Why not just use Google Translate?

A few days ago, I was discussing my work as a translator with a friend of mine. After going through the general details of what I do, he asked: “So, why don’t your clients just use Google Translate?”

It’s a question that I’m sure many translators have faced before, and I doubt it will be the last time I hear it. It wasn’t meant to be an insult to our profession (nor was it taken as one), but rather seems to reflect a common general perception of translation. As it was based on a genuine interest in what I do and highlighted an important issue, I wanted to give a clear, convincing answer.

Naturally, I started out with the typical translator’s response: “It just doesn’t work in many cases, it trips up on verbs, word order, everything really, and it doesn’t take account of the context.” Yet I could see that he wasn’t satisfied, he wanted concrete info.

I continued. “Think of an English word like ‘set’. It can mean so many different things. We can play a set of tennis, we can set up a business, set ourselves up for a long night of translating… Obviously, other languages don’t have the same word for all those meanings and Google Translate can’t always catch the right one.”

Still slightly unconvinced, at this point the conversation drifted onto something else and I went away feeling that I didn’t make my point quite as clearly as I could’ve done. As such, I decided to see if I could come up with a few examples here to demonstrate a few of the limitations of Google Translate.

I’m not going to go to the extremes of using examples that have gone catastrophically wrong, there are plenty of posts that do that. Instead, I want to show that, despite its many strengths and its rapid improvement in recent years, Google Translate won’t be replacing professional translators any time soon.

First up, how about a nice French proverb like “le monde appartient à ceux qui se lèvent tôt” [literally: the world belongs to those who get up early]?

Google gets this literal rendition spot on. But what does that actually mean? Though French speakers will be familiar with the world belonging to them when they get up nice and early, it won’t strike a chord with an English ear. However, if you were to say “the early bird catches the worm”, your Anglophone audience would certainly catch your drift.

Or what about the lovely (if slightly obscure) French phrase “c’est fromage et dessert” [literally: it’s cheese and dessert] that I recently had to tackle in translation?

It seems simple at first glance, it’s just a pair of common nouns. But this wasn’t a translation of a menu or something similar as you might expect. Instead, it was an article on university education in France. In this context, the phrase was used as a play on the old menu choice of “fromage ou dessert” [cheese or dessert] that invites diners to choose one or the other at the end of a meal.

In using “et” [and] instead of “ou” [or], it highlights that, whereas normally you have to make a choice between the two, in this situation you can enjoy each of two normally opposed options.

Putting the phrase through Google Translate, we’re left clueless as to its meaning in this context with a literal rendering of “it is cheese and dessert”. 

When translating the phrase myself I opted for an English version reading “it’s a case of having your cake and eating it”, recreating both this idea of combining two seemingly opposing choices as well as the culinary allusions contained in the French.

Both of these examples highlight a huge problem with Google Translate, it simply can’t handle idiomatic language. The same can be said of rhetoric, style, humour, and many other important facets of language that are tough even for a professional translator.

Finally, here’s an example from another text I worked on a while back. This time I thought I’d go all out and give an excerpt from the French text, a Google-translated version and the published English version to show the discrepancies.

The article in question offered a round-up of the sprinting events at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games and the excerpt used is taken from the opening paragraph, which summarises a few of the highlights from the competition.

I’ve deliberately chosen an example where it was possible for the published version to remain very close to the French to show that even when a fairly literal rendering would suffice in English, Google Translate still isn’t up to the task (despite faring pretty well).

The problems are fairly clear to see, but I’ve highlighted a few personal favourites.

French text

Avec un nouveau triplé 100 m-200 m-4 x 100 m, Usain Bolt a définitivement cimenté à Rio sa légende de plus grand sprinter de tous les temps. Le Sud-Africain Wayde van Niekerk a fait sensation en battant un record du monde vieux de 17 ans sur 400 m, Elaine Thompson, la compatriote d’Usain Bolt, a réalisé le doublé 100 m-200 m, tandis que l’Américaine Allyson Felix est devenue la femme la plus titrée de l’histoire en athlétisme.

