However, according to my understanding, the introduction on the page is still biased, and it seems that the interpretation is deliberately promoted and the translation is belittled. On the contrary, a UN interpreter interviewed made a more objective comment on the difference between the two.
In addition, a small test of idiom translation on the official website aims to tell the audience that the interpreter will "freely translate" idioms, that is, non-word-for-word translation. But I once heard an interview with a UN interpreter, which mentioned idiom translation, and the way to deal with it should be as literal as possible. Because the speaker is very likely to also talk about the image or content of the previous idiom, if there is no previous literal translation, it may cause a breakpoint in meaning.
View more about The Interpreter reviews
