Techno-scientific terms omitted from translation

  • Thread starter Thread starter louislaolu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Terms Translation
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
4 replies · 1K views
louislaolu
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary: Why were the two terms "visible light interference" and "the non-visible spectrum" omitted from the translation?

I am doing a contrastive study of a Chinese sci-fi novel and its English translation.

The following is a more faithful translation of the original:
The initial considerations were purely technical. Unlike traditional astronomy, radio astronomy didn’t have as many demands on atmospheric quality and visible light interference, but required minimal electromagnetic interference on the non-visible spectrum.

The actual English translation is as follows:
The initial considerations were purely technical. Unlike traditional astronomy, radio astronomy didn’t have as many demands on atmospheric quality, but required minimal electromagnetic interference.

Could anyone please tell me why the translator omitted the terms "visible light interference" and "the non-visible spectrum"?
 
Last edited:

Discussion

Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks!

The following is an explanation I found：
The translator has omitted "visible light interference" and "non-visible light bands" from translation, as the wavelengths of visible light are several orders of magnitude different from those used in radio astronomical observations, and have almost no impact on the latter. Moreover, "non-visible light bands" has a too broad a scope, being too general, and omitting it has no impact on the relevant scientific descriptions.

Do you think it makes sense?
 
louislaolu said:
The following is an explanation I found：
The translator has omitted "visible light interference" and "non-visible light bands" from translation, as the wavelengths of visible light are several orders of magnitude different from those used in radio astronomical observations, and have almost no impact on the latter. Moreover, "non-visible light bands" has a too broad a scope, being too general, and omitting it has no impact on the relevant scientific descriptions.
I think the translation is far easier to understand than the "more faithful" translation. At least for someone with a little understanding of the problems of optical and radio astronomy. The bane of (terrestrial) optical astronomy is air turbulence (leading to the "sparkling" of stars and blurred photographic images), whereas in radio astronomy a severe problem is interference from all sorts of electrical devices.

I have no idea of the correct technical terms in Chinese. They may circumscribe something imported from another language. A too "faithful" translation can turn out to be barely intelligible.
louislaolu said:
Do you think it makes sense?
Yes.
 
WernerQH said:
I think the translation is far easier to understand than the "more faithful" translation. At least for someone with a little understanding of the problems of optical and radio astronomy. The bane of (terrestrial) optical astronomy is air turbulence (leading to the "sparkling" of stars and blurred photographic images), whereas in radio astronomy a severe problem is interference from all sorts of electrical devices.

I have no idea of the correct technical terms in Chinese. They may circumscribe something imported from another language. A too "faithful" translation can turn out to be barely intelligible.

Yes.
Thank you for the very useful reply!