THE ONION RING SYNDROME AND THE LOST-AND-FOUND IN TRANSLATION Ülle Leis

TEACHING PRACTICE RECONSIDERED: TARTU ANNELINNA GYMNASIUM PROJECT Natalja Zagura, Ülle Türk

THE ONION RING SYNDROME AND THE LOST-AND-FOUND IN TRANSLATION

Ülle Leis Conference interpreter, trainer and columnist

“Oh, onion rings! I wish I’d known; I would have ordered some, too,” my British friend said and looked wistfully at my plate. “I love onion rings!”

He had taken his time reading the menu at a popular restaurant in Tallinn’s Old Town. How come he had overlooked his favourite dish? Well, he hadn’t. He simply had not recognised it, masked as Piirissaare onions baked in beer dough. The onion ring incident is a prime example of a translation completely lost on the foreign visitor that nevertheless looks like a good job to Estonians, many of whom would say that the English name is an “exact and correct” translation of the Estonian õlletaignas küpsetatud Piirissaare sibulad.

It was a beautiful case of Lost-in-Translation (LiT), and ever since that fateful day I have used a code name for similar instances – the Onion Ring Syndrome (ORS, “Sibularõngaste sündroom ehk Tõlge Eesti moodi”). The ORS stands for a translation (written) or interpretation (oral) where the text user cannot recognise an onion ring (or something else) or where an onion ring is not really what the text user would call an onion ring. This may be a good time to ask yourself how you would grade Piirissaare onions baked in beer dough and onion rings if these were your students’ translations of õlletaignas küpsetatud Piirissaare sibulad.

A LiT a day keeps the ORS away

Avoiding the ORS, a source of considerable confusion, bitter disappointment and acute embarrassment, should be a key objective both when learning a language and when using it in a reallife situation. I believe that LiT incidents can be a handy language teaching tool to combat the ORS. Misunderstandings are gold dust, as Geoff Lindsey, a prominent phonetician and Honorary Lecturer in Linguistics at University College London, has said: “When I teach – always – one of the things that characterizes my teaching is grabbing hold of every misunderstanding that happens. They’re just gold dust. As humans, whenever we try to communicate using languages other than our mother tongue, misunderstandings arise, but instinctively we try to ignore those misunderstandings, we immediately try to rephrase, to repair the damage, we get embarrassed and we want to just simply step over the obstacle. Whereas I do the opposite. I immediately want to freeze time, hit the pause button, wind back and try to really examine closely, precisely what went wrong. Because every time you do that, you can be sure that you will learn something very significant about what matters. It will tell you what is important, what problems are the significant ones that arise in the interface between speakers of that language and speakers of English. Grabbing hold of errors, treating errors as a sort of gift from above, a gold dust that tells you what goes wrong.”

LiT cases can teach us as much as textbooks, often more. They also stand a better chance of being remembered because they are usually interesting, visualisable, unusual, understandable and/or

useful (IVUUU), especially when we combine the text with images (TLE “Kutse vastuvõtule Vinnide vennaskonnas”) and steer clear of linguistic jargon. A typical dissection of a LiT case would start with a comparison between the intended or assumed and the actual meaning, examine possible reasons for blunders and suggest prevention strategies. I have used the same approach in my biweekly Tõlkes leitud Eesti (TLE, ‘Estonia Found in Translation’) column in the national daily Postimees.

Interpretation as a language enhancement tool

Years of teaching interpreting at universities and private workshops and courses have made me reflect more and more about the chicken-and-egg relationship between language learning and translation and interpreting (T & I): do we need to learn a language for T & I or do we need to do T & I in order to learn a language? Although language proficiency is a prerequisite to applying for an MA in conference interpreting, that assumed proficiency often fails in interpreting class, and feedback from tutors - professional conference interpreters and particularly from native speakers among them - leaves students shell-shocked. A number of them may already have interpreted at events, and some have done it for years. They have to distance themselves from the rights and wrongs of the translation exercises that they did at school and give up habits, many of which are deeply ingrained and extremely difficult if not impossible to change. When somebody from Tallinn says Tiheda liikluse pärast on meie kontori address nüüd Pärnu maantee 12 asemel Pärnu maantee 222, it would be a crime to interpret it as Because of heavy traffic our office is now at Pärnu maantee 222 instead of Pärnu maantee 12. Conversely, Because of heavy traffic we have moved our office from central Tallinn to the outskirts would be welcomed with wholehearted approval in an interpreting class but would probably be condemned at a language lesson as a barbaric translation crime. I have lost count of the times when students have interpreted Kallid külalised! Kallid kolleegid! Kallid sõbrad!, the typical greetings at the beginning of a speech, as Dear guests! Dear colleagues! Dear friends!, and been told by dozens of native speaker interpreters the same thing – never use Dear with these words, except for friends. They insist on Guests, colleagues, dear friends, the same that you can see in speeches by native speakers. Are you shocked?

