni (Mandarin dialect)
— Wo ai ni (Putunghua dialect)
— Ngo ai nong (Wu dialect)
Comorien
— Ni sou hou vendza.
Corsican
— Ti tengu cara (male to female)
— Ti tengu caru (female to male)
Creol
— Mi aime jou
Croatian (familiar)
— Ja te volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim te (used in common speech)
Croatian (formal)
— Ja vas volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim vas (used in common speech)
— Ljubim te (in todays useage, "I kiss you", 'lj' pronounced like 'll' in Spanish, one sound, 'ly'ish)
Croatian (old)
— Ljubim te (may still be found in poetry)
Czech
— Miluji te (a downwards pointing arrowhead on top of the 'e' in te, which is pronounced 'ye')
— Miluju te! (colloquial form)
— Mam te (velmi) rad (male speaker, "I like you (very much)", often used and prefered)
— Mam te (velmi) rada (female speaker)
Danish
— Jeg elsker dig (see also dialect Friesian)
Davvi Samegiella
— Mun rahkistin du.
Dusun
— Siuhang oku dia
Dutch
— Ik hou van je
— Ik hou van jou
— Ik bemin je (old fashioned)
— Ik bemin jou (old fashioned)
— Ik ben verliefd op je
— Ik ben verliefd op jou
— Ik zie je graag
— Ik hol van die (Gronings a Hollands dialect)
Ecuador Quechua
— Canda munani
English
— I love you
— I adore you
— I love thee (used only in Christian context)
Esperanto
— Mi amas vin
Estonian
— Mina armastan sind
— Ma armastan sind
Ethiopian
— Afgreki' (one of the Ethipians dialects, there are over 80 - see also under "Amharic")
Farsi (old)
— Tora dust mi daram
Farsi
— Tora dost daram ("I love you")
— Asheghetam
— Doostat daram ("I'm in love with you")
— Man asheghetam ("I'm in love with you")
Filipino
— Mahal ka ta
— Iniibig kita
Finnish (formal)
— Mina rakastan sinua
— Rakastan sinua
— Mina pidan sinusta ("I like you")
Finnish
— (Ma) rakastan sua
— (Ma) tykkaan susta ("I like you")
French (formal)
— Je vous aime
French
— Je t'aime ("I love you")
— Je t'adore ("I love you", stronger meaning between lovers)
— J' t'aime bien ("I like you", meant for friends and family, not for lovers)
Friesian
— Ik hou fan dei
— Ik hald fan dei
Gaelic
— Ta gra agam ort
— Moo graugh hoo
Galician
— Querote
— Queroche
— Amote
Ghanaian (Akan, Twi)
— Me dor wo.
Georgien (Caucasus)
— Me shen mikvarkhar
German (formal)
— Ich liebe Sie (rarely used)
German
— Ich liebe dich
— Ich hab dich lieb (not so classic and conservative)
Greek
— S'ayapo (spoken "s'agapo", 3rd letter is lower case 'gamma')
— Eime eroteumenos mazi sou ("I'm in love with)
— Eime eroteumenos me 'sena(you", male to female)
— Eime eroteumeni mazi sou ("I'm in love with)
— Eime eroteumeni me 'sena (you", female to male)
— Se latrevo ("I adore you")
— Se thelo ("I want you", denotes sexual desire)
Greek (old)
— (Ego) Philo su ('ego', for emphasis)
Greek (Ancient)
— Philo se
Greenlandic
— Asavakit
Guarani'
— Rohiyu (ro-hai'-hyu)
Gujurati (Pakistan)
— Hoon tane pyar karoochhoon.
— Hoon tuney chaoon chhoon ('n' is nasal, not pronounced)
Hausa (Nigeria)
— Ina sonki
Hawaiian
— Aloha wau ia 'oe
— Aloha wau ia 'oe nui loa ("I love you very much")
Hebrew
— Anee ohev otakh (male to female)
— Anee ohevet otkha (female to male)
— Anee ohev otkha (male to male)
— Anee ohevet otakh (female to female) ('kh' pronounced like Spanish 'j', Dutch 'g', or similiar to French 'r')
Hindi
— Mai tumase pyar karata hun (male to female)
— Mai tumase pyar karati hun (female to male)
— Mai tumse pyar karta hoon
— Mai tumse peyar karta hnu
— Mai tumse pyar karta hoo
— Mai tujhe pyaar kartha hoo
— Mae tumko peyar kia
— Main tumse pyar karta hoon
— Main tumse prem karta hoon
— Main tuze pyar karta hoon ('n' is nasal, not pronounced)
Hokkien
— Wa ai lu
Hopi
— Nu'umi unangwata
Hungarian
— Szeretlek
— Te'ged szeretlek ("It's you I love and no one else")
— Szeretlek te'ged ("It's you I love, you know, you", a reinforcement)
(The above two entries are never heard in a normal context.)