Google’s version

With a new triple 100 m-200 m-4 x 100 m, Usain Bolt has definitely cemented in Rio its legend of the biggest sprinter of all time. The South African Wayde van Niekerk made a sensation by beating a 17-year-old world record over 400m, Usain Bolt’s compatriot Elaine Thompson scored 100m-200m, while American Allyson Felix became the most titled woman in history in athletics.

Published translation

In the men’s sprinting events in Rio, Usain Bolt claimed three more golds to cement his status as the greatest sprinter of all time and South Africa’s Wayde van Niekerk broke a 17-year-old world record in the 400m. In the women’s competitions, Bolt’s compatriot Elaine Thompson took a sprint double in the 100m and 200m while Allyson Felix of the United States became the most-decorated female athlete of all time.

Ultimately, Google Translate is a great resource for certain purposes. It works pretty well in many cases and you can often get the gist in the examples above.

If all you need is that gist, then that’s fine. However, when you’re looking for a flowing, polished translation that always makes sense, don’t just assume that Google will do the job, get yourself a pro!

All that remains now is for me to print off this post and make it into a neat little handout to give to the next person who asks “Why not just use Google Translate?”



Calling all translators! Tell me about ethics.

Hi everyone, just a quick one today.

As many of you will already know, I’m currently about halfway through writing my PhD thesis on the ethics of translation and I was hoping that you might be able to offer me a little help.

I’ve attempted to retain a sense of practical, professional relevance within my thesis, using real-life translation examples from my own work where possible and always keeping that act of translation in mind, but I’d also greatly appreciate some input from my fellow professionals to get a better sense of what ethics really means to other translators.

Have there been times in your translation practice or your translation career when the question of ethics has come up or when you yourself have had to make ethical choices?

What is your take on a translator’s need to be faithful, accurate or impartial and how do you approach a text with this in mind?

Feel free to discuss anything that you feel is relevant.

I’d love to hear from as many people as possible so don’t be afraid to share this post.

Leave a comment on here, tweet me, email me (joseph@jaltranslation.com), send out a message in a bottle, whatever you want!

Looking forward to hearing from you.


A few thoughts on research in translation

I hope you’re all well out there and enjoying a productive February. Today I thought I’d offer a bit of an insight into what I’ve been up to recently.

As some of you will already know, I started a PhD in Translation Studies in September 2014 and am currently about halfway through my research journey. While I initially continued working for a few translation clients alongside my research, I’ve more or less phased out my freelance translation work for the time being (aside from a few projects here and there) to prioritise working on my thesis.

So what am I actually writing about? As I’ve mentioned in a few previous blog posts, I’m really interested in the ethics of translation and my research represents an attempt to bring together and develop upon the wide range of conceptions of ethics put forward within Translation Studies. I’m doing this by using ethical theory as an underlying framework allowing me to highlight the key areas of focus to date and to uncover blindspots that represent potential future lines of enquiry.

But enough of that, I don’t really want to go into my research itself here. Instead, I want to discuss translation research more generally as a potential path, offering a frank take on my experience so far and a few thoughts off the top of my head on the kind of attributes that are key to PhD research (in my experience at least), some of which are closely linked to the skills required to be a successful freelance translator.

Quite a few of my readers are current or former translation MA students and I know that (in the UK at least) a number of universities are now taking on PhD students in Translation Studies, so maybe I’ll be able to convince some of you that a PhD is (or, perhaps more likely, isn’t) for you..


Passion and focus

An absolute must when contemplating a PhD is a passion for your subject and a clear idea of your specific areas of interest within that field. It’s important to identify a void within your particular area of research that not only has enough scope to fill a thesis but is also focused enough to avoid getting out of hand and spilling beyond the word limit before you’ve even scratched the surface.

