I'm reviewing a fucking translation for a volume of essays on new media.
The only thing I learned is that the translator is not a traitor but sometimes demented.
For example, when translating "stencil machine" - which would then stencils - as "the printing press to stereotypes."
Nothing to say, if one is a little 'research finds that Firmin Didot invented the term applied to the press to define a duplicate impression of an original typographical element.
course, if one is not normal and knows the history of printing from movable type forward can also be argued that the translation makes sense.
But if one is instead normal "machine for printing stereotypes" makes you think.
would be like saying you reformat content and when you print instead of what you've written come out of clichés, clichés, stereotyped forms of expression.
You write: "James Brown" and her release: "the black one, as we know, is gifted."
You, "the woman" she "the one that says no, dear, I have a headache."
And so on.
you try to print.
The only thing I learned is that the translator is not a traitor but sometimes demented.
For example, when translating "stencil machine" - which would then stencils - as "the printing press to stereotypes."
Nothing to say, if one is a little 'research finds that Firmin Didot invented the term applied to the press to define a duplicate impression of an original typographical element.
course, if one is not normal and knows the history of printing from movable type forward can also be argued that the translation makes sense.
But if one is instead normal "machine for printing stereotypes" makes you think.
would be like saying you reformat content and when you print instead of what you've written come out of clichés, clichés, stereotyped forms of expression.
You write: "James Brown" and her release: "the black one, as we know, is gifted."
You, "the woman" she "the one that says no, dear, I have a headache."
And so on.
you try to print.
