Pedro Álvares (asker) Apr 19, 2020:

Thank you for putting things into context. I can understand now how a client might have to resort to a point system such as this to choose a translator.

As elsewhere, the UK is not faring well in the pandemic and the hope is that something good politically might come out of this. Johnson is doing much better as well, thank you for asking. Brazil, on the other hand, is also looking ugly, though the hope for a change in it is much more feeble. Stay safe, Pedro

Nick Taylor Apr 17, 2020:

@Pedro Thanks for your rejoinder Pedro.
As I see it the points system is a type of "reward" to incentivate answerers to provide assistance where unusual terms are encountered or the context is vague. Oft-times the answers are "intuitive" by bi-linguals. The level of certainly is of course quite there to differentiate between absolutely positive down to "what about this then?"and in most cases is is of course subjective. I basically gave up translating when I got tenure at my university and only take on work that appeals to me and ia challenge - like novels for example. I leave the bread and butter work to my PROZ coleagues. Who are exellent translators, whom I know personally, and as has been my own experience, get jobs by reference to this "leaders" chart which seperates the wheat from the chaff. (another biblical reference). Of course there are freeloaders who just ask and never! answer, which IMO isnt playing fair! All take and no give! I do it just to keep mentally agile, like crossword puzzles, and I find it fun! And of course good answers get put in the database for future reference, which can be very helpful. I suppose things in the UK are "as good as to be expected", keep well.

Pedro Álvares (asker) Apr 16, 2020:

I am sorry for not replying very promptly to your answers, Nick and Tereza, but whenever i checked in on the progression of the discussion in the search results page i didn't open the discussion thread since no new changes appeared on the surface.

Thank you for clarifying the rules of the website a little, Tereza; i will consider making my next question for points after your explanation, though i really don't see the point in the point system (pun not intended but accepted). It is hard for me to imagine a client turning someone down because he is not in the leader board of Proz.com, but, then again, i'm new here.

On your point about the expression (a thorny answer this one) i don't know how often it is used in a derogatory sense, but i'm almost certain it is not ironic in the context i submitted it. It is used technically, in an explanation of a concept used by a philosopher (Kaufman), so no irony.

Would love to see more (and ironic) instances of it, for contrasting, if you have any?

Have a great post-Easter

Nick Taylor Apr 14, 2020:

@Pedro Cheers Pedro. Next time make it points OK :-)
Enjoy Proz Kudos, its fun! better than a crossword. Keep well!
PS - take a look at the pt En Leaders in the "league table" for me ha ha!
https://www.proz.com/?sp=leaders_new

Tereza Rae Apr 12, 2020:

@Nick Taylor Dear Nick, thank you for your reply and for your explanation. I will sleep much better now that I know it was 'seulement un petit malentendu'. And I should admit that I sometimes takes things too seriously... I do think that your answer (involving the pope to keep the holiness) is brilliant, and I do believe that you should get those 4 points. But I'm also kind of new around here and there are things that I still don't quite understand. Let's see what happens.
Happy Easter to you too, with social distance and all. 🌸🐇🌸🐣🌸🐝🌸🥕🌸🌼 (Sorry, but I love emojis!)

Nick Taylor Apr 11, 2020:

@Tereza Rae What we have here is a little misundrstanding - un petit malentendu. Of course my remark was "ironic" or "wry", however it was not actually addressed to you, but to Pedro. However having a Doctorate in design i raely use wizmos, dingbats, mojos or other assorted pre-masticated graphisms/icons/symbols to express the mood of what i write as i think it tends to diminish the interpretation (and to a certain extent its deliberately ambiguity) No mojo gojo here I am afraid! nevertheless "to shock" was absolutely inintentional, and as your perspicaciousness proves, you saw the funny side of it. I wish you good health, happiness, and a good easter! I could put a mojo gojo of Jesus on the cross, but I won't. (wink)

Tereza Rae Apr 11, 2020:

