The Perils of Bad Translation

Most readers share a precious, yet complex, relationship with books, marked by joy, guilt, discovery, and so much more. Dear Troubled Reader, written by Suresh Menon, is an advice column on all things literature and language. It addresses questions that readers have, from the simple to the profound, treating every question with equal seriousness. You might ask: How do I begin reading? Or is writing a mirror into the writer's world? Expect recommendations from the columnist, remedies for ‘bad’ reading habits, advice on navigating the inevitable reading slump, and much more.

We hope this column becomes a space of hope and companionship for you, the reader. A place that brings you back to your bookshelves with renewed love for reading, greater curiosity about languages, and the desire to discover new voices and fresh literature.

Send your questions via email to editor@the-hyphen.in, or leave a comment below.

I love reading theory and I love reading single-character driven stories (think “Notes from Underground”). But, when more than a couple of characters come in, my attention doesn't quite stay with what I’m reading. What can I do to extend the horizon of fiction I read?
- Spoorthi

That’s an interesting problem, an unusual one even. Did you have the same issue before you read Dostoevsky? For example, when you were little and reading “The Engine That Could” or Enid Blyton’s “Noddy” books? Perhaps you can approach it mathematically, reading books with two main characters (Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot”, Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road”), then three main characters (Hemingway’s “The Old Man and the Sea”, even if the third character is a large fish which does not have a speaking role), and so on till you get into “The Mahabharata” or war novels with thousands, even lakhs of characters. Actually, there’s only one way to extend the horizon – and that is by reading, and then reading some more. And perhaps reading homeopathically, if you will allow the expression, by following the law of minimum doses or steadily increasing doses, as explained above. And soon you should be able to read “Five Little Pigs” by Agatha Christie.

I often have conversations with people who casually remark that there is no need for translators anymore since AI can do that job quicker. I tell them that translation isn't merely a word-to-word transformation from one language to another, but also requires the tone and style of the author to be translated, which is a difficult task. However, I feel that that isn't a convincing answer, and sounds Utopian or unrealistic for someone who is all about “getting the job done”. How does one navigate such a discussion about AI and translation?
- Aanya Vinayaa

You are right. About being ‘Utopian’ – one must strive towards the ideal in everything, otherwise what’s the point? Translation cannot be a word-to-word rendition. That kind of translation is a travesty. You only need to think of a line from a favourite Bollywood song to realise this. But it is not totally useless. Many translators begin with word-to-word just to get a sense of the original before a second go at the same material for the tone and style and nuances. “Getting the job done” is limiting and works for instruction manuals for your blender or wi-fi, but even then there are dangers. “Do not expose to moisture” has sometimes become “Keep away from wet feelings” while “rotate clockwise” once appeared as “turn in the direction of the clock’s happiness.”

A recent special was a message I read, translated into Marathi and then back into English thanking the Indian pilot, Captain Smit Machchar for his heroism in saving 174 lives aboard a UAE plane that was hijacked by his co-pilot with an intention of crashing it. The double translation called him “Captain Mosquito”! It was on social media, so the provenance is suspect, but the point remains.