Overcharged Buttons

Hey, at least they didn’t use “perezaryadka” (re-load)! Just ‘over-load’.

“Peregruzka” is a perfect new nickname for Hillary, or “Madame Overload”!

I’m getting acute sense of “peregruzka” each time I see Hillary.

Of course the most appropriate Russian word to use seems to be “pere-ZA-gruzka”, which is almost exclusively technical term. To be fair, Russian language is not friendly, especially for foreign diplomats.

Btw “Perestroyka” also fits, and it would have a nice retro ring to it.

Maybe Clinton should be pressing the reset button on her staff.

Yes, make more room for us! We need jobs.

Lavrov is embarrassing – he does not get it right either. It is, as Candide said, ‘overload’, not ‘overcharge’. Lavrov should know better. I am not a fan of Clinton, but her mistake is far less then Lavrov’s who speaks English after all. Not sure if Sean meant to draw attention to Lavrov’s mistake over Clinton’s I wonder what else he might be missing…

Перезарядка would work, but I think a better translation would be “сброс”, since it is the most common term used for reset in multiple areas from computers to avionics to printing.

But even перегрузка is not as bad a translation as Lavrov’s silly attempt at a jab, since it is actually gives a better context. A red button can just as well say overload if its purpose is to mitigate it. Reset has a similar function. A decent case of антонимический перевод.

As for ‘perestroika’, until someone made a mistake and the incorrect translation took hold in the West as “restructuring”, it was predominately a military term meaning ‘redeployment’. The word переСТРОЙка does not originate from строить it originates from строй – formation.

Sort of similar when Putin called Israeli president “мощный мужик” and was poorly translated as “powerful man”, while the most appropriate would be “stud”.

Perhaps the Obama administration should read

http://proenrichment.com/2009/03/07/7-tips-to-make-someone-trust-you/

to reset the relationship …maybe I am right

Cyrill,

You’re right, ’sbros’ is the word most common people would use, especially ‘technari’.

I am no fan of Lavrov, but there is a plausible explanation that he may have tried to be diplomatic by sowing more confusion around the incident, so to make Hillary look not the only one ‘polnaya dura’ around.

Maybe it went like this:

“We worked hard to get the right Russian word,” Mrs. Clinton said, handing the button to Mr. Lavrov. “Do you think we got it?”

Lavrov out loud, “You got it wrong!”

Lavrov to himself, “God, what am I saying, diplomats not supposed to speak truth, especially to this crazy ‘baba’! Quick, to backpedal, what do I do now? Got it, make a raprochment goof!”

Lavrov out loud, “It means…er…overcharge”

The thing is, perezagruzka or perezagruzit’ has been used in the Russian press (in “analytical” pieces) for at least a few years with the meaning of “reset” a relationship or (to use a dead-tree media metaphor) turn over a new page. I have never seen “sbros” or any other word used in this context. So there was one right word – perezagruzka – and they f*ed it up. Very disappointing, and there’s really no excuse or explanation for it but rank incompetence. There are enough people around the world who (having never interacted with actual Americans) believe in the stereotype of “tupye amerikantsy” without giving them additional ammo like this.

Makes you wonder how much gets lost in translation in arms reduction treaties and what have you;especially in the fine print.Lavrov is a hard case,but I reckon he’d meet his match with someone of the calibre of Richard Holbrooke.

IMO,not bothering to find somebody in the State Department capable of getting one word right not only shows incompetence,but shows a far too casual/don’t really care attitude,if not downright disrespect towards Russia.

Lyndon, I shared your reaction to the language gaffe at first. But there is, I think, a deeper problem.

How do you seem like a serious diplomat trying to enter into an important renegotiation of binational relations when you start the process by bringing in a TOY?!

I can only imagine what the Russians there thought of this gimmick. The translation issues just distracts one from how goofy and ridiculous this whole moment was. You say stereotype, they say generalization.

”IMO,not bothering to find somebody in the State Department capable of getting one word right not only shows incompetence,but shows a far too casual/don’t really care attitude,if not downright disrespect towards Russia.”

