Abstract In this study, we analyze some examples extracted from articles in the field of nutrition published on the official website of "Le Figaro." The analyzed examples all involve figurative meaning. We evaluate the translations provided by Google and Reverso in relation to figurative meaning. We will rely on Vinay and Darbelnet's translation methods and Antoine Berman's perspectives regarding the analysis of the systematics of deformation, or rather, deformative tendencies. Vinay and Darbelnet's methods and Antoine Berman's deformative tendencies seem to be the most relevant for addressing the questions in our research problem. The analysis of examples from our corpus sheds light on quite controversial issues concerning translation methods, fidelity, and translation betrayal. Our research problem revolves around the following questions: Can the two electronic translation tools accurately and adequately translate figurative meaning? Which of these two tools provides a translation closest to the correct one? We have already acknowledged that these tools are fueled either by translator memories (TM) or by machine translation (MT), so the questions that arise regarding our methodology are: What are the most common deformative tendencies in these tools? Is the translation offered by these tools source-oriented or target-oriented?