Marcelo González Aug 22, 2015:

Some final thoughts Putting oneself in the place of the reader is, in fact, what many of us do: we endeavor to bring the text to the reader. When we use, however, a term like 'deputies' in the UK (or US, Australia, Canada, Ireland, etc), we end up doing the opposite, ie bringing the target text (TT) reader to the source text, because, as we all know, "Deputy' is not used to refer to legislators in the UK (nor in the US for that matter). Thus, the effect is a 'foreignizing' one. As for the rhetorical question regarding the use of 'Prime Minister' (in relation to Arg), our NOT using this term underscores our commonly-held belief that texts of this nature are to be rendered in a way that sounds natural, ie 'the closest natural equivalent'. In my opinion, what makes translating texts of this type so challenging may, in fact, be the differing levels of sophistication of their readers and the difficulty in meeting the expectations of r non-specialist readers who may have more or less background information on the topic, including, of course, those who very well know there are no MPs in Chile nor 'Deputies' in the UK :-) Again, a good discussion. And yes, Adolfo, we may have to agree to disagree on this one.

Adolfo Fulco Aug 21, 2015:

Ok. I understand and agree with that approach, but not in this case. I try tu put myself in the place of the reader, and I wouldn't want to be reading about MPs in Chile. For example: would you say "Argentina's Prime Minister"?
Didn't think so! So, why say "MP" when the correct word is "deputy" (A deputy is a legislator in many countries, particularly those with legislatures styled as a 'Chamber of Deputies' or 'National Assembly'.) Like I said, it would be misleading as it wouldn't reflect the true nature of Chile's political system. Alex didn't ask us to give him an equivalent, he asked whether he could say "deputies" and "senators", or if he HAD to use an equivalent. And I believe that he can use "deputies" and "senators". The same happens with non-specialised readers in Argentina. I wouldn't want to be reading about "los diputados y senadores del Reino Unido". I do believe that if an equivalent IS needed I would said "MP", but this is not the case.

I think we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one! Cheers!

Marcelo González Aug 21, 2015:

The translator's (in)visibilty In my doctoral thesis, 'Metaphor and agency in the English-Spanish translation of texts in the social sciences' (2014), I discuss the collaborative-intervenient role of the translator in adapting texts to meet the expectations of target-markets. To my 2011 publication, I even added, with authorial consent, target-language references and quotations. The adaptation suggested by maryhume (of using MP) is not only consistent with a 'naturalizing' (or 'domesticating') approach, but with practices dating back to Antiquity as well. I agree with both maryhume and Adolfo: this has been a very good discussion. Cheers from the Marianas :-)

Adolfo Fulco Aug 21, 2015:

The question remains... Is the audience uneducated? I don't think they are, as they're reading about politics in South America. Do I think it's OK to just change "deputy" (diputado) for MP? I certainly do not! Alex asked if he could maintain "deputies" and "senators", and I believe he can. Again, he can add a footnote if he wishes. But like I said, he would be treating the audience as uneducated. Besides, if the audience doesn't understand what is meant by "deputy", they can always look it up if they're interested in knowing about Chile's political system. If he wishes to be truthful to the original text, he should maintain "deputies" and "senators". I think this an interesting debate. Thank you!

Mary Gardner Hume Aug 21, 2015:

I agree with Marcelo regarding using the most appropriate rendering depending on the audience. My understanding is that the translation of the names of the political posts should reflect the most similar post in the reader's government structure. In this case, so that the readers of the translation can identify what political post equivalents to those in their government structure are participating in the discussion. Overall, I think that this has been a very fruitful and thought provoking discussion, since as Marcelo points out, it is a subject that many translators have dealt with.

patinba Aug 21, 2015:

Parliamentary system vs. Presidential system In case you think they are the same, I quote from the American Heritage dictionary:
Parliamentary system: A system of government in which the power to make and execute laws is held by a parliament. Britain has a parliamentary system of government, one of the oldest in the world. The United States does not; its legislature, the Congress, passes the laws, and a separate part of government, the executive branch, carries them out.

Adolfo Fulco Aug 21, 2015:

Marcelo I understand your POV, but the Asker is talking about Chile, and in Chile you have "diputados y senadores". He asked if he could simply use the words "deputies" and "senators", and I believe he can. Even if he's translating for a non-specialised audience, I don't think it would be an accurate translation if he uses the word MP. He could say "deputies" and "senators" and explain in a footnote what they do, but he would be assuming that the audience is uneducated, and we don't know that. Maybe what we have to ask here is what he means by "non-specialised". If someone is reading about Chile and its political system with "diputados y senadores", I advice against using MPs as we would be misleading the reader into thinking that Chile has a political system similar to the UK.

Marcelo González Aug 20, 2015:

part II That said, this text raises an interesting question about the limitations of such an approach across two distinct systems of governance---a question with which many of us have dealt in the context of education and the nomenclature of rank in academia. In the UK, the upper house is not comprised of senators (and much less, of senators who are elected), something that news watchers were recently reminded of in the aftermath of a recent scandal emanating from the House of Lords.

Marcelo González Aug 20, 2015:

The way I see it... ...the most appropriate rendering may depend on the degree to which a 'domesticating' (or 'naturalizing') approach is embraced. If the target audience is the UK, the most appropriate translation (following this approach) would be Member of Parliament (MP). Though I claim no expertise with respect to the UK, MPs (members of the lower house) are not commonly referred to as "deputies', as far as I know. I may be wrong. Am I missing something here? As for the US system, the word 'deputy' is simply not used to refer to legislators (at least not as a title that all members hold).