TÀI LIỆU THI HỌC PHẦN LÝ THUYẾT DỊCH (EHOU)

On the other hand, you may see it as complicated,artificial and fraudulent, since by using another language you are pretending to be someone you are not.Hence in many types of text legal

ĐẠI HỌC MỞ HÀ NỘI

ĐỀ CƯƠNG THI HỌC PHẦN

LÝ THUYẾT DỊCH

HÀ NỘI, 2022

The concept of translation (Khái niệm dịch thuật)

Often, though not by any means always, it is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the waythat the author intended the text Common sense tells us that this ought to be simple, as one ought to be able tosay something as well in one language as in another On the other hand, you may see it as complicated,artificial and fraudulent, since by using another language you are pretending to be someone you are not.Hence in many types of text (legal,

administrative, dialect, local, cultural) the temptation is to transfer as many SL (Source Language) words tothe TL (Target Language) as possible The pity is, as Mounin wrote, that the translation cannot simplyreproduce, or be, the original And since this is so, the first business of the translator is to translate A text maytherefore be pulled in ten different directions, as follows:

(1) The individual style or idiolect of the SL author When should it be (a) preserved, (b) normalised?

(2) The conventional grammatical and lexical usage for this type of text, depending on the topic and thesituation

(3) Content items referring specifically to the SL, or third language (i.e not SL or TL) cultures

(4) The typical format of a text in a book, periodical, newspaper, etc., as influenced by tradition at the time.(5) The expectations of the putative readership, bearing in mind their estimated knowledge of the topic and thestyle of language they use, expressed in terms of the largest common factor, since one should not translatedown (,or up) to the readership

(6), (7), (8) As for 2, 3 and 4 respectively, but related to the TL

(9) What is being described or reported, ascertained or verified (the referential truth), where possibleindependently of the SL text and the expectations of the readership

(10) The views and prejudices of the translator, which may be personal and subjective, or may be social andcultural, involving the translator's 'group loyalty factor', which may reflect the national, political, ethnic,religious, social class, sex, etc assumptions of the translator

Needless to say, there are many other tensions in translations, for example between sound and sense,emphasis (word order) and naturalness (grammar), the figurative and the literal, neatness andcomprehensiveness, concision and accuracy

Translation as a profession has to be seen as a collaborative process between translators, revisers,terminologists, often writers and clients (literary works have to be checked by a second native TL reviser anddesirably a native SL speaker), where one works towards a general agreement Nevertheless, finally, only oneperson can be responsible for one piece or section of translation; it must have the stamp of one style Theprinciple with which this book starts is that

everything without exception is translatable; the translator cannot afford the luxury of saying that somethingcannot be translated

Translation is an instrument of education as well as of truth precisely because it has to reach readerswhose cultural and educational level is different from, and often 'lower' or earlier, than,

that of the readers of the original - one has in mind computer technology for Xhosas 'Foreign' communitieshave their own language structures and their own cultures, 'foreign' individuals have their own way of

thinking and therefore of expressing themselves, but all these can be explained, and as a last resort theexplanation is the translation No language, no culture is so 'primitive' that it

cannot embrace the terms and the concepts of, say, computer technology or plainsong But such a translation

is a longer process if it is in a language whose culture does not include computer technology If it is to coverall the points in the source language text, it requires gn ter space in the target language text There-fore, whilsttranslation is always possible, it may for various reasons not have the same impact as the original

Translation has its own excitement, its own interest A satisfactory translation is always possible, but agood translator is never satisfied with it It can usually be improved There is no such thing as a perfect, ideal

or 'correct' translation A translator is always trying to extend his knowledge and improve his means ofexpression; he is always pursuing facts and words He works on four levels:

translation is first a science, which entails the knowledge and verification of the facts and thelanguage that describes them - here, what is wrong, mistakes of truth, can be identified; secondly, it is a skill,which calls for appropriate language and acceptable usage; thirdly, an art, which distinguishes good fromundistinguished writing and is the creative, the intuitive, sometimes the inspired, level of the translation;lastly, a matter of taste, where argument ceases, preferences are expressed, and the variety of meritorioustranslations is the reflection of individual differences

