“Translating Academic Writing: Human vs. Machine” (article)<\/a><\/p>\ntranscript<\/h2>\n
(intro music)<\/span><\/p>\nVanessa: Hello all, and welcome to kNOw Women in Philosophy: Alice Analysis. We are your hosts, Vanessa<\/span><\/p>\nSydney: … and Sydney. In today\u2019s episode, we\u2019ll be looking at some archival materials from the life of 20th-century American philosopher and logician, Alice Ambrose. Through these pieces, we\u2019ll gain some insight into how Alice fit into the philosophical community of her time and how her work was valued.<\/span><\/p>\nVanessa: The first archival material we have the letter by Ariel F. Compiran which was written on July 27th, 1986 addressed to Alice and her husband Morris Lazerowitz. Compiran is a philosophy professor at Universidad Veracruzana. In this letter, he was requesting permission to do a full translation of the essay, \u201cFree Will\u201d by Alice Ambrose and Lazerowitz which was published in English in the University’s Journal. But by this time, he had already written an abstract in Spanish for students that didn\u2019t speak English. The reason why he was now requesting to do a full translation of the essay was because he said that the journal fulfilled a needed demand for new information regarding the field of analytic philosophy, and he expressed that Alice\u2019s work is helpful and Illuminating to everyone in the University from Professors, staff, and students.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nSydney: Alice responded very promptly; it only took her about one week later, and her response is dated August 4th, 1986. She responded on behalf of Morris and herself and she said that they were more than happy to give permission for the translation. Specifically, she said that she was \u201cpleased to have it reached new readers who would otherwise not see it\u201d. She also mentions the Spanish translations of her and Morris’s books, \u201cFundamentals of Symbolic Logic\u201d and \u201cNecessity and Language\u201d which were published by The Instituto de Investigaciones Filos\u00f3ficas that Compiran also worked with. She says that she appreciates the translations and she hopes to continue the relationship with the institute. Towards the end of the letter, she takes a personal spin. She mentions the American Philosophical Association that’s going to be meeting in Boston later that year and she asks Ariel Compiran if he plans to attend. She says that if he does plan to attend, she extends an invitation to meet with each other either in Boston or in Northampton.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nVanessa: So, what I think that this reveals Alice\u2019s work is that she wanted as many people as possible to be introduced to logic and philosophy and she always did what she could to make it accessible. It also shows that she wanted to keep a long relationship with these universities, like La Universidad Veracruzana, The Instituto de Investigaciones Filos\u00f3ficas at the Universidad Nacional Aut\u00f3noma in Mexico. And so, this shows the influence in the philosophy world, as several of her works had previously been translated and people often sought after her, and Morris, I guess.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nSydney: This also reveals a lot about Alice as a person because although Compiran addressed the letter to both Alice and Morris, since they both wrote \u201cFree Will\u201d, Alice responded herself. Technically, she does use \u201cwe\u201d and first person plural to include Morris, but she signed the letter herself. So, it shows that she takes ownership over her work and she didn’t automatically defer to Morris, even though that would have maybe been the expectation of that time. Just because it\u2019s a husband and wife working together and they expect that the husband is in charge. It also shows that Alice was very warm and friendly towards her fellow philosophers, and she hopes to make connections with them. Like how she invites Compiran to visit if he happens to be going to that conference, even though she’d never met him. Based on this, Alice clearly doesn’t fit the stereotype of the hermit, loner philosopher\/academic that sometimes we see in media.<\/span><\/p>\nVanessa: Now for other examples, we have, as previously mentioned, The Fundamentals of Symbolic Logic or <\/span>Fundamentos de L\u00f3gica Simb\u00f3lica<\/span>. And so this was originally published in 1950 but was then revised in 1962. And this was obviously written in English but it was then translated to Spanish in 1968. So this was 6 years after the revised edition had been published. So, fast forward to 20 years or so- we have Necessity and Language which was originally published by Alice and Morris in 1984. And this was translated as \u201c<\/span>Necesidad Y Filosof\u00eda\u201d<\/span> and it was translated for La Universidad Nacional Aut\u00f3noma de Mexico. The first edition in Spanish was published in 1985, so it only took one year after the publication for it to be translated. And so, it shows that as her career went on, it took less and less time for her work to be translated, which shows that her work became much more notable and sought-after.<\/span><\/p>\nSydney: Yea, so, between these translations that we found… they’re only small snippets of her career, but it still says a lot about how her influence grew over time and how she also interacted with others in the field of philosophy.<\/span><\/p>\nVanessa: Thanks for listening, we hope you enjoyed this episode.<\/span><\/p>\n(outro music)\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Alice Ambrose Lazerowitz was a professor of logic and philosophy at Smith College for decades, but her influence extended well beyond Northampton. Listen to find out how Ambrose and her work were sought out across national borders and language barriers. Image by Ashley Moxo. References Ambrose, A., & Lazerowitz, M. (1962).\u00a0Fundamentals of Symbolic Logic, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5575,"featured_media":168,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-season-1"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5575"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=111"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":184,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111\/revisions\/184"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/168"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/know-women-in-philosophy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}