Schleiermacher and Deutscher - Jane

 Scheleiermacher repeated a lot of points that have been made regarding translating by other readings we have done. The part that stood out to me was the beginning when he discussed the 2 methods of translating and the section in the middle about the biggest humiliation a translator can feel. The 2 methods he mentioned (choosing to translate for the writer or the reader) neatly organized the multiple ways of translating onto a spectrum. I know I personally like to translate depending on my understanding of it while trying to do it as direct as possible. This kind of translating also leans into the topic of translating for your native tongue. If you translate directly, then the readers of the native language may not understand what is being said (maybe a joke or a relation that is made in the foreign language and not the native one). The failure to consider these factors or recognizes these risks in translating was described as the biggest humiliation a translator should experience. Because in the end, no matter how bad the original text may have been or how hard the translation process was, if the final translated product is not enjoyable to read, it is ultimately the fault of the translator and not the reader. This big responsibility that translators choose to take on and rise to the challenge is interesting and will forever be under appreciated.

Deutscher's paper brought to light a lot of oppressive tendencies that were seen in a lot of countries (*especially America) when it comes to cohesion of two or more different groups. Conformity is forced upon people when they are in new environments, especially ones where the language and culture are different. The way someone's language has taught them to think will have an everlasting impact on the way they see the world. Because of this, interpretation of/ conveying information differs greatly and in turn affects the way each person sees the world (whether it is directions, colors, feminine and masculine grammar, etc.) This did make me wonder: is language defined/influenced by culture or vice versa? This almost sounds like the question "which came first: the chicken or the egg," which would lead to the conclusion that it is both, there is no right answer.