or those of us who are translators, technology has
increasingly become a necessity. Years ago we grudgingly agreed to use
word processors, and now we even own TEnTs (translation environment
tools). But deep in our hearts we often long for the days that are so
well depicted in this image of St. Jerome, the patron saint of
translators and, judging by his innumerable appearances on translators'
websites, the most revered of our role models.
While St. Jerome's linguistic achievements are beyond
doubt (and probably beyond our reach), his image here in his quaint
study seems to communicate something else: a highly romanticized idea
of translation that has very little in common with our role as modern
translators who work in highly computerized environments.
I had a few minutes in the subway today to spend reading
in "The Story of Writing" by A. Robinson. This is not a ground-breaking
work, but it's a lovely book that nicely outlines the history of
writing. (Now that I've outed myself as a lover of writing, check out
my sporadic
collection of characters.) The number of complex writing systems of
the past and present are mind-boggling. Stunning systems like
Cuneiform, the Egyptian hieroglyphs, Rongorongo, Chinese and its many
descendants, and even alphabet- or quasi-alphabet-based scripts must
have felt like insurmountable hurdles to computer developers in the
1980s and early 1990s. At those times it was a struggle to enter one
language at a time, let alone several different scripts together on one
page. (I remember being given my first DOS-based Chinese data entry
system in 1990 in a rather covert operation: it turned out to be an
illegal copy of a system that had been developed for the Chinese
government and was not supposed to be distributed at all!)
Now fast forward about 15 years to today, when it's
possible to view webpages like this:
These different languages that appear on Wikipedia's
home page are each represented in their own individual scripts. Just a
few years ago most of them could not have been displayed at all because
neither the operating systems nor the browser would have supported the
code. A few years later, many could have been displayed individually,
provided you had the right fonts installed, had your operating system
configured to support complex languages, and made your browser display
them in the correct code pages. But they could not have been displayed
together.
Only very recently have a number of factors converged to
make this polyglot page possible: a) current operating systems support
complex languages rather seamlessly; b) fonts are available (such as
Arial Unicode or Code 2000) that support a large
number of "minor" writing systems; and c) most importantly, Unicode has
put an end to the need for many different code pages and having to
worry about different code pages for different character sets (see a Translation
Journal report of the advent of Unicode many years ago). The
webpage above is written in UTF-8, the most common form of Unicode for
web purposes and, as you can see, the languages are all displayed
correctly. Well, almost all. If you look more closely at the listing in
the last paragraph you can see one entry with squares. That's Oriya, a
font that Firefox struggles with.
So now we come back full circle to the "fine arts" in
the title, an image of St Jerome, and technology in general. The point
I am trying to make is this: We can frown all we want on technology and
the changes it has caused in our work environments. However, while we
have spent the last few years frowning, a large array of language
processing technologies have come to a point where things are falling
into place. While language barriers exist (and we should be the first
to welcome that fact!), languages can now live side by side, at least
virtually. That's truly fine art, and I can't imagine St. Jerome not
embracing that.
Technology bears no value in and of itself, but the
effective employment of technology can wield great force, either
positive or negative. The above is an example of something incredibly
positive. Only by being knowledgeable about technology and by employing
it wisely and effectively can we continue to push language technology
toward a positive future.
|