The ethics of translation, for instance, has been explored at length without reaching any consensus over what it requires of us and this means there are a number of avenues yet to be explored. The downside to these huge voids is that the subject is so massive that a specific issue can easily slip out of focus. It’s extremely important to keep your research goals in mind and make sure you haven’t gone off track completely, something I have to keep reminding myself!

Discipline and perseverance

A PhD thesis is a big old project, there’s no doubt about that.The idea of being left on your own with a blank canvas and three years to create a polished 80-100,000 word document is a daunting prospect to say the least.

Of course, there is support out there in various forms (supervisors, online groups, other PhD students…) but you still need plenty of self-discipline and motivation to keep those creative juices flowing!

For me, this is one area where freelancing has been pretty useful. Working at home surrounded by all the potential distractions that come with the territory was nothing new to me, making the transition to research a fairly smooth one.

However, when you’re translating, it tends to be with a tight deadline in mind and a paying client who wants their end product ASAP! With a PhD thesis, although there are supervisory meetings and reviews with mini “deadlines” of sorts, I find it helpful to set regular personal targets and goals to break the project down into manageable chunks.

Flexibility and open-mindedness

So far in my research journey, I’ve already been in the rather unfortunate position of having to change my primary or secondary supervisor on three occasions due to retirements and lecturers taking on new roles.

While on the one hand this has allowed me to gain several different perspectives on my work – I’ve received valuable input from a range of vastly-experienced experts who all (unsurprisingly) have a different take on my subject area – it has been undeniably disruptive at times.

Yet the main thing I’ve taken from these changes is how important it is to be flexible in developing a PhD project. Working on a thesis, you have to adapt your intellectual focus based on feedback, your developing interests and your ongoing research.

Linked to this is an openness to criticism, which is again something that I’ve experienced working as a translator. As is the case with translated texts, your ideas will not always be met with universal appreciation and it’s important to use advice and criticism as an opportunity to learn and improve, accepting when you’re heading down a blind alley and when you need to explore new ideas.

Ultimately, it is also important to remember that you are the driving force behind your project and are in a position to choose which path you eventually follow.


Eighteen months in, I still love my research topic and feel I am making good progress. It can sometimes be overwhelming working in such a huge, complex area and there have certainly been setbacks along the way (supervisor changes, paper rejections, ideas that simply don’t work out etc.).

However, even though I still have lots of ground to cover in the thesis and am fully expecting the next 18 months to be extremely challenging, it’s a challenge that I’m looking forward to.

P.S. If you’ve enjoyed studying translation in the past and think a PhD might be for you, feel free to send me an email for any further advice and I’ll try my best to help out! 🙂

Starting out as a freelance translator

Hello everyone, hope you’re all well out there in translation land and have some exciting plans to round off the year!

Today’s post is something a little different. I recently gave a talk to the Translation Studies MA students at the University of Hull and thought I’d share my presentation with you here.

As the title of this post suggests, the seminar was all about getting started as a freelance translator, with me sharing tips and advice based on my own experiences within the wonderful world of freelancing.

Hopefully there will be plenty of useful information in there for those of you interested in a career in freelance translation and perhaps there will even be one or two handy snippets for more experienced freelancers.

The presentation touches upon everything from finding and completing your first translation job to a few different ways of developing an online presence using social media.

Public speaking and presentation skills aren’t my strongest areas but they are skills that I’m keen to develop, especially with conference papers, teaching and further presentations on the horizon. As such, any feedback or handy links for developing these areas would be greatly appreciated!

Anyway, here’s the recording of the presentation and the accompanying slides. (Click the images to get the full screen, slideshow version)



P.S. If you’re having trouble with the SoundCloud player, here’s a direct link to the recording: https://soundcloud.com/jaltranslation/starting-out-as-a-freelance-translator

The Case for Non-Native Translators?

