CurrentAffairs : Fresh Greg Chappell controversy in Indian cricket - all smoke, no fire?
India Uncut has justifiably panned the Indian Parliamentarians for their sense of misplaced priorities. But how guilty is the Indian media of CREATING controversies, when none exist? An excellent example of the kind of distortion the electronic news media is indulging in sometimes, is yesterdays news item, on Chappell having commented on the criticism of him in the Indian Parliament. When the news broke out, I was watching Aaj Tak which is a division of the prestigious 'Living Media group'.
Aaj Tak anchors first read out Chappell's comments viz., "Indian Parliamentarians have the right to comment on the state of Indian cricket. They are paid to do it". This was translated literally as "Chappell ne kaha ki Bhartiya sansadon ko tippani karne ka pura adhikar hai kyonki isi baat ke woh paise lete hai!"
Although the translation is correct literally, the connotations of the same sentence can be quite different in Hindi. While in English the phrase"they are paid to do it" usually means a straightforward 'it is their job to do it', by adding "isi baat ke" in the Hindi translation, the same translation can also be construed as an insulting barb/potshot. Keep in mind that "paise lena" for the Indian mind does not always ring as an honorable word. To make matters worse, the anchors also commented that by saying this Chappell had insulted Indian parliamentarians or at the very least taken a potshot at them.
It is extremely important to translate a comment with its true meaning in another language rather than do a literal translation and repeat it endlessly. Do respected media organizations like the Living media group not know what any mass communication student can understand?
I suspect thay they DO fully understand the nuances of the language and the comment, but then, if generating a controversy can improve the bottom line that much more, its better to keep churning new ones from the studios. After all one has to be 'Sabse Tej', no ?
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
Aaj Tak anchors first read out Chappell's comments viz., "Indian Parliamentarians have the right to comment on the state of Indian cricket. They are paid to do it". This was translated literally as "Chappell ne kaha ki Bhartiya sansadon ko tippani karne ka pura adhikar hai kyonki isi baat ke woh paise lete hai!"
Although the translation is correct literally, the connotations of the same sentence can be quite different in Hindi. While in English the phrase"they are paid to do it" usually means a straightforward 'it is their job to do it', by adding "isi baat ke" in the Hindi translation, the same translation can also be construed as an insulting barb/potshot. Keep in mind that "paise lena" for the Indian mind does not always ring as an honorable word. To make matters worse, the anchors also commented that by saying this Chappell had insulted Indian parliamentarians or at the very least taken a potshot at them.
It is extremely important to translate a comment with its true meaning in another language rather than do a literal translation and repeat it endlessly. Do respected media organizations like the Living media group not know what any mass communication student can understand?
I suspect thay they DO fully understand the nuances of the language and the comment, but then, if generating a controversy can improve the bottom line that much more, its better to keep churning new ones from the studios. After all one has to be 'Sabse Tej', no ?
