In the translation industry, consistency of terminology within a document is a desirable characteristic. To achieve a translation with the same consistency of terms/phrases that are important to one’s business, company, or institution, the source document should have uniformity as well.
However, as a lover of words, I appreciate how we as speakers and how language itself seem to resist uniformity. Take, for example, the multiplicity of words used for the @ symbol, found in everyone's email address.
English alone has many words for this symbol, including “atmark” or “commercial at,” terms that some have observed lack the romance or at least the visual provocation of @’s name in other languages:
In Italian, “chiocciola” (little snail)
In Dutch, “aperstaart” (monkey’s tail)
In Swedish, “snabel-a” (‘a’ with an elephant’s trunk) or “kanelbulle” (Swedish equivalent to a Chelsea bun)
In German, “eine Klammeraffe” (a clinging monkey)
In Yiddish, a strudel
In Finnish, a monkey’s tail
In Greek, a little duck
In Russian, a little dog
Some say it should be called the “ampersat,” to follow suit with & or “ampersand.” Others simply refer to it as the “at” sign, which is straightforward enough and gives a clue to its use over its appearance, but in my opinion is a bit banal. Other names cited in the
Free Online Dictionary of Computing include: rare, each, vortex, whorl, intercal, whirlpool, cyclone, snail, ape, cat, rose, cabbage, amphora…
Certainly, when it comes to translation, consistent terms/phrases are desirable and necessary. However, if the @ symbol is any model, the immense variety and creativity of word options in language can present a powerful force.
Thanks to the “Odds and Ends” chapter in
Word Watching by Julian Burnside for much of this information. See the on-line discussion and more words for @ on guardian.co.uk by clicking
here.
