|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 09 2012 @ 03:43 PM EDT |
>> Most languages are a lot more flowery than English and people cannot
make too much of an issue about the literal translation of the words.
In this particular case, it seems that Apple did not bother to provide the spin
as part of the translation, but merely wanted to convince the jury that a
management pep talk was actually a set of orders to the underlings to go forth
and figure out how to copy Apple. It seems that the spin was done after the
translation, in other words, and probably not as an actual part of the
translation. It could be, of course, that spin was put into the translation,
too. But I agree that even if so, what we see does not comprise orders to get
busy and start copying.
I can not help but be reminded, though, of another situation in which the stakes
are much higher than just a lawsuit between a couple of companies. Some time
ago, the president of Iran made a statement to the effect that he believes the
state of Israel was founded upon fundamental injustice and simply could not last
forever. In the background of recent history, such an opinion on his part is
totally understandable. Likewise, it is clear that there are a lot of people who
do not like such an opinion and do not want anyone to say such a thing with
impunity. Nevertheless, it is not in itself an incitement to violent action, but
the statement of an opinion or conviction.
But when translated into English, that statement of Ahmadinejad became a
"call for the destruction of Israel" and in that form has been
repeated many times all across the US media. In fairness to the US media, some
of the first accounts did indeed mention what he had actually said alongside of
what was made of his statement in translation. Those sources do deserve credit.
Actually it is from such sources as the New York Times that I learned that the
headline-grabbing twisted translation was in fact twisted back when the
statement was made, was twisted in translation, and started to appear in the
press. A few other newspapers followed the lead of the Times in this, too, and
took care to point out that the translation was inaccurate. But the misstated
translation has been repeated many times since as if it were a simple fact. Even
those newspapers which tried at first to put accuracy above sensationalism are
now tending to mention it in words something like "Ahmadinejad is on record
as having said ...", with no attempt at accuracy at all.
The potential consequences can obviously be much worse than the loss of a
billion dollar judgment by a large company, however unjust that loss may
appear.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