While the idea of a translator working out of their native tongue is the stuff of nightmares for many established professionals, I recently took part in a round table discussion that briefly centred around questioning whether or not this method could actually be beneficial to translation.

Though the topic only came up in passing and there was little real support for the notion at the time, the discussion stuck with me and I thought that I would dedicate today’s post to entertaining this idea.

In the real world of translation, professional associations such as the ITI state that:

members shall translate only into a language that is either (i) their mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one in which they have satisfied the Institute that they have equal competence

[I find this definition of a “native language” as a “language of habitual use” to be a much more balanced distinction than “mother tongue” and, as such, here we’re using “non-native” to designate a language that is not that of habitual use]

However, while these guidelines forbid non-native translation, Antoine Berman’s conception of the aim of translation as receiving the “foreign” as “foreign” – where this encounter with the “foreign” enables the receiving culture to grow and develop – hints at the potential benefits of such a method (after all, who better to transmit this “foreignness” or “otherness” than somebody with extensive experience of that very other?).

So, aside from the obvious situation involving a rare language pair, where the use of a non-native translator is inevitable (though not necessarily preferable), what else can non-native translation offer us?


A seemingly obvious benefit is that native speakers should have a comprehensive command of the source language and culture, allowing them to unpick the most convoluted jargon with greater ease than a non-native – undoubtedly a valuable attribute in a translator.

However, simply being a native speaker doesn’t guarantee comprehension. There are plenty of topics in English that are beyond my understanding and, as a result, you won’t be able to get to the heart of a text without hiring a specialist.

Furthermore, unless this command of the source language is mirrored by the translator’s target language ability, that understanding won’t be reflected in the translation. It’s all well and good to perfectly understand a source text but if you can’t transfer that understanding into the target text then it is all for nothing.


Taking Berman’s lead once again, it can be argued that the non-standard use of a target language (influenced by an increased proximity to the source language) may result in innovation that can help the receiving language to develop.

One interesting anecdote I came across recently was the story behind the name of famous video game character Donkey Kong (the tie-wearing gorilla at the top of this post). Allegedly, creator Shigeru Miyamoto believed “donkey” could mean “stupid/stubborn” (depending on which sources you read) in English and assumed that the name Donkey Kong would convey the sense of “stupid/stubborn ape” to an American audience.

When he suggested this name to Nintendo in America he was initially ridiculed but the name stuck and, subsequently, some of those intended associations will have surely attached themselves to the English term given the character’s iconic status. While this usage stems from poor target language skills rather than his proximity to the source language, it neatly demonstrates the potential value of non-native language use.

In reality, though, how often will this be the case? The other side of the coin is that this improper usage can simply see us disregarding necessary grammar rules and misrepresenting a language by failing to adequately capture potentially key elements of meaning. For every Donkey Kong there will be a thousand translations like the one below (and much worse, no doubt) that negate any potential positive effects.


With concerns remaining over whether or not translators get suitable recognition for their work, perhaps the implementation of non-native translation and these “innovative” usages offers us a way to differentiate translators’ work as an independent form of writing and increase the translator’s visibility. If all translations were produced by non-natives, we’d have a much better idea of when we are reading a text in translation.

However, when confronted with today’s standards of translation, which require perfectly readable, error-free target texts (a standard that professional guidelines – including the stipulation outlined above – are seemingly designed to uphold), these new translations are likely to be rejected outright and, if they did get released into the world, they would perhaps just serve to make translation synonymous with unreadable garbage.

Sure, we’d know when a text has been translated but we’d also be likely to quickly decide to steer clear of any translations in the future… Not quite the positive result we had in mind.

Clearly, concrete benefits of non-native over native translation are fairly hard to find and, while collaboration between native and non-native translators could prove to be a beneficial course of action in some situations, this solution is often impractical.

Ultimately, however, I find this entire discussion to be overly general and prescriptive. The basic label of native or non-native is not enough to assess what really matters: translation competence.

