From: Andy Toth (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 04 2002 - 13:58:08 MST
second-hand translations are not admissible in court; i would recommend
that an unknown corporate, federation of international translators (fit)
member, work from the original document and then provide a certification
that the translation is verbatim and true (from the translator who performed
the translation). otherwise it will not be valid for the purpose of ECFMG
certification. second hand translations can also ruin peptide sequences,
especially those done as a favor (ie, especially those the translator did
not have true feelings for).
---Original Message Follows----
From: Dossy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: How factual are second-hand translations? (was Re: Bullshit (was
: Aid for Afghanistan))
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 14:37:57 -0500
On 2002.01.04, John Clark <email@example.com> wrote:
> Let's take the drastic step of actually looking at some facts, namely
> quotations from Mr. Osama bin Laden:
So, what Arabic languages do you speak, John?
Oh, are you basing your "facts" on a translation that's bankrolled
by the United States? You've seen the movie "Wag the Dog", right?
-- Dossy Shiobara mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/ "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70) _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:32 MST