19239
The difference between "翻訳" and "通訳" has been explained very well in several
forums. Even so, for me that nuance is a distraction and I prefer to simplify
with this strategy:

>   1. When I hear "翻訳", "通訳", "訳す", or "訳する" I sense "to translate". If
> "written or spoken" is ever relevant, I can deduce from context.
>   2. To say "to translate", I just say "訳す". My understanding is that "訳す"
> can have either the "翻訳" and "通訳" meaning. A native speaker can use context
> to decide "written or spoken".
>

I've not been corrected yet. That strategy seems like an easy solution to the
"written or spoken" issue. So, is my strategy wrong in any way? Might it be
technically correct, but painfully unnatural, Japanese?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-10-24T03:08:55.277
19238
2014-10-24T04:23:52.557
4835
question
words
"訳す" is the best way to say "to translate"?
According to dictionaries, the correspondence with English is pretty good:

  * **翻訳する** and **訳す／訳する** both mean "translate", to say or write something in one language that corresponds to another language. This is often written, but strictly speaking it doesn't have to be.

  * **通訳する** means "interpret", which is translating orally so that two or more people can communicate with one another. So technically, you're translating any time you interpret, but not the other way around.

Dictionaries mostly say 翻訳する and 訳す／訳する are synonyms in this sense.

* * *

You're right, though, that some people treat 訳す as "translate" and 翻訳する as
specifically "translate writing". For example, [on
eigoTrans.com](http://www.eigotrans.com/topics/trans_difference.shtml) we find
the following description:

> 当たり前のことだが、「通訳」は **声を通じて言語を訳す** のに対し、 **「翻訳」は文字によって言語を訳す**
> 。つまり、翻訳者は文章での表現力が、通訳者は音声での表現力が必要となってくる。

Here they use 訳す as a general term for translation, and they use 通訳 and 翻訳 for
spoken and written translation, exactly as you suggested. But take a look at
this definition for 通訳 from 明鏡国語事典, which uses 翻訳 in a very different way:

> 異なる言語を話す人の間に立って、話が通じるように双方のことばを **翻訳して伝える** こと。また、その人。「英語を日本語に通訳する」「同時通訳」

If 翻訳する were always limited to written translation, this definition wouldn't
make any sense―there's no _written_ translation involved in interpreting. But
I'm sure you understand this definition just fine anyway, so it's safe to say
that 翻訳する can also refer to translation in general, not just written
translation.

* * *

How do we reconcile this? Actually, it's pretty simple―it's based on context!
We find the exact same distinction made in English in the same contexts. For
example, [Macmillan
Dictionary](http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/interpret)
defines _interpret_ like this:

> _to translate what someone is saying in one language into another language
> so that someone else can understand it_ "I speak Spanish. Would you like me
> to interpret for you?"

It's clear that in this definition _translate_ is used in a general sense.
There's obviously no written translation involved in interpreting!

But you can find professionals who use the term _translate_ [specifically for
writing](http://www.alsintl.com/blog/translate-vs-interpret/):

> Translation essentially consists of taking a text in one language and
> rendering it into another language. Did you catch that word “text”? **The
> key characteristic of translation is the fact that it works in the medium of
> the written word.**

This is the same situation we find with 翻訳 and 通訳 in Japanese! 翻訳 is often
used specifically for written translation, but it's also possible for it to
refer to translation in general. So to decide how 翻訳 is used, just like in
English with _translate_ , you'll need to pay attention to context.

And the same goes for your strategy of always saying 訳す. **You'll want to
choose which word you say based on context.** You're right that you can use
the word 訳す for both written and spoken translation, but if (for example) you
want to talk specifically about interpreting, the most natural word is
probably 通訳する, and you'll want to use that instead.

As a general rule, **you should aim to use the same word a native speaker
would use in the same context** , and I'm afraid that means taking shortcuts
like "always use 訳す" is counterproductive.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-10-24T04:23:52.557
19239
2014-10-24T04:23:52.557
19238
answer