Using Translation.

All languages have particular rhythms, accents, and ways to structure sentences. Often when reading texts that have been translated into English, it is possible to tell whether a text is a translation without knowing anything about the author or the background of the text. This is due to the writing being not quite fluid.
For example, this is an abstract from The Lover by the French author Marguerite Duras, translated into English by Barbara Bray:

We go back to the apartment. We are lovers. We can’t stop loving each other.

This is poetic prose. There is rhyme between ‘lovers’ and ‘other’ however the lack of flow and disjointedness makes it seem like there is something missing. There is a sense of absence in these words that comes from how the sentences sound. Maybe if it had been written first in English it might sound something like this:
We go back to his apartment because we are lovers. No matter how hard I try, we can’t stop loving each other.

I think there are three main factors that contribute to differentiating a translation from something written in English to begin with, none of which are entirely tangible. The first is the rhythm of the words. The second is the somewhat opaque feeling of telling and not showing. And finally, the third is a feeling of absence the text generates, as if the reader is disconnected from the text and looking at it from an outsider’s perspective. This combination of all three creates an aura of dissonance- of something being slightly odd or unnaturalised about the rhythms, sounds, and words used. These three factors are mainly what I try to imitate if I want to use “translation” or “faux-translation” in my work.

The first factor I referred to (rhythm) makes the texts feel sparse and pared down. The story feels spacious because the rhythm is suppressed or deadened. When written firstly in English, most sentences naturally have a beat/off-beat rhythm that is acquired effortlessly when speaking English fluently. In a translation, rhythm is often secondary (unless it is poetry) as translators are firstly concerned with conveying meaning accurately.

The second factor I have noticed in translation is contrary to the advice of first year creative writing lecturers- to show and not tell. Translations often tell and don’t show. They have an explicitness in their sentences and a focus on conveying tangible messages. This factor and rhythm informs the third factor of translations I mentioned-a sense of absence.

A sense of absence is created be sparse sentences and a suppressed rhythm. Although telling without showing expresses clarity (eg. Rudolph is angry. Her bedroom smelt strange.) I would argue it evokes a sense of absence because it is not descriptive. There are many things that are left out.

When writing, sometimes I use these ideas about translation in my work. All three of these elements, if used well can be effective and liberating in helping you find a different voice, bring a sense of absence to your work, and write using different styles.