It is not a question of an interpreting class being right and a language class being wrong, mind you, and using the first to correct the second. A language class cannot and does not have to be like an interpreting class, but it can draw inspiration and handy tips from the latter. After all, the people who study to be an interpreter or a translator learn to do somebody else’s talking or writing in another language. Why not use the same tools to teach pupils to do their own talking or writing, to add variety, reality and fun to language lessons, to increase the pull factor and pupils’ motivation? And let’s not forget that prevention is better than cure.

What is interpreting and how do you measure interpreting quality?

The layperson’s understanding of the words ‘interpretation’ and ‘translation’ for which we usually use the same word (tõlkimine) in Estonian, is heavily influenced by language lessons and exercises at school which, however, lack many of the fundamental elements of professional interpreting:

- authentic speaker (a minister, a doctor, a businessman), authentic customer and authentic setting (a press conference, an opening ceremony, a factory visit, a training course, a court hearing); there is no genuine need to communicate and to match one’s language to the occasion (e.g. formal or informal); there is limited exposure to real people whose native and non-native language and manner of speaking vary a great deal;

- intercultural communication: students are not required or expected to think how to make sure that somebody from a different country or culture understands things Estonian (places, people, traditions, food, e.g. Munamägi, kohuke, the Song Celebration) or how to adjust their language and behaviour to the people for whom they are interpreting;

- there is a dominance of written language whereas interpreters interpret spoken language into spoken language, a language radically different from and much simpler than written language. The vocabulary and the dos and don’ts of spoken and written English are quite different, e.g. native speakers always speak with contractions (there’s, I’m) which should be avoided in formal writing. Longman dictionaries (see Longman Communication 3000) highlight the differences between spoken and written frequency;

- there is not much at stake, apart from a grade, contrary to real life where there is a genuine need to understand and to be understood, and where stakes are very high – professional reputation, lucrative contracts, dream jobs, successful products, human lives.

Professional interpreting means (in simple terms) converting to another language • what is being said (the message) • in the manner in which it is said (how: tone, register etc), bearing in mind • the occasion (where) and • the audience (to whom)

Interpreting quality cannot be measured in absolute units like seconds or metres. There are, however, certain key criteria and a ranking that emerged in two landmark studies that examined quality expectations among interpreters (Bühler) and users of interpretation (Kurz). The ranking is a point of reference in interpreter training and conference interpreting worldwide, but priorities may change depending on the occasion, for example fluency may rank much higher in a TV broadcast and correct terminology at an experts’ meeting. The following criteria were considered as important by

Sense consistency with original message Logical cohesion of utterance

Correct terminology

Completeness of interpretation

Fluency of delivery

Correct grammatical usage

Native accent

Pleasant voice Interpreters % Bühler 1986

96

83

47

28 Users % Kurz 1989

81

72

36

There are fascinating findings, highly relevant both for interpreting class and language learning. Look at Sense consistency with original message (#1) and Completeness of interpretation (#4). Many people would probably assume that they mean the same thing, i.e. if everything has been interpreted the rendering matches the original message and vice versa, in order to convey the message of the original you need to interpret everything. In reality the two are separate notions and interpretation can match the original message without being ‘complete’. Moreover, sense consistency is about twice as important as completeness. And did you see that logical cohesion ranks second?

The interpreting process

Interpreting is a bit like a bird’s-eye view of a house – you see the roof (the result) but not what is

under it (how it was achieved, TLE “Ood labajalgadele”). Interpreting can also be compared to putting up a multi-storey building where you start from the foundation and progress in a fixed order, floor by floor. Well, the ‘floors’ may and do overlap in professional interpreting but I am keeping things simple here for the language class. Interpreting starts from listening. Before starting to interpret we need to listen, understand and analyse the content (main message, who-what-why-when, structure, hierarchy and links), the form (style, formal / informal etc) and non-verbal communication (intonation, tone, body language). Only then can we move on to (re)creating the same message in the target language, bearing in mind the audience, the occasion, intercultural differences and our non-verbal communication. And all of this has to be done in a split second. For a detailed overview of each of the stages in the interpreting process, please see my article “Elukutse: tõlk”.

