Of course there is no absolute answer to what "good" or "bad" translation. In a sense, a good translation must be achieved within the available budget while fulfilling its purpose
However, there are cases where text quality is the dominant factor: a well-written, easy-to-understand text saves your employees time and gives a positive impression to their customers and business partners. Here are some things I would suggest to watch when evaluating the quality of the translated text in English. These are the criteria that a good translator should take into account when translating his text and highlight some of the problems that often occur in mediocre translations. Of course, some of these may apply in general to translations between different languages:
– Do translations overwhelm formal or scientific vocabulary? In English, words that are too scientific can often be translated directly into other languages. For example, is the word "anomaly" when the "mistake" sounds more natural? Does the translation refer to "lung disease" when "lung disease" sounds more natural to the general public? Classical symptoms of the French and Spanish translations of these languages, where the word "Latin" is a naturally occurring, normal-speaking word in these languages, but the English language only becomes a scientific term for scientists. 19659002] – The translation uses words that are comprehensible, but not enough "le mot juste"? Does the text speak of "social integration" when "social integration" sounds more natural? Can you talk about "potential problems" instead of "potential problems"? Or is the person's "administrative status" when the "administrative status" is more common?
– Are there any adjectives or descriptive terms in which English would use the compound much more naturally? For example, English allows a term such as "remote access device", while in other languages, a term that literally means "remote access device" or "remote access device".
are terms that use the term "a" or "overvalued" where the English compound is used. Overuse of terms like "sales strategy" rather than "sales strategy", classical signs of translations on different languages.
– Do the definers ("a", "a", "a")) used because they would be idiomatic in English? Expressions such as "increased productivity," and not simply "seen increased productivity", point to too much literal translation. It is far finer that a term such as "terms and conditions", "cities and cities," not "conditions," "cities" suggests a translation that usually does not allow two nouns to make the same the word is used for "the" (for example, French), while the word "the" is unnatural in English.
– Does the translation use narrative style and rhetoric that sounds natural in English? We all saw the French museum symbols, which, for example, were reported to be "the king dies in 1483". The finer signs of translation include over-use rhetorical questions (which are, for example, more common in Spanish than in English, where the text sounds too childish). In English translation decisions must be made, for example, for contrasters ("no", "do not know", "no", "no") or present ("Who …?" Vs. "Who (m) …?") , which was not necessarily the source language. Is the style adopted convey the impression you want to give to your audiences?
Finally, the translated text should be ideal as if the original was written to convey the message with the desired style and legibility
Supported by sbobet