@ Pedro Alvares Dear Pedro, I have noticed that you a new on this site, so you probably don't quite understand yet the point system here, and that's why you said: "I consider it very difficult to put a number to how correct an answer is." That's not how it works, and that's not what I suggested. In a nutshell, each time an answer is selected as the most helpful one (either because it got the most peer 'agrees' or because it was selected by the asker, the answerer is awarded 4 points. However, if the question is posted as a NON-PRO or NOT FOR POINTS (which I assume to be the same thing, please someone correct me if I'm wrong), then no points are awarded. All I did was to suggest that it becomes a PRO question, that's all, not that the answers are graded differently, which is impossible here.

Tereza Rae Apr 11, 2020:

shame on me? Dear Nick, I'm a bit shocked with your statement, and I hope that you are just kidding, which, in that case, you have failed to add a smiling emoji or something else to indicate the humour in your short message. Why should I be ashamed of my self for asking if this could be a pro question, instead of non-pro? I've seen other people do the same here before. Isn't this what the site encourages us to do, to try to get as many points as possible so our profile becomes more visible? What's wrong and shameful about that? Anyhow, your answer was chosen, but it's likely that you won't get any points. Now, that is a shame...

Nick Taylor Apr 11, 2020:

@ Pedro Actually I have herd it used motre often than not in a derogatory way (which I also think is the way it is used ironically in the text. anyway, thanks for your input.
Have a good easter and keep well in the UK?

Pedro Álvares (asker) Apr 11, 2020:

Mais papista que o papa I believe this expression is adequate for a number of reasons.

First, it is used very descriptively of people who are extremely committed to something, that is, it is not judgmental of the person of whom it is said allowing space for the rest of the passage to "speak". Plus, it implies in this context that they are morally superior, which i believe the original expression does to.

Second, it preserves the biblical/religious undertone of the ST very well, especially given that the ST is a newspaper article meant for a wide audience, not only people particularly interested in religion.

Third, as an idiomatic expression, it avoids paraphrasing the ST, which is one of those widely held rules of thumb of translation practice. It makes use of a good idiomatic expression of Portuguese.

Pedro Álvares (asker) Apr 11, 2020:

Mais papista que o papa I believe that this expression fits my translation better. All other options carry a negative/judgmental sense that i don't think the original expression transmits.

If i say of someone "Ele julga-se o dono da verdade, ou quê?", i am implying that he is not in fact right, or that he is wrong in believing his version of the facts. At least, that i disagree with him regardless of how well supported his answer is.

The same goes for "moralistas" (which was my first choice while translating tbh) or "pessoas que se julgam superiores". These expressions imply that they are not in fact morally superior. But the way i'm reading "holier-than-thou" is that those of whom we say that are, in fact, morally superior to us, or at least they act in such a way that they make us feel like they are. Their example shine on our moral shortcomings.

The use of "pessoas soberbas" preserves the idea that those people are morally superior, and keeps the biblical overtone, but implies that these people succumb to pride and boasting, ie, they commit a sin of some kind. I am looking for a more neutral expression given the rest of the text.

Pedro Álvares (asker) Apr 11, 2020:

why not for points? I consider it very difficult to put a number to how correct an answer is. Plus, I suspect that quantification is misleading in this case because more than one answer to this question can be correct depending on external factors. I wouldn't want to attribute more points to an answer because of the circumstantial reason that it fits my translator better than any other suggestions. In a different translation, with a different source text and a different target audience, another suggestion could be the better option, so by selecting an expression as the absolute right equivalent and making an entry in the glossary as such seems misleading and diverts us from perhaps discussing other, better alternatives in the future.

Judging a translation's quality using relative terms, instead of absolutist, is more close to good practices in translation, i believe.

Thank you for your input!

Nick Taylor Apr 11, 2020:

No points Shame on you!

Tereza Rae Apr 11, 2020:

why not for points? I consider this to be a tricky expression to translate. Is it possible to change it into a 'for points; question?