Some years ago, while in France, I was waiting to withdraw money from an ATM machine. There was a woman in front of me using the machine, and she appeared to be having some difficulty trying to read the display; she was shading her eyes with her hands against the glare of the bright sun and squinting at the screen. I asked her if the machine was working, ‘ça marche?’ to which she replied ‘Oui, ça marche, mais on ne voit rien !’ meaning ‘it’s working, but you can’t see anything!’. Well, of course that is the meaning of what she’d said, but if you translate her response literally, what she in fact said is translated as ‘Yes, that walks, but one doesn’t see anything!’
As I walked off in frustration and empty-handed, I started to think about what she’d said and how so many very common expressions simply can’t be translated word for word between languages. As a father of four children all of whom studied French at school, I had become well aware, while helping them with their homework, of the challenges of trying to compose sentences with the use of a language dictionary, but without reference to either context or already established forms of expression. Word for word translation with the assumption that other languages use the same sentence structures and vocabulary as our own (known as ‘interference’) can sometimes be comical (for example, don’t translate ‘il pleut des cordes’ into English as ‘it’s raining ropes’, because English-speakers will look at you strangely, but instead say ‘it’s raining cats and dogs’ (literally, ‘il pleut des chats et des chiens) and which is, of course, a much more sensible expression!! However, at the other end of the scale, it can also be catastrophic, as in when a Dutch captain of a KLM passenger jet announced in English, ‘We are now at take-off.” He intended to communicate that the plane was already in the process of taking off’. However, because English syntax works differently from Dutch, the progressive meaning was lost, misleading the traffic controllers into believing that the aircraft was stationery and simply ‘ready’ for take-off, resulting in tragic consequences.
So, returning to the woman in my story, still staring desperately at the cash machine, let’s examine her choice of words and see why her sentence ‘Oui, ça marche, mais on ne voit rien !’ mustn’t be translated literally;
Firstly, the French ‘ça’ in this example is a general pronoun which is very common in French. It is actually a contraction of cela, which means ‘it’. Ça is also used to replace the more formal ceci, which means ‘this’. These derivations are why ça is often defined as “it,” “that,” or “this’’. Ça is also an indefinite pronoun and, as such, it does not change based on the subject or the number of the sentence. This means that there are no other forms of ça, which makes using it in sentences a little easier for those learning French. However, for French learners of English, the opposite translation can be a challenge because it’s not easy to know when to translate ‘ça’ into ‘it’, ‘that’, or ‘this’. The differences in application between these three pronouns I will address in my next blog, but suffice to say that in this case the English translation for ‘ça’ would have been ’it’, because we were referring to an object (the cash machine) already clearly the subject of the conversation. If we had said ‘this’ or ‘that’, then we would have been introducing a conceptually ‘new’ object.
Secondly, the French verb ‘marcher’ has a number of meanings; of which the most common are ‘to walk’ and ‘to work’ (the latter in the sense of ‘to function’). So, learners of English, make sure that you use the second translation because the idea of a ‘walking’ cash machine can be a bit disturbing, to be honest. Remember also to use the correct present tense. If you say ‘it works’ (Present Simple), you are suggesting that it ‘works’ habitually, i.e., that’s what it does as a matter of routine. However, in this case you want to express that ‘it’s working’ at that moment in time, while you are having the conversation, by using the Present Progressive (or Continuous) tense.
Thirdly, in English the translation of ‘one’ for the French ‘on’ is archaic and is used only in the most formal speech. In fact, my advice is not to use it, ever… except if you are The Queen or are doing an impression of her, in which case, HRH The Queen would probably respond by saying that ‘one is not amused’. The French ‘on’ can be used in English to mean either ‘we’ (ma femme et moi, on est francais = my wife and I, we’re French), ‘people’ in general (aux États-Unis, on parle anglais = in the USA, people speak English), or ‘you’, non-specifically (on ne sait jamais quoi faire = you never know what to do).
Fourthly, when the lady said ‘ne voit rien’, the literal translation here is ‘doesn’t see anything’. However, there is a subtle yet noticeable difference in the meaning here. In many other languages, when you are describing that you are ‘unable’ to do, hear, see, smell something, etc., it suffices to use the equivalent of the Present Simple form. For example, in other languages you would most likely ask the equivalent of ‘Do you see that bird?’ and the answer might be either ‘Yes, I see it!’ or ‘No, I don’t see it!’. This construction is perfectly acceptable in English too, and yes, people will know what you mean. However, in everyday English it is probably more natural to use the modal verb ‘can’ in situations where there is an implied difficulty or challenge in the task. The questioner would more probably ask ‘Can you see that bird?’, because there is an implied difficulty associated with ‘seeing the bird’; for example, it may be a foggy day, the bird might be far away or almost invisible against the clouds, etc. This does not necessarily mean, therefore, that the other person is ‘physically’ incapable of seeing the bird, it just means that they are trying to see it but are not ‘managing to’. (for native French speakers, to give a sense of ‘I can’t see it’ in French, one might say it was like saying ‘Je n’arrive pas à le voir’). So, in the case of ‘cash machine lady’, she was clearly having difficulty seeing the display of the machine, and despite how hard she tried, was unable (though not physically) to see it. Hence, ‘you can’t see anything’.
So, hopefully you can see by analysis of just this one, very simple short sentence, how learners of English, and indeed of all languages, need to beware of the ‘literal translation’ and make sure that they are using not just a good translation dictionary, but also an experienced language teacher (ahem!) to explain the sometimes subtle differences in everyday language use between languages that often have many similarities!
I hope you have enjoyed the blog so I’ll say goodbye for now, or, as the English don’t say it;
To the re-seeing, all the world! (Au revoir, tout le monde !)
If you have enjoyed reading this blog, please ‘like’ it and share it with your friends and colleagues, and if you know anyone who might be interested in my online one-to-one lessons, please do ask them to contact me to discuss how I can help them to excel in English.
Thank you,
Martin
Recent Comments