Mandelson calls protests 'xenophobic'

[Sysman]

IMHO the inescapable requirement for a good translator is that the target language be one that is native to them. Thus only bilingual people will be good in both directions of a given pair.

Agreed. Getting adverts translated can be very tricky too, as you need someone who understands the culture and mentality of the target audience, and is current with those things too.

One may write in a language that is not native (although few are really good at it, and the number who have written lasting literature in a non-native language is countable on one hand), but one should not be a profassional translator into it.

I believe Vladimir Nabakov was one of the few to achieve this.

[Mich the Tester]

Wikip on Asimov:
His family emigrated to the United States when he was three years old. Since his parents always spoke Yiddish and English with him, he never learned Russian.

Ustinov:
Ustinov was born in Swiss Cottage, London....
Ustinov was educated at Westminster School

So they're not really what I meant. Nabokov is the one that springs immediately to mind; Conrad is often quoted, though Nabokov dismissed him (as a non-native writer) because, unlike Nabokov himself, he didn't write in his own language at first and only later write in English; Conrad wrote only in English.

Worth mentioning Izak Dinesen (Karen Blixen) who wrote in Danish and then translated into English; whether that is the same as (re-)writing in English is debatable.

Ustinov wrote in a number of languages and not only English. My point is that it's possible, but really only feasible for those who've spent a very long time learning two languages, or grown up with two languages, which makes our accredited translators look a bit silly.

[Mich the Tester]

Agreed. Getting adverts translated can be very tricky too, as you need someone who understands the culture and mentality of the target audience, and is current with those things too.

The Dutch try this, especially when they write letters to clients. They all think they speak and write excellent English, but they tend to bugger it up completely by translating word for word. Sometimes I actually have to translate their English, word for word, back into Dutch to understand what they’re trying to say. If I had a fiver for every time I’ve found myself suggesting to them that they should let me take a look before sending their correspondence or documents to a client, I’d be a very rich man.

[expat]

Ustinov wrote in a number of languages and not only English. My point is that it's possible, but really only feasible for those who've spent a very long time learning two languages, or grown up with two languages, which makes our accredited translators look a bit silly.

Yes, I agree with that: that's why I carefully say a native language. A person may have more than one.

But I maintain that it is very rare indeed for someone to be as good in any language that is not "native" to them, as most educated speakers are good in their own language.

Incidentally, "native" is a misnomer, since it doesn't have to be your language from birth, but it has to be from a young age. We went to France when our daughter was 8 and our son 11: he learned to be very fluent, she acquired French as a second "native" language. (As she never tired of pointing out to her older brother - and I owe to her later linguistics course the distinction in the word "acquired").

[expat]

Agreed. Getting adverts translated can be very tricky too, as you need someone who understands the culture and mentality of the target audience, and is current with those things too.

An in-depth translation. As they say, the French word for London is not Londres but Paris.

[threaded]

IMHO the inescapable requirement for a good translator is that the target language be one that is native to them. Thus only bilingual people will be good in both directions of a given pair.

One may write in a language that is not native (although few are really good at it, and the number who have written lasting literature in a non-native language is countable on one hand), but one should not be a profassional translator into it.

The problem here is that, much like the UK, many qualifications have had a period of grade inflation. They even recently re-jigged the grading system to try and hide it. (How's about gaining a masters in databases, but not knowing how to do a normalisation - I digress) Yet they've increased the requirements for foreigners. So you get foreigners who are much better translators than the locals, leaving many running 'rubber stamp' operations as they're basically not up to the task themselves, but have the license...

One fun thing I might mention is that one of my friends is foreign born and wrote the most commonly used school grammar book.

A guy this morning was asking me questions, he's wanting to set up his own taxi company. Trying to get him to understand that he has to pass the local taxi driving test, (a bit like The Knowledge,) and then work for someone else for a minimum of 5 years, before he could apply for a company license for himself, was fun.

If you want to own land over a certain area you have to have a farmers license, which requires another set of qualifications...

And certain EU nationalities (Germans come to mind) are specifically barred from purchasing certain classes of properties.

Yeah, this 'ere EU thing sounds good until you actually look at what is really going on. At least we're not killing each other on a regular basis any more, but I'm yet to be convinced it's the EU thing that's stopped that.

[Mich the Tester]

At least we're not killing each other on a regular basis any more, but I'm yet to be convinced it's the EU thing that's stopped that.

Wealth, warm houses and an abundance of food are what keep people from killing each other. If the EU helps to maintain those conditions it must be OK.

[expat]

At least we're not killing each other on a regular basis any more, but I'm yet to be convinced it's the EU thing that's stopped that.

I'm not at all convinced. It is good not to be doing it, but I think it's because, after generations of fights on all sides (usually spaced one generation apart, to wipe out the shame and the debt from the previous defeat), the Germans looked back at what they did last time, and thought to themselves that they didn't really want to be like that. So they stopped.

[Doggy Styles]

I'm not at all convinced. It is good not to be doing it, but I think it's because, after generations of fights on all sides (usually spaced one generation apart, to wipe out the shame and the debt from the previous defeat), the Germans looked back at what they did last time, and thought to themselves that they didn't really want to be like that. So they stopped.

kept losing

[expat]

kept losing

Not at all. They lost WWII, they lost WWI, but they won the Franco-Prussian War, and they won, or at least were on the winning side in, the Napoleonic Wars.

Clue: the winning side is the one that gets the English-speakers onside.