Ibaloi (Phillipines)
— Pip-piyan taha
— Pipiyan ta han shili (I like/love you very much)
Imazighan
— Hamlagh kem
Indi
— Mai Tujhe Pyaar Kartha Ho
Interglossa
— Mi esthe philo tu.
Icelandic
— Eg elska thig (pronounced 'yeg l-ska thig')
Ilocano
— Ay-ayaten ka
Indonesian
— Saya cinta padamu ('Saya', commonly used)
— Saya cinta kamu ('Saya', commonly used)
— Saya kasih saudari ('Saya', commonly used)
— Saja kasih saudari ('Saya', commonly used)
— Aku tjinta padamu ('Aku', not often used)
(tjinta is the old written version influenced by Netherlands)
— Aku cinta padamu ('Aku', not often used)
— Aku cinta kamu ('Aku', not often used)
(cinta is the modern written version since 1972; same for saya and saja)
Italian
— Ti amo (relationship/lover/spouse)
— Ti voglio bene (between friends)
— Ti voglio (strong sexual meaning, "I want you" referred to the other person's body)
Irish
— Taim i' ngra leat
Irish-Gaelic
— t'a gr'a agam dhuit
Japanese
— Kimi o ai shiteru
— Aishiteru
— Chuu shiteyo
— Ora omee no koto ga suki da
— Ore wa omae ga suki da
— Suitonnen
— Sukiyanen
— Sukiyo
— Watashi wa anata ga suki desu
— Watashi wa anata wo aishithe imasu
— Watashi wa anata o aishitemasu
— A-i-shi-te ma-su
— Watakushi-wa anata-wo ai shimasu
— Suki desu (used at the first time, like for a start, when you are not yet real lovers)
Javanese
— Kulo tresno
Kankana-ey (Phillipines)
— Laylaydek sik-a
Kannada (Indian)
— Naanu Ninnanu Preethisuthene
— Naanu Ninnanu Mohisuthene
Kikongo
— Mono ke zola nge (mono ke' zola nge')
Kiswahili
— Nakupenda
— Nakupenda wewe
— Nakupenda malaika ("I love you, (my) angel")
Klingon
— bangwI' SoH ("You are my beloved")
— qamuSHa ("I love you")
— qamuSHaqu' ("I love you very much")
— qaparHa ("I like you")
— qaparHaqu' ("I like you very much!") (words are often unnecessary as the thought is most often conveyed nonverbally with special growlings)
Korean
— Dangsinul saranghee yo ("I love you, dear")
— Saranghee
— Nanun dangsineul joahapnida ("I like you")
— Nanun dangsineul mucheog joahapnida ("I like you very much")
— Nanun dangsineul saranghapnida
— Nanun dangsineul mucheog saranghapnida ("I love you very much")
— Nanun gdaega joa ("I like him" or "I like her")
— Nanun gdaereul saranghapnida ("I love him" or "I love her")
— Nanun neoreul saranghanda
— Gdaereul hjanghan naemaeum alji (You know how much I love him/her.)
— Joahaeyo ("I like you")
— Saranghaeyo (more formal)
— Saranghapanida (more respectful)
— Norul sarang hae (male to female in casual relationship)
— Tangsinul sarang ha o
— Tangshin-ul sarang hae-yo
— Tangshin-i cho-a-yo ("I like you, in a romantic way")
— Nanun tangshinul sarang hamnida
Kpele
— I walikana
Kurdish
— Ez te hezdikhem
— Min te xushvet
— Min te xoshwet (Southern dialect)
Lao
— Khoi hak jao
— Khoi hak chao
— Khoi mak jao lai ("I like you very much")
— Khoi hak jao lai ("I love you very much")
— Khoi mak jao (This means "I prefer you",
but is used for "I love you".)
Lappish
— Mun rahkistin du. (Davvi Samegiella)
Latin
— Te amo
— Vos amo
Latin (old)
— (Ego) Amo te ('Ego', for emphasis)
Latvian
— Es tevi milu (pronounced 'es tevy meelu')
('i in 'milu' has a line over it, a 'long i')
— Es milu tevi (less common)
Lebanese
— Bahibak
Lingala
— Nalingi yo
Lisbon lingo
— Gramo-te bue', chavalinha!
Lithuanian
— As tave myliu (Ush ta-ve mee-lyu) (over the 's' of 'As' has to be a 'v')
Lojban
— Mi do prami
Luo (Kenia)
— Aheri
Luxembourgish
— Ech hun dech gar
Maa
— Ilolenge
Madrid lingo
— Me molas, tronca!
