In its simplest possible description, work ethics in any profession refers to the concept of “rights” and “wrongs” pertaining to it. In the words of Nobel Prize Winner Albert Camus, “A man without ethics is like a wild beast loosed upon this earth.” Because every individual’s perception of morality is unique and distinct, whatever be the profession, the context and applicability of work ethics becomes a controversial matter of debate and discussion. Despite differences in opinion, while several professionals have come to a consensus on defining ethics for their respective fields, the translation fraternity is yet to witness such a consensus, as ongoing debates go to the extent of even questioning the applicability of ethics in professional translation.
The International Federation of Translators set up in 1953 had prescribed an official set of guidelines for professional translators, that requires them to have the necessary linguistic expertise and adequate knowledge of their subject matter. It also mentions that they must refuse to translate from a translated text or make any alterations without the author’s consent and have the right to accept or refuse a translation, as well as demand documents necessary for the translation. As translators they must respect professional secrets, refuse any detrimental work and refuse to work in conditions inferior to those established by the profession. The aforementioned code of conduct throws some light on the role of ethics in translation. The foremost priority while translating documents irrespective of the field is the requirement of maintaining confidentiality of the document. Since clients entrust their private and often valuable documents with the translator, it is necessary on the latter’s part to possess high levels of integrity for ensuring that they do not divulge the same to anybody else. There are more critical aspects to the profession like reliability, quality assurance, impartiality and objectivity. In several situations, the client availing the translation service has no sure shot way to cross check the accuracy of the translated version. By the time the errors are identified, the damage is already done. Especially in technical, legal, financial, medical and scientific translation, the attention to minute details is a must, and even a small error could prove to be catastrophic. Hence the primary aspect of translation ethics entails accountability on part of the translator. The next aspect that comes into picture is the translator’s personal opinion bias that could reflect in the translated text, especially in case of literary and academic translations, thereby yielding a distorted version of the original text. Although efficient translation requires that one needs to execute culturally appropriate or culturally neutral translations keeping the psyche of the end-user in mind, a translator must seek the client’s approval before incorporating or removing any text while working on the assignment. In case the translator feels that the project is beyond his or her area of expertise, and he cannot do complete justice to it, it is always better to refuse rather than creating a poorly translated version of the original content. A tricky question arises here; when a translator finds a number of errors in the source text itself or finds it unethical/ derogatory/objectionable or even harmful, should he/she go ahead and translate the same? In case of mistakes in the source text, it is generally considered appropriate that the translator seeks clarity on the same from the author or client before going ahead. But in instances where the source text itself is objectionable to a particular section of society, should the translator allow his personal opinion to come in the way of his profession? There have been instances of translators in certain countries refusing to translate or localize websites pertaining to female empowerment, because they consider them to be “blasphemous”. In another instance, a translator was caught amidst a controversy for translating the personal diary of a woman on the instructions of her husband. And most importantly of all, if a translator is asked to undertake an assignment which could be potentially harmful to society, such as a bomb-making manual or an illegal document, should he refuse or go ahead with the project for the sake of earning his livelihood? In case he goes ahead and executes the project, is he to be held equally responsible as the perpetuators for the subsequent harm caused, for merely translating the text?Your guess is as good as mine, while this question still remains open for debate.
