Part 3

 Dwelling in the glass house

             The first section described how our perceived identity as translators can influence our performance. This section deals with some of the ways we can and do create mental frameworks that structure our way of translating, and some of the consequences these frameworks can have. We have chosen such a seemingly obscure subtitle for this section because these mental frameworks can be likened to a glass house: they provide an invisible structure in which it is easy to give our entire attention to the view outside, or to the furniture inside, but a conscious effort is required to adjust our focus in order to examine the walls (unless, of course, they draw attention to themselves by being badly smeared!).    
     As we also saw in the first section, a key skill for translators who wish to continue developing throughout their working lives is self-observation. It is this skill that the authors have been encouraging translators to exercise through the Workshops for Translators. These workshops have highlighted just how many of us live with an assumption that what we do as translators is not observable and cannot be brought into conscious awareness without it slipping through our fingers. It has also demonstrated, however, that such self-observation is possible and can be taken very deep, and to excellent effect. But getting started with the habit is not so easy: after all, it is difficult to see something you can’t see. In this part we would like to offer some guidelines in embarking on this demanding path.
To begin with, let us work at some general unconscious patterns that recur constantly during the translating process.

• It is important to be aware of the frames of reference we use in our thinking. We often limit our resourcefulness by operating on unconscious presuppositions that are not always well anchored in reality.

• Our internal state is a central factor at all stages of the translating process. Yet it is widely perceived to be mostly dependent on external/environmental factors and beyond the individual’s control. In fact, a translator’s performance consists of a set of discrete skills that can be developed. The further the translator develops across the full range of these skills, i.e. the greater his/her competence, the greater will be his or her confidence. And two of the most vital components of a resourceful translating state are trust (in our resources) and confidence (in ourselves).
• Although translating is often said to be a solitary task, relationship factors and the need for effective communication with others must not be underestimated.
• Possibly the most vital skill in the translator’s repertoire (presupposing, of course, linguistic competence) is the ability to ask relevant/effective questions of other people and of ourselves.

 Frames of Reference

 Frames of reference are filters through which we look at the world. However, our choice of which frame we use is more often not unconscious. Indeed, we are seldom even aware that these is a filter separating us from the ‘reality’ we observe. Applying this concept to translating, there are a number of very basic filters which, if used judiciously, can radically alter the product of our labour. The filters we have singled out as being most influential all turn out to belong in pairs, like coins with two sides. The suggests that when you are operating through any one of these frames of reference there is an either/or choice of how to look at things. If this does not suit you, you can free yourself by becoming aware of the filter and electing to set it aside.

The most important frames of reference we have identified so far are:

• Task/relationship

• Nearness/distance
• Inclusion/exclusion
• Form/content
• Foreground/background
• Freedom/responsibility

a)      Task/relationship

            Any activity will look different depending on whether your focus is on the task to be carried out or the relationship with the other people involved. The activity of translating is no exception. It is easy to think of translating as a solitary task in which the translator is alone with the text: the job is to get to a satisfactory end-result. Translators accordingly tend to approach their work primarily through the task frame. However, the translator is always also part of a team, whether actual or virtual: not only are we working for a client or a requesting department and using dictionaries compiled by armies of specialists, we are also a link in the chain between a writer and his audience, a government and the governed. This is true even of the solitary freelance translator, let alone staff translators working in the Translation Service at the Commission, for example, who are hard to put to count the number of different teams they belong to depending on the aspect of their work under consideration: terminology, technology, teamwork with peers of the same language, of the other Community languages, the role within the hierarchy, the virtual team which changes for every document and so on.|            Like it or not, we are players in the game of human communication in all its complexity. Remaining aware of the relationship aspect of our work while we engage in the task of translating is bound to affect both our choices as to how we set about the tasks and the result of our labour.

