TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Update/apply/synchronize From:Richard Lippincott <rlippinc -at- BEV -dot- ETN -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 9 Dec 1994 16:06:33 EST
Laurie Rubin writes:
>The main problem is that the software is going to be translated
>into Japanese, so the development opinion is, what does it matter.
As we say in Massachusetts, "Dawn breaks over Marblehead." My first thought,
and you've probably already had the same idea, would be to take some of those
"typical" examples of bad Japanese/English translations and use them as
examples: "This is what matters. We'll be producing stuff like this."
Which leads to a question I've never heard anyone ask: Are those examples of
bad translation really -all- translation problems? I've always assumed that
they were originally good writing, poorly translated. What if the stuff is just
plain bad writing, and the translation only compounds the problem?
I'm working on a product, BTW, and our manuals are being translated into
Japanese by a sister company. We try hard to keep in mind that the material
-will- be translated. Instead of taking an attitude of "Oh, it doesn't matter",
we try to say "Let's make sure they understand the -English- part without
any problem, and then we can be sure they'll be able to translate it properly."
rlippinc -at- bev -dot- etn -dot- com