Maiese
— Wa wa
Malay
— Saya cintamu
— Saya sayangmu
— Saya sayang anda
— Saya cintakan mu (grammatically correct)
— Saya sayangkan mu ( " )
— Saya chantikan awak
— Aku sayang kau
Malay/Bahasa
— Saya cinta mu
Malay/Indonesian
— Aku sayang kau
— Saya cantikan awak
— Saya sayangkan engkau
— Saya cintakan awak
— Aku cinta pada kau
— Aku cinta pada mu
— Saya cinta pada mu
— Saya sayangkan engkau ('engkau' often shortened to 'kau', 'engkau' is informal form and should only be used if you know the person _really_well)
Malayalam
— Njyaan ninne snehikyunnu
— Njyaan ninne premikyunnu
— Njyaan ninne mohikyunnu
Malaysian
— Saya cintamu
— Saya sayangmu
— Saya cinta kamu
Marathi
— Mi tuzya var prem karato
— Me tujhashi prem karto (male to female)
— Me tujhashi prem karte (female to male)
Marshallese
— Yokwe Yuk
Mohawk
— Konoronhkwa
Mokilese
— Ngoah mweoku kaua
Mongolian
— Be Chamad Hairtai (very personal)
Moroccan
— Kanbhik (both mean the same, but spoken)
— Kanhebek (in different cities)
Navajo
— Ayor anosh'ni
Ndebele (Zimbabwe)
— Niyakutanda
Nepali
— Ma timi sita prem garchhu (romantic)
— Ma timilai maya garchhu (less emphatic, can be used in a non romantic conext, too)
Norwegian
— Jeg elsker deg (Bokmaal)
— Eg elskar deg (Nynorsk)
— Jeg elsker deg (Riksmaal outdated, formerly used by upper-class and
conservative people)
Nyanja
— Ninatemba
Op
— Op lopveop yopuop
Oriya
— Moon Tumakoo Bhala Paye
— Moon Tumakoo Prema Kare
Oromoo
— Sinjaladha
— Sinjaldha
Osetian
— Aez dae warzyn
Pakistani
— Mujhe tumse muhabbat hai
— Muje se mu habbat hai
Papiamento
— Mi ta stimabo
Pedi (related to Tswana)
— Kiyahurata. (pronounced as Kee-ya--hoo-rata)
Pig Latin
— Ie ovele ouye (pronounced as I-ay ov-lay u-yay.)
Pilipino
— Mahal kita
— Iniibig kita
Polish
— Kocham cie
— Ja cie kocham
Portuguese/Brazilian
— Eu te amo (pronounced 'eiu chee amu')
— Eu amo-te
— Amo-te
Punjabi (Indian)
— Main tainu pyar karna
— Mai taunu pyar Karda
Quenya (J.R. Tolkien)
— Tye-melane
Raetoromanisch
— te amo
Romanian
— Te iubesc
— Te ador (stronger)
Russian
— Ya vas lyublyu (old fashioned)
— Ya tyebya lyublyu (best)
— Ya lyublyu vas (old fashioned)
— Ya lyublyu tyebya
Samoan
— Ou te alofa outou.
— Ou te alofa ia te oe.
— Talo'fa ia te oe. ("Hello, from me to you")
— Fia moi? ("Would you like to go to bed with me tonight?")
Sanskrit
— Anurag (a higher love, like the love of music or art)
Scot-Gaelic
— Tha gr`adh agam ort
Serbian (formal)
— Ja vas volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim vas (used in common speech)
— Ljubim te (in todays useage, "I kiss you", 'lj' pronounced like 'll' in Spanish, one sound, 'ly'ish)
Serbian (familiar)
— Ja te volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim te (used in common speech)
Serbian (old)
— Ljubim te (may still be found in poetry)
Serbocroatian
— Volim te
— Ljubim te
— Ja te volim ('j' sounds like 'y' in May)
Sesotho
— Kiyahurata. (pronounced as Kee-ya--hoo-rata)
Shona
— Ndinokuda
Singhalese (Ceylon)
— Mama oyata adarei
— Mama oyaata aadareyi
Sioux
— Techihhila
Skopian
— Te sakam (a little stronger than "I like you")
— Te ljubam ("I really love you")
— Jas te sakam ('j' sounds like 'y' in May)
— Pozdrav ("Greetings")
Slovak
— Lubim ta
Slovene
— Ljubim te
Somalian
— Waan ku jeclahay
Spanish
— Te amo
— Te quiero
— Te re-quiero (Argentine way to say I love you very much)
— Te adoro (I adore you)
— Te deseo (I desire you)
— Me antojes (I crave you)
Srilankan
— Mama oyata arderyi
Suaheli (Ostafrika)
— Ninikupenda
Swahili
— Nakupenda
— Naku penda (followed by the person's name)
— Ninikupenda
— Dholu'o
Swedish
— Jag alskar dig. (pronounced "Yag alskar day")
Syrian/Lebanese
— Bhebbek (male to female)
— Bhebbak (female to male)
Tagalog
— Mahal kita
Tahitian
— Ua Here Vau Ia Oe
— Ua here vau ia oe
Tamil
— Naan unnai kaathalikir^en ("I love you")
— Naan unnai kathalikkinr^en ("I love you")
— Naan unnai Virumbukir^en ("I love you")
— Naan unnai Virumbukinr^en ("I love you")
— Naan unna kathalikaren (The last 'n' in both Naan and Kaathalikaren, are spelt thru nose and is almost silent) (Coloquel, when you speak casually, without much stress on grammar)
— Nee yennai kaathalikiraai! ("You love me!") (If its a question like You love me? or Do you Love me? Then "Nee Yennai kaathalikkiraaya?)
