Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2.
3.
4.
5.
The highlighted idea is that translation has for a long time been
perceived as a secondary activitya mechanical onea low status
occupation, always overshadowed by the original, creative process.
Nowadays, however, due to an ever-increasing post-war
reconsideration, translation has reached its own status versus the
original, a status which Ortega y Gasset had already anticipated more
than half a century ago: The translation is not the original, but the
path to the original, or as the leading Polish theoretician Zenon
Klemensiewicz pointed it out, the translation is neither a
reproduction of the original nor an alteration of the elements and
structures of the original. The translators task is, then, to grasp
their functions (of the original structures) and make use of the
elements and structures of his own language in order to
achieve, as much as possible, the same functional effect. 13
Apud Susan Bassnett, Translation op.cit., p. 2.
See Ji Lev, Die literarische bersetzung: Theorie einer Kunstgattung. (Frankfurt am
Main-Bonn: Athenum Verlag, 1969), pp. 21-22.
10
12
13
16
24 See Theodore Savory, The Art of Translation. (Boston: The Writer, Inc., 1968), p.
35-36.
17
Ibid , p. 24,
20
term used to describe the nature and the extent of the relationships
between SL and TL texts, somehow the interlingual counterpart
of intralingual synonymy. In fact, we are dealing with a
polysemous word, the precise meaning of which varying from one
theoretician to another. Nowadays, to reduce translation equivalence
to something quantifiable, on the one hand, and translation, on the
other hand, to the mere replacement of textual material in one
language by suitable textual material in another language, i.e. to a
simple linguistic exercise, is no longer acceptable, because cultural,
textual, and other factors have gradually started to play an essential
role in translation. This perception has triggered distinctive
classifications in the issue of equivalence. Here are some:
1. Nida (and Taber, too,) distinguishes between dynamic and
formal equivalence. Dynamic equivalence occurs when the message
of the SL text has been so transported into the TL that the response
of the TL receptor will be essentially like that of the SL receptor. A
well-known example of a dynamically equivalent translation is the
decision to render the Biblical phrase Lamb of God into an
Eskimo language as Seal of God. The fact that lambs are
unknown in Polar Regions has led to the substitution of a culturally
meaningful item. Despite argumentation in favor or against it, the
notion of dynamic equivalence is especially relevant to Bible
translation, given the particular need of Biblical translations to both
inform readers with a relevant message and elicit a response from
them.
In the course of time, the initial term of dynamic equivalence
will be gradually replaced by functional equivalence, a new term less
open to misinterpretation and which serves to highlight the
communicative functions of translating, i.e. the function of the SL
text is adapted in order to suit the specific context in and for which
it was produced. Later developments in Translation Studies agree
upon the fact that the function a text has to fulfill has apparently
become now the most widely accepted frame of reference for
translation equivalence. However, problems remain in the case of
texts that possess more than one function.
21
32
original, but, on the other hand, he also admits that the translator
must have clearly in mind what faithfulness implies and in what it
consists. In his opinion, faithfulness does not mean a word-for-word
translation, which, otherwise, is the most primitive type of
translating, fit only for the most mundane and prosaic of matters, 41
but rather adherence to the Source Text, a fair and successful
communication of the spirit of the original:
One reason for the advocacy of faithfulness is that the
translator has never allowed himself to forget that he is a translator.
He is not, he recognizes, the original author, and the work in hand
was never his own; he is an interpreter, one whose duty is to act as a
bridge or channel between the mind of the author and the minds of
his readers. He must efface himself and allow Rome or Berlin to
speak directly to London and Paris. If he feels that he has done this,
he may well be proud of his achievement. 42
Ibid., p. 51.
Ibid., p. 51.