Each floor in the house of interpretation has its own whys and hows, drills and remedies. Difficulties and problems should be traced back to the relevant floor. A student’s interpretation may deviate from the original or be difficult to understand for a variety of reasons, e.g. insufficient knowledge of the target language, memory failure, neglected analysis, gaps in general knowledge, insufficient knowledge of the source language, problems with listening etc. Each problem has a different cure and order of priority. Perfecting target language pronunciation is not very urgent when major misunderstandings occur because of inattentive listening, a very rocky foundation.

How do you get lost in translation?

LiT trouble may start from the meaning of a word, and not necessarily in a foreign language but already in Estonian, the source language. If one assumes that ‘ametikäik’ is ‘ametlik käik’ and ‘ehe’ is ‘mitte võltsitud’ (TLE “Tagauksest Soome” and “Sibularõngaste sündroom ehk tõlge Eesti moodi”) these mistakes will pass on to the English translation (Official entrance, instead of Staff only, and genuine liqueur, instead of authentic liqueur). It is true that ‘mägi’ is ‘a hill’ in English but it is significantly more important that the word that we use in English matches what it describes, rather than the source word in a dictionary (TLE “Aga sõnaraamatus ...”). People tend to associate a word with one dominant meaning (vähisupp > cancer soup, instead of crayfish soup, TLE “Kas võtame geeli või könti?”), often the one learnt at school, but most words have multiple meanings whose use and frequency may change over time (TLE “Üks lugu ühest”). Even a Yes may mean No: if you ask an Englishman “Don’t you have a copy?” and he says “No” it is the equivalent of “Yes” in Japanese and a number of other languages, meaning that he does not have a copy (TLE “Kohtumine lüka-tõmbaga”). Many LiT mistakes happen when a similar word is assumed to have the same meaning (TLE “Robustne järeldus taktitundelisest seedimisest”, “Taktitundeline aluspesu ja d-Eesti”, “Mood ja veoautod tõlkeorkaanis”).

Focusing exclusively on words and ignoring non-verbal cues that carry most of the meaning (TLE “Üks surnud mutt”) can result in fascinating LiT exchanges like the one where an Estonian reporter asked film students in America for their verdict on the Estonian film Vehkleja (‘The Fencer’). The reporter thought that the student who said “Good” meant praise, even though the intonation was anything but complimentary, as the reporter was to find out after his follow-up question.

Words do not exist and cannot be used in a vacuum. Putting words together may spell more LiT trouble. First there is what I call the chemical reaction of words, similar to what happens when you mix yellow and blue or baking soda and vinegar. A + b may mean ab in one language but x in another language, for example kõrg + kool and high + school (TLE “Kuidas saada orgasmi” and “Kutse vastuvõtule Vinnide vennaskonnas”). Secondly there is the tooth brushing principle – you

need to know which words are used together (TLE “Punamütsikesest, kes läks vanaemale”). Teeth are brushed in English but (literally) washed in Estonian. Knowing that pesema is wash and hambad is teeth is not enough to say “Lähen pesen hambad ära” – you would end up with I’ll go wash my teeth, instead of I’ll go brush my teeth.

Thirdly, words must suit not just each other but also their user, the people involved in communication and the occasion (formal / informal, oral / written etc, TLE “Aga on ju sõna ehk viis nippi õige sõna valikul”, “Tudisevad tikk-kontsad ja valehabe ehk keelemardisandi teejuht”). There is etiquette in language, just like in behaviour and dress (TLE “Frakk ja kollased sandaalid”). There is what the British say and what the British mean, and what others understand.

The last but definitely not the least LiT cause is the curse of knowledge, unknown to even many experienced multilingual communicators (TLE “Teadmise needus”). We find it hard to imagine that others might not know things that are perfectly obvious to us, and even if, we do realise it, we often struggle to explain them.

How to teach interpreting?

Teaching interpreting is essentially the same as teaching how to drive a car – a brief introduction of the rules followed by supervised practice. Conference interpreting students move from consecutive (first into Estonian and then into a foreign language) to simultaneous (into Estonian and then into a foreign language), from easier topics and speeches to more challenging work that resembles real-life assignments. Similar to a driving instructor who must be a driver, interpreting classes at interpretertraining programmes must be taught by practising conference interpreters. In addition to being an interpreter, one also needs to know how to teach interpreting. I have had the good fortune to attend many Train the Trainer courses and workshops with world-renowned experts, e.g. Gile, Pöchhacker, Gillies, Moser-Mercer, Fleming, Kurz, Harmer and numerous others. The following is a combination of key takeaways from these specialist events and my own teaching experience.