— Naam iruvarum vi'rumbukirom (We both are loving).
— Naam iruvarum oruvarukkoruvar vi'rumbukirom (We both are loving each other).
Telugu (Indian)
— Neenu ninnu pramistu'nnanu
— Nenu ninnu premistunnanu
— Ninnu premistunnanu
Thai (formal)
— Phom rak khun (male to female)
— Ch'an rak khun (female to male)
— Phom-ruk-koon (male to female)
— Chun-ruk-koon (female to male)
— Phom lak kun (male to female)
Thai
— Khao raak thoe (affectionate, sweet, loving)
Tswana
— Ke a go rata
Tshiluba
— Ndi mukusua (I love you)
— Ndi musua wewe (I want you)
— Ndi ne ditalala bua wewe (I have love for you)
Tunisian
— Ha eh bak
Tumbuka
— Nkhukutemwa
Turkish (formal)
— Sizi seviyorum
Turkish
— Seni seviyorum
— Seni begeniyorum ("I adore you") (g has a bar on it)
Twi (Ghana)
— Me dowapaa
— Me dor wo
Ukrainian
— Ya tebe kokhayu
— Ja tebe kokhaju (real true love)
— Ja vas kokhaju
— Ja pokokhav tebe
— Ja pokokhav vas
Urdu (Indien)
— Main tumse muhabbat karta hoon
— Mujhe tumse mohabbat hai
— Mujge tumae mahabbat hai
— Kam prem kartahai
Vai
— Na lia
Varmlandska
— Du ar gorgo te mag
Venda
— Ndi a ni funa
Vietnamese
— Anh yeu em (male to female)
— Em yeu anh (female to male)
— Toi yeu em
Volapuk
— Lofob oli.
Votic
— Mia suvatan sinua.
Vulcan (Mr.Spock)
— Wani ra yana ro aisha
Walloon
— Dji vos veu volti (lit. I like to see you)
— Dji vos inme (lit. I love you)
— Dji v'zinme
Welsh
— Rwy'n dy garu di.
— Yr wyf i yn dy garu di (chwi)
Wolof
— Da ma la nope
— Da ma la nop (da malanop)
Yiddish
— Kh'hob dikh lib
— Kh'ob dikh holt
— Ikh bin in dir farlibt
Yucatec Maya
— 'in k'aatech (the love of lovers)
— 'in yabitmech (the love of family, which lovers can also feel; it
indicates more a desire to spoil and protect the other person)
Yugoslavian
— Ja te volim
Zazi (kurdish)
— Ezhele hezdege
Zulu
— Mina Ngithanda Wena (rarely used; means "Me, I love you.")
— Ngiyakuthanda (pronounced as NGee-ya--koo--tanda)
Zuni
— Tom ho'ichema
— Ek is lief vir jou
— Ek het jou lief
Akan (Ghana)
— Me dor wo
Albanian
— Te dua
— Te dashuroj
— Ti je zemra ime
Alentejano (Portugal)
— Gosto de ti, porra!
Alsacien (Elsass)
— Ich hoan dich gear
Amharic (Aethiopian)
— Afekrishalehou
— Afekrischalehou
— Ewedishalehu (male/female to female)
— Ewedihalehu (male/female to male)
Apache
— Sheth she~n zho~n (nasalized vowels like French, '~n' as in French 'salon')
Arabic (formal)
— Ohiboke (male to female)
— Ohiboki (male to female)
— Ohibokoma (male or female to two males or two females)
— Nohiboke (more than one male or females to female)
— Nohiboka (male to male or female to male)
— Nohibokoma (male to male or female to two males or two females)
— Nohibokom (male to male or female to more than two males)
— Nohibokon (male to male or female to more than two females)
Arabic (proper)
— Ooheboki (male to female)
— Ooheboka (female to male)
Arabic
— Ana behibak (female to male)
— Ana behibek (male to female)
— Ahebich (male to female)
— Ahebik (female to male)
— Ana ahebik
— Ib'n hebbak
— Ana ba-heb-bak
— Bahibak (female to male)
— Bahibik (male to female)
— Benhibak (more than one male or female to male)
— Benhibik (male to male or female to female)
— Benhibkom (male to male or female to more than one male)
— Nhebuk (spoken to someone of importance)
Arabic (Umggs.)
