In 2007, he was hired by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Zhang Jing, a native of Hangzhou, graduated from Hangzhou Foreign Language School in 2003 and was admitted to the Foreign Affairs University of China as an English major. During the Sino-US high-level strategic dialogue, Zhang Jing was on the sidelines for translation work. This dialogue was the first face-to-face meeting between China and the United States since the Biden administration took office, and it was also the first high-level meeting after the first New Year’s Eve call between China and the United States. As Sukhodrev put it when asked how it felt to be part of and shape history: “They formulated it – I interpreted it.China Women’s Daily and Metropolis Express reported earlier this afternoon, posted a Weibo : On March 19, local time, the Sino-US high-level strategic dialogue ended. There are many interesting examples out there that show just how hard it really is to balance literal meaning, personal bias and intent of meaning as a diplomatic translator.
While the interpreter on the Chinese side, Zhang Jing, opted for calm translations (an example: she translated the literal equivalent of “we Chinese aren’t buying it!” to “this is not the way to deal with the Chinese people”), the American counterpart got criticised for exacerbating the US delegation’s already strident language, which had an effect on the entire diplomatic process. A recent example comes from a meeting in Alaska between diplomats from China and the United States for bilateral talks of the Biden administration. This also calls in question the personal bias and political tendencies an interpreter and diplomatic translator brings to the table, as these can ultimately alter the language used, as well as the meaning of diplomatic protocols and speeches. Perhaps Sukhodrev should have removed the bite from the statement? This example shows just how hard it is as a diplomatic translator to balance literal meaning and intent of meaning.
While Sukhodrev’s translation is technically correct, he might have underestimated the likelihood of the West interpreting it as a threat at a time that clearly hinted towards the statement being exactly that. To the Western world, this statement sounded off, but in the Communist realm it was something quite ordinary. We will bury you”) does sound less threatening, suddenly referring more to history-making and ideology than to direct warfare.
Chinese translator zhang jing full#
While Sukhodrev stood by his translation, calling it an “exact interpretation”, it should be noted that the quote in full context (“Whether you like it or not, we are on the right side of history. That’s why many people believe that the interpretation, “we will bury you”, is actually too literal a translation, as it could in fact be interpreted as many different things, including “we will live to see you buried” and “we shall outlast you” – all provocative phrases, yet representing less of the imminent threat of “we will bury you”.
According to Sukhodrev, Khrushchev was especially challenging to translate, as the former president loved to speak in an inflammatory way, with rare proverbs and jokes at the heart of his turn of phrase. What many didn’t know was that the statement had most likely been misinterpreted by Viktor Sukhodrev, a famous Russian-to-English interpreter who worked for Krushchev and many other Soviet leaders on the world stage. This statement had NATO member nations worried, and the world entered a state of fear of an imminent nuclear threat. One of the most famous examples of diplomatic mistranslation took place on 18 November 1956, when former president of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, said something in a room at Moscow’s Polish embassy, full of western diplomats tasked with once again setting right the relationship between the Soviet Union and the United States: “My vas pokhoronim,” he said, which was unfortunately translated as “we will bury you”. We take a look at some historic examples of where diplomatic translation got… well, lost in translation. Ever thought about the significance of diplomatic translation? It’s certainly not an easy task, with translating errors potentially having wide-ranging and far-reaching implications.
0 kommentar(er)
