Like-Blog
Presenting you the most interesting translation solutions
Why Like-Blog? Now, first of all, this blog is a blog that you should like (and read regularly) – at least, if you are interested in translation. Then, the topic discussed here is one in which the meaningful likeness between a text and its translation in the language pair English-German plays a key role. On this page, I will take a close look at some interesting translation solutions that I have come across in the course of my work as a translator and translation scholar.
A translation solution is only as good as the arguments that support it. This means that any translation criticism, whether positive or negative, needs to be justified. The quality of a translation solution shows only when we compare it to other possible translation solutions in a given translation situation. Therefore, a translation critic should not only say why a translation solution is bad, but also demonstrate what a better solution might look like. I will try to stick to these principles of translation criticism. So if you have any questions regarding my line of argument or if you disagree, please, let me know your opinion by phone at +49 4171 6086525 or by e-mail to bittner@businessenglish-hamburg.de. So much for the introduction. I hope you’ll enjoy reading this blog!
Gold (June 2026)
Here is another translation example from “Bringing NASA down to Earth” by Tom Huntington (Invention and Technology, Fall 2008, Volume 23):
“‘The reason gold was used is that it virtually didn’t react with anything,’ says Deigan, who worked at National Metallizing before founding AFMInc. ‘While it was wildly expensive, it was also not corrosive. It would withstand space a long time.’”
In German: “,Der Grund für die Verwendung von Gold war, dass es praktisch mit nichts reagierte‘, erklärt Deigan, der vor der Gründung von AFMInc für National Metallizing arbeitete. ,Obwohl äußerst teuer, war es außerdem korrosionsbeständig. Es konnte den Bedingungen im All für eine lange Zeit widerstehen.‘”
This translation is, in general, very idiomatic. Only the syntactic pattern of the sentence in the middle doesn’t quite make sense. The problem is that, here, “while” cannot be translated as “obwohl”. While the conjunction “while” may introduce both a temporal and a concessive subclause, this does not mean that the German equivalents are always “während” and “obwohl”, respectively.
For the rendering with “obwohl” to make sense, the main clause would need to contain a negative term (e.g.: obwohl es teuer war, war es schlecht oder korrosionsanfällig). There is no corresponding contrast, though, in the original. The properties of gold as presented in the source text – that is, the high price and its resistance to corrosion – cannot easily be translated using a temporal or a concessive subclause, because aligning the negative quality of the high price with the positive characteristic of corrosion resistance calls for a more sophisticated construction. Rather, the high price might be regarded as a reason why corrosion resistance should be expected. However, such a causal connection doesn’t work as the price (“wildly expensive”) is presented as something negative.
The problem can be solved using a sentence pattern with “zwar” and “aber”: Es war zwar extrem teuer, dafür aber war es korrosionsbeständig.