— Ana hebbek
Armenian
— Yes kez si'rumem
— Yes kez gesirem (eastern Armenian dialect)
Assamese (Indian)
— Moi tomak bhal pau
Basque
— Nere maitea (means "my love")
— Maite zaitut (means "I love you")
Bassa
— Mengweswe
Batak (Nordsumatra)
— Holong rohangku di ho
Bavarian
— I mog di narrisch gern
— I mog di (right answer "i di a")
Bemba
— Ndikufuna
Bengali
— Aami tomaake bhaalo baashi
— Ami tomay bhalobashi
— Ami tomake bahlobashi
— Ami tomake walobashi
— Ami tomake vhalobashi
Berber
— Lakh tirikh
Bicol (Philippines)
— Namumutan ta ka
Bolivian Quechua
— Qanta munani
Bosnian
— Volim te
Braille
— : : ..: | ..: | |..-.. .: : ": .., : .: ;
Brazilian / Portuguese
— Eu te amo (pronounced 'eiu chee amu')
— Amo-te
Bulgarian
— Obicham te
— As te obicham
— Obozhavam te ("I love you very much")
Burmese
— Chit pa de
Cambodian
— Kh_nhaum soro_lahn nhee_ah
— Bon sro lanh oon
Canadian French
— Sh'teme (spoken, sounds like this)
— Je t'aime ("I like you")
— Je t'adore ("I love you")
Catalan
— T'estimo (Catalonian)
— T'estim (Mallorcan)
— T'estime (Valencian)
— T'estim molt ("I love you a lot")
Cebuano (Philippines)
— Gihigugma ko ikaw.
Chamoru (or Chamorro)
— Hu guaiya hao
Cheyenne
— Nemehotatse
Chichewa
— Ndimakukonda
Chickasaw (USA)
— Chiholloli (first 'i' nasalized)
Chinese
— Goa ai li (Amoy dialect)
— Ngo oi ney (Cantonese dialect)
— Wo oi ni (Cantonese dialect)
— Ngai oi gnee (Hakka dialect)
— Ngai on ni (Hakka dialect)
— Wa ai lu (Hokkien dialect)
— Wo ai ni (Mandarin dialect)
— Wo ie ni (Mandarin dialect)
— Wuo ai nee (Mandarin dialect)
— Wo ay ni (Mandarin dialect)
— Wo ai ni (Putunghua dialect)
— Ngo ai nong (Wu dialect)
Comorien
— Ni sou hou vendza.
Corsican
— Ti tengu cara (male to female)
— Ti tengu caru (female to male)
Creol
— Mi aime jou
Croatian (familiar)
— Ja te volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim te (used in common speech)
Croatian (formal)
— Ja vas volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim vas (used in common speech)
— Ljubim te (in todays useage, "I kiss you", 'lj' pronounced like 'll' in Spanish, one sound, 'ly'ish)
Croatian (old)
— Ljubim te (may still be found in poetry)
Czech
— Miluji te (a downwards pointing arrowhead on top of the 'e' in te, which is pronounced 'ye')
— Miluju te! (colloquial form)
— Mam te (velmi) rad (male speaker, "I like you (very much)", often used and prefered)
— Mam te (velmi) rada (female speaker)
Danish
— Jeg elsker dig (see also dialect Friesian)
Davvi Samegiella
— Mun rahkistin du.
Dusun
— Siuhang oku dia
Dutch
— Ik hou van je
— Ik hou van jou
— Ik bemin je (old fashioned)
— Ik bemin jou (old fashioned)
— Ik ben verliefd op je
— Ik ben verliefd op jou
— Ik zie je graag
— Ik hol van die (Gronings a Hollands dialect)
Ecuador Quechua
— Canda munani
English
— I love you
— I adore you
— I love thee (used only in Christian context)
Esperanto
— Mi amas vin
Estonian
— Mina armastan sind
— Ma armastan sind
Ethiopian
— Afgreki' (one of the Ethipians dialects, there are over 80 - see also under "Amharic")
Farsi (old)
— Tora dust mi daram
Farsi
— Tora dost daram ("I love you")
— Asheghetam
— Doostat daram ("I'm in love with you")
— Man asheghetam ("I'm in love with you")
Filipino
— Mahal ka ta
— Iniibig kita
Finnish (formal)
— Mina rakastan sinua
— Rakastan sinua
— Mina pidan sinusta ("I like you")
Finnish
— (Ma) rakastan sua
— (Ma) tykkaan susta ("I like you")
French (formal)
— Je vous aime
French
— Je t'aime ("I love you")
— Je t'adore ("I love you", stronger meaning between lovers)
— J' t'aime bien ("I like you", meant for friends and family, not for lovers)
Friesian
— Ik hou fan dei
— Ik hald fan dei
Gaelic
— Ta gra agam ort
— Moo graugh hoo
Galician
— Querote
— Queroche
— Amote
Ghanaian (Akan, Twi)
— Me dor wo.
