I work as a professional cook, and damn near every product we use in a kitchen these days comes in packaging that is labeled in both English and Spanish (and occasionally, French). It becomes a bit amusing when I see identical products from different companies that have ended up with very different Spanish descriptions.
Take “Saran Wrap” for example. We don’t actually use Saran (brand), I’m just using the “familiar” name. We’ve ended up with big rolls of this stuff from two different companies, labeled as follows:
Brand #1:
English: Plastic Food Wrap
Spanish: Papel de Plástico para Envolver Alimentos
Brand #2:
English: Foodservice Film
Spanish: Envoltura Transparente Para Alimentos
The “problem” comes when I Google Translate the Spanish back to English (note that I’m not translating from English to Spanish and then back to English, I’m translating the Spanish, as it appears on the packaging, to English).
#1’s Spanish translates to English thusly: Paper Plastic Food Wrap.
Not bad, except for the “Paper” part. I already knew that “papel” was Spanish for “paper”, and when I first read “papel de plástico”, I took that to mean, roughly, “plastic that is like a sheet of paper”, and assumed that Spanish must not have a specific, single word to describe the particular form of plastic. Normally, Google does a pretty good job with phrasings like that one, but it appears it didn’t know exactly what to do with “papel de plástico”. But, even before I ran the phrase through Google, I could see that it said, more or less literally, “Plastic for wrapping food”.
It appears that Brand #1 did a better job than Brand #2.
Going Spanish -> English, I got as far as typing “envoltura”, which Google translated to “envelope”. Huh. Not quite the right word. Nevertheless, I soldiered on and finished the full phrase. In this case, Google did attempt to adjust the phrasing.
“Envoltura Transparente Para Alimentos” became “Transparent Food Casing”.
Now that, to my ears, is a description more suited to something you stuff ground meat into to make sausages.
Confusing me even further was Brand #2’s secondary description:
“Film/Película”
The only use I have seen of “película” has been to mean “movie”. But, okay, in English we use both “film” and “movie” to refer to the same thing: “I’m going to watch a movie”, “I’m going to watch a film”. Some critics write movie reviews, and we call those people “film critics”.
But Google wants to confuse me. If I go Spanish -> English and type “película”, Google returns, “movie”. And if I go the other direction, both “film” and “movie” translate to película. So this presents a problem (for me, anyway). It appears to me that either Spanish does not have a single, specific word for paper-thin plastic (hence Brand #1’s use of “papel de plástico”, or Brand #2 made the mistake of just using the first word some translation program spit back at them.
This, IMO, falls into one pitfall of ignorant translating: not grasping the subtle differences in the meanings of similar words. A good example of this, in English, would be the differences between “seeing”, “looking”, and “watching”. In the case of “film” and “movie”, while we use them synonymously, the former actually refers to the physical medium, while the latter refers to the “art” contained on that medium. Unexposed film is not a movie, and acting that has not been recorded is also not a movie (and is certainly not a “film”). It is only the combination of both “film” and “acting” (and various other considerations) that turns these things into a “movie”.
For that matter, the English word “film” is a pretty generic noun that is used to describe pretty much anything that is very thin, flat, wide, and transparent/translucent. Like a film of water on a solid surface, or a film of solids on top of a liquid, or, in adjective form, a filmy nightgown.
Hmm. This has turned into more of an essay than a question. Okay, basic question behind this:
For Nava and any others who are fluent in both English and Spanish, which of the two descriptions of identical products is better/more accurate?
Part of the problem lies in the fact that in English, you are perfectly free to use a word like “wrap” as a noun, even if nobody else has ever done so, and everyone will understand what you are saying. Spanish is a “legislated” language, and you can’t do things like that in Spanish. So Spanish has no noun for “wrap”, and any of several nouns that name things that in English would be wrap, are used for things that have a limited range of applications that would not work in Spanish. So Spanish has to call a wrap “a thing for wrapping”.
The OPs example is actually “Paper of plastic for to wrap foods”, which of course is exactly what it is, so it is perfectly descriptive, and should not trigger any confusion or misunderstanding. If you don’t understand Spanish, used according to the rule of Spanish, read the English instructions.
In other words, he Spanish label is correct, and the English language permits non-standard usages so English speakers can cut corners, that can’t be cut in Spanish.
Right. Although it has improved in recent years, Google Translate cannot be regarded as a reliable translation tool. It’s still a literal-minded robot that can’t distinguish the nuances between different words for the same thing, or often when the same word has two wildly different meanings.
My question is whether these companies are US-based, so that the Spanish descriptions might have been generated by Google Translate, or whether you are getting products imported from Mexico (say) where the Spanish might be authentic.
The OP is also taking a far too literal approach to English. The generic English term for Saran Wrap ® is “cling film”.
Among other meanings, film is thin flexible stuff. Much of which is plastic. “Film” in the sense of photographic film is simply a colloquial shortening from the original “photographic film” to just “film” in contexts where photography was obviously implicated.