The fact that a translator is stronger in the source language than the target language does not necessarily dictate that their translations will be poor as a range of other, supporting skills also play an important role.

Both the Donkey Kong and the “don’t touch yourself” examples demonstrate a clear lack of linguistic/cultural knowledge and research skills and these are a vital part of any translator’s skill set.

However, while we cannot routinely assume that non-native translations will always be inferior, perhaps the most important element of translation competence in contemporary professional practice is the ability to produce error-free target language texts and, in my experience at least, that ability is much more likely to be found in a qualified “native” speaker.

– If you’re looking for a different take on the discussion, check out these interesting posts: ‘The Importance Of Being A Native‘ & ‘Native or Non-native… This Is the Question‘. Enjoy!

An Agency Perspective on Ethics

In a way, today’s post picks up from where we left off last time out with a review of Anthony Pym’s On Translator Ethics. However, while Pym offered an academic take on what a translation ethics demands of us, today’s discussion from Adam Earl provides an interesting agency perspective on ethical matters. Let’s get to it.

The Importance of Integrity Throughout the Translation Process

Maintaining your personal integrity is a priority for professional translators; have you ever considered how integrity plays a vital role throughout the translation process? A translation agency should ensure that their translators show integrity in three key areas, and in this post I’d like to share these with you.

Integrity towards the author

By showing integrity to the author of the document that sits before you, you ensure that you respect their vision for what they want to communicate. It’s not a translator’s place to say that you disagree with some of the author’s key assertions, or that their main argument is completely unfounded — even if it does seem ludicrous to you!

By showing integrity to the author, you’ll keep the accurate translation of their document at the forefront of your aims and goals. And if you really do disagree with the author’s content, then it’s probably best not to accept the contract at all.

Integrity towards the contract

Next, an agency expects their translators to display integrity to the translation contract that they’ve taken on. Displaying integrity to a contract entails more than simply abiding by the terms and conditions of your arrangement: it entails treating a particular contract with the same level of professionalism as any other.

For example, an agency like Tomedes often receives requests for very short translation assignments — sometimes the source text only consists of a single sentence! They require their translators to treat these smaller jobs with the same level of care and professionalism as they would technical, multi-document projects. They’ve found that by treating all contracts equally, they’ve managed to build a loyal clientele who respect their integrity to making and fulfilling contracts.

Integrity towards the text

Finally, a translation agency requires translators to maintain integrity to the text. Translators need to remember that they’re not an editor! Whilst providing a localized translation requires the use of editorial skills, the translator’s primary aim should be to provide a faithful translation of the source text rather than a more readable one.

Bear in mind that some clients may actually want you to perform more detailed editorial duties, but make sure you include that as an extra service in addition to translating the text, and clearly outline what each service you provide entails in your terms and conditions. On the other hand, some clients may be angry if you deviate from the source text without permission, so make sure you provide as direct a translation as possible unless you agree otherwise beforehand.

Final thoughts

By showing integrity towards the author, the contract and the text, you’ll come across as a professional translator who should be valued by their clients. How do you maintain integrity throughout the translation process? Feel free to share your thoughts with us below.

Author Bio

Adam Earl works as a freelance writer and communicator, and writes for the Tomedes Translators’ Hub blog as well as other technology-related blogs.

Book Review: On Translator Ethics – Anthony Pym

As many of you will know, for the last year or so I’ve been working on a PhD in translation studies and today I thought I’d use a little of my research material to bring you a book review. Since my research is focused squarely on the ethics of translation, the review rather predictably delves into one of the key texts in this area – On Translator Ethics by Anthony Pym.

Within the context of translation studies, the word ethics conjures up interest and mystery in equal measure. While it is widely recognized as a key area for discussion throughout the discipline, scholars have attempted to grapple with all things ethical in translation for decades and found varying – though generally limited – success.