Practice material (we call them speeches) is crucial. The right dose and mix of adrenalin and difficulty, a surprising subject, a special occasion and/or a memorable speaker will work wonders. Students of conference interpreting mostly interpret each other’s speeches and occasionally guest speakers and videos. For your language lessons, however, it is better that you pick videos, at least in the beginning, so that speeches fit the students and their skills and are suitable for interpretation. Try talk shows (Ringvaade, Hommik Anuga), TEDx Talks, use search words in Youtube (see below). Look for natural conversation. Avoid news programmes and read-out speeches. Having pupils prepare and deliver speeches would be great for language, general knowledge and public speaking, but they would need to be trained first and also trusted to do their homework. An unsuitable speech wastes time and dampens enthusiasm. You can, however, ask students to bring clips, once they have seen the routine. They can then interpret (= be) their beloved heroes and favourite subjects, which will only add to the fun and excitement.

Speech difficulty, another extremely importantcriterion, depends on the topic (practical < abstract < emotional), the speech type (narrative / descriptive < argumentative < formal / emotional / small talk) and many other factors, e.g. familiarity with the subject, structure (clear or vague), use of visuals, style (e.g. irony, colourful language), language (e.g. native or non-native, plain or technical, spoken or written), delivery (read, monotonous, fast) and density. A dense speech is packed with information (facts, names, numbers) and needs preparation, advanced processing skills and the endurance that beginners do not have.

Sound quality is critical – interpreting begins with listening and we can only listen to what we hear, so steer clear of clips with background music or noise. When you play a clip check with the students whether they can hear the speaker well and ask them to tell you immediately when they have problems with the sound.

Prepare the ground with paraphrasing i.e. interpreting within one language as done at interpreting schools worldwide. Students have to change the wording, word order and sentence structure as much as possible but keep the original meaning and make sure that the outcome sounds natural (Meie juures tormab > Siin puhub kõva tuul). Paraphrasing

forces the student to separate words from the meaning and focus on the latter. Interpreting has been compared to parachuting because interpretation (the jump) only begins when you exit source text wording (an aircraft) and your parachute opens. Interpreting is also described as undressing the meaning of the source text (taking off the clothes of words) and dressing the meaning in a new wording in the target language. forces the student to look at larger text passages, instead of just one word at a time, a source of many mistakes is a litmus test of language, both passive and active shows how (and how differently) students have understood the source text is a training ground for the interpreting technique and tools helps to do an interpretation that sounds natural in the target language and is free from source language influence

Start with narrative or descriptive speeches that tell a story or give practical advice and that are visualisable, relatable and/or predictable. You can find them easily by googling videos with Kuidas and how to or using the same search words on Youtube: How to Repair a Hole in a T-Shirt, How to Fix A Running Toilet, Patient Walk-through of Wisdom Teeth Extraction, British Airways tour of the A380, Kuidas teha pannkooke, Ekskursioon Sky Plusis, Kompostiljon: kompostimise 3 põhimõtet, Kuidas disainida isetehtud kaitsemaski?

Do not think that you can only use videos with familiar words. You and your students will be surprised that it is possible to understand and interpret the plumber in the running toilet video, even though he uses terms that none of you have heard before, terms for which you do not know the Estonian equivalent. Contrary to popular belief it is very often possible to understand (and interpret) a text without understanding every word, and conversely, to misunderstand (and misinterpret) a text that does not have a single unfamiliar word in it. When a street sweeper taking great pride in her work talks at length in a video and says, “Mul on olnud see maja seitse aastat ja kunagi pole kaebusi [koristamise kohta] olnud” one would think that the meaning is crystal clear – ‘I have been sweeping the street around the house for seven years and never had a single complaint [about my work]”. It is therefore surprising to hear it interpreted as “I have been the owner of the house for seven years and never had a single complaint”. It is a literary translation that clings stubbornly to the words of the original and ignores all the pointers – the context, the questionable logic of the lady being both the owner of a house and its hired street sweeper who has never had a single complaint (from herself?) etc.

Do not think that you have to use videos with “perfect speakers”. I can still see and hear the stunned student in my interpreting class at university who asked “Is this really how people speak?” after a video that he had had to interpret. He confessed that until then he had only interpreted speeches of his fellow students so he was blissfully unaware of what it was like in the “real world”. A speaker like Anand Kumar can offer a much more exciting challenge than somebody speaking perfect English. What is more important, these encounters prepare for survival in real life, for driving in all weather and road conditions.