And “Photographic film” was so named because it was a thin sheet of flexible plastic that could, with the extra chemicals and such, be used for photography.
Once, back in the 1910s or so we’d shortened “photographic film” to “film”, we next started on the words for movies. When movies were first invented they were “motion pictures”. Which were shot on “motion picture film.”
Eventually through the same shortening process, the word “film” has come to mean
“a motion picture entertainment”,
the physical medium that entertainment is shot on,
the physical medium that entertainment is later displayed from,
the physical medium used to record photo images,
the physical medium used to store and display photo images in the form of slides,
any thin flexible plastic,
any thin flexible material, especially if it’s transparent or translucent.
any thin liquid layer floating on a solid or liquid surface.
For just 4 little letters, F I L M covers one hell of a lot of ideas.
In Spanish, “papel” means something very thin, not literally “paper” in English. Aluminium foil, for example, is called “papel de aluminium.” It’s descriptive but not definitive. This is similar to what you found with the plastic; is describes that characteristic rather than the material. Translation is not literal 1:1.
As far as envelope, you’re confusing the object for the meaning: “to envelope” something is to surround it completely. In English that’s what the object we call “an envelope” does. Its use in Spanish is very pure.
“Pelicula” is very film-centric (in the USA movie sense). It’s like “reel”; it’s specific to the industry and doesn’t translate as any particular “film.” In the USA it would be awkward today to say, “Let’s go see that film!”, whereas in Mexico it would have the meaning as current USA “movie.”
Merriam-Webster disagrees with you. Full definition, 2:
something that envelops : wrapper <the envelope of air around the earth>
Wrapping-whatever is definitely a wrapper
In Spain those same items could be called película de plástico, but it’s one of those things which are understood in every country, but used more in some places than in others; for some reason, on this side of the pond we went with papel de aluminio but película de plástico. The two expressions are understandable and correct, to my understanding.
Google’s approach is the same one used by too many sworn translators. They are required to be “as literal as possible”; too often, what they do is take the first option in the dictionary, which is exactly what Google does. That is how you end up with articles on cataract surgery talking about waterfalls (they’re both cataratas in Spanish) or with a list of grades where matrícula de honor (honors, the highest possible grade; in theory it carries free tuition for an equivalent amount of credits) gets translated as plate of honor (matrícula treated as license plate instead of tuition).
One of the best-worst cases I’ve seen was something which was evidently made in a Spanish-speaking country and English used as the hinge for translations. That means the item’s description was written in Spanish, then translated from Spanish to English, and then from English to other languages.
Spanish: base para enfriar portátiles
English: cooler laptop base
Other languages: more fashionable laptop base
If I’d been the first translator I would have gone with “cooling”, but alas…
I would say this is an oversimplification. Just because Spanish doesn’t have null derivations [e.g. wrap (v) => wrap (n)] as does English, doesn’t mean it’s not productive–it is [envolver, envoltura]. Most languages are, in one way or another, (as Inner Stickler points out). You can’t let mechanistic Google translations be the basis for such generalizations.
Just to clarify my meandering up there: I do fully understand that Google Translate is not going to be perfect, and that, in many (most?) instances I’m not going to find literal, 1-for-1 equivalencies between languages, because different languages work differently. That’s why I was asking for answers from people who are fluent in both languages.
My own limited knowledge of Spanish has come, almost entirely, from working with Mexican-Americans in restaurants, so what little Spanish I know mostly revolves around objects/situations you’d find in a commercial kitchen. Learning that way has actually become more difficult in recent years. When I first started in the industry, 33 years ago, the overwhelming majority of Mexicans here were migrant agricultural workers who were only here for the orchard and farm work, and they’d be gone when the work was done. Over the years, more and more Mexicans started settling here, and a lot of them started filtering into the restaurant business. Along with that, more and more restaurant suppliers started using bilingual labeling. So, between Mexican coworkers and bilingual labeling, I managed to pick up bits and pieces of Spanish, but not enough to actually attempt to speak the language. And now … it’s difficult to even ask a language question of an Hispanic coworker, because at this point they’re mostly 3rd- or 4th-generation descendants of immigrants who don’t really know Spanish themselves.
Anyway, that’s the reason for some of my confusion regarding direct, word-for-word translations. In speaking with Mexicans, I’d been told that the Spanish for “paper” was “papel”, and that “movie” was “película”, but wasn’t told about other ways the words were used.
Another common meaning for “papel” is “role” (as in role of a play). So a literal translation of a theater review could end up describing how someone appeared in the paper of Hamlet.
I think something you are coming up against is that words in translation often seem oddly constructed-- stilted and ornate at the same time.
English is like that, too. We just are so used to our odd constructions (like “washing machine” and “remote control” and “birth control pill”) that we no longer parse them out in our head.
Actually, I’m not assuming that. I look at Google Translate as “the best I can do when I don’t have a Spanish-fluent Mexican handy”.
