Katherina Polig makes the point that
translating press releases poses particular
challenges and demands skills that go
"beyond accuracy and completeness of
information" (TL60,3). Does it? Is it really
within the remit of the translator to render an
overly verbose Italian or French press release
into a sober and concise German tone, as
she suggests? Her interesting feature adds to
the discussion as to how much freedom we
have as translators/transcreators.
She says that the format and style of press
releases vary widely between countries and
that this is where the translator needs to
intervene. However, German, Italian, French
and English definitions of what a press release
is, and how one should go about writing one,
are surprisingly similar. We are told in all
these countries that a press release should be
factual and avoid boastful language and
exaggeration. Authors should avoid a heavy
nominal style, passive tense and intricate
embedded clauses. They should adopt a
'journalistic style' – i.e. be informative without
value judgements. A press release should be
worded in a neutral way and provide the
journalist with factual information, rather than
serving any promotional purposes.
It seems to me that it is not that the
expectations for press releases are different
in different countries. More likely, the authors
disobey the rules, perhaps out of ignorance
or because they are not
writers/editors and are
blissfully unaware of their
clichés. This, in my opinion,
happens regardless of country.
But is it really the job of the
translator to take the matter in her/his own
hands to this degree? Must we obey the
rules that the author has disregarded? Could
this not be seen as overstepping our
authority as translators? (I am the first to say
that the translator often knows better, but I
also know that it is often best not to insist.)
I would caution translators not to deviate
too much from the source. I would personally
be worried at completely restructuring a
press release, shortening it from 700 words
down to 350, and leaving out details that I
suspect might not really be needed. This is
particularly risky if you are not an employee
or a direct subcontractor of the company.
What is legitimate, I would say, is to
cautiously tone down the language, leave out
tautologies and superfluous, exaggerated
adjectives. And perhaps split an over-long,
complex sentence into two shorter ones, to
improve legibility. But whatever you do, be
prepared that you might be challenged even
when you allow yourself relatively minor
editorial changes. You may well need to
justify them to your client.
Isabelle Weiss MCIL
Overstepping our authority
26 The Linguist Vol/60 No/4 2021
thelinguist.uberflip.com
OPINION & COMMENT
Email linguist.editor@ciol.org.uk with your views
Caught reading The Linguist
Nathalie Reis MCIL read the June-July issue
at Marseille Provence airport, waiting for her
connecting flight to Corsica. She spent a week
on the island with her family after they had
been apart for a year due to the pandemic.
Where do you read yours? We'd love to
see your snaps. Please send them to:
linguist.editor@ciol.org.uk.
Star Letter prize
This issue's Star Letter writer
wins a copy of Alex Bellos's
The Language Lover's Puzzle
Book. For your chance to
win, share your views at
linguist.editor@ciol.org.uk.
STAR
LETTER
P
1
O L
2
I S
3
H A
4
R
5
A B
6
I C
7
I I T T
8
H O U
D
9
E L A Y E R I
10
N U I T
G
L M O N R L
I
11
C E N I G
12
O O D B Y E
N
E L O T
G
13
O
14
O D M O R N
15
I N G
O
16
C D I N
17
C
18
O C K N
19
E Y C
20
O C
21
O A
U
I I T O Z V
L
22
A T I N E
23
U S K E R A
U
A T S I C J
S
24
I N D H I P
25
A S H T O
Crossword solution
Puzzle page 25
©
SHUTTERSTOCK