Georgien (Caucasus)
— Me shen mikvarkhar
German (formal)
— Ich liebe Sie (rarely used)
German
— Ich liebe dich
— Ich hab dich lieb (not so classic and conservative)
Greek
— S'ayapo (spoken "s'agapo", 3rd letter is lower case 'gamma')
— Eime eroteumenos mazi sou ("I'm in love with)
— Eime eroteumenos me 'sena(you", male to female)
— Eime eroteumeni mazi sou ("I'm in love with)
— Eime eroteumeni me 'sena (you", female to male)
— Se latrevo ("I adore you")
— Se thelo ("I want you", denotes sexual desire)
Greek (old)
— (Ego) Philo su ('ego', for emphasis)
Greek (Ancient)
— Philo se
Greenlandic
— Asavakit
Guarani'
— Rohiyu (ro-hai'-hyu)
Gujurati (Pakistan)
— Hoon tane pyar karoochhoon.
— Hoon tuney chaoon chhoon ('n' is nasal, not pronounced)
Hausa (Nigeria)
— Ina sonki
Hawaiian
— Aloha wau ia 'oe
— Aloha wau ia 'oe nui loa ("I love you very much")
Hebrew
— Anee ohev otakh (male to female)
— Anee ohevet otkha (female to male)
— Anee ohev otkha (male to male)
— Anee ohevet otakh (female to female) ('kh' pronounced like Spanish 'j', Dutch 'g', or similiar to French 'r')
Hindi
— Mai tumase pyar karata hun (male to female)
— Mai tumase pyar karati hun (female to male)
— Mai tumse pyar karta hoon
— Mai tumse peyar karta hnu
— Mai tumse pyar karta hoo
— Mai tujhe pyaar kartha hoo
— Mae tumko peyar kia
— Main tumse pyar karta hoon
— Main tumse prem karta hoon
— Main tuze pyar karta hoon ('n' is nasal, not pronounced)
Hokkien
— Wa ai lu
Hopi
— Nu'umi unangwata
Hungarian
— Szeretlek
— Te'ged szeretlek ("It's you I love and no one else")
— Szeretlek te'ged ("It's you I love, you know, you", a reinforcement)
(The above two entries are never heard in a normal context.)
Ibaloi (Phillipines)
— Pip-piyan taha
— Pipiyan ta han shili (I like/love you very much)
Imazighan
— Hamlagh kem
Indi
— Mai Tujhe Pyaar Kartha Ho
Interglossa
— Mi esthe philo tu.
Icelandic
— Eg elska thig (pronounced 'yeg l-ska thig')
Ilocano
— Ay-ayaten ka
Indonesian
— Saya cinta padamu ('Saya', commonly used)
— Saya cinta kamu ('Saya', commonly used)
— Saya kasih saudari ('Saya', commonly used)
— Saja kasih saudari ('Saya', commonly used)
— Aku tjinta padamu ('Aku', not often used)
(tjinta is the old written version influenced by Netherlands)
— Aku cinta padamu ('Aku', not often used)
— Aku cinta kamu ('Aku', not often used)
(cinta is the modern written version since 1972; same for saya and saja)
Italian
— Ti amo (relationship/lover/spouse)
— Ti voglio bene (between friends)
— Ti voglio (strong sexual meaning, "I want you" referred to the other person's body)
Irish
— Taim i' ngra leat
Irish-Gaelic
— t'a gr'a agam dhuit
Japanese
— Kimi o ai shiteru
— Aishiteru
— Chuu shiteyo
— Ora omee no koto ga suki da
— Ore wa omae ga suki da
— Suitonnen
— Sukiyanen
— Sukiyo
— Watashi wa anata ga suki desu
— Watashi wa anata wo aishithe imasu
— Watashi wa anata o aishitemasu
— A-i-shi-te ma-su
— Watakushi-wa anata-wo ai shimasu
— Suki desu (used at the first time, like for a start, when you are not yet real lovers)
Javanese
— Kulo tresno
Kankana-ey (Phillipines)
— Laylaydek sik-a
Kannada (Indian)
— Naanu Ninnanu Preethisuthene
— Naanu Ninnanu Mohisuthene
Kikongo
— Mono ke zola nge (mono ke' zola nge')
Kiswahili
— Nakupenda
— Nakupenda wewe
— Nakupenda malaika ("I love you, (my) angel")
Klingon
— bangwI' SoH ("You are my beloved")
— qamuSHa ("I love you")
— qamuSHaqu' ("I love you very much")
— qaparHa ("I like you")
— qaparHaqu' ("I like you very much!") (words are often unnecessary as the thought is most often conveyed nonverbally with special growlings)
Korean
— Dangsinul saranghee yo ("I love you, dear")
— Saranghee
— Nanun dangsineul joahapnida ("I like you")
— Nanun dangsineul mucheog joahapnida ("I like you very much")
— Nanun dangsineul saranghapnida
— Nanun dangsineul mucheog saranghapnida ("I love you very much")
— Nanun gdaega joa ("I like him" or "I like her")
— Nanun gdaereul saranghapnida ("I love him" or "I love her")
— Nanun neoreul saranghanda
— Gdaereul hjanghan naemaeum alji (You know how much I love him/her.)
