A translator’s job can reach a terrifying height of pressure during wartime. As a couple of recent examples show, a simple translation issue can undermine an entire agreement or add confusion to an already messy conflict.

During the negotiation of a peace plan between Russia and Georgia, a “translation problem” contributed to difficulties in its interpretation. Parties signed a French document that was then translated into English and Russian. Among other small discrepancies, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was vexed over the replacement of “for” with “in” in one passage. He called it “a direct forgery.”

The main linguistic glitch was in a passage in the Russian version that spoke of security “for South Ossetia and Abkhazia,” whereas the English version spoke of security “in” the two areas.

Mr. Kouchner’s remarks confirmed comments by an unnamed Russian official earlier in the day who said the two versions were “not the same.”

“In the Moscow version, the text refers to security ‘for’ Abkhazia and ‘for’ South Ossetia,” said the official, speaking to Agence France-Presse on the condition of anonymity.

“In the document given to the Georgian leaders, it was presented as ‘in’ Abkhazia and ‘in’ South Ossetia. It is not the same,” he added.

The wording is significant because it refers to the “buffer zones” that Russia has created in undisputed Georgian territory and that Moscow says are necessary to prevent Georgian forces from threatening the two breakaway provinces.

At the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a Saudi Arabian prisoner’s criminal trial was put on hold due to issues with the simultaneous interpretation among the defendant, his lawyers and court reporter.

[Army Col. James] Pohl tried to question al Darbi on whether he wanted a U.S. military or civilian lawyer but the exchange was difficult to follow because the translators’ voices competed with the judge’s.

The translators worked in a booth outside the courtroom and their voices were broadcast simultaneously via earphones so the defendant could listen in Arabic and into the courtroom so his answers could be repeated in English.

The lawyers, the defendant and the court reporter could not keep up, so Pohl recessed the hearing until the problems could be fixed.

Translation issues have interrupted the hearings since 2004, when the U.S. military first convened the special court to try foreign captives on terrorism charges at the naval base, rather than in the regular U.S. civilian or military courts.

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 16th, 2008 at 2:01 pm and is filed under Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.