The next step is argumentative speeches (Miks/Why). Why you should wake up early, Why can’t you use phones on planes?, Why you should love statistics, Miks on TTÜ parim ülikool?, Miks müüa kinnisvara talvel?, Miks on küberkiusamisele vastu astumine suurim julgus? They help to learn to tell the difference between facts and opinions, to understand argumentative discourse and develop analytical skills.

The last category is formal speeches and small talk: Most amazing welcome speech at Georgia Tech, The Graham Norton show, president Barack Obama’s hilarious final White House correspondents’ dinner speech, president Toomas Hendrik Ilvese kõne noorte laulu- ja tantsupeo avamisel, Janeli Normeti lõpukõne, intervjuu Ott Tänakuga. This is where the how (emotions, atmosphere, entertainment) usually matters much more than the what. It is at first surprisingly difficult for students to sound as if they really mean the words of appreciation or as if the speech is really meant to create a convivial atmosphere. They can get better quickly, though, if you draw their attention to it and insist on them making the effort. But you must insist.

Set-up at class

Make sure that everybody knows the basic rules before you begin. Here is an example of a brief.

You’re the speaker in another language so when the speaker says, “I think” you say “I think”, not “s/he thinks”. You have to interpret what the speaker’s saying and the way s/he’s saying it (happily, sadly etc). Please come to the front of the class. I’ll play the video for a few sentences and then stop it so that you can interpret. Look at your audience (classmates), don’t look only at the speaker or me. Tell the story. Communicate. Your customers need your help here and now. Don’t think of words, think of the meaning and words will follow. Use simple language. Saying the same thing (message, not words) as the speaker is king. Being clear is a close second. You can change the word order. You can cut up a long sentence into several short sentences.

If you get stuck don’t ask “How do you say x in English?”. It’s useless, we’ll not tell you. I don’t mind that you don’t know the word. We all have moments when we don’t know a word. There are many ways to say the same thing, there’s no single right or wrong wording. We’ll wait until you find another way to say it, remember paraphrasing? We’ll cheer you for finding the way out on your own. It’s a precious skill. You’ll always need it, whatever you do.

Interpretation is a package. Your language can be great but it‘s useless if the customer at the back of the room can’t hear you or if you sound as if you are doubting every word. We don’t want to see the blood, sweat and tears of your work. We just want to know what the speaker’s saying. Think of the exercise as a bungee jump. See where it takes you, what happens. Have fun. End of brief.

Do a quick pre-speech warm-up before take-off. Who is the speaker? Do you know him? What do you know about the subject? Why is s/he talking about it and where? What do you think s/he will say? What special vocabulary do you think will come up? Agree on who the audience is and ask what it means for the interpreter.

Think about where to find a real customer. One of the reasons why many interpretation problems go unnoticed by Estonians and emerge only in the ears of native speakers is that native speakers who do not understand Estonian rely on the interpretation as an independent, autonomous text. They want to understand it, they want it to be clear. If you understand both the source and target language, however, your impression of the interpretation is influenced by your understanding of the original speech.

A real customer does not necessarily have to be somebody who does not understand the source language. You can have the student who is interpreting listen to the speech on earphones and the rest of the class will be “real customers” who can watch but not hear the original speaker. This can be an eye-opener on non-verbal communication because the class will often form expectations on what’s to come based on the speaker’s facial expressions (e.g. anger or laughter) and body language. If the interpretation does not match them, it would be useful to discuss why. You can also get real customers if you arrange students in groups of three where A tells B a story without C hearing it, and B interprets the story (or tells it in the same language) to C, with A present. It is extremely useful to

experience what it is like to hear yourself being interpreted, and for the interpreter to get feedback straight from the speaker. We all tend to take things much more personally when we hear “our” story being interpreted.

Feedback

“I think I did quite well. [---] Feedback was positive.” “Whispered simultaneous was quite easy [compared to interpreting in front of the audience]”.

These were some of the comments of the pupils involved in an event about which a triumphant headline proclaimed in the Estonian teachers’ newspaper (Õpetajate Leht), “The international education conference was interpreted by pupils”. A week earlier the same paper had published an article by Mari Uusküla, Associate Professor of Translation studies at Tallinn University, describing the wide-spread myth that translating was a piece of cake.