 b)      Nearness/distance

             Some of the time we are immersed in the text, completely steeped in the world of the document to the exclusion of all else. At other times we tae critical distance from our work, stepping back mentally from what we are creating to get a better perspective on it. Taken one stage further, this is also one of the keys to mastering the art of self-observation. There are moments when we are immersed in our work, but we reach a more empowered stage when we can also sit back and observe ourselves as we toil away.
            So it is also with the translating process – only how often do we take sufficient distance from ourselves to really take stock of how we operate? How often, when translating a text, do we feel that we are wading waist-deep through thick mud without realizing that much of the resistance we are encountering comes from wavering concentration? Than we are not managing to immerse ourselves sufficiently in this text? How often do we stop and ask ourselves what we can do to make things easier? Similarly, how often do we realise, when utterly immersed in the flow of translating, that we are losing all objectivity and straying too far from the necessary register? How often to we consciously disentangle ourselves from our text and take some distance before continuing, just to make sure we are producing what is really needed by the client?
            The process of translating a document from beginning to end is en evolutive one of approaching a text, discovering its context, style and purpose; becoming one with it as we uncover its message and transfer it into our language; differentiating our critical mind from it so as to see it in its larger context and judge its quality, appropriateness and adequacy. The final read-through completes the process, the translator has integrated the text into his or her world experience and releases it to a separate existence.

 c)      Inclusion/exclusion

             One prime example of inclusion and exclusion in action is the distinction translators often make between terminological resources which they can access from inside their workplace and those they have to leave their workplace to consult. Superficially, this appears to relate to convenience and ease of access. For some, “workplace” means just their own desk, for others it may include the colleague in the office next door or a fellow translator working for the same agency. It is likely that our dividing line between inside and outside, near and far, varies depending on the situation. Using a resource in my workplace can mean not interrupting my concentration, while paying a visit to the library can be a ‘welcome break’ which allows me to distance myself from the text.            At a deeper level, however, this frame of reference also has much to do with the question of relationship: who we mentally include in our team. Here we are talking about ‘my’ resources versus ‘outside’ resources (self/other – us/them). The dividing line between self and other varies from one individual to another and from one context to another. It can also depend on other frames of reference being used. Implicitly, however, there is always the question of trust: the sources which a translator considers as “internal” have been validated to that translator’s satisfaction and she can therefore use them with confidence.

 d)      Form/content 

            Often as we translate we are so taken up with the content r the story that we neglect to attend to the form in which the story is told. This can make for a  finished product which hangs together rather uncomfortably. Every sentence contains clues and pointers to form in its cohesive devices, which we often overlook because they do not seem to contribute to the content of the story, yet without them the reader would undoubtedly lose the thread! As translators it is part of our job to pay attention to the cohesion, and hence the ‘comprehensibility index’, of the message. 

e)   Foreground/background 

            If the text we are translating is in the foreground, the context in which it was written is in the background. If the words of the text express certain ideas explicitly, other ideas remain implicitly present in the background, without which the text cannot be understood. Every communication, written or verbal, contains some given information (whether implicit or explicit) and imparts something new.
            At another level, translators are often taken up with the task if rendering a text in another language (foreground). However, on days where we have less inspiration, this task can be heavy going. The problem here does not lie in the task, but in our relationship with the task, which determines the internal state in which we tackle it. This relational aspect is usually left in the background, but can usefully be brought to the foreground if there is a problem of motivation to be solved. 

f)    Freedom/responsibility

             Herein lies a basic paradox. The tram runs on rails, and bemoans the fact that it has so little freedom of movement, never able to depart from the route laid out for it. The bus is free to run wherever it chooses, but sometimes wishes it were restricted to rails, because of the weight of responsibility it carries for having to choose where it will travel. Without freedom there is no responsibility. And yet, without responsibility there can be no real freedom.
            It is said of translating that there is no creativity in the task, since the translator is not free to express his or her own ideas, only to render those of others. However, 90% of the content of practical translation textbooks seems to revolve around how to develop judgment on when to depart from the tramlines. The way the present authors see it, it is our responsibility as translators to render the message of the original both accurately and in the manner most appropriate to its intended purpose. Within that remit, we are free to use all the resources at our disposal, indeed it is our duty to do so.