ProZ.com translation contests »
Bon voyage: "Stories about travel" » English to Korean

Competition in this pair is now closed.

Discussion and feedback about the competition in this language pair may now be provided by visiting the "Discussion & feedback" page for this pair. Entries may also be individually discussed by clicking the "Discuss" link next to any listed entry.

Source text in English

The moment when, 50 years ago, Neil Armstrong planted his foot on the surface of the Moon inspired awe, pride and wonder around the world. This newspaper argued that “man, from this day on, can go wheresoever in the universe his mind wills and his ingenuity contrives…to the planets, sooner rather than later, man is now certain to go.” But no. The Moon landing was an aberration, a goal achieved not as an end in itself but as a means of signalling America’s extraordinary capabilities. That point, once made, required no remaking. Only 571 people have been into orbit; and since 1972 no one has ventured much farther into space than Des Moines is from Chicago.

The next 50 years will look very different. Falling costs, new technologies, Chinese and Indian ambitions, and a new generation of entrepreneurs promise a bold era of space development. It will almost certainly involve tourism for the rich and better communications networks for all; in the long run it might involve mineral exploitation and even mass transportation. Space will become ever more like an extension of Earth—an arena for firms and private individuals, not just governments. But for this promise to be fulfilled the world needs to create a system of laws to govern the heavens—both in peacetime and, should it come to that, in war.

The development of space thus far has been focused on facilitating activity down below—mainly satellite communications for broadcasting and navigation. Now two things are changing. First, geopolitics is stoking a new push to send humans beyond the shallows of low-Earth orbit. China plans to land people on the Moon by 2035. President Donald Trump’s administration wants Americans to be back there by 2024. Falling costs make this showing off more affordable than before. Apollo cost hundreds of billions of dollars (in today’s money). Now tens of billions are the ticket price.

[ … ]

It is a mistake to promote space as a romanticised Wild West, an anarchic frontier where humanity can throw off its fetters and rediscover its destiny. For space to fulfil its promise governance is required. At a time when the world cannot agree on rules for the terrestrial trade of steel bars and soybeans that may seem like a big ask. But without it the potential of all that lies beyond Earth will at best wait another 50 years to be fulfilled. At worst space could add to Earth’s problems.

Winning entries could not be determined in this language pair.

There were 12 entries submitted in this pair during the submission phase, 7 of which were selected by peers to advance to the finals round. Not enough votes were submitted by peers for a winning entry to be determined.

Competition in this pair is now closed.


Entries (12 total; 7 finalists) Expand all entries

Filter entries
Language variants:
Entry #27502 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
389 x41 x20
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.503.80 (5 ratings)3.20 (5 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • 2 users entered 5 "like" tags
  • 1 user disagreed with "likes" (1 total disagree)
당시 본지에는 이런 주장이 실렸다.
Flows well
ysha86
미국의 월등한 능력을 선전하는 수단으로서 추진된 일이었다. 이미 성공한 선전을 굳이 한 번 더 할 필요는 없었다. 지구 밖으로 나가 궤도에 진입한 우주 비행사는 현재까지 571명에 그친다. 1972년 이후로는 누구도 디모인에서 시카고까지의 거리보다 더 멀리 우주에 나가지 못했다.
Flows well
ysha86
다가올 시대에 우주 개발이 과감하게 추진되리라 예상할 수 있다.
Flows well
Ju Young Kim
-1
1
이런 장담은 더 이상 무리한 것이 아니다
Flows well
ysha86
행정 체제
Good term selection
ysha86
Entry #27806 — Discuss 0 — Variant: South Korea
JIWON KIM
JIWON KIM
South Korea
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
193 x43 x21 x1
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.713.71 (7 ratings)3.71 (7 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • 1 user entered 1 "like" tag
  • 1 user agreed with "likes" (1 total agree)
+1
달착륙은 그 자체가 목적이 아닌 미국의 뛰어난 기술력을 보여주는 수단으로 사용할 일종의 이벤트였다.
Good term selection
Well speci​fied : 뛰어난​ 기술력, 일종의 ​이벤트
Ju Young Kim
Entry #27527 — Discuss 0 — Variant: South Korea
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
111 x43 x21 x1
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.253.17 (6 ratings)3.33 (6 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • 2 users entered 2 "like" tags
비용 감소가 큰 몫을 했습니다
Good term selection
ysha86
터무니없어 보일 수 있습니다.
Flows well
Ju Young Kim
Entry #27704 — Discuss 0 — Variant: South Korea
Jane Jo
Jane Jo
South Korea
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
41 x400
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.253.25 (4 ratings)3.25 (4 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #27878 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
401 x22 x1
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.573.57 (7 ratings)3.57 (7 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #28111 — Discuss 0 — Variant: South Korea
carib
carib
South Korea
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
3003 x1
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.803.60 (5 ratings)4.00 (5 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #27683 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Paul LIm
Paul LIm
South Korea
Finalist
Voting points1st2nd3rd
0000
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.203.60 (5 ratings)2.80 (5 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags


Non-finalist entries

The following entries were not selected by peers to advance to finals-round voting.

Entry #27706 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
imJerry
imJerry
South Korea
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.072.88 (8 ratings)3.25 (8 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #27166 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Youngchan Kim
Youngchan Kim
South Korea
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry3.002.75 (4 ratings)3.25 (4 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #28147 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry2.802.80 (5 ratings)2.80 (5 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #27637 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry2.502.60 (5 ratings)2.40 (5 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags
Entry #28178 — Discuss 0 — Variant: Not specified
Rating typeOverallQualityAccuracy
Entry2.402.40 (5 ratings)2.40 (5 ratings)
Entry tagging:
  • No "like" tags