Lost or Twisted in Translation?

On 7th December 2021, BBC Corespondent in The Hague, Anna Holligan , published an article on about Princess Amalia on the occasion of her 18th birthday. I read the original English and the Persian translation (published on 11th December 2021 on BBC Persian) of this article and noticed numerous inconsistencies between the two texts. In this article, I present a side by side comparison between the two texts and point out the discrepancies between the original and translated text and how it has impacted the implications of the content.

One of the main reasons that I started the podcast and newsletter series of Your Native Analyst was to contextualize the news about Iran and the Middle East, for the European and the Dutch politicians as well as the general public, and by doing so unveil the nuances that are?“lost in translation”. In this article, I demonstrate how the content of a relatively non-political issue has been exploited in translation. The aim is not to evaluate the quality of the original article written by Anna Holligan . The aim is to reveal how significant pieces of information and important nuances are lost, or better to say twisted, in this article. I hope after reading this article the readers, specially our European and Dutch representatives, modulate their when negotiating with the Iranian government, and collectively move towards a just and sustainable international community.

Two Different Headlines with Two Different Inferences

The Headline of the original English article says: "Amalia: Heir to the Dutch throne keeps it normal at 18" (see the header image of this article). It's a positive description of the "normality" of Amalia's life. However, the Persian translation of this article, not only does not use the same headline, but also picks a negative tone by indicating that the Dutch Heir to the throne is still not ready to be/become the Queen. One might wonder: firstly, why the Persian translation has picked a completely different headline for the exactly the same article written by the same journalist? secondly, why the Persian translation chooses to use a negative headline and instead of referring to the "abilities" of the future Queen, refer to "lack of abilities"; thirdly, in the whole article, there is only ONE sentence which refers to Princess Amalia talking about not being fully ready; from the original English version: "Amalia herself believes she isn't ready for the role of queen and would ask her mother to fill in until she is."; why would BBC Persian pick a segment for the Headline which has no further explanation on what Princess Amalia could have meant by this sentence.

A Crown Princess with No Agency

The original English version of the article, refers to the actions of Princess Amalia in active voice meaning that she is placed as the "subject" of the sentence and leads her own action; whereas in the Persian translation, a passive voice is frequently used meaning that she is placed as the "object" of the sentence and the actions lead her. For instance:

1. The tagline under the main image of the article in the original English version reads: "Crown Princess Amalia has led a relatively normal life in the Netherlands" which is clearly indicating that she is in charge of her actions and life. However, the Persian translation of the article claims: "The life of Crown Princess Amalia has been relatively normal", which places her in a passive position: the life of her (passive) has been normal, instead of she (active) has led a normal life.
2. The first sentence of the Persian translation article is also another example of taking away the "agency" from Princess Amalia: "It seems that the [current] heir to the Dutch throne, right from the beginning, has been ordered for a country whose national motto is 'be normal'". Again, the passive structure of the sentence clearly removes the agency of Princess Amalia and paints her as a subordinate "posted from abroad" object. The original English sentence is: "For a country whose national motto is 'be normal', the heir to the Dutch throne is a pretty good fit". Quite a contrast to what the Persian translation presents.

Homosexuality: Not Important

The original English version of the article tells us that "Homosexuality is no big deal in her family". When we describe an act or situation as "no big deal", it means that it has little to no consequences for the one who commits the act or the ones who get into that specific situation. This is very different than calling the act or situation "not important". Importnat means it has significant worth or value.

Yet, the Persian translation of the article, has chosen to translate the sentence as follows: "Homosexuality is not important in her family", which could easily be interpreted that the Dutch royal family has no value for homosexuality, whereas the original sentence explicitly meant that in the royal family there are no consequences for being homosexual.

Amalia: a PR Project

In the original English version of the article, towards the end we read: "And yet our understanding of her has been filtered through a PR lens and an authorized autobiography." A soft skeptical reference to the clean representation of Princess Amalia. Yet, the Persian translation takes it several stages further and claims: "However, her image is created and burnished by a PR project and an official autobiography." One may wonder again, why would BBC Persian present such a negative image of the Dutch Crown Princess?

Misspelling the name of the King

Last but definitely not the least, the Persian translation of the article has misspelled the name of the Dutch King: instead of Willem-Alexander, they have typed his name as Wellim-Alexander. There is no excuse for that, absolutely none.

For a moment, put these pieces of information in a broader context: For thousands of years, Iran (Persia) has been a monarchy until the so-called Islamic Revolution of 1979, which converted the monarchy into a mishmash of a political systems that the world had never seen before. I dubbed it the Mule of Political Systems , and have written often about the systematic violation of human rights by this regime.

One of the opponents of this regime is the Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi living in exile since 1979. One may wonder whether the Persian translation of this article is implicitly trying to "hint" that the Iranian Crown Prince is still not ready to take the crown? Or he is a PR project created and burnished by some other forces? Or he has no agency of his own.

One may wonder, in a country where sexual minorities are prosecuted and executed on regular basis, should an article about the freedom of sexual orientation of a young female teenager be presented as "not important"? Shouldn't BBC News and BBC Persian take the opportunity to give a better example for respecting and valuing all forms of being?