Report on July 2001 Urantia Foundation Translator's meeting
This report was prepared as a result of interviews with several individuals who attended the meeting as well as materials distributed at the meeting by Urantia Foundation.
The trustees were all present at the meeting. Other attendees were:
Urantia Foundation staff:
Tonya and Steve Baney
Sheila Schneider
Mindy Williams
James Woodward
Bob Solone
Jay Peregrine
Marcia Lansu
Matthew Viglione
Linda Jensen
Seppo Kanerva
Cathy Jones
Kathleen Swadling.From Latin America:
Ana Beatriz Garcia, Foundation representative from Mexico.
Carlos Rubinsky, Foundation representative from Argentina.
Victor Barcia Bory, Mexican reader now living in London, strong Foundation supporter.
Agustin Arellano, Reader from Mexico
Liza Palm, Reader from Mexico
Carlos Zapata, Reader from Colombia
Nina Bravo, Reader from Chile.
Ricardo Ruiz, Reader from Chile (husband of Nina Bravo).Others:
Nancy Shaffer, meeting with trustees on IUA charter revision.
Seppo Niskanen, Manager of UF office in Finland
Costas Diamantopolous, Foundation representative for Greece, UK, and Poland; also translator of a Greek edition of The Urantia Book.___________________________________________
What follows is Seppo's history of the Spanish translation as provided to attendees of the Foundation's meeting of 06/29/01. This was part of a document which included an additional history written in Spanish by the Foundation's current Spanish translator, Antonio Moya. Moya's history has been omitted here.
As indicated in the writing above, the view of the Martin‑Myesrsian Foundation for a long time was that all translations must be produced by Americans. Martin may have had the view of the Foundation lawyer(s) to go by in his representing such an odd notion ‑ yet I am not positive about it ‑ it may just as well have been Martin's private thinking. Only when I got into the picture, did this mistaken view begin to change, but before that happened, even I was asked if I wouldn't like to apply for United States citizenship.
The above review does not describe the "acontecimientos" which preceded the publication of the first Spanish printing in 1993. The author evidently excluded this portion of the narrative because it doesn't belong to his first‑hand experiences. But it does belong to mine.
When I had completed the formatting of the Finnish translation in late 1992, 1 was then given the electronic text of Spanish translation for formatting. I was interested in seeing how the text runs in Spanish, and my fingers were itching to get to work. I started reading, and to my horror I spotted two typos or gremlins on the very first line of the text. I went on reading and spotted dozens and eventually hundreds of mistakes, missing sentences, missing paragraphs, and mistranslations. I alerted Richard, who was doing the executive directorship at the head office at that time ‑ Martin had resigned in September. Richard arranged a meeting with Doug Fraser and professor Egea, who figure in the report above. We flew down to Dallas and met with the two gentlemen at professors Egea's home during one weekend.
After these two finally had understood and seen in their own eyes that there are thousands of mistakes in the translation, we agreed upon a procedure according to which, going paper by paper, I was to read the entire translation and collate it with the English text, write a report on my findings to Doug who would then consult prof. Egea and make the corrections which I then would incorporate in the electronic text. The printer, Donnellys, had set a deadline for 1 March 1993 when the electronic files for the Spanish, Finnish and the tenth English printing, the Finnish Index and the English Concordance had to be with them.
The Spanish correction process was very time consuming, involving correspondence back and forth between me and Doug, Doug and prof. Egea. Just to read consecutively two texts in languages ‑ Spanish and English ‑ neither of which is my own, and to compare and collate them, with the Spanish text on a small computer screen and the English text in a book, was almost inhuman in those circumstances. I had to work 18‑ to 20‑hour days, weekends inoffided, for months in a row, so to meet the deadline of 1 March 1993. 1 had calculated that for me to be able to meet the deadline and have the time even to format the Spanish book, to produce the Finnish Index and to format it, I needed to do three papers a day, write my memo at the end of the day, and enter the corrections which I had received from Doug in the text. To collate three papers a day, is beyond all reasonable standards. (I am now doing the same for the latest revision/retranslation of the Spanish book, and I spend one whole day of 15 hours in doing just one paper.) During those terrible months in late 1992 and early 1993 1 knew all the time that what I was doing could not possibly end up in an impeccable text. I was aware that I was missing too many mistakes.
As concerns the quality of the language, I remember how puzzled I was in my realising that the Spanish translation is slavishly faithful to the English syntax. As Spanish is not my native language, I cannot have any exact knowledge of what is excellent Spanish and what is not, and it was very strange for me to witness that the Spanish translation looked almost as if it were a machine‑made translation. But I thought that since it was checked and corrected by a university professor, the language must be good Spanish. My knowledge however was and continues to be that in no two languages the syntax is similar, so my puzzlement continued till I learned it from the Seville group in October 1993 that my fears had been well‑founded; their unabashed opinion was that the newly published Spanish book was "horrible."
The Seville group's new translation is, in my assessment, an excellent rendering. It is in true, genuine, authentic Castilian; it is not a "Spanglish" rendering like the first and the successive unrevised translations are.With the help of the Seville group I corrected the worst still remaining typos in the second printing (first soft‑cover printing), and the subsequent printings are basically identical with the second printing. The latest printing includes the Foreword and part IV of the new translation, and the difference in language is considerable should the new Foreword and part IV be collated with the first‑printing text. That is the cause and reason of the troubles. Evidently, the poor Spanish of the first and the subsequent printings doesn't bother some Latin American readers as much as it maddens the Peninsular Spanishspeakers.