— Joahaeyo ("I like you")
— Saranghaeyo (more formal)
— Saranghapanida (more respectful)
— Norul sarang hae (male to female in casual relationship)
— Tangsinul sarang ha o
— Tangshin-ul sarang hae-yo
— Tangshin-i cho-a-yo ("I like you, in a romantic way")
— Nanun tangshinul sarang hamnida
Kpele
— I walikana
Kurdish
— Ez te hezdikhem
— Min te xushvet
— Min te xoshwet (Southern dialect)
Lao
— Khoi hak jao
— Khoi hak chao
— Khoi mak jao lai ("I like you very much")
— Khoi hak jao lai ("I love you very much")
— Khoi mak jao (This means "I prefer you",
but is used for "I love you".)
Lappish
— Mun rahkistin du. (Davvi Samegiella)
Latin
— Te amo
— Vos amo
Latin (old)
— (Ego) Amo te ('Ego', for emphasis)
Latvian
— Es tevi milu (pronounced 'es tevy meelu')
('i in 'milu' has a line over it, a 'long i')
— Es milu tevi (less common)
Lebanese
— Bahibak
Lingala
— Nalingi yo
Lisbon lingo
— Gramo-te bue', chavalinha!
Lithuanian
— As tave myliu (Ush ta-ve mee-lyu) (over the 's' of 'As' has to be a 'v')
Lojban
— Mi do prami
Luo (Kenia)
— Aheri
Luxembourgish
— Ech hun dech gar
Maa
— Ilolenge
Madrid lingo
— Me molas, tronca!
Maiese
— Wa wa
Malay
— Saya cintamu
— Saya sayangmu
— Saya sayang anda
— Saya cintakan mu (grammatically correct)
— Saya sayangkan mu ( " )
— Saya chantikan awak
— Aku sayang kau
Malay/Bahasa
— Saya cinta mu
Malay/Indonesian
— Aku sayang kau
— Saya cantikan awak
— Saya sayangkan engkau
— Saya cintakan awak
— Aku cinta pada kau
— Aku cinta pada mu
— Saya cinta pada mu
— Saya sayangkan engkau ('engkau' often shortened to 'kau', 'engkau' is informal form and should only be used if you know the person _really_well)
Malayalam
— Njyaan ninne snehikyunnu
— Njyaan ninne premikyunnu
— Njyaan ninne mohikyunnu
Malaysian
— Saya cintamu
— Saya sayangmu
— Saya cinta kamu
Marathi
— Mi tuzya var prem karato
— Me tujhashi prem karto (male to female)
— Me tujhashi prem karte (female to male)
Marshallese
— Yokwe Yuk
Mohawk
— Konoronhkwa
Mokilese
— Ngoah mweoku kaua
Mongolian
— Be Chamad Hairtai (very personal)
Moroccan
— Kanbhik (both mean the same, but spoken)
— Kanhebek (in different cities)
Navajo
— Ayor anosh'ni
Ndebele (Zimbabwe)
— Niyakutanda
Nepali
— Ma timi sita prem garchhu (romantic)
— Ma timilai maya garchhu (less emphatic, can be used in a non romantic conext, too)
Norwegian
— Jeg elsker deg (Bokmaal)
— Eg elskar deg (Nynorsk)
— Jeg elsker deg (Riksmaal outdated, formerly used by upper-class and
conservative people)
Nyanja
— Ninatemba
Op
— Op lopveop yopuop
Oriya
— Moon Tumakoo Bhala Paye
— Moon Tumakoo Prema Kare
Oromoo
— Sinjaladha
— Sinjaldha
Osetian
— Aez dae warzyn
Pakistani
— Mujhe tumse muhabbat hai
— Muje se mu habbat hai
Papiamento
— Mi ta stimabo
Pedi (related to Tswana)
— Kiyahurata. (pronounced as Kee-ya--hoo-rata)
Pig Latin
— Ie ovele ouye (pronounced as I-ay ov-lay u-yay.)
Pilipino
— Mahal kita
— Iniibig kita
Polish
— Kocham cie
— Ja cie kocham
Portuguese/Brazilian
— Eu te amo (pronounced 'eiu chee amu')
— Eu amo-te
— Amo-te
Punjabi (Indian)
— Main tainu pyar karna
— Mai taunu pyar Karda
Quenya (J.R. Tolkien)
— Tye-melane
Raetoromanisch
— te amo
Romanian
— Te iubesc
— Te ador (stronger)
Russian
— Ya vas lyublyu (old fashioned)
— Ya tyebya lyublyu (best)
— Ya lyublyu vas (old fashioned)
— Ya lyublyu tyebya
Samoan
— Ou te alofa outou.
— Ou te alofa ia te oe.
— Talo'fa ia te oe. ("Hello, from me to you")
— Fia moi? ("Would you like to go to bed with me tonight?")