34
translation becomes the bridging of both the time and the space, its
overall function being to produce in the minds of the TL readers
the same emotions as those produced by the original in the
minds of the SL readers. 43
In the pre-linguistics period of translation theory, which may
be said to stretch from Cicero through St. Jerome, Luther, Dryden,
Tytler, Goethe, Schleiermacher, Ortega y Gasset, and Savory,
opinion moved to and fro between the literal, faithful and exact
translation and the free, beautiful and natural one, depending on
whether the preference was either for the author and the SL text or
for the reader and the TL text. Moreover, up to the nineteenth
century, literal translation was also viewed as a philological academic
exercise and activity. In fact, most of these pre-linguistics opinions
were to a great extent anticipated and synthesized by Alexander
Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee, in The Principles of Translation
the first systematic study in English of the translation processwho
in 1791 enunciated three basic principles, which are still valid
nowadays, as they stipulate a balance between form and content, a
blending of the future communicative and semantic approaches:
1. the translation should give a complete transcript of the
idea of the original work;
2. the style and manner of writing should be of the same
character with that of the original;
3. the translation should have all the ease of the original
composition. 44
Gradually, in the nineteenth century a more scientific
approach crystallized and theorists started to admit the existence of
two opposite and apparently irreconcilable tendencies:
a) when texts that are meant to inform the reader effectively
and appropriately (non-literary culture) should be
translated more freely in order to produce upon the TL
43
44
Far, far more than their numbers, it was the tanks, the planes
and the tactics of the Germans that caused us to retreat. It was the
tanks, the planes and the tactics of the Germans that took our
leaders by surprise and thus brought them to the state they are
today . . .
For France is not alone! She is not alone! She is not alone!
45
See Lawrence Venuti, The Translators Invisibility. (London: Routledge, 1995), pp.
15-20.
47 Ibid, pp. 19-34.
48 Peter Newmark, Approaches, op.cit., p. 53.
40
46
49
In order to establish an accurate classification of textcategories and text-types, a series of distinctive internal as well as
external factors must be taken into account, such as: language
functions, language varieties, facts and reality vs. fantasy and fiction.
Now, judging by the way in which the three main functions of
language (acc. to Bhlers 1934 functional theory of language)
expressive, informative and vocativeare closely reflected in the
source text and which need to be accurately preserved in the target
text, in 1971, Katharina Rei suggested the following tripartite
typology: informative, expressive, and operative texts. It is a
matter of common knowledge that, each text-type is identified by its
semantic, lexical, grammatical, and stylistic features, which reflect its
primary function and which will then, undoubtedly, influence the
way it is translated. Nevertheless, Rei warns us that these types
represent tendencies rather than clearly delineated categories.
Moreover, pure types of informative, expressive, or operative
texts are quite rare, so that most texts display an overlap of these
three functions, with an emphasis on one or the other. In other
words, texts may also have secondary, more subsidiary functions. It
is, therefore, the translators duty to identify the primary function of
the text to be translated and then in harmony with it to select the
proper translation method and procedure.
A) In the case of the informative text (content-focused
texts/inhaltsbetonte Texte), the primary aim is that of
transmitting information to the TL readerit is TL-oriented[Im
informativen Typ nehmen referenz-semantische Inhaltselemente den obersten
Rang unter den quivalenzkriterien ein . . .] 50 , the translators main
concern being that of achieving mainly semantic equivalence, and
only afterwards to turn to other kinds, such as connotative and
aesthetic. 51 The format of the informative text is often standard:
In the informative text-type, the referential-semantic content elements hold the
highest rank among equivalence criteria . . . (our translation)
51
See Katharina Rei/Hans J. Vermeer, Grundlegung einer allgemeiner
Translationstheorie. (Tbingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1991), pp. 150-151 and
Katharina Rei, Textbestimmung und bersetzungsmethode: Entwurf einer
42
50
54
55
45
59
the reader, the two main directions finally shaped up into the
semantic and the communicative translation and, in the end, it
was Peter Newmark who managed under the above-mentioned
headings to reunite all these factors by presenting the basic
translation methods and procedures in the form of a flattened V
diagram:
SL emphasis
TL emphasis
Adaptation
Word-for-word translation
Literal translation
Free Translation
Idiomatic Translation
Faithful translation
Semantic translation
Communicative Translation
__________________________________ 60
60
discrete units and omitting the criteria of normal syntax and wordorder in the source language. 61
The purpose of the word-for-word/interlinear translation
is, on the one hand, to provide access to a text for people who
would, linguistically speaking, be inadequately equipped to tackle it.
On the other hand, since it is meant to be read in conjunction with
the original text, the word-for-word translation functions as a crib
and throws light on the mechanics of the SL (a useful technique for
illustrating how the syntax of a foreign language works).
B) Literal translation is often taken for a synonym of the
word-for-word translation, which is quite untrue. As a pretranslation process/strategy, which indicates the problems that are
still to be solved, literal translation is, like the related notion, an
out-of-the-context translation of the SL lexical words, which
observes the TL syntactical patterns, or as one of its champions,
Nabokov, defined and characterized it in the Foreword to his own
translation of A. S. Pushkins Eugene Onegin, it is a rendering, as
closely as the associative and syntactical capacities of another
language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original. 62 On a
more philosophical level, Walter Benjamin, a defender of the
principle of untranslatability, believes that the kinship of languages is
more clearly highlighted in a literalist approach to translation.
