Sisyphe wrote:Par contre, je suggère que la première traduction après la version française initiale, et la dernière avant la version française finale soient en anglais, afin que les anglophones puissent apprécier plus directement la "déformation" qui se sera produite.
Thank you so much, Sisyphe!
didine wrote:zcalin wrote:If one translator (not necessarily Didine, but any of us who can master at least 4 languages) does a translation from language A to language B, and several stages later from language C to language D - in theory, what would prevent him/her in practice from translating directly from language A or B to language D, once he/she possesses such versions?
The spirit of the game
OK, Didine, I didn't mean that any of us were cheaters... Let me rephrase: What would prevent him/her from being influenced by the versions in the languages A and B, once he/she possesses such versions? I know that my lokanofriends are honest guys, but such things can involuntarily happen to anyone...
Flamenco wrote:Tout à fait et puis même en jouant le jeu, le traducteur ne pourra pas s'empêcher de penser à la première version qu'il a vue.
Exactly, that's my point!
Maïwenn wrote:Keep cool Zcalin
Hehehe, Thanks, Maï!
Now, I dare make two more suggestions...
1. There may be cases of languages with very few (probably just two) translators, of which one (or even both) may master only 2 or 3 languages, and this may cause trouble in completing the chain. I don't see why the text shouldn't pass through one language more than once, on condition, of course, that only the last version is passed forward to the next translator. Perhaps I wasn't specific enough in my last sentence, here's an illustration of my idea:
French(1) ->
English(1) -> German -> Russian -> Finnish ->
English(2) -> Greek ->
French(2) ->
Portuguese(1) -> Danish ->
English(3) -> Italian -> Spanish ->
Portuguese(2) -> Romanian -> Czech ->
English(4-Final) -> French(3-Final).
Of course, the translator of Finnish -> English(2) knows nothing about the English(1) version, and the version passed on to the Greek translator is NECESSARILY the English(2) version, and NOT the English(1) version. Similarly, the translator of English(4-Final) -> French(3-Final) knows absolutely nothing of the previous English or French versions, and so on...
Yes, this was a bit exaggerated, this chain was excaptionally short, languages should not repeat that often, I left outside some important languages (like Polish, Ukranian, Swedish, Bulgarian, Turkish, Hebrew, Japanese, Arabic etc etc), but it was just an example. remember that each "->" represents one translator, there is no such thing as two arrows standing for one translator.
It's just that Sisyphe may be confronted with the situation of not finding a "way out" of one language other than a language already used previously. Get me?
2. One way to ensure a greater variation of the versions of the text (this does NOT IMPLY wrong versions, but just technically different), I recommend coupling languages as different as possible, and where it is possible. I mean, avoid such pairs as: Swedish-Danish, German-Dutch, French-Italian, Spanish-Portuguese, and try to make combinations such as: Romance language - Slavic language - Asian language - Germanic language - Celtic language - Romance language etc etc
God question ; 
Il est un peu tard pour que je réponde à cela. 