I cant understand why they didnt just ask a Russian native speaker. Surely there are a few actual Russian academics floating around Washington?

To be fair to everyone concerned translation of a lot of words is a nightmare and totally hit and miss. But Lavrov could have been a lot cooler and polite in the situation. Sergei Ivanov would have had a good laugh over it and saved the situation – he is witty – but Lavrov has a face like a spanked arse most of the time. Which probably makes him ideal for promoting Russian foreign policy.

Not sure it is really a f*ck up, Lyndon. There are multiple contexts this button can be a part of. Usage of перезарядка in Russian analytical media might or might not be sufficient to warrant its use. This was definitely a symbolic photo-op moment without much meaning. In this case, the most appropriate would be the most known. Сброс would be one and перегрузка would be another. Perezagruzka would be third. To me they are equally appropriate and none of this would be discussed if not for the crass, dumb jab from Lavrov, Mr. Hedgehog.

What Hillary\’s team botched without even knowing it, was spelling it in Latin letters. Typical idiocy of Hollywood – between themselves, Russians speak English with Russian accents. Well, those Russians in the US that are not professional translators do speak horrendous gibberish like закрой дору а то чилдренята зафризанеют. Asking them, Ger, would not be a god idea.

Ivanov has more class for sure – no surprises here since he graduated from филфак ЛГУ.

Too much ink has been wasted on this embarrassing but trivial mistake. More than likely Lyndon is correct: they meant to write “perezagruzka” and ended up writing “peregruzka”. In other words, more than likely it was not ignorance, but simply a typo. When I go over my own writing, time and again I miss my typos because my brain “autocorrects” itself. Alas, the autocorrection is limited to my brain–it does not transfer to the screen/paper. Heck, at times even respectable publications end up with a couple of silly mistakes despite going through both a copyeditor and a proofreader. So I feel bad for the translator because I’m guessing he or she chose the correct word, but made a typo that was not caught until it was too late. Embarrassing? Yes. But that’s about it.

Hey Sean, long time, was in the neighborhood thought I’d stop by –

“It’s nice to see that the new Administration is continuing the incompetency of the old one.”

I think this is going too far. A blunder in translation that only language geeks are laughing over will disappear by next week. What was in the letter is far different than anything that has came out of the White House in eight years. Remember, before 9/11 missile defense (can we just call it star wars like in the 80s?) was foreign policy agenda item #1. Bush would never have even broached the subject of its undoing.

Can you really tell me what is wrong with the letter, or what means as a foundation or a new Russian/US relationship? One that actually takes seriously the concerns of each side? We must certainly stay on the watch, there are indeed things foriegn-policy wise that he has already done that I am uneasy with, but it still has been only 45 days or so, so I’ll allow the honeymoon to last a bit longer and see how things will play out, before I start saying things like “the new Administration is continuing the incompetency of the old one.”

And from what I can tell, and I think the NY Times article you posted backs this up, the Russians did not receive the letter, and the ideas therein, coolly. They recognized there were no concrete proposals, but that they were the basis for negotiation. One quite different than under Bush.

As Lyndon rightly points out, the word should have been перезагрузка, nothing else.

I have heard this story several times the last days, but this is the first time I actually got to see a close up picture of the reset button. And I am flabbergasted. Not only does the state department not know what the right word is in Russian – they don’t even know that the Russian alphabet is different from the English one.

There is also a theory that Hillary was set up by Obama people in the ‘button snafu’. Rumor has it there are pro-Obama people in State Dept. doing all they can to make Hillary look foolish.

Unexpectedly, there is a sensible explanation.

http://rebellionbrewery.com/?p=312

“The Russian word peregruzka appears at the top of the button, spelled in latin letters. If this was meant to be a literal translation, why would the letters be in Latin? The english translation for this word is “overload” and anyone that knows how to type a few letters into an online translation website can easily figrue that much out. An english word appears below the button and that word is “reset”. These words do very much make sense together: when something is overloaded (like a circuit), you reset it.”

