Spotting that eCPD Webinars (@eCPDWebinars) were offering a series on translating architecture I signed up for the first session on architexts. The series was led by Pierre Fuentes (@ArcTranslations | Proz), a qualified architect living in Edinburgh.
The webinar used GoToWebinar, and took place at 15:30 CET, closing at 16:50. Now I’ve attended any number of webinars for free, and my issues with the format are well documented – see in particular Video video, The webinar experience and In class. I’ve also participated in any number of MOOCs. Clearly as a priced product eCPD’s webinars have a different economic model, and not least need to be rather more closed than a MOOC, however I do wonder if more interactivity could be built around the sessions, particularly as in this case they took the form of a series. While there were opportunities to interact at the start and beginning in the form of polls, it was not a social event – there was no chat during the session and no invitation to take things forward afterwards.
The session took the form of a lecture, with much of the time spent on the presentation of slides with bulleted lists of (fairly basic) information, lacking pace and drive. (As they say on R4’s Just a minute: “he’s listing again!”) These could have been sent to participants beforehand, allowing more of the session to be spent on substantive issues actually related to translation and the skills required in this particular field, or even to go into more depth on some aspects of the information – it’s a waste of a webinar to use it mainly for knowledge transmission (what rather than why), and the end result is not very engaging. I switched to surfing with half an ear mode after about 15 minutes.
Post webinar I received an email with the slides and a four page list of resources to cover the whole series, mainly relating to French, with two pages taken up by a list of texts about architecture from Plato’s Republic onwards. Hrmph. In total I received six emails relating to the webinar, from four different email addresses.
Following an email exchange with eCPD Webinars I decided not to attend the rest of the series, which didn’t seem to be what I was looking for, suggesting that a flipped webinar might have been more substantial. I will however be giving the webinar on editing non-native English next week a go – stand by!
Below is an overview of the #archiseries gleaned from the website and Twitter.
Building on translation studies theory, we will look at who ‘writes’ architecture and what text types they produce. Some particular genres, which occur more regularly in the workload of translators, will be looked at in more detail.
Translation is “about guiding the intended co-operation over cultural barriers enabling functionally oriented communication”. This quote from guru Jeremy Munday’s Introducing translation studies (2001/13) from Holz-Mänttäri (1984:8) is useful, as it encapsulates an issue around both translation and non-native English – cultural differences may get in the way of what you are trying to say.
Different types of texts (or genres) are shaped by three functional characteristics, ie the purpose of the text:
- informative – content focus
- expressive – aesthetic focus
- operative – reader focus, reactive
All three may be present, but one will predominate. See diagram presenting how different text types relate to this classification:
See also Katharina Reiss’ ‘Type, kind and individuality of text: decision making in translation’, in L Venuti, The translation studies reader, London: Routledge, 2000.
The webinar was informative, where it could have been more operative : D To offer more meat Pierre could have started with the diagram and then moved on to how different linguistic devices relate to the process of translation.
Translating graphic communication is an issue – this uses tight and particular language aka jargon and specialised terminology, with lots of acronyms and abbreviations. One to one literal translations will often not do. It may be presented as a PDF, which is a pain, or worse! as a drawing, requiring special software. (No hints offered on what to do about this.)
What is this ‘technicality’ that translators are all talking about? What does this term imply for texts related to architecture? We will identify the links between architecture and technical fields such as engineering, design, law, property, sustainability, etc – from fancy pedantry to essential jargon. A picture being worth a thousands words, we will also discuss how to translate drawings (or not).
The mother art
Architecture and translation are both about design, but there is a fine line between skills and style. Using architects’ favourite figure of speech, the analogy, this presentation will look at recurrent stylistic problems and how to approach them.
From proportion to moderation: a brief history of architecture
Architecture is older than literature. It has shaped human life as soon as the human soul sought means to protect its cell, the body. It has shaped the dimensions of the chairs we sit on as well as the borders between some of our countries, sometimes more radically than nature itself. Through a brief history of western architectural theory, this final presentation will define what architecture has meant, means and might mean to people.
More useful was an article on terminology found on @sandersonkim’s website:
- source text (ST): a 1911 German dissertation on Le Corbusier’s writings on German urban planning sources for a client in New Zealand – so that’s how and where requests may come from!
- how far should your target text (TT) be country specific, in particular if you don’t know the jargon aka canon of specialist vocabulary in that country? and bear in mind the time the text was written in – in this case the TT should not sound too modern
- have the texts referred to been translated before? usage may be established in this way
- what to call the discipline itself? In French ‘urbanisme’, in German ‘Städtebau’, while in English there is a choice between town/city/urban, planning/design – again, what is/are the convention/s?
- ditto re ‘ville’ or ‘Stadt’ – UK English tends to favour ‘town’ and US English ‘city’ planning, while ‘urban’ covers both
- do ‘rues’/’Straßen’ translate as streets or roads? do the two English terms cover different ranges of meaning? checking usage in architectural texts can help
- ingenuity and lateral thinking may be more important than deep subject knowledge and technical expertise – architects tend to creative use of language, making architrans where ‘art’ meets ‘technical’ translation