News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.6K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1.2K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 459     0 

2015 Federal Election

Quote of the French language debate "Assad has killed 8 times more people than ISIS" - Elizabeth May. I'm no fan of Assad but could anybody seriously say they would rather be under ISIS than Assad?
 
I can't believe that this election could be won/lost over a fracking niqab. Is this what that biggot Lynton Crosby is bringing to this election?
 
I was really surprised to see Mulcair jump on Trudeau for his father's handling of the October crisis in the debate last night. Given yesterday was the anniversary of Trudeau's death, it seemed a little cruel and unsporting - and attempt to throw Justin Trudeau off? And hardly relevant to anything up for debate these days.

What seems particularly ironic to me, is that Mulcair would ever go in that direction, given the unfortunate relationship between the FLQ terrorists and the NDP in the late 1970s and into the 1980s. The NDP did ultimately take steps to distance themselves from convicted FLQ assassin Paul Rose - but it wasn't quick. And to this day, the NDP continues to court those in Quebec who sympathized and even supported the assassination of the deputy Premier.

So why did Mulcair of all people open this to debate?
 
nfitz said:
I was really surprised to see Mulcair jump on Trudeau for his father's handling of the October crisis in the debate last night. Given yesterday was the anniversary of Trudeau's death, it seemed a little cruel and unsporting - and attempt to throw Justin Trudeau off? And hardly relevant to anything up for debate these days.

What seems particularly ironic to me, is that Mulcair would ever go in that direction, given the unfortunate relationship between the FLQ terrorists and the NDP in the late 1970s and into the 1980s. The NDP did ultimately take steps to distance themselves from convicted FLQ assassin Paul Rose - but it wasn't quick. And to this day, the NDP continues to court those in Quebec who sympathized and even supported the assassination of the deputy Premier.

So why did Mulcair of all people open this to debate?
Click to expand...

Easy, his support is Quebec is collapsing and bring up the October Crisis is a sure attempt to do guilt by association.

AoD
 
And it seemed like Trudeau was waiting for that moment to pounce on Mulcair or Harper over bringing up his father. His response was well prepared and definitely one of the debate's highlights.

While many criticized Mulcair for his quick shots at other candidates, I actually enjoyed them. It's always nice to see a bit of humour added to debates. Trudeau and Harper were good sports and seemed to enjoy them too.
 
Tuscani01 said:
And it seemed like Trudeau was waiting for that moment to pounce on Mulcair or Harper over bringing up his father. His response was well prepared and definitely one of the debate's highlights.

While many criticized Mulcair for his quick shots at other candidates, I actually enjoyed them. It's always nice to see a bit of humour added to debates. Trudeau and Harper were good sports and seemed to enjoy them too.
Click to expand...

I am surprised he didn't go further and bring up the fact that his father helped to create a Canada that is modern, outward looking and fearless and dig at Harper on that score.

AoD
 
I actually attended last night's debate....have never gone to one before and since it was right across from the office and I would be watching it at home anyway and the road closures were going to make getting out of here in rush hour a mess I decided to go.

For those who watched from home...was there any discussion around how much of the debate (particularly from Trudeau and Mulcair) was conducted in French? My personal read was that their campaigns have figured out that Quebec is very much "in play" and they were speaking to to Quebec voters for that reason.

It left much of the live audience (primarily, as you would imagine, anglophones) watching the debate on the large screens that had a very slow and bizarre translation service. I am not a particular fan of either gentleman but I give them enough credit to know that, often, the tranlsations we saw could not possibly be what they were saying.

Like, Nfitz, I think that the October crisis was a bizarre (and inappropriate) thing to bring up.....it was in the context of the C-51 debate and he was pointing out that the NDP, unlike the Libs, opposed C-51 as they, alone, opposed use of the war measures act so long ago.

The debate as a whole was a bit more substantive than previous ones....the moderator did allow too much drifting to non-foreign policy matters but it was a good effort.

Like I said, first time I have attended one live and certainly an experience I would recommend to anyone that had an interest in politics (although, hopefully you can attend somewhere where they put a bit more thought into how to get the audience into the venue in the face of the protest groups).
 
TOareaFan said:
For those who watched from home...was there any discussion around how much of the debate (particularly from Trudeau and Mulcair) was conducted in French? My personal read was that their campaigns have figured out that Quebec is very much "in play" and they were speaking to to Quebec voters for that reason.

It left much of the live audience (primarily, as you would imagine, anglophones) watching the debate on the large screens that had a very slow and bizarre translation service. I am not a particular fan of either gentleman but I give them enough credit to know that, often, the tranlsations we saw could not possibly be what they were saying.
Click to expand...

My only complaint with the debate was the production value, and most of the issues came from the translations.

Watching on TV, I was stuck listening to a shrilly voice translating the French portions into English, but the lady kept stumbling on words and leaving lots of gaps. Felt like I was likely missing some things as a result. When the leaders switched back to English, the translator was often still translating the French portion, which would cut off the beginning of the English.

There was also a few times where the translator failed to translate anything at all... as if she just got up and went to the bathroom. Somewhere mid-way, the voice switched to a man, who then also disappeared.

CPAC had a different group of translators, but following the debate on Twitter, it sounded like people watching the CPAC feed weren't happy with their translators either. One person even posted a pic of them watching both feeds at the same time to make sure they weren't missing anything.

It should not have been a bilingual debate. I don't think they thought it through.
 
Tuscani01 said:
My only complaint with the debate was the production value, and most of the issues came from the translations.

Watching on TV, I was stuck listening to a shrilly voice translating the French portions into English, but the lady kept stumbling on words and leaving lots of gaps. Felt like I was likely missing some things as a result. When the leaders switched back to English, the translator was often still translating the French portion, which would cut off the beginning of the English.

There was also a few times where the translator failed to translate anything at all... as if she just got up and went to the bathroom. Somewhere mid-way, the voice switched to a man, who then also disappeared.

CPAC had a different group of translators, but following the debate on Twitter, it sounded like people watching the CPAC feed weren't happy with their translators either. One person even posted a pic of them watching both feeds at the same time to make sure they weren't missing anything.

It should not have been a bilingual debate. I don't think they thought it through.
Click to expand...
So the translation was equally bad as we got at the event ;)

I think any debate in Canada billing itself as a "national debate" has to be bilingual. Also, since one of the party leaders is clearly stronger in French than English, it would appear biased if you restricted it to English. (IMO)
 
I didn't watch ... do you mean like closed captioning?

Interpreters don't work solely with the spoken word, so yes I was simplifying a bit. But during a debate or a speech, you're listening to an interpreter, not a translator (unless the organizers cheaped out, but even a translator becomes an interpreter when providing working verbally). They are often given the text of a prepared speech (you hear this in the Throne Speech, for example), so they can verify vocabulary and not be stumbling over syntax, but they have to be prepared to react if the speaker deviates from the script. Debates are difficult because people speak over each other, they don't always speak in complete sentences, and they can suddenly throw in something totally off the cuff. Interpreters also spell each other off, just like air traffic controllers (and sign-language interpreters!), so that would explain the break, but it shouldn't be obvious to the listener.

Becoming an excellent interpreter takes years, and it's highly stressful (we've all heard examples of mis-interpretations between international delegations). The debate organizers might not have been able to hire highly skilled, practiced, political interpreters.

(By the way, the reason this is a bugbear is that I have a degree in translation & interpretation)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top