Indeed, ‘Peregruzka’ requires ‘Reset’ and ‘Reset’ is usually done with pushing a button.

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn there was an outlet peddling such curiosity item on the margins. If so, they just hit the Mother Lode.

”Well, those Russians in the US that are not professional translators do speak horrendous gibberish like закрой дору а то чилдренята зафризанеют. Asking them, Ger, would not be a god idea.”

Fair enough Cyrill, ye know better than me, but I would have thought that Washington would have plenty of real Russian IT/Physics/Maths people – there are plenty floating around my tiny city of Limerick, and surely they’d know the word for reset.

”Ivanov has more class for sure – no surprises here since he graduated from филфак ЛГУ.”

I think he was a spy in London for a while too. He’s really witty, I remember when he was at the UN he sounded like a charming old guy who’d seen it all before and was worried by nothing. This is in stark contrast to the rest of the Kremlin, who are a rewind back to Molotov and Mr Nyet. Its a pity he isnt Foreign Affairs minister; Russia would hardly advance their cause much but we’d all get a good laugh and a much nicer impression of the country.

These words do very much make sense together: when something is overloaded (like a circuit), you reset it.”

Hmm, this explanation sounds familiar, where would I hear it…

Washington would have plenty of real Russian IT/Physics/Maths people

Ger, these are exactly the people I had in mind. I know a fair amount of them and their Russian is pretty bad. “Воз’ми 101 хайвей и потом ехит на Лоренс”

It’s definitely a talent thing. I certainly don’t have it. Also, there is a huge difference between translating text and translating speech while it’s taking place (there is a term for it, isn’t there? I forgot…)

Actually, Kolya, interpretation is like everything else: 5% talent and 95% practice and skill. Most language schools concentrate on theory. I have a friend that teaches at Monterey Institute of International Studies – his method is completely different and is very close to martial arts. Understanding is not required (it wil come eventually) Interpretation skills come with drills and practice.

Context drives meaning. In that particular context, I think that ‘перегрузка” was quite appropriate. More so then перезагрузка. And using Lavrov as an expert was hardly appropriate. He couldn’t even respond in kind to a mild diplomatic advance. That to me was incompetence, not the button.

In that particular context, I think that ‘перегрузка” was quite appropriate. More so then перезагрузка.

Cyrill, with all due respect, the above statement makes you sound like you have no idea what you’re talking about.

That is all.

Too much ink has been wasted on this embarrassing but trivial mistake. More than likely Lyndon is correct: they meant to write “perezagruzka” and ended up writing “peregruzka”. In other words, more than likely it was not ignorance, but simply a typo.

I’m not so sure too much ink was wasted on this. It does speak to one fundamental problem in US-Russian relations: language.

Turn it around … if Lavrov had presented a button at some US-Russia meeting that said “resist” when he intended “reset” it would get legs in the English news media and confirm certain stereotypes of Russians speaking poor English and all that entails.

Insert Yakov Smirnoff “In Russia, you don’t press button, button presses you” joke here.

I think it speaks to carelessness of staffers in Washington and some disdain or lack of basic knowledge in the Russian language. I doubt this would have happened if the language involved were French or Spanish.

It’s a pretty simply thing to check the translation of a single word. Even Google translate gets this one correct.

Thanks, Cyrill. INTERPRETER, that’s the word that was on the tip of my tongue and yet I didn’t quite get it. Which means that I could never be a good interpreter. As you say, most of it is practice, practice, practice, but I suspect that the talent part is crucial. If you don’t have it, you’ll never be a good interpreter. Sort of like being musical. Most of us love music, but few of us actually have the talent to be truly good at it, regardless of how much we practice. (Translation of texts is a totally different ball game, though.)

Cyrill, with all due respect, the above statement makes you sound like you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Lyndon, after two decades in the business that includes albeit limited experience in localization, I really do not care much if you think I do not know what I am talking about.

