add translation-review-comment skill and doc review workflow

- skills/translation-review-comment/SKILL.md: 14 rules distilled from 473
  Wade editor comments across 3 manuscripts
- translate-files/佛法与企业管理/review-comments.dj: manual comment
  reference for maple's translation (anchored comments not possible via API)
- docs/google-docs-comment-journey.dj: full journey log from OAuth setup
  to discovering Google Drive API's anchor limitation
This commit is contained in:
iacore
2026-06-21 10:13:32 +08:00
parent fe603f15fc
commit 71eccff31c
10 changed files with 1008 additions and 18 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
# Common Translation Issues Taxonomy
From 译文常见问题与案例示范 (Common Issues in Translation, 2026-03-30).
Categorized by accuracy and readability.
## Accuracy Issues
Standard: convey meaning at the content level, not word-by-word correspondence.
"Translation is not simply word conversion."
"You must understand what thought it is actually trying to express."
### 1. Omission (漏翻)
Content present in source but absent from target.
Example:
> 随着黑白牌的运用,象征这部分已能为大家提供系统的学习和训练资料。
>
> With the help of the Black-and-White Cards, this approach now offers a structured
> system of study.
>
> *Missing:* 学习和训练 (learning and training) — "study" only covers half.
> Also: 象征这部分 (symbolizing this aspect) is dropped.
### 2. Mistranslation (错翻)
#### a. Over-free translation, weakening the original
> "道德"一词,人们耳熟能详。即使在道德日渐边缘化的今天,人们依然会用"这人
> 很有道德""这么做太缺德了"来评价周遭人事。
>
> "Morality" is a familiar term, and even in today's world, where it has become
> increasingly marginalized, expressions like "immorality" are still commonly used
> to describe certain behaviors and individuals.
>
> *Issue:* The source gives two concrete colloquial expressions ("这人很有道德" /
> "这么做太缺德了") — the target collapses them into a single abstract "expressions
> like 'immorality'." The vividness and specificity are lost.
#### b. Over-literal translation, harming comprehension
> 作为素菜馆,应该尽量提供绿色食品。
>
> A vegetarian restaurant should strive to offer green food.
>
> *Issue:* 绿色食品 = "safe and healthy food" (Chinese idiom), not
> "green food" (color of food in English). → `safe and healthy options`
#### c. Misunderstanding the source
> 政府现在倡导文化自信,习主席提出的"讲仁爱,重民本,守诚信,崇正义,尚和合,求大同"。
>
> President Xi Jinping has called for a confident embrace of Chinese culture,
> highlighting virtues such as...
>
> *Issue:* Two different subjects: the government advocates cultural confidence;
> Xi proposed the six virtues. The target merges both into Xi alone.
#### d. Wrong word choice causing misunderstanding
> 提供一些通俗易懂的法宝
>
> with easy Buddhist materials
>
> *Issue:* 通俗易懂 means "accessible to a general audience," not "easy/simple."
> The Dharma can be accessible but is never "simple." → `accessible`
### 3. Overtranslation (多翻)
Adding parentheticals or expansions not in the source.
> 出家人不仅要对三宝、师长、道友建立没有染污的情感
>
> Monastics should cultivate pure and untainted emotions not only toward the Three
> Jewels (the Buddha, the Dharma, the Sangha), their teachers (The Head Monk and
> Abbot), and fellow practitioners...
>
> *Issue:* Parenthetical expansions like "(the Buddha, the Dharma, the Sangha)"
> and "(The Head Monk and Abbot)" are not in the source and should be removed.
### 4. Terminology Errors
- 身心 → `body and heart mind` → should be `body and mind`
- 甘露别院 → `Ganlu Bieyuan The Amrita Retreat Center` → official: `Amrita Retreat Center`
- "六字" → `six characters` → should be `six words`
### 5. Detail-Level Issues
- Tone appropriateness
- Citation source authority
- CN→EN conversion rules: numerals, units, date formats
- Proper noun handling: transliteration vs. translation
## Readability Issues
Standard: fluent sentences, graceful expression, matching target reader habits.
"Conform to what foreign readers find readable."
"Concise, clear, accurate, not draggy, meaning clear."
### 1. Redundancy & Wordiness
#### a. Long / nested sentences
Sentences with too many clauses that can't be read in one breath. Split them.
#### b. Passive voice overuse
> 如果对肉食消费得少,乃至完全不消费,那么从业者自然随之减少,很多动物就可以摆脱被屠宰、割截的厄运。
>
> If meat consumption were reduced, or even eliminated entirely, then the number of
> businesses involved would naturally be lessened. This way, many animals could be
> spared from the adversity of being slaughtered and butchered.
>
> *Issue:* Three passives in two sentences. Active rewrite is more concise:
> *If people consume less meat — or none at all — fewer will work in the industry,
> and many animals will be spared the fate of slaughter and dismemberment.*
#### c. Nominalization (动词名词化)
> 我们前期倡导的正念禅修,比较重视培养觉知。
>
> In the early stages of mindfulness practice, we placed greater emphasis on
> cultivating awareness.
>
> *Issue:* "placed greater emphasis on" is nominalized. → `we emphasized`
### 2. Poor Structure (结构不当)
Top-heavy sentences — the main clause arrives too late.
> 没有如法的生活,不能严格要求自己,在今天这个红尘滚滚的时代,我们简直是没希望的。
>
> Weathering today's deluge of worldly temptation, without a Dharma-aligned lifestyle
> and strict self-discipline, we have no hope.