Originally published in 1997 as Pour une éthique du traducteur, Pym’s work is based on seminars given by the author at the Collège International de Philosophie in Paris. As On Translator Ethics, aside from the obvious changes ensuing from the translation from French to English, we are informed that the text has also been revised by the author and updated to include brief, polemical commentaries at the end of each chapter tackling contemporary ethical issues such as non-professional translation.

Chapter 5 also represents an entirely new addition and yet, beneath this veneer, this is essentially the same text as was published back in 1997. Indeed, as Pym explains in his introduction, while technological developments and the professional translation community’s attitudes towards scholarship engendered certain changes in his focus, the crucial ethical thrust behind the work required no alteration.

For Pym, the ethics of translation is twofold: it contains ‘collective, professional aspects as well as the translator’s individual morality’ (15) and ‘[i]f any decision includes moral aspects, it follows that any act of translation, and any theoretical treatise on it, can be read from the point of view of ethics’ (16). With these statements, Pym equates the act of translation as a whole with an ethics of translation.

However, rather than seeking to address the question of ethics within the act of translation, as Corinne Wecksteen puts it, Pym proposes to replace the ‘fundamental question ‘how should one translate?’ … by the question ‘should one translate?’’ (Wecksteen 2000: 125), considering that ‘if we know why we translate, then we can deduce how we should translate and perhaps even what we should translate in each situation’ (Pym 2012: 12).

He goes on to depict translation as a cooperative act and sets this notion of cooperation at the very centre of his ethical theory. For him, the benefits of cooperation represent the final measure to evaluate the necessity of translation, implicitly moving from a traditionally deontological to a consequentialist ethics, focusing on ends rather than means.

Aside from these notions of cooperation, meanwhile, Pym’s main postulate is that translators are primarily intercultural agents located in the intersections of cultures rather than within one single culture. In order to initiate this switch, his opening chapter is dedicated to a critical re-reading of Friedrich Schleiermacher’s seminal 1813 paper ‘On the different methods of translating’, concluding that his binary opposition presumes that translators take only one side in their interventions, excluding the middle ground within which Pym believes that the future of translation could lie.

Within this ‘third’ space, translators are dominated by the ethics of cooperation and primarily responsible not to the source text writer, the client or their readers but to their fellow translators. This manoeuvre is carried out in order to argue that translators are by definition detached from national interests, benevolent but impartial helpers and, for Kaisa Koskinen, to create an ‘aura of innocence and moral disinterestedness’ (Koskinen 2000:74) in a tactical move aimed to raise the profile of translation. Overall, this is an innovative rethinking of the traditional binary dichotomies dominating the field yet a notion that leaves fundamental concerns.

As well as problems raised by ideas upholding the existence of mutually discrete cultures, Lieven Tack notes that Pym’s research also fails to consider important covert aspects of human communication such as hidden agendas and unconscious biases. Importantly, ‘[i]nformation does not flow freely, not even in intercultures; it is inevitably anchored, situated, appropriated and inscribed in complex ideological contexts. The mutual benefit, as the guiding principle for the question whether or not to translate, is not always clearly in sight.’ (Tack 2001:301).

Furthermore, despite Pym’s insistence that the answer to ‘why translate’ will solve the issue of ‘how to translate’, it is not an entirely natural connection, and one that potentially undermines his research. Ultimately, what Pym actually means by his ethics of intercultural cooperation remains vague – ideas such as translators using the principle of cooperation to produce ‘socially recognized added value’ (Pym 2012:158) may sound extremely promising but Pym never really gets close to helping the translator sitting in front of their source text.

Most worryingly from an ethical perspective, meanwhile, there are points in the discussion of the principle of cooperation where the process actually seems to align itself with commonly held conceptions of the unethical. Paradoxically, Pym says that if we translate with a view to achieving cooperation then we are ethically valid while also asserting that ‘[w]illful ignorance or reductive misrepresentation of the other is the quickest route to non-cooperation [i.e. the unethical for Pym]’ (ibid. 143), returning us to the labyrinth of fidelity (in this case to abstract ideas of representing the other) and leaving us to question what course of action we are to follow if the client asks us to omit or change something to represent a specific ideology. Is the cooperation ensuing from pleasing the client sufficient to overrule the need for representing the other in a specific manner?