If you are in that business professionally as well, I’d suggest you might reconsider the black and white approach to interpretation, especially in the case of interpreting a single word within a context defined by situation, rather then text. The context is not limited to “analytical” writings that have appeared recently but involves the button symbol as well. Creating an appropriate label is quite different from translating a word like reset for an academic exercise.

As you say, most of it is practice, practice, practice, but I suspect that the talent part is crucial.

No, Kolya, that ability to fish out an appropriate word from your brain comes with practice, not talent. Talent part contributes to ability to learn a foreign language, but knowing two languages does not make one an interpreter.

As with any other profession, there are methods you build your skills on. One of the most important rules is to avoid interpreting the original text as much as possible. First step is to grab the essence, the meaning of the original text, and then interpret, placing it within the appropriate context. There are others: try making the target text about 80% of the length of the original; avoid starting your target text with conditionals (although, однако) especially when the source starts with one; cut off all the fluff fillers – they have no meaning; avoid percieved “equivalents” (if the source contains the word “interesting”, avoid using “интересно”, “imitate” is almost never “имитировать”, etc) Just to mention a couple.

pere-ZA-stroika is a better pick :-p
“reconstruction of perestroika with kinda preliminary destruction.”

If you are in that business professionally as well, I’d suggest you might reconsider the black and white approach to interpretation, especially in the case of interpreting a single word within a context defined by situation, rather then text. The context is not limited to “analytical” writings that have appeared recently but involves the button symbol as well. Creating an appropriate label is quite different from translating a word like reset for an academic exercise.

Classic bullshit! In fact, I think it rises to the level of “taureau merde”, a refined level of BS that takes decades of practice! Bravo! You wrote two complete paragraphs, without really saying anything meaningful at all!

However, you blow it at the end. Your final sentence is flat out and obviously wrong. Obviously, the spelling or the translation for this button was wrong. All that was required to make it correct was a 1st year Russian language student who knew how to use a translation program and transliterate correctly.

It was one word. It was wrong. Stop trying to invent elaborate excuses for why it may have been subtly correct.

When a need to “restart” or “reset” my PC I перегружаю not переЗАгружаю. But might this be I´m lazy to say two extra letters?

re-load or overload?
I guess if we unload old shit to reload it again – it pereZagruzka.
If we want to throw old stuff and load new – peregruzka.
But Lavrov should have been less quick next time.

You wrote two complete paragraphs, without really saying anything meaningful at all!

Sorry Shedd, that you did not get the meaning, but it was not really directed at you, but rather at someone who might know at least basics of interpretation and localization. In the future, if you feel that familiar state of rage after missing a point, try to understand that it is quite possible that you don’t know enough – just like you might not know as much or enough of the oil business, freightforwarding or interpreting.

In this particular case, I’d suggest at looking at field theory of words to help you grasp the simple concept – there are multiple possible translations of just one word, depending on the field intensity, i.e. context, since there is never an “exact equivalent”.

“No, Kolya, that ability to fish out an appropriate word from your brain comes with practice, not talent. Talent part contributes to ability to learn a foreign language…”

Thanks for the interesting comment, Cyrill. I have to defer to you in this, since you are the one with experience on this. I guess you are saying that one thing is to have facility for languages and another is to be a good interpreter. The former is talent, the latter is primarily practice.

An acquaintance of mine is (or was) an Air Force NCO who is a translator of Somali and a couple of obscure languages. By obscure, I mean that I don’t even remember the names of those languages. Before joining the Air Force he didn’t know any languages and he didn’t even intend to become a translator. He was selected after taking a test during basic training. The test did not use words from an existing language, but it was designed to assess aptitude for languages (Cyrill, you probably know the kind of test I’m referring to.) After basic training he was sent to Monterey.

“Classic bullshit! In fact, I think it rises to the level of “taureau merde””

Yes, this whole thread is getting very French. There the Institute de la Langue Francaise keeps careful watch over just such important controversies and tries to exert pressure on publishers/writers to refrain from bastardizing the French language with nasty Anglicisms. For example, back in the 70s/80s they were witch-hunting any technical writers who might slip in the phrase “silicon wafer”; they wanted “Gaufrette de Silicon” even if that completely obfuscated the meaning – though it did make one laugh.

