Acing the Classics translation test (Expert Oxford & Cambridge Application Advice)
This post is aimed at the translation test that candidates who study Greek and/or Latin for A Level will sit. Different considerations apply to the Language Aptitude Test (Oxford) and language aptitude interview (Cambridge) – this is a topic all of its own, for another post.
Most of the Oxbridge preparation process is exhilarating and a little bit glamorous. You read new books, think bold and daring thoughts, craft a glittering personal statement, picture yourself sparring across a coffee-stained, ancient desk with your interviewers … and then there’s the translation test.
When you’re gearing up for interview, it’s easy to forget about this humble little hurdle. This means it’s also easy to forget how important it is. Classicists still put a premium on stylish and accurate translation, so you get a lot of credit for performing well.
More importantly still, the test is easy to assess and hard to argue with, so can provide a convenient way of picking one candidate over another. Whilst it’s hard for admissions tutors to compare two students’ interview performances if they have radically different styles, it’s easy just to pick the one with a higher translation score.
This means it’s easy for them to differentiate you based on your test score. However, it’s not necessarily easy for you to differentiate yourself. This is because a translation that might score you full marks in A Level may not get you full marks here. You need to go the extra mile to stand out. That’s all very well – but how do you do it?
Mercifully, Cambridge has given us a big clue in publishing its mark scheme. It’s reasonable to assume this isn’t radically different from Oxford’s, so we’ll use this as a guide to both tests, both of which get you to translate a passage (or passages) of similar levels of difficulty. The Cambridge exercise is marked out of 10 on the following criteria:
[9-10] Excellent understanding of the passage. Few, if any, mistakes in accidence/syntax or gaps in vocabulary. Consistently successful improvements on a literal translation. Meaning conveyed stylishly and fluently throughout.
[7-8] Good understanding of the passage. Some mistakes in accidence/syntax and some gaps in vocabulary, but not significant enough to prevent basic comprehension. Some improvements on a literal translation and good overall fluency of English.
[5-6] Incomplete understanding of the passage. Several mistakes in accidence/syntax and/or gaps in vocabulary with some affecting comprehension in crucial places. Translation mostly literal and lacking fluency of English.
[3-4] Limited understanding of the passage. Mistakes in accidence/syntax and gaps in vocabulary throughout, serious and numerous enough to prevent accurate comprehension in most places.
[1-2] Little or no understanding of the passage. Only shows knowledge of isolated vocabulary and accidence/syntax.
There are two big differences between these criteria and those you’ll be familiar with from A Level.
(1) Oxbridge tests have less tolerance for error
The A Level approach is to divide the passage up into sections of around 10-15 words and award you marks out of 5 for each section. You’re allowed one “slight error” per section, which includes getting the “incorrect person or tense” of a verb.
By contrast, the Cambridge marking criteria above are far less forgiving. In the Oxbridge test, every mistake has the capacity to affect your mark. The key message from this is: be as precise as possible.
Note the emphasis on vocabulary. Given that it’s an aptitude test, you might think the examiners wouldn’t be too worried about how much you know. The message from these criteria is: they are. Time spending learning vocab is time well spent (just make sure you learn how each word declines or conjugates).
(2) Style is important
Style isn’t prioritised at A Level, but it’s a vital component of the Oxbridge assessment criteria. To ace this test, you need “Consistently successful improvements on a literal translation” with meaning conveyed “stylishly and fluently throughout.” Making “some improvements” on a literal translation and having “good overall fluency” of English isn’t enough.
Obviously, to hit the “few, if any, mistakes” criterion, you need to show what the passage means. This requires a delicate balancing act: you need to reassure the examiner you’re not fudging the meaning, but you also need to depart from literalism. This is made more difficult by the fact that the passages (like the one quoted below) are chosen to be difficult to render into natural English. Getting top marks may require a little ingenuity.
The approach I’d suggest is therefore a moderately conservative one. Identify the literal meaning, tweak it a bit to make it more readable, and allow yourself one or two flourishes in the passage. Improvement on a literal translation can be as simple as rendering militibus captis as “after they had captured the soldiers” rather than “with the soldiers having been captured”.
Worked example
The sentence quoted below comes from the Cambridge sample paper. This sentence is the opening to the Cicero’s first Philippic:
antequam de republica, patres conscripti, dicam ea, quae dicenda hoc tempore arbitror, exponam vobis breviter consilium et profectionis et reversionis meae.
A literal translation would be something like:
Before I say those things about the republic, members of the Senate, which I think need to be said at this time, I will explain briefly to you the plan for my setting out and turning back.
This translates almost all the words accurately, but “plan” doesn’t seem right here given that it seems to refer to an action taken in the past.
A more idiomatic translation might run:
Members of the Senate, before I say what I think this hour demands about the republic, I shall briefly explain to you what my reason was for setting out and turning back.
This is likely to score higher than the first. It reads better (“stylishly and fluently”/“improvements on a literal translation”); it finds meaning for every word of the Latin (“few, if any, mistakes”); and it carries a hint of gravitas.
However, this is not necessarily the best, and certainly not the only way of translating this passage. Indeed, rendering dicenda hoc tempore as “what the hour demands” might be a step too far from the Latin for some examiners on its own. However, a flourish like this shows that you have confidence and you can get away with a risk or two provided (1) you don’t do this in every sentence and (2) each flourish contributes to bringing out the meaning of the Latin.
The best way to make this judgement call is by using the analysis skills you’ve developed in studying you’re A Level set text – think about the passage’s style as well as its meaning. In this case, hoc tempore is emphatic (more so than e.g. nunc) and closely linked in the word order to dicenda, which arguably justifies my translation. In the heat of the moment, however, I might opt for something more conservative – “what I must say at the present time” – which might score higher anyway.
Summary
If you do one thing between now and your translation test, revise your vocab and grammar like you would for an exam.
If you do two things, read through some past papers and think about how you’d translate them.
If you do three, write out alternative translations – one more literal, one more idiomatic – and compare them against each other and the marking criteria.
Good luck!
This article was written by Tom (Oxford - Classics).
If you find this content useful, please visit Tom's profile for further information on applying to Oxbridge. Alternatively, book support now with Tom, using the form below.
Author: Tom - Oxford
BA/MPhil Classics
I’ve been lucky enough to study Classics at both Oxford and Cambridge. This means I’ve had experience of the admissions systems at both universities, as well as of the important differences in teaching and course structure.
