4.1 A translation is typically accepted as a translation. Atypical translations have a different status. According to Islamic tradition, no foreign language version of the Quran is considered sacred and hence it is regarded as a paraphrase or interpretation at best if not a downright desecration. Article 4 of the EEC Council’s Regulation No. 1 of 1958 provides that “Regulations and other documents of general application shall be drafted in the four official languages”. This suggests that it is possible to create semantically identical Dutch, French, German, and Italian texts independently from each other. Paradoxically, the EU has continued to avoid the term translation in the still effective Regulation No. 1 while running multiple translation and interpretation services, which in turn do use both terms in their everyday operations. From the point of view of Postcolonial Studies, translation also has an atypical status, as it is not (only) a tool of bridging communication gaps but (also) one of taking and keeping colonial control.

 

4.2 The term translation typically refers to a form of verbal communication between two languages (interlingual translation). In an atypical case, translation does not cross language boundaries but connects two varieties of the same language (intralingual translation or rewording). Intersemiotic translation or transmutation means the interpretation of verbal signs by means of nonverbal signs. (Jakobson 1959).

 

4.3 Translation is typically regarded as a type of written communication, versus the atypical sight translation, aka hybrid interpreting (an impromptu spoken translation of a written ST) and forward and backward translation (a coping strategy by which learners translate mentally from L1 into L2 and from L2 into L1 respectively). As in many other languages, the English word translation means both an action and metonymically its result. From the perspective of TS, the latter seems to be the typical and the former the atypical, as process-oriented research only emerged in the second half of the 20th century, thousands of years after translation as text was made the subject of systematic inquiry and debate.

 

4.4 Translation typically arrives at a natural and/or live language, but this is not always the case. Atypical practices include translation into a dead language, e.g. Alice in Wonderland, Don Quixote, Grimms’ Fairy Tales, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Robinson Crusoe, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, The Little Prince, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, translated into Ancient Greek, Egyptian, Gothic, Latin, Old English, Sanskrit, etc. Also, the TL can atypically be a constructed language, such as Esperanto in Zamenhof’s translation of Hamlet.

 

4.5 The typical TT is considered to be a full translation, one that converts every single ST character into the TL. Because culture-bound terms often resist translation and usually not every detail of the ST is relevant, full translation may seem typical but is probably more an ideal than a reality. However, from the perspective of lay people and most TS scholars, there are atypical TTs. One is abridged translation, which reproduces only as much of the ST as is requested by the client. The other is subtitling and surtitling, where limited space and reading time require the omission of some ST information. The third atypical form is supplementary translation. This can extend a full translation, whether with words, paragraphs, or entire pages, due to a subsequent extension of the ST, or it can fill the gaps in an abridged translation. Alternatively, it can supply client-specific information in a TL template, used for the quick and consistent translation of standardised official forms (birth, death, and marriage certificates, European Arrest Warrants, powers of attorney, etc.). The fourth atypical mode is updated translation. This affects documents used at regular intervals (e.g. concert programs, course schedules, meeting agendas, tax returns), where the bulk of the ST remains the same and translation is only required for a few words/names/dates, sentences, or paragraphs that have changed since the last edition. Lastly, a summary translation only retains the key points and not necessarily in the original order. Interpreting also has the typical meaning of ‘full’, but this again is more an ideal than a reality. The reproduction of each syllable and semantic shade can fail owing to a host of factors. These range from a quiet voice or a crackling microphone all the way to rapid and inarticulate speech, insider jargon, vague allusions, and acronyms. At times, consecutive interpreting is atypically limited to a summary, eliminating repetitions and examples at the client’s explicit request. Consecutive interpreting can also take the form of supplementary interpreting. Rather than conveying each of the consecutive utterances, this mode only fills the lexical gaps and lapses of the communicators, who are otherwise fluent in one or both languages of the interaction.

 

4.6 Similarly to the typically monolingual ST (cf. 3.7), the TT is typically drafted in one language. The atypical TT is called multilingual translation or parallel translations, made in more than one TL, primarily for multinational companies. Such projects are an atypical form of team translation (cf. 2.6) as each translator involved works on the entire ST and not just a designated portion. At the same time, they may need to cooperate to make sure they are clear about each ST portion and manage any company-specific (chiefly international) terminology consistently in their respective TL versions.