So to Cyrill, I say what’s wrong with technical types that say: “Воз’ми 101 хайвей и потом ехит на Лоренс” if it gets people to the right place in minimum time?

So to Cyrill, I say what’s wrong with technical types that say: “Воз’ми 101 хайвей и потом ехит на Лоренс” if it gets people to the right place in minimum time?

Tess, absolutely nothing wrong with it if it is used within a small group that uses that language. When my mother came over and met with some of her old friends that had been in the States for several years, she could not understand half of what they were saying.

Every group has their argot. Забуковать is a common word in Russian among freight forwarders. If I interpret a specific meeting within such a group, I might use it for expediency. I would not use that word for a target audience that does not use it commonly or at all.

My comment was only about using people that just happened to know two languages in various degrees of depth as interpreters/translators. I doubt anybody without much experience in gynecology would jump at an obstetrician with Shedd’s attitude. You might argue, still aware of the difference in skill and knowledge.

Somehow interpretation is like art – everyone is a bona fide critic.

Peregruzka of relationship implies the wrong meaning. Sbros of relationship sounds weird.
Talking of Putin, Hillary once said the man has no soul. I wonder whether it stands for robot.

Translating and interpretting appear to be very different things in my experience (I am competent to do neither). I have come across many good translators in my work in Russia, but only one or two good interpreters. Usually somebody who is proficient at a language can translate, but it takes an additional skill to be able to interpret.

Good catch, Khabar.

Whatever happened to the memory of “Putin has no soul” comment? Could it be Hillary is creating such new brouhahas to bury memories of her old statements?

Well, she is just a politic (i.e. a person with limited free will) and her husband’s testimony once had impressed the world in such a manner that she would have to prove the presence of will in her character.

Sorry, for bookish style.

I must say the more I think about Hillary’s brazen rewriting of history, the angrier I get. This witch kept pestering Bush for trying to make nice with Putin and now she has the ovaries to blame Bush for the breakdown between Russia and the US!

Hill and Bill are the ones who destroyed all the goodwill between Russia and the US for long years to come, and now they are offering to fix it. This is outrageous.

Remember this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q55SxoaiJjw&feature=related

I’m sure Kremlin still remembers. May be that’s the reason Lavrov was so blunt. How often do you hear, “You got it wrong!” in diplomatic dialog on direct TV?

I think Americans won’t do much harm to Russia in the nearest future, so Lavrov can press as many fake buttons as he wishes.

Candide, I’m no fan of Hillary. I was glad she lost the primaries and was not happy about her becoming State Secretary. I have to say, though, that your irrational hatred toward her is very amusing.

So far she has not been too impressive at State, but it’s much too early to give a fair assessment. We’ll have a better idea a year from now. Diplomacy and politics is the art of the possible, and considering that Clinton was an effective senator (something even Republican senators admit) there is hope she’ll be a good Secretary of State. Regardless of her performance, though, she’ll be demonized by people like you.

“Usually somebody who is proficient at a language can translate, but it takes an additional skill to be able to interpret.”

I agree completely, Tim.

My sense of things was that to be a good interpreter one needs a certain talent that goes beyond language aptitude, but Cyrill is disabusing me from that notion.

Is anyone seriously suggesting that translating this one word correctly required any interpretation skill?

I think this would be a perfectly valid discussion for lengthy texts or conversations (particularly idioms).

But this was one word on a button that clearly was wrong and easily could have been translated and labeled properly. It was mere incompetence, not lack of some great skill or experience, that resulted in this Hillary button fiasco.

Wally, as comments threads usually go, the discussion veered away (more than once) to other subjects. As to the “button fiasco” itself, the whole thing is a storm in a teacup.

