You don't become a translator 'for nothing'

[Midland]

Hello! I need your input.

When someone tells you, "You don't become a translator for nothing," meaning you've studied hard to become a translator and can understand both languages very well and that your knowledge is useful about the subject you are talking about (for example, the meaning of difficult words people usually don't know).

Does this expression imply "mocking" or have some other negative implications about you?

When one of my friends used this expression, I had a mixed feeling about it. Is it another alternative of saying, for example, "Great. Only you could do it" or a kind of condescending phrase?

Please let me know the subtle (or apparent?) nuances about this "you (they, he, etc.) .. not ... for nothing" expression.

Midland

 

[elroy]

Here's how I understand the sentence.

"You don't become a translator for nothing" - You don't spend all the time/effort/energy it takes to become a translator without expecting to reap any benefits.

Alternatively, it could mean "you don't become a translator for free," meaning that it takes a lot of time, effort, and energy to become one.

More context would help, but my spontaneous interpretation of the sentence was the first one.

 

[. 1]

I don't think that it was a mocking comment.
It is a statement that it is an effort to become a translator so such a decision is not made lightly.

.,,

 

[Midland]

Thanks, elroy and .,,

"You don't become a translator for nothing" - You don't spend all the time/effort/energy it takes to become a translator without expecting to reap any benefits.

I don't think that it was a mocking comment.
It is a statement that it is an effort to become a translator so such a decision is not made lightly..,,

So, that means I don't need to doubt the speaker's intention or don't need to feel embarrassed, miffed or upset when I hear this phrase.

Then can I use it to somebody older than or senior to me when I want to praise the effort of somebody having become something, as in, "You understand every balance sheet in a second or two. You haven't been in the accounting section for over 3 decades for nothing."

Please let me tell how you feel about this kind of situation.

Thank you.

Midland

 

[elroy]

Yes, I believe you could use that statement in a complimentary fashion.

 

[maxiogee]

When someone tells you, "You don't become a translator for nothing," meaning you've studied hard to become a translator and can understand both languages very well and that your knowledge is useful about the subject you are talking about (for example, the meaning of difficult words people usually don't know).

Does this expression imply "mocking" or have some other negative implications about you?

When one of my friends used this expression, I had a mixed feeling about it. Is it another alternative of saying, for example, "Great. Only you could do it" or a kind of condescending phrase?

Please let me know the subtle (or apparent?) nuances about this "you (they, he, etc.) .. not ... for nothing" expression.

Is this the sentence exactly as it was said?
If it is then it seems an unusual think to have said to someone who is already a translator. It would normally mean "one has a reason for becoming a translator" - a reason such as a love of languages, a desire to travel, or whatever. I can see no mockery in it, nor are there many nuances to it..

However, if what was said was "You didn't become a translator for nothing" then there are nuances and potential mockery in it — maybe the translation was so easy that anyone with a schoolchild's level of the language could do it.

 

[Midland]

Thank you, maxiogee.

I understand that "You don't become a translator for nothing." sounds unusual. Then, what is the proper way of saying it? "You are not a translator for nothing" is more appropriate?

And if "you didn't become ..." has a negative implication as you said, then does the past tense sentence always have such a negative impression?

For example, if someone says "You didn't go to Yale for nothing," does this imply that "You went to Yale, but it doesn't mean you are so specially brilliant because many others can do that"?

I'm a bit confused. Please enlighten me.

Midland

 

[maxiogee]

I understand that "You don't become a translator for nothing." sounds unusual. Then, what is the proper way of saying it? "You are not a translator for nothing" is more appropriate?

As I don't know what your friend was trying to say I cannot answer you.

And if "you didn't become ..." has a negative implication as you said, then does the past tense sentence always have such a negative impression?

For example, if someone says "You didn't go to Yale for nothing," does this imply that "You went to Yale, but it doesn't mean you are so specially brilliant because many others can do that"?

I'm a bit confused. Please enlighten me.

Midland

Yes, it would usually be negative. The comment "You didn't go to Yale for nothing" would be used to convey a sense of "You think you're so clever, well - you're not!". The fact that others can or do go has nothing to do with it.

 

[susanb]

Thank you, maxiogee.

I understand that "You don't become a translator for nothing." sounds unusual. Then, what is the proper way of saying it? "You are not a translator for nothing" is more appropriate?

And if "you didn't become ..." has a negative implication as you said, then does the past tense sentence always have such a negative impression?

For example, if someone says "You didn't go to Yale for nothing," does this imply that "You went to Yale, but it doesn't mean you are so specially brilliant because many others can do that"?

I'm a bit confused. Please enlighten me.

Midland

How about:
If you went to Yale, you should have got your benefits.
If you became a translator (made all this big effort), you should take advantage of it.
Let's wait for the natives, though

 

[ireney]

Midland any more context? I mean did he/she say anything before or afterwards that could help us understand?

And how about his tone/expression?

 

[Cayuga]

Yes, it would usually be negative. The comment "You didn't go to Yale for nothing" would be used to convey a sense of "You think you're so clever, well - you're not!". The fact that others can or do go has nothing to do with it.

I have to disagree, maxiogee, and not just because I went to Yale. In this case, as so often with colloquial American English, tone of voice is everything. The same sentence can be spoken genuinely or sarcastically.

"The Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776."
"Wow. You didn't get a history degree from Yale for nothing."

"Actually, it was signed over the course of the 2nd and 3rd of July. But the first public reading of it was on July 4th."
"Wow! You didn't get a history degree from Yale for nothing."

 

[Midland]

Thank you so much for your input!

About the first example, "You don't become a translator for nothing," my friend did not mean much harm, but he is a bit sarcastic. Yet I don't think he (Japanese) had the knowledge about the subtleties of this expression.

In this case, as so often with colloquial American English, tone of voice is everything. The same sentence can be spoken genuinely or sarcastically.

"The Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776."
"Wow. You didn't get a history degree from Yale for nothing."

"Actually, it was signed over the course of the 2nd and 3rd of July. But the first public reading of it was on July 4th."
"Wow! You didn't get a history degree from Yale for nothing."

Cayuga's explanation is quite clear. It depends on how you say it. Right?

Suppose "you" are Keiko, and her friend Yoko said,

(1) You didn't study abroad for nothing.
(Situation) Keiko doesn't speak English so well despite her 4 years of studying in USA, but one day Yoko found Keiko knows a lot about college talk in USA, which is of little service to career promotion. Yoko thought that at least Keiko's effort was meaningful about something Yoko didn't know.
(Nuance) A kind of mockery.

(2) You didn't study abroad for nothing.
(Situation) Keiko is an excellent speaker of English and can do the job very well. One day her friend Yoko realized Keiko has a lot of people connected to the college she went in USA and that Keiko studied abroad not just to learn English but to have a lot of connections.
(Nuance) Praise

Are these two ways of using the phrase possible? Does it all depend on the context and the tone of voice, etc.?

Sorry it's very confusing, but I really appreciate your help because this expression, to be precise, its standard translation into Japanese, is very useful but I need to avoid misunderstanding and hurting others' feelings.

Midland