The Seville group just a week ago completed the new translation of part III, but my advice to the trustees is that this new part III would not be included in the next printing. If it were, there would one more divergent book and even more confusion. Once the new translation is available and covers the entire book, then only is it time to print the new book. I am afraid that there is so much difference between the Latin American Spanish and Peninsular Spanish (Castilian) that the Foundation needs to print two Spanish books In the future: one for Spain, and one for the Latin American readers.
Seppo Kanerva
_____________________________________________
Latin American attendees at the meeting were all very disturbed by Seppo's recommendation that the Foundation accept the premise that there are two distinctly different versions of the Spanish language and that the Foundation should therefore publish two Spanish translations. After a full day's work came up with the following document:
______________________________________________
Recommendations from the Advisory Committee for the revision of
El Libro de UrantiaThe Advisory Committee for the revision of El Libro de Urantia, has decided to submit this document, in order to state the reasons for the development of a unified translation for the Spanish‑speaking world.
I. Analysis
1. There is only one Castilian Language
1.1 Publishing houses and renowned writers and qualified translators agree in pointing out that there is only one literary and commercial Spanish
1.2 It has been announced that later this year will be published the XXII version of the Royal Academy of Spanish Language dictionary encompassing unifying and standardizing processes of the Spanish language which will include peer organizations from Latin America, Philippines and the U.S. This shows a world wide trend for language unification
Based on the analysis of the forward and document 120 from 1995 and 1999 Spanish editions, and the present English edition, the committee reached the following conclusions:
2.1 1995 Version
As many readers have pointed out since El Libro de Urantia first edition, the book presents form and content problems:
a. Introduction of unnecessary neologisms
b. Hybrid Syntax (Spanglish)
c. Content Conceptual inaccuracies2.2 1999 Version
The translation presents mainly content problems as well as form ones:
a. It alters the conceptual structure, rewriting from a subjective viewpoint, aiming to arrive to a literary oversimplification a. Complete phrases are added which do not exist in the original text
b. Verb tenses have been altered
c. Out of context entries which violates semantic content
d. Wrongly, from the same word and concept, multiple translations have been madeII Conclusions
1. El Libro de Urantia is a revelation for a thousand years and possesses a particular own style. Only ONE Translation is recommended for all the Spanish‑speaking countries which follow and respect quality, strength and beauty of the English text.
2. It is desirable to have a final Spanish version which keep the essence, content and original meanings. Thus, we consider it is necessary to create single work team which will encompass people and visions from Spain and Latin America as well as English native speakers who will be advisors for the revision, also a professional style corrector is needed.
3 This team's task is to revise the 1995 Spanish version and all other revisions in process in other countries, in order to unify the criteria and ensure an improved text without interpretations nor simplifications.
4. Translates textually many of the teachings in order to deliver to future generations an accurate version.
5. Ethical implications
Negligence: We warn the foundation of the risks implied in publishing two Spanish versions. We do not want to overlook or "wash our hands" in this matter .
To establish a negative precedent: Dividing a language could mean to divide many languages in a near future.
Complicity: If we read spiritually the book searching for unity, we cannot betray its nature.
Transgression: By being accomplices we come into transgression of our own principles and values, being disrespectful to the book, our mother tongue and ourselves.Such as God is Truth, Goodness and Beauty, the translation of El Libro de Urantia, should transmit the Truth, Goodness and Beauty of the original revelation.
6. Since the Portuguese translation is about to appear we strongly recommend a unification and standardization of key terms, names and concepts.
__________________________________
This document was submitted to Seppo, who reportedly expressed considerable displeasure with it. The attendees then insisted on presenting the document to the trustees, which was finally allowed. Saturday evening the trustees said that they accepted all the recommendations and that the next printing would be in September and would consist of the original 1993 edition with corrections which would be submitted by the present advisory group. However, on Sunday morning the trustees came back and said they would reprint the 1993 edition in September "as-is" and that their long-term plan would be to print only one Spanish translation "if this turns out to be possible."
Seppo was apparently quite taken aback by the refusal of the attendees to endorse his program. Some attendees reorted being concerned that the Foundation was rushing through translations with more attention being given to political and ideological considerations than literary considerations.
On Sunday morning, the advisory group, which had been led to believe it would be serving in an on-going advisory capacity in regards to the revision of the Spanish translation, was told that this was their only planned meeting and that the trustees would get back to them regarding their suggestions in two months or so, after the trustees had had time to more fully consider them.
The weekend apparently included a lot of recruiting efforts to turn each of the attendees into IUA representatives. Ana Baetriz, the rep from Mexico, had apparently led Tonya to believe that all the 19 study groups which Agustin Arellano has operational in Mexico City were hers. There was apparently quite a bit of embarrassment when Agustin let Tonya know that there were no IUA groups in Mexico City and that Ana not only has no study group, she has driven people away from the one which Agustin gave her to develop at Nalanda's book store in Mexico City.
Tonya gave attendees tours of the building at 533. One visitor said that when Tonya was asked about source authors and books used to construct the text she replied that the Foundation had thousands of source books in the basement which the Foundation was going to make into a research library. She said that the original text for The Urantia Book was very complex, too complex for human understanding, and that the Forum had asked questions to clarify the material and had then been involved in using the source books to find suitable phrases to express the original material, the work of the Forum being what ultimately appeared as The Urantia Book. (At least this is the understanding which the person reporting the conversation came away with.)
In terms of the copyright, attendees reported being told that the revelators want the trustees to maintain the copyright and that they, without question, will prevail in their appeal.
The attendees wanted to know if they could now legally produce their own translations. Tonya tried to evade the issue but Agustin pushed her to respond. She finally admitted that it would be legal, but that it would also be "disloyal" and "very Caligastian."
At the concluding meeting on Sunday, it was implied to the attendees that if they supported the foundation in the matter of the Spanish translation, they might be flown to Paris next year to attend a larger translator's conference.