>
> *Issue:* The condition clauses pile up before the main point. Restructure:
> *Without a Dharma-aligned lifestyle and strict self-discipline, we have no hope
> of weathering today's deluge of worldly temptations.*
### 3. Wrong Word Choice (用词不当)
> 当一个人开始关心生命的大问题时,对小问题自然云淡风轻。
>
> when we begin to contemplate the profound questions of existence, the banal
> iterations of daily life lose their significance.
>
> *Issue:* "banal iterations" is obscure. Simplify.
### 4. Weak Flow & Transitions (流畅性 & 连接词)
> 修行的核心就是止恶行善。为什么某种行为能成为生命的主导?就是因为不断重复。
>
> The essence of cultivation lies in ceasing unwholesome actions and promoting
> wholesome ones. But why do certain behaviors dominate our lives? Because of
> constant repetition.
>
> *Issue:* Adding transition words improves flow. The "But" here creates a false
> contrast — the second sentence is explanation, not counterpoint.
## Detection Checklist
When reviewing, run through:
- [ ] Any missing content? (compare paragraph-by-paragraph)
- [ ] Any added content? (parentheticals, expansions not in source)
- [ ] Any over-literal renderings that don't work in English? (idioms, set phrases)
- [ ] Any over-free renderings that lose specificity? (concrete examples → abstract)
- [ ] Subject confusion? (two actors merged into one)
- [ ] Buddhist terminology checked against terms DB?
- [ ] Sentences too long to read in one breath? (split at natural breaks)
- [ ] Passive voice clustering? (3+ in a paragraph)
- [ ] Nominalized verbs? ("placed emphasis on" → "emphasized")
- [ ] Top-heavy sentence structure? (main clause buried after long preamble)
- [ ] Obscure word choices? (would a general reader understand?)
- [ ] Missing or misleading transition words?
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
# Deliberation Protocol (审议规程)
From 东方译场审议手册 (Oriental Translation Review Manual, 2026-03-25).
Guidance from Ven. Jiqun on translation review culture and process.
## Core Standards
1. **Accuracy (准确性)** — primary. Convey content-level meaning, not word-by-word
correspondence. Deepen accuracy iteratively; grasp the "inner spirit" rather than
fixating on literal vs free translation.
2. **Readability (可读性)** — secondary. Fluent sentences, graceful expression. Do
not pursue endless revision; what is achievable now is the best for now.
**Test**: invite 510 readers to read aloud and give feedback — is it clear or
obscure? Is it concise? Is the meaning clear?
## Decision-Making
When opinions differ:
- Compare which version is more accurate and more readable
- Do NOT cling to your own view (不执着于己见)
- If two people cannot decide, invite 510 to read and vote
- Remember: the translation is for the READERS, not for yourself
## Core Principle: Rejoice First (随喜)
Before flagging issues, affirm what is good. Professional translation companies
emphasize positive feedback to build translator confidence and good collaboration.
Criticism alone — however precise — breeds resistance and harms the final result.
In the Oriental Translation Workshop, rejoicing in others' merits cultivates
sympathetic joy (随喜), compassion, selflessness, and boundless merit — while
encouraging others' wholesome efforts.
**Practice**: develop eyes that SEE the merits in a translation. Rejoice with
genuine gladness. Examples:
- "So many technical terms and complex logic here — you handled it beautifully!"
- "This word choice is exactly right."
- "The prose is so clean and fluid!"
- "Excellent!" / "Good word choice!"
## Three Principles for Giving Suggestions
1. **Lower the self** — use compassionate, gentle, skillful language
2. **Be diligent and attentive** — find the actual problems
3. **Tier your suggestions** — make clear what MUST change, what COULD improve,
and what needs DISCUSSION
## Three-Tier Issue System
### Level 1: Spelling, Grammar, Format (拼写、语法、格式)
**Action**: fix directly, keep tracked changes visible.
May annotate for translator development:
- "MPI format uses American English — `toward` not `towards`."
- "Use `Chan` here, not `Zen`."
- "MPI format does not use diacritics — `Yogacara` not `Yogācāra`."
### Level 2: Omission, Mistranslation, Wordiness, Tone, Word Choice
(漏翻、错翻、啰嗦、语气问题、用词问题)
**Action**: preferably flag for translator to fix themselves; may also fix
directly with tracked changes.
Suggested language:
- "Did we miss something here?"
- "This sentence is quite long — could we split it into 23?"
- "The translation here differs from the original. It reads as if the teacher
is saying X, but I think he means Y. What do you think?"
- "This word feels a bit strong here — your thoughts?"
- (After direct adjustment) "I tightened this sentence — does this work?"
### Level 3: Citation Versions, Slightly Awkward Wording, Marginal Readability
(引用版本不当、用词稍微不当、阅读体验略差)
**Action**: flag and discuss with translator.
Suggested language:
- "I found another citation version that may be more concise — which do you prefer?"
- "Could we use this word instead? Might fit better."
- "Could you take another look at this passage? I feel readability could improve
but I'm not sure how — your thoughts?"
## Tone Guide
- Address the translator as 菩萨 (Bodhisattva) — respectful peer address
- Use questions, not commands: "Could we...?" "What do you think?" "Would this work?"
- Frame as collaborative inquiry, not correction