KudoZ question not available

07:17 Jul 25, 2012 

My pleasure!

07:15 Jul 25, 2012 

Dear Caryl, yes, that was it, but I managed somehow:) thank you.

18:11 Jul 19, 2012 

If the text you're quoting from is http://tinyurl.com/chxnz8j then the wording could, indeed, be a bit confusing.

Here are some clear definitions, from fairly authoritative sources, which seem to support Grzegorz's proposition:

http://tinyurl.com/6sqjb7x (Step 4 on Page 8 of the document, page 11 of the pdf)
http://tinyurl.com/7ak592c
http://tinyurl.com/cd3ycuq
http://tinyurl.com/d9o5ok2
http://tinyurl.com/d3vvylt

and there are many more.

17:24 Jul 19, 2012 

E.g. a Czech original translated into German, translated subseqently into English and back... Elementary, my dear Watson...

17:20 Jul 19, 2012 

Na początku może być nawet n różnych tłumaczeń, które przy pomocy m sędziów kompetentnych oraz stosownych miar (współczynniki zgodności) daje dopiero niejako "zagregowane" tłumaczenie forward. Następnie możemy sporządzić p tłumaczeń w przeciwnym kierunku ocenianych przez q sędziów kompetentnych (tłumacze i sędziowie powinni być w tym wypadku nowi) i tak dalej, w wyniku czego otrzymamy jedno tłumaczenie zwrotne, i wówczas sprawdzamy, jak daleko "upadło jabłko od jabłoni" :-). Szczegółowych strategii jest wiele, wszystko zależy od badacza decydującego o adaptacji kulturowej narzędzia, a zwłaszcza finansowania, które otrzymał w ramach grantu.

17:08 Jul 19, 2012 

I'm not sure whether it is exactly 'tłumaczenie na język docelowy'. Everything would be fine if it was not for the sentence: "Forward translation requires a second set of reviewers that have access to both the original item and its initial translation."
So, it would seem that initial translation is not a forward translation...

12:20 Jul 19, 2012 

Lilian is obviously mindful of the immortal words of Tennyson, "Forward, the Light Brigade!" (http://tinyurl.com/39w3rv).

If only Lord Cardigan had thought to use an imperative to give the order "and back as well"...

11:48 Jul 19, 2012 

Actually, Lilian may be right There are certainly translations so heavy that they need heaving back and forward. That is precisely where a Master whips the poor translators and yells in the imperative: "forward!", "back!", "forward!"

11:42 Jul 19, 2012 

:( :(

11:19 Jul 19, 2012 

Lilian, would you please explain to the community why do you regard "forward" in the phrase in question as a verb in the imperative? To most of us it is an adjective. I am genuinely eager, however, to educate myself at the hands of a native English speaker.

07:07 Jul 19, 2012 

yes, exactly, it was supposed to be read as forward translation and back translation.
Thank you all for your help!

21:01 Jul 18, 2012 

Jest to rzadki przypadek, kiedy kontekst nie jest potrzebny, bo każdy, kto profesjonalnie zajmuje się tłumaczeniami wie, o co chodzi. Nie iwdzę też nic niepoprawnego w tym zwrocie.

20:57 Jul 18, 2012 

It is a perfectly correct phrase in English. You should read it as: forward (translation) and back translation.

20:23 Jul 18, 2012 

What is the exact context. The sentence is wrong. The first part is a verb in the imperative mode and the other part is a noun phrase. A sentence in English cannot look like that.

20:23 Jul 18, 2012 

What is the exact context. The sentence is wrong. The first part is a verb in the imperative mode and the other part is a noun phrase. A sentence in English cannot look like that.