By Sneha Gautam
The chosen text is from the French newspaper Le Monde which is being used everywhere throughout the world just as in France. The text discuss about how the French tend to go to work when they are sick, when they should stay in their bedroom at home.
Original text
Aller travailler alors qu’on est souffrant serait-il une maladie particulièrement française ? A l’encontre des idées toutes faites sur l’absentéisme dont feraient preuve les salariés hexagonaux, une note de la direction de l’animation de la recherche, des études et des statistiques (Dares) publiée, mercredi 5 août, tend à démontrer qu’au contraire les Français auraient tendance à aller au travail alors qu’ils devraient plutôt garder la chambre.
En 2016, selon les données Insee, les salariés (public et privé confondus) ont déclaré avoir été malades onze jours en moyenne. Sur ces onze jours, ils sont restés chez eux huit jours, mais ont préféré se rendre sur leur lieu de travail les trois autres journées. Autrement dit, un jour de maladie sur quatre est passé au travail, selon cette étude qui s’appuie sur les déclarations de 27 000 salariés et sur l’enquête « Conditions de travail et risques psychosociaux » de 2016. Ce phénomène ne concerne toutefois que les salariés en bonne ou relativement bonne santé, qui sont ponctuellement malades. Les salariés en mauvaise santé, souffrant de pathologies longues et qui cumulent de nombreux jours d’absence dans l’année, sont peu ou pas concernés par le présentéisme.
Peur de perdre son emploi
Quels sont les motifs qui poussent ainsi les salariés à préférer leur bureau − ou leur poste de travail − au calme de leur domicile ? « La propension au présentéisme dépend fortement des conditions de travail », répond Ceren Inan, statisticien à la Dares et auteur de cette étude inédite. Paradoxalement, plus le travail est intense, envahissant − débordant sur la vie privée, par exemple ou contraint −, plus le présentéisme est affirmé. De même, le sentiment de ne pas disposer des moyens nécessaires pour faire correctement son travail est facteurs de présentéisme − le salarié craignant que son absence n’aggrave encore les choses à son retour ou bien que la charge ne retombe sur les épaules des collègues.
Literal Translation
Would going to work while you are ill be a particularly French disease? Contrary to ready-made ideas on absenteeism shown by French employees, a note from the direction of the animation of research, studies and statistics (Dares) published, Wednesday August 5, tends to demonstrate that on the contrary, the French tend to go to work when they should rather keep the room.
In 2016, according to INSEE data, employees (public and private together) declared that they had been sick for eleven days on average. Out of these eleven days, they stayed at home for eight days, but preferred to go to their workplace the other three days. In other words, one in four sick days is spent at work, according to this study which is based on the declarations of 27,000 employees and on the 2016 “Working conditions and psychosocial risks” survey. However, this phenomenon only concerns employees in good or relatively good health, who are occasionally ill. Employees in poor health, suffering from long pathologies and who accumulate many days of absence during the year, are little or not affected by presenteeism.
Fear of losing your job
What are the reasons that push employees to prefer their office - or their workstation - to the quiet of their home? "The propensity to presenteeism strongly depends on working conditions", answers Ceren Inan, statistician at Dares and author of this unpublished study. Paradoxically, the more intense and intrusive the work - spilling over into private life, for example or being constrained - the more presenteeism is asserted. Likewise, the feeling of not having the necessary means to do a job properly is a factor of presenteeism - the employee fearing that his absence will make matters worse when he returns or that the burden will fall on the shoulders of colleagues.
Pros
In this content, I got the chance to learn different new words and figured out how to make an interpretation of the source text into the target language. In this the essential and exceptionally central point which I have picked up is tht during the interpretation we should not change the exacting importance of the words. The more I will translate or work with these types of texts the more I will expertise in this field.
Cons
While translating I took care about the language, that I should not change the exacting eaning of the tet, the significance of the words, or the epressions. Numerous words were hard which I need to adapt yet so I needed to look through it out all alone and set it in the deciphered content. Misinterpretation of one word changes the whole meaning of the sentence so it took lot of patience and attention to translate.
Strategy
In the broader sense, any act of speaking or writing depends on the willingness to communicate with the other. It is the linguist Martinet according to him, language is an instrument of communication according to which human experience is analyzed differently in each community. In general, language is a means of communicating messages, but according to Martinet, language aims more at means that make it possible to achieve a communication objective.
In translation, we communicate between two different languages, but by communicating between two languages, this communication is achieved because of parallelism of thought and parallelism of situation no longer parallelism of expression. In this translation process, we also encounter certain features of a situation in which the two different texts produce common features or of the same situation which allows two texts to communicate well. We can thus say that the translation depends on the interchangeability of the texts in which the source language and the arrival language are left in the same situation thus establishing coherent relations through the same relevant features.