Further questions outlined by Koskinen, such as ‘how does one evaluate the benefits of cooperation?’ and, ‘how does one choose between conflicting interests in cases where an obvious middle ground ensuring long-term cooperation simply does not exist?’, (Koskinen 2000:73) add to a growing list of problems but there remains a great deal of promise in the new directions that Pym has uncovered.

Though concerns remain over the solutions provided, Pym has undoubtedly done a lot more for demystifying ethics than most others, successfully tying the subject to a methodology of translation and hinting at a future beyond binary opposition. While the discussion of practical, commercial insights alongside more traditionally intellectual, philosophical themes often forms a somewhat jarring juxtaposition when reading the text – Pym’s attempt to provide practical contextualisation for his abstract theory is highly commendable, seeking to address a long-standing issue in translation studies by bridging the gap that exists between theory and practice.

Ultimately, Pym remains a key voice in the area and the ongoing relevance of his (largely unchanged) ideas – signaled by this essential republication of his work to a new audience after a fifteen-year gap – provides a strong indication of both the value of his contribution and the need for more work in the area. While his solutions are not always adequate, perhaps suffering from ‘casting the net too wide’ as he attempts to come up with a one-size-fits-all solution for the complex, multi-faceted world of translation, Pym’s contribution opens up a number of new directions at the very least.

Thoughts from the Territories of Understanding Conference

Hello everyone, I trust all is well out there in translation land! As some of you may have spotted, last week marked the occasion of the second international postgraduate conference in translation and interpreting studies at Queen’s University in Belfast.

Entitled Territories of Understanding: Conflict & Encounter, the organisers put on a thoroughly enjoyable event and I wanted to share a few quick thoughts that emerged during my stay in Northern Ireland.

The Present and Future of Translation Studies

Spread out over the course of two days, the conference’s twenty or so papers were slotted around keynote talks from leading translation studies scholars Susan Bassnett, Michael Cronin and Samia Bazzi.

While these big-name talks all provided ample food for thought (as you’d expect), reflecting the breadth of research in contemporary translation studies and showcasing what the (inter)discipline’s well-established scholars have to offer, there was much more to the conference than the chance to hear from a few translation heavyweights.

This was the first time I’d attended a specifically postgraduate conference and I was blown away as translation’s emerging scholars were provided with the leading voice. Talks were consistently excellent throughout, tackling a vast array of topics while centring around the notion of conflict and encounter, and the whole event was characterised by a universal willingness to share and discuss ideas.

Indeed, beyond enjoying two intense days of translation talk (what’s not to like about that, right?!), it was this postgraduate basis that really set the event apart. Having seen first-hand what this new generation has to offer, I left Belfast with no doubt that there is a bright future in store for translation studies.


Moving beyond translation studies

Back in the present, one of the most pressing general issues facing current and future translation scholars alike (and something that is also a real concern in the translation profession) is the need to move beyond our own borders and demonstrate the complexity and relevance of translation to a wider audience.

As our ongoing preoccupation with expanding understandings of translation continues to take the area beyond traditional notions of a specifically linguistic activity, translation studies’ interdisciplinary appeal is becoming increasingly evident.

While such tightly focused conferences can often represent a case of preaching to the converted, talking up the merits of a subject to an audience of fully fledged enthusiasts, the range of high quality talks on offer from people based outside of translation studies demonstrated that this push beyond our borders is gathering increasing pace and garnering tangible results within the academic world.

Talks centring around discussions of politics, tourism and art seamlessly blended in alongside more traditional discussions of corpus linguistics and rhetoric and the conference gave a strong sense of the progress that has been made over the last few years.