Kolya,

I am not into demonizing Hillary or anybody else, just calling a spade a spade. Once again, Hillary and her cheating husband are probably the most responsible for squandering any goodwill there was between the US and Russia. Hillary was saying the most outrageous things about Russia for minute political gains during her run for the White House and Bill was humiliating Russia at every opportunity during his presidency. So it comes as extremely rich for Hillary to try shifting blame on Bush. Do you forget that Dems kept accusing Bush for being too nice with Putin for the 8 last years?

Obviously you do forget. So does Sean, who praised Hillary for “admitting her mistakes” in supposed contrast “to the previous administration”. How about publicly describing one Russian President as a soulless ghoul and next RP as a mindless puppet, did she admit it was a mistake? How about ramming through the Kosovo intervention without any regards for Russian objections, did she admit it was a mistake?

Any person with Hillary ‘diplomatic’ record should never been allowed to work at the State Dept. even as a janitor. Just compare Hillary and Dr. Rice to get an idea who is really qualified for the Secretary of State post.

Next as on cue comes ‘tess’ and pipes that Hillary gaffe would be a lot worse if commited by Rice. Obviously ‘tess’ forgets that Dr. Rice is an accomplished academic and serious stateswoman who specialized in Russian language and culture, so she never had and never would have made any outrageous statements or stupid cheap gifts like Hillary did.

Finally, just because I reminded you of the recent history you accuse me of “irrational hatred” and tendencies to “demonize”, and throw all that other Dem. propaganda garbage at me. Shame on you!

Candide, you are a ridiculously funny guy!! But I’m worried that you might get apoplexy. Take a few breaths and calm down….

“Obviously ‘tess’ forgets that Dr. Rice is an accomplished academic and serious stateswoman who specialized in Russian language and culture,”

Au contraire, that’s exactly what I was remembering. Let’s call you Mr. 180; someone says ‘black’ you read ‘white’.

As Dr. Rice was known for not reading stuff that she deemed unimportant (e.g. Richard A. Clarke’s pre-911 warning memos) I think such a typo could have slipped by her.

So there we have it, folks: Hillary may have goofed, but Dr. Rice is responsible for 9-11!

Your Dem. propaganda machine in action.

A last one from me on the “peregruzka” issue. I suspect that several of you have read today’s JRL Steve Shabad’s email. From reading the email, it’s easy to see why there was some confusion even among those who are fluent in both languages. For the curious, here is the text of the email :

///
There has been a lot of confusion over the linguistic error on Hillary Clinton’s gift of a gadget “reset button” to Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. First, Lavrov himself pointed out that the Russian word “peregruzka” inscribed on the button was a mistranslation, but then he himself erred in saying that that word means “overcharge.” It actually means “overload.”
Now Peter Lavelle, in his otherwise reasonable commentary on the prospects for U.S.-Russian relations, has unwittingly compounded the confusion by mistranslating “peregruzka” as “reload,” evidently thinking that the reload here means reloading weapons. And then he bases his commentary on the false juxtaposition of “reset” vs. “reload.”
As I mentioned at the top, “peregruzka” means “overload,” not “reload.” And ironically, one of the correct translations of “reset,” the word “perezagruzka,” which was undoubtedly the word that Hillary’s staff intended to put on the button, does normally mean “reload.” In this context, however, it is meant in the computer or electronic sense, as in reloading (i.e. resetting) parameters.
It’s worth noting that the Russian media themselves rendered “reset” several different ways in its dispatches on Joe Biden’s speech, where the word was first used. Besides using “perezagruzka,” they also translated the word as “perezapusk,” “sbros” and in a few cases simply inserted the word “reset” in English, since many Russians are presumably familiar with the English word from electronics they use.
///

Of course many Russians know what “reset” means and do not need translation at all.

http://mobbit.info/item/2007/06/04/vneshnyaya-knopka-reset-prikol-no-vpolne-deistvyustcii

Exactly, Candide. That’s what the last few lines of that email said.

“… in a few cases simply inserted the word “reset” in English, since many Russians are presumably familiar with the English word from electronics they use.”

Hey, maybe State got the idea from that link you sent but then thought that if they don’t translate someone may take offense. As they say, the way to hell is paved on good intentions.