Sanskrit
— Anurag (a higher love, like the love of music or art)
Scot-Gaelic
— Tha gr`adh agam ort
Serbian (formal)
— Ja vas volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim vas (used in common speech)
— Ljubim te (in todays useage, "I kiss you", 'lj' pronounced like 'll' in Spanish, one sound, 'ly'ish)
Serbian (familiar)
— Ja te volim (used in proper speech)
— Volim te (used in common speech)
Serbian (old)
— Ljubim te (may still be found in poetry)
Serbocroatian
— Volim te
— Ljubim te
— Ja te volim ('j' sounds like 'y' in May)
Sesotho
— Kiyahurata. (pronounced as Kee-ya--hoo-rata)
Shona
— Ndinokuda
Singhalese (Ceylon)
— Mama oyata adarei
— Mama oyaata aadareyi
Sioux
— Techihhila
Skopian
— Te sakam (a little stronger than "I like you")
— Te ljubam ("I really love you")
— Jas te sakam ('j' sounds like 'y' in May)
— Pozdrav ("Greetings")
Slovak
— Lubim ta
Slovene
— Ljubim te
Somalian
— Waan ku jeclahay
Spanish
— Te amo
— Te quiero
— Te re-quiero (Argentine way to say I love you very much)
— Te adoro (I adore you)
— Te deseo (I desire you)
— Me antojes (I crave you)
Srilankan
— Mama oyata arderyi
Suaheli (Ostafrika)
— Ninikupenda
Swahili
— Nakupenda
— Naku penda (followed by the person's name)
— Ninikupenda
— Dholu'o
Swedish
— Jag alskar dig. (pronounced "Yag alskar day")
Syrian/Lebanese
— Bhebbek (male to female)
— Bhebbak (female to male)
Tagalog
— Mahal kita
Tahitian
— Ua Here Vau Ia Oe
— Ua here vau ia oe
Tamil
— Naan unnai kaathalikir^en ("I love you")
— Naan unnai kathalikkinr^en ("I love you")
— Naan unnai Virumbukir^en ("I love you")
— Naan unnai Virumbukinr^en ("I love you")
— Naan unna kathalikaren (The last 'n' in both Naan and Kaathalikaren, are spelt thru nose and is almost silent) (Coloquel, when you speak casually, without much stress on grammar)
— Nee yennai kaathalikiraai! ("You love me!") (If its a question like You love me? or Do you Love me? Then "Nee Yennai kaathalikkiraaya?)
— Naam iruvarum vi'rumbukirom (We both are loving).
— Naam iruvarum oruvarukkoruvar vi'rumbukirom (We both are loving each other).
Telugu (Indian)
— Neenu ninnu pramistu'nnanu
— Nenu ninnu premistunnanu
— Ninnu premistunnanu
Thai (formal)
— Phom rak khun (male to female)
— Ch'an rak khun (female to male)
— Phom-ruk-koon (male to female)
— Chun-ruk-koon (female to male)
— Phom lak kun (male to female)
Thai
— Khao raak thoe (affectionate, sweet, loving)
Tswana
— Ke a go rata
Tshiluba
— Ndi mukusua (I love you)
— Ndi musua wewe (I want you)
— Ndi ne ditalala bua wewe (I have love for you)
Tunisian
— Ha eh bak
Tumbuka
— Nkhukutemwa
Turkish (formal)
— Sizi seviyorum
Turkish
— Seni seviyorum
— Seni begeniyorum ("I adore you") (g has a bar on it)
Twi (Ghana)
— Me dowapaa
— Me dor wo
Ukrainian
— Ya tebe kokhayu
— Ja tebe kokhaju (real true love)
— Ja vas kokhaju
— Ja pokokhav tebe
— Ja pokokhav vas
Urdu (Indien)
— Main tumse muhabbat karta hoon
— Mujhe tumse mohabbat hai
— Mujge tumae mahabbat hai
— Kam prem kartahai
Vai
— Na lia
Varmlandska
— Du ar gorgo te mag
Venda
— Ndi a ni funa
Vietnamese
— Anh yeu em (male to female)
— Em yeu anh (female to male)
— Toi yeu em
Volapuk
— Lofob oli.
Votic
— Mia suvatan sinua.
Vulcan (Mr.Spock)
— Wani ra yana ro aisha
Walloon
— Dji vos veu volti (lit. I like to see you)
— Dji vos inme (lit. I love you)
— Dji v'zinme
Welsh
— Rwy'n dy garu di.
— Yr wyf i yn dy garu di (chwi)
Wolof
— Da ma la nope
— Da ma la nop (da malanop)
Yiddish
— Kh'hob dikh lib
— Kh'ob dikh holt
— Ikh bin in dir farlibt
Yucatec Maya
— 'in k'aatech (the love of lovers)
— 'in yabitmech (the love of family, which lovers can also feel; it
indicates more a desire to spoil and protect the other person)
Yugoslavian
— Ja te volim
Zazi (kurdish)
— Ezhele hezdege
Zulu
— Mina Ngithanda Wena (rarely used; means "Me, I love you.")
— Ngiyakuthanda (pronounced as NGee-ya--koo--tanda)
Zuni
— Tom ho'ichema
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