But this expansion must also be accompanied by a note of caution. While these widening understandings of what translation can entail undoubtedly allow us greater scope in engaging with other fields, it seems that an already limited focus on using theory to inform the core practice of translation may be slipping further from our attention.

Aside from a few papers that did explore concrete examples of translation issues, direct concerns from translation and interpreting professionals were only briefly discussed during a round table discussion at the very end of the conference – a clear indication of the way in which such concerns are all too often relegated to the sidelines.

Our core focus (which, for me at least, is that of translation as an interlingual transfer operation going from a source text to a target text) is becoming increasingly diluted and the acceptance of more abstract notions of translation, which are so powerful in extending a welcoming hand to neighboring disciplines, perhaps sees us running the risk of becoming disconnected with an important element of our discipline’s goal. That all-important sense of real-world applicability remains in danger of drifting out of sight – a concern that is not new but is well-worth reiterating.

Ultimately, however, my enduring impression of the conference is undoubtedly that of the considerable quality and the strong sense of direction within the young translation studies community. As the only translation studies PhD student at my university, it was great to get a real sense of what is happening in the wider community. What’s more, my enjoyment of the talks and the discussions that followed really confirmed that, one year into my translation research, I’m definitely working in the right area!

BONUS ODDITY: A poster for ‘Rough on Rats’ poison found during a flying visit to the Ulster museum. Enjoy…

Top Language Lovers 2015 – It’s time to vote!

Hi everyone, hope you’re all well! Just a quick one today to let you know that the voting phase for the Top 100 Language Lovers 2015 competition hosted by bab.la and Lexiophiles has just started.

I’m delighted that my blog (JALTranslation) has been nominated in the “Language Professional Blogs” category once again and any votes would be greatly appreciated!

The competition is now in its seventh edition and last year there were a whopping 1,200 participants and 50,000 votes cast. Voting falls into five categories (language learning blogs, language professionals’ blogs, language Facebook pages, language Twitter accounts and language YouTube channels) and you can pick your favourites in each category.

The voting phase lasts from May 26th to June 14th and the winners will be announced on June 17th.

So, what are you waiting for? Click below to pick your favourites and I’ll be back soon with more translation-based bloggery 🙂

Vote the Top 100 Language Professional Blogs 2015

The Joys of Working From Home

Earlier today, during a spontaneous mid-morning break from my work, I found myself questioning whether or not, after several years of working almost exclusively from home as a freelance translator and researcher, I could go back to working in the ‘real world’ of offices, 9-5 and all that jazz.

While the obvious answer is yes, of course I could, it struck me that the longer I’ve been working from home, the more certain I’ve become that the transition back would be a slow, painful one.

From the freedom to take mid-morning breaks that lead to blog posts like this to the increased productivity associated with working in such a tailored environment, working from home has played a huge part in my personal development.

With that in mind, here are ten conclusions that I’ve drawn based on my adventure so far (with tongue planted firmly in cheek).

  • Family members / friends will never quite understand that ‘at home’ does not equate to ‘doing nothing and likely to be grateful for a call/surprise visit’.
  • Lengthy conversations with pets are entirely normal.
  • My clothing habits have gone beyond the point of no return and I’m OK with that.

  • Caffeine can be used to solve most work-related issues.
  • At this point, my own personal schedule has become so deeply engrained that having to adhere to anybody else’s timekeeping rules would most probably cause my brain to cease functioning.
  • The degradation of social skills is a very real thing.

  • With the vast majority of communication revolving around email conversations, it is essential to become adept at utilising subtle variations in tone, from the ‘I’m really not happy’ staccato sentences to the all-powerful smiley face.
  • These days, anyone complaining about their dreaded commute is automatically met with a smug inward grin as I picture my five-second saunter from bed to office.


  • Internet connection issues are always cause for unmitigated panic.
  • My boss is pretty awesome.