I reflected on the interpretation arrangements of the conference in my column “Lapstööjõud tõlkepõllul” (‘Child labour in the interpretation market’): “The pupils’ post-conference comments show where the myths [that translating was a piece of cake] come from. [---] If pupils are given work that requires specific skills, knowledge, experience and competent supervision but there are neither the skills, knowledge, experience nor supervision, it makes ripe ground for misconceptions. Matters are made even worse if pupils, complete novices, are asked to rate their performance and the self-assessment is assumed to be realistic and objective. From there it is a tiny step to the firm conviction that one can interpret and is a great interpreter because one has interpreted John or Mary or has interpreted at event x. [---] Having pupils with no interpreting experience do whispered interpretation equals a medical student performing heart surgery on day one of his or her studies. Interpretation can complement language lessons with the same thrill that popular experiments bring to chemistry lessons. Operating guidelines and safety procedures are important both in a chemical lab and at interpretation trials because words can also cause allergic reactions, burns, fires, and even explosions that are no less damaging, despite being mental and not physical.”

Feedback and self-assessment are not mutually exclusive but mutually complementing. They are not substitutes for each other, though. Feedback should not be confused with the “Thank you, very nice” or “Your English is great!” that people say more out of politeness than because they really mean it. The earlier your students realise it the better.

Leave feedback to the end of the student’s turn and start by asking the student what s/he thought of his/her interpretation. Students often think that they have to list only the mistakes, and all of them. No. Tell students that finding something positive in their performance is a must and negative observations are optional. If they mention problems, try to talk them through why they thought they had the problems. If they misinterpreted something, do not say that they interpreted x as w, but they should have interpreted it as z. Remember that in order to improve it is crucial to diagnose and treat the root cause and not the consequences. Go back to what it was in the source language and ask the student to paraphrase it to check how they had understood the meaning. Give them a second chance to interpret it. Steer them to as many equivalents as possible, never insist on one solution.

After self-assessment it is the turn of the real customer, followed by anybody else.

Feedback from the teacher should be kept for last. Make it structured (content – language – delivery) and prioritise. Always find something to praise. Avoid a chronological list of each and every slip. Tell students that they can comment on your feedback.

Content: Did it match the original? Was it clear? Did it achieve its purpose – would the listener be able to make pancakes, understand why it was useful to wake up early, feel the special atmosphere?

Language: Differentiate between language problems that interfere with intelligibility and minor issues. Focus on the first.

Delivery: Was it audible? Clearly enunciated? Convincing? Did non-verbal communication (tone, intonation) support and match the content?

Neil deGrasse Tyson, one of America’s best-known scientists and a popular science communicator has written in his Letters from an Astrophysicist: “You asked what I teach my children. My answer is – I do not worry about what they know as much as I worry about how they think. This just might be the highest of all pedagogical goals, because the most important moments in life occur at times when how we think will matter more than what we know.”

What we know about a language is not as important as the way we think about a language. Language is a means to an end where the two should go together like a horse and carriage. LiT incidents, the ORS and interpreting can help us see the end, the wood behind the trees. They can add spice to language lessons and give both teachers and students food for thought. Real food, too, delivered through mouth-watering translations and interpreting. For example, onion rings.

The author thanks the Irene Tiivel Fund at the Estonian National Culture Foundation for its support. The next annual scholarship round is open from 1 September to 15 October 2020. www.wordwaltz.eu, FB Tõlk Ülle Leis, ulle.leis[at]gmail.com

URVE HANKO IN MEMORIAM

EATE commemorates Urve Hanko (11 November 1926 – 4 October 2019), Associate Professor Emerita of the University of Tartu. She taught mainly stylistics, lexicology and translation studies. In cooperation with Gustav Liiv, she published the voluminous English-Estonian Dictionary of Idioms (1998) and numerous study aids, among the best-known of which is Ilukirjanduse tõlkimisest eesti keelde (On Translation of Literature into Estonian, 1972). Urve Hanko was also a prolific translator of literature (e.g. Kingsley Amis, Charles Percy Snow, David Herbert Lawrence, John Irving, John Fowles, Thomas Hardy, Margaret Atwood, Harold Pinter, Herman Melville). We will always remember her kind and hospitable attitude to colleagues and students, her bright and charming smile.

THE ONION RING SYNDROME AND THE LOST-AND-FOUND IN TRANSLATION Ülle Leis

Next Article

TEACHING PRACTICE RECONSIDERED: TARTU ANNELINNA GYMNASIUM PROJECT Natalja Zagura, Ülle Türk