That makes me wonder how Spanish would describe a plastic tarp, of the type you would lay out when painting a room. That would be a “plastic sheet”, possibly made of the same material, except thicker, and used in an entirely different manner from plastic food wrap.
Yes, that’s another one I’ve seen in kitchens, and it is part of the reason I became curious about "papel.
Oh yes, I know. I had a rather entertaining experience with this a few years ago when I wanted to send a “letter” to a Japanese musician of whom I’m a particular fan. Her website had a contact form, but since she doesn’t market herself outside of Japan, her website was entirely in Japanese kanji. Since I neither speak nor read Japanese, I couldn’t even identify which button was the “submit” button and which was the “cancel” button. So I just copy/pasted the kanji into an online translation program, and that program returned something that was, to my eyes, a “word salad” that, at a glance, was utterly meaningless. It was a string of apparently random words. It took quite a while, but I was eventually able to piece together all of the metaphors and similes into something that was basically coherent to me, coherent enough that I was finally able to distinguish between “submit” and “cancel”. I sent off my message in English, confident that somebody on the other and would understand me. Alas, I never received a reply, but then I wasn’t really expecting one.
That’s something I’ll have to check on Monday. “Brand #1” is labeled as Sysco’s own “house brand”, while “Brand #2” is something I think we got from Food Services of America. I’ll have to look more closely to see where each was actually manufactured.
Interestingly, I’m 50 years old, and have purposely avoided using brand names as generic terms; almost everybody who calls this stuff “Saran Wrap” is older than me. Most of us in the foodservice business just call it “plastic wrap”, not “cling film”.
That all leads to my ultimate question: what is the actual etymology of the English word, “film”? In almost every instance, “film” is not a standalone object. It is almost always combinatory. “Film” doesn’t typically exist on its own; “film” is almost always layered onto something else, or “something else” is layered onto “film”. “Film” is either a covering or a container. Where does this word come from?
In English, I would say, “to envelop”, not, “to envelope”. “Envelope” is purely a noun. “Envelope” is, physically or metaphorically, an “object”. A physical “envelope” is a tangible object into which I place another tangible object. A metaphorical “envelope” is something I might be “pushing” - “pushing the envelope” means “attempting to break out of defined limits”.
In English, “envelop” and “envelope” are verb and noun, respectively. When I read the word “envelop”, I picture an amorphous mass subsuming a smaller object.
“Pelicula” is very film-centric (in the USA movie sense). It’s like “reel”; it’s specific to the industry and doesn’t translate as any particular “film.” In the USA it would be awkward today to say, “Let’s go see that film!”, whereas in Mexico it would have the meaning as current USA “movie.”
[/QUOTE]
For the record, the aluminum foil I use at work is labeled, “papel de aluminio”.
Funny you should mention “cataracts”. I’m familiar, in English, of the use of “cataract” as a synonym for “waterfall”. I’ve always been puzzled as to why the word is also used to describe an eye problem.
That reminds me of the Spanish “congelado”. As in, “mantegnar congelado” (not sure if that should be “mantegnar” or “mantegñar”) as the Spanish translation of “keep frozen”. I see that, and it’s obvious to me that “mantegnar” (or "mantegñar) is “maintain”, which matches one use of the English “keep”. And it’s equally obvious that “congelado” = English “congealed”. Except … in English, “frozen” and “congealed” have entirely different connotations. In English, “frozen” means that anything whatsoever has been lowered in temperature to the point that all liquids have become solid. aka, “ice”. But “congealed” generally refers to food fats that, at high temperature are liquid, but, once cooled, become solid. Physically, the exact same thing as water turning into ice, but applied to fats. Like, you cook up a chicken broth, and when that broth cools off, it turns into a gelatinous mass. That’s “congealed”, not “frozen”. In English, “frozen” means “reduced in temperature below 32°F (0°C)”. “Congealed” simply requires refrigeration, not “freezing”.
Well, at least give me credit for recognizing “envolver” and “envoltura” as different forms of the same idea.
And, as a chef, I have an enduring hatred for this ongoing trend of “wraps”, i.e. cold sandwiches rolled up into tortillas. As far as I’m concerned, “wraps” are bastardizations of nature’s most perfect food, the burrito.
"“Pelicula” is very film-centric (in the USA movie sense). It’s like “reel”; it’s specific to the industry and doesn’t translate as any particular “film.” In the USA it would be awkward today to say, “Let’s go see that film!”, whereas in Mexico it would have the meaning as current USA “movie.”
[/QUOTE]
Missed the edit window, missed editing the above bit out of my post.
I wasn’t referring to you or what you said–just a general notion that often appears on this board, where people say, “English does X, unlike other languages.” Generally all languages find ways to do the same things–they just might do it differently.
But I have a question: It’s been I while since I’ve worked in a restaurant. Are you saying the products from distributors like Sysco all have equal Spanish to English labeling uniformly?