 

4.7 While the TT depends on the ST as its raison d’être, it is typically considered as an autonomous entity given its separation from the ST in space and time. For instance, a typical literary translation is published solely in the TL, and only refers to the ST in the imprint. In this sense, dubbing is atypical as it replaces SL speech but is closely tied to it through lip movement and length. Further atypical modes include bilingual TTs, which occur below, above, next to, as a footnote or endnote of the ST, as in subtitles and surtitles, multilingual signs and notices, bilingual editions of literary translations for language learners, quotes in non-translated texts, and voice-over.

 

4.8 The typical TT is the only translation of the ST, mainly in specialist topics, where a single rendering is normally sufficient (cf. 5.1). The atypical TT is a retranslation, usually of fiction, i.e. a subsequent TL version of the ST by another translator. Retranslations are also atypical as they are compared with both the ST and the previous TTs for quality assessment, especially when they claim to be completely new without a single sentence adopted from the first translation.

 

4.9 The typical TT gives the illusion of an original. This expectation has received various names ever since antiquity, including transparent or domesticated translation (Venuti 1995), instrumental translation (Nord 2005), and covert translation (House 1981). An atypical TT, which in this sense is source-oriented and leaves “traces” of the ST, has been called foreignised translation (Venuti), documentary translation (Nord), and overt translation (House).

 

4.10 The typical TT has the same quality as the ST, i.e. it is neither worse nor better. The atypical TT is an improved translation, free from all deficiencies of the ST, including typos, grammatical and collocation errors, inconsistent terminology and style, logical flaws, semantic anomalies (vagueness, ambiguity, nonsense), mathematical inaccuracies, etc. (cf. 4.12). In fact, given the translation universal of normalisation or standardisation, i.e. the tendency to exaggerate TL features (Baker 1996: 183) even if the ST was intentionally unconventional, it is not clear if identical quality is indeed the norm and improvement the exception.

 

4.11 The TT is typically considered a finalised/definitive translation, which is ready for use without any further intervention. The atypical TT is a raw/rough translation, a preliminary human translation that is only as accurate as to give a basic idea of the nature and contents of the ST, or a machine translation output used without post-editing. Rough translations are also prepared of poems written in an exotic language, to be finalised by a literary translator. Furthermore, a reworked translation, usually of a literary or sacred text, is one improved by the translator or another practitioner for later editions. For instance, Martin Luther constantly refined his German Bible until his death. Some atypical TTs are prone to change owing to their genre and hence cannot ever be definitive. The lines of a translated play, just like those of one originally written in the TL, may be performed erroneously. However, the translator watching the show may prefer marvellous to beautiful or Come, please, with me to Please, come with me as recited on stage, and incorporate those in the next edition of the translation.

 

4.12 The typical TT is an accurate translation, one that is semantically (denotatively) and stylistically equivalent with the ST. Here, too, there is a wide range of atypical forms. The first is mistranslation, a translation that unintentionally departs from the ST in semantic and stylistic terms. (Translated lyrics, whether in operettas or pop music, with a partly or totally different meaning are not mistranslations but adaptations, i.e. deliberate deviations.) Another atypical TT is translationese or translatese, a pejorative name for awkward and ungrammatical translations, its audiovisual equivalent being dubbese. While translationese may be annoying to read, it can successfully convey the overall ST message. A similar atypical concept is minimal translation (Heltai 1997: 118), which is just acceptable under the circumstances but lacks all the accuracy, flow, consistency, etc. of a typical “good” translation. A phonemic/phonological or metrical or rhymed translation is atypical in that it reproduces the sound, meter, and rhyme scheme of an ST poem at the expense of the sense. Even less typical is a singable translation, which may depart far from the SL libretto to be fit for voice pitch, articulation, vowel length, etc. The typical accuracy is also “violated” by adaptation (close fidelity to the ST subordinated to suitability for a given audience) and its different forms. Localisation adapts the multilingual translation (cf. 4.6) of websites, software, and video games to a specific country or region. Transcreation is a creative advertising and marketing translation that keeps the ST intention and effect but adapts idioms. Transediting (Stetting 1989: 374), an increasingly common trend in present-day journalism, is the combination of translation and editing.