Years ago, I tweeted a screenshot of a Google News page that listed the most popular stories of the day, all related to the keyword "translation." All, and I mean all, of those that day were titled "Lost in Translation." They weren't even about the same story, but -- as we all too painfully know -- "Lost in Translation" seems to be the wittiest cliché journalists can come up with when translation is involved.

Of course, the media's use of this platitude is inaccurate because they're trying to indicate that translations are measured along a hit-or-miss paradigm, where "wrong" translations are the norm and "perfect" translations are rare, that elusive utopia that translators (and machine translation engines!) presumably strive to attain

As working translators, we know that a "perfect" translation is neither a goal nor a possible reality. We know that complete and linear transfer of form and meaning between two languages is not achievable, no matter how closely those languages might be related. So, is there something that is "lost in translation"? Yes, always. But successful translation is still possible and translation work is still enjoyable because so much can be gained in translation as well. And it's in the balance between the two that a translation is successful. How is that achieved? By the ongoing internal -- and sometimes external -- negotiation processes carried out by the translator or translation team. That is what makes it possible to generate a text that becomes equivalent in its expressive force and meaning by transformation, by inevitably adding changed and new elements. This is what this translator is striving for.