Raymond Ho
Does this translation sound natural? <font color="#b00000" face="Calibri" size="3">

<font color="#000000">Hello, everyone</font>


<font color="#000000">Having painstakingly done a translation exercise, I would like to know if it sounds natural to you. It does not matter if you do not understand the Chinese source text, because you can give your comments and suggestions from the perspective of a reader. In particular, I would like to know if the words are correctly used in this translation? By the way, the translation does not imply that I agree with the author’s viewpoint. Thanks.</font>


<font color="#000000">Source text:</font>

<font color="#000000">中國民族自古以來從不把人看作高於一切,在哲學文藝方面的表現都反映出人在自然界中與萬物佔著一個比例較爲恰當的地位,而非絕對統治萬物的主宰。因此我們的苦悶,基本上比西方人爲少爲小;因爲苦悶的强弱原是隨欲望與野心的大小而轉移的。農業社會的人比工業社會的人享受差得多;因此欲望也小得多。况中國古代素來以不滯於物,不爲物役爲最主要的人生哲學。並非我們沒有守財奴,但比起莫利哀與巴爾扎克筆下的守財奴與野心家來,就小巫見大巫了。中國民族多數是性情中正和平、淡泊、樸實、比西方人容易滿足。</font>


<font color="#000000">Translation:</font>

<font color="#000000">The peoples of China have never, even dating back to ancient times, perceived humankind as reigning supreme over everything.  The representation of humankind in our philosophy, culture and art generally connotes a status decently proportional to all things in nature, rather than a supreme sovereign that exercises absolute rule over everything.  Therefore, we basically get frustrated less frequently and intensely than westerners do, because at bottom the intensity of frustration varies with the level of desire and ambition.  People in agricultural societies are much worse off than their industrial counterparts in terms of enjoyment, and hence far weaker are their desires.  Moreover, freedom from being limited and enslaved by materials prevailed for long as the dominant philosophy of life in the ancient times of China.  It is not that there are no misers among us, but they pale in comparison with those misers and ambitionists under the pens of Molière and Balzac.  With honest, peaceful, unpretentious and down-to-earth temperaments, the peoples of China are mostly more easily satisfied than westerners.</font>


<font color="#000000"> </font>


<font color="#000000"> </font>


</font>
May 12, 2018 3:57 AM
Comments · 4

I think it's a pretty good translation too for a non-native English speaker.  There are parts that does sound unnatural, but you get the meaning across.  I rewrote parts of it and adopted SHL's revision for your reference:

The peoples of China have never, even dating back to ancient times, perceived humankind as reigning supreme over everything.  The view expressed in our philosophy, art, and culture is one that places humans on par with all other things in nature, rather than as a being who reigns superior over them.  Therefore, our frustrations are generally less intense than that of westerners, because the level of one’s frustration is often directly proportional to one’s level of desire and ambition.  People in agricultural societies lived in far inferior living conditions than that of their industrial counterparts; their desires and expectations are therefore far lower and more easily satisfied.  Furthermore, Chinese philosophy has long valued the freedom of not being enslaved by material possessions.  That is not to say that we don’t have greedy and miserly characters in our literature, but they pale in comparison with those under the pens of Moliere and Balzac.  With honest, peaceful, unpretentious and down-to-earth temperaments, the peoples of China are generally easier to satisfy than westerners.

May 12, 2018

Yes, German is my favorite language because it’s a better, more logical, clear and precise language than English.  But, that’s beside the point. If  I’m being far too harsh, perhaps someone could explain what this sentence  in English means, because I have no idea: „  Therefore, we basically get frustrated less frequently and intensely than westerners do, because at bottom the intensity of frustration varies with the level of desire and ambition.“?

I‘m not trying to be harsh, I simply don’t understand the sentence, especially the phrase „because at bottom of intensity of frustration varies...etc“. That means what?

May 12, 2018
I believe SHL was far too harsh. For one thing, I’m fairly sure Raymond does indeed mean “peoples” — or as SHL would say in his favorite language (German)
“Völker”

I agree that the phrase “connotes a status decently proportional” doesn’t work at all, but most of the translation seems well written. 

The meaning of “miser” in this context is unclear to me — you may want to look it up in an English dictionary. Also “ambitionist” is not an English word, as far as I know. By the way, “ambition” usually has good connotations in English. Maybe you are referring to greed and avarice.

There’s nothing whatsoever wrong with “humankind.” Personally, I prefer the more traditional “mankind,” “humanity,” or simply “man,” but “humankind” works well as a modern, gender-neutral (very appropriate for a translation from Chinese) version of “mankind.”

I’m really impressed with the English. It would be good for a European, but it’s especially impressive considering Raymond’s native language is different.
May 12, 2018

No, I’m sorry to say the translation does not sound natural in English at all. It is understandable, but the choice of words seems odd, sometimes vague in meaning. The most obvious error, which repeats,  is referring to the „Peoples“ of China. The Plural is „People of China“ not Peoples. There‘s so much that needs to be re-written to make the paragraph flow better that it would take some time to do. My guess is that the translation is far too literal, which gives it its unnatural and awkward sound. This is just one example of a sentence that needs to be rewritten: „the representation of humankind in our philosophy, culture and art generally connotes a status decently proportional to all things in nature, rather than a supreme sovereign that exercises supreme rule over everything.“

First, you need to drop the word „humankind“ everywhere it appears in the paragraph and just say human or humans instead. The phrase „decently proportional“ is an odd expression and one I’ve never heard  before. But, I think I know what you are driving at. This is a more natural sounding sentence: „The view, expressed in our philosophy, art and culture, is one that places humans on par with all other things in nature, rather than as a being who reigns superior over them.“ I think that is what you were getting at in that sentence.  That’s just a rewrite of one sentence. It’s not the only possibility, but it expresses the thought more clearly. I’ll let others provide rewrites of the remaining parts of the paragraph, or improve on mine if they’d like. 

May 12, 2018