Reading Notes on Part One

六六七

Reader: 王加琴
Reading Time: 32 days
Reading Task: Part One
Summary of the Content:
Part One systematically identifying and eliminating redundant language in Chinese-to-English translation. It categorizes five major types of “unnecessary words” with annotated examples, including unnecessary nouns and verbs, unnecessary modifiers, redundant twins,saying the same thing twice and repeated references to the same thing.
Evaluation：
There are many strengths. Firstly, its approach is to give examples, using side-by-side comparisons (A: Chinglish / B: Revised) to expose subtle redundancies. For instance, it clarifies how nominalizations reduce vitality from expression. Besides, the classification transforms abstract “wordiness” into feasible categories. By isolating “category nouns”, it equips us to self-diagnose. Additionally, it highlights how Chinese process-oriented thinking conflicts with English’s preference for result-oriented verbs.
However, it still has some limitations. Some “redundant’ phrases may serve rhetorical emphasis in persuasive writing, but it treats them as universally incorrect. It’s also over-simplified. Some unreasonable modifiers such as “serious disaster” could be contextually valid.
Reflection:
Firstly, this part revolutionized my editing process. I now examine every noun-verb pair, enhancing clarity in technical documents. And the “redundant twins” concept exposed my unconscious reliance on emphasis, pushing me toward precision over lengthiness.  
Besides, its rules extend beyond translation to global communication. In multinational teams, eliminating redundancy prevents ambiguities. However, the standardized approach risks killing stylistic diversity. For instance, poetic or rhetorical contexts may intentionally use repetition. Balancing concision with expressive intent remains a delicate skill.  
What’s more, I recognize that how Language One structures influence Language Two. This awareness fosters intentional translation in professional settings.