However, among modern literary translators, the number of those
who would consider literal translation to be a suitable procedure, is
fairly small, and Eugene Nidas words seem to fully support their
standpoint:
Since no two languages are identical, either in the
meanings given to the corresponding symbols or in the ways in
which such symbols are arranged in phrases and sentences, it
stands to reason that there can be no absolute correspondence
George Steiner, After, op.cit., p. 308.
Vladimir Nabokov, Foreword, in A. S. Pushkin Eugene Onegin, (editied and
translated by Vladimir Nabokov, 4 vols.). (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,
1964/1975), p. viii.
49
61
62
66
70
72
2.
3.
4.
76
77
Ibid., p. 132.
Ibid., p. 133.
62
Ibid., p. 135.
63
6. Stages in Translating
82
See Andrei Banta and Elena Croitoru, Didactica traducerii. (Bucuresti: Teora,
1998), p. 57-9 and Elena Croitoru, Interpretation and Translation. (Galai: PortoFranco, 1996), pp. 121-2.
84 Roger T. Bell, Translation, op.cit., p.45.
66
83
67
relate to each other in the process. 85 Now that this investigation has
also been completed, the translator can move on to the third stage
of the text analysis, that of the pragmatic level.
B) The pragmatic analysis throws light onto the communicative
function of the SLT. By it the translator tries to identify, on the one
hand, the field covered by the text, the role it is playing in the
communicative activity, what intention the text serves and, on the
other hand, the register features, in other words, the means through
which the communicative function is achieved, such as: the theme
and the rheme, the stylistic characteristics, the elements of
accentuation, the connotations, coherence and lack of coherence,
the degree of formality, politeness or impersonality and, in the case
of a poetic texts, the elements of rhythm and rhyme, along with the
devices which realize them: alliteration, assonances, onomatopoeic
sounds, etc.
The last level of the analysis having been thus completed, the
translator can now proceed to the stage of synthesis, but in a
reversed order, i.e. the processing of the text in the TL begins at
pragmatic level. According to Roger T. Bell, once all the SL
information has been thoroughly analyzed, the translator has to
make important decisions first, as to what to preserve and what
to change, before embarking upon the TL processing of the text
(the actual translation process):
(a)
85
(b)
(c)
86
Ibid. p. 58.
69
87
88
A faithful translation is the one guided by the translationoriented text analysis. It has to meet the same requirements,
structures, patterns and peculiarities to which the author
submitted in creating the original.
The translator is a mediator between two different language
communities, between two intercultural situations of
communication.
The translator must have syntactic, semantic and cultural
knowledge and needs bilingual and bicultural competence.
The translator seeks the universal through the particularity of
languages. 88
Selected Bibliography
Banta, Andrei., Croitoru, Elena. Didactica traducerii. Bucureti: Teora,
1998.
Bassnett, Susan. Translation Studies. London and New York:
Routledge, 1991.
Bell, Roger T. Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. Harlow:
Longman, 1991.
Catford, J. C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. An Essay in Applied
Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press, 1965.
Chukovsky, Kornei. A High Art. Knoxville: The University of
Tennessee Press, 1984.
Coseriu, Eugenio. Falsche und richtige Fragestellungen in der
bersezungstheorie in Wills, Wolfram. ed. bersetzungswissenschaft. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft,
1981.
Croitoru, Elena. Interpretation and Translation. Galai: Porto-Franco,
1995.
Folena, Gianfranco. Volgarizzare e tradurre: idea e terminologia
della traduzione dal Medio Evo italiano e romanzo
allumanesimo europeo in La Traduzione. Saggi e studi. Trieste:
Edizioni LINT, 1973.
Greere, Anca Luminia. Translating for Business Purposes. Cluj-Napoca:
Dacia, 2003.
Hervey, Sndor & Higgins, Ian. Thinking Translation: A Course in
Translation Method: French into English. London: Routledge, 1992.
Jakobson, Roman. Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics, in
Sebeok, Thomas A., ed. Style in Language. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1960.
Koller, Werner. Einfhrung in die bersetzungswissenschaft. HeidelbergWiesbaden: Quelle & Meyer, 1992.
Lawendowski, Boguslaw P. On Semiotic Aspects of Translation in
Sebeok, Thomas A., ed. Sight, Sound and Sense. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1978.
72
74