As a means of communication, translation is used for multilingual notices, which have at last appearedincreasingly conspicuously in public places; for instructions issued by exporting companies; for touristpublicity, where it is too often produced from the native into the 'foreign' language by natives as a matter ofnational pride; for official documents, such as treaties and contracts; for reports, papers, articles,correspondence, textbooks to convey information, advice and recommendations for every branch ofknowledge Its volume has increased with the rise of the mass media, the increase in the number ofindependent countries, and the growing recognition of the importance of linguistic minorities in all thecountries of the world Its importance is highlighted by the mistranslation of the Japanese telegram sent toWashington just before the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, when mokasutu was allegedly translated as'ignored' instead of 'considered', and by the ambiguity in UN Resolution 242, where 'the withdrawal fromoccupied territories' was translated as le retrait des territoires occupls, and therefore as a reference to all of theoccupied territory to be evacuated by the Israelis

Translation has been instrumental in transmitting culture, sometimes under unequal conditionsresponsible for distorted and biased translations, ever since countries and languages have been in contact witheach other Thus the Romans 'pillaged' Greek culture; the Toledo School transferred Arabic and Greeklearning to Europe; and up to the nineteenth century European culture was drawing heavily on Latin andGreek translations In the nineteenth century German culture was absorbing Shakespeare

Translation is not merely a transmitter of culture, but also of the truth, a force for progress It could beinstanced by following the course of resistance to Bible translation and the preservation of Latin as a superiorlanguage of the elect, with a consequent disincentive to translating between other languages

The Analysis of a Text before doing the translation (Phân tích một văn bản trước khi dịch)

READING THE TEXT

You begin the job by reading the original for two purposes: first, to understand what it is about; second,

to analyse it from a 'translator's' point of view, which is not the same as a linguist's or a literary critic's Youhave to determine its intention and the way it is written for the purpose of selecting a suitable translationmethod and identifying particular and recurrent problems Understanding the text requires both general andclose reading General reading to get the gist; here you may have to read encyclopaedias, textbooks, orspecialist papers to understand the subject and the concepts, always bearing in mind that for the translator the

function precedes the description - the important thing about the neutrino in context is not that it is a stableelementary particle, preserving the law of conservation of mass and energy, but that now the neutrino has beenfound to have mass, the Universe is calculated to be twice as large as previously thought 'Chair', chaise,Stuhl, Sessel, sedia, silla, stul- they all present

somewhat different images, lax bundles of shapes that differ in each culture, united primarily by a similarfunction, an object for a person to sit on plus a few essential formal features, such as a board with a back andfour legs A knife is for cutting with, but the blade and the handle are important too - they distinguish theknife from the scissors

Close reading is required, in any challenging text, of the words both out of and in context In principle,everything has to be looked up that does not make good sense in its context; common words like serpent (F),

to ensure they are not being used musically or figuratively (sly, deceitful, unscupulous) or technically (EECcurrency) or colloquially; neologisms - you will likely find many if you are translating a recent publication(for 'non-equivalent' words, see p 117); acronyms, to find their TL equivalents, which may be non-existent(you should not invent them, even if you note that the SL author has invented them); figures and measures,converting to TL or Systeme International (SI) units where appropriate;

names of people and places, almost all words beginning with capital letters - 'encyclopaedia' words are asimportant as 'dictionary' words, the distinction being fuzzy (Words like 'always', 'never', 'all', 'must' have noplace in talk about translation - there are 'always' exceptions.) You can compare the translating activity to aniceberg: the tip is the translation - what is visible, what is written on the page - the iceberg, the activity, is allthe work you do, often ten times as much again, much of which you do not even use

THE INTENTION OF THE TEXT

In reading, you search for the intention of the text, you cannot isolate this from

understanding it, they go together and the title may be remote from the content as well as the intention Twotexts may describe a battle or a riot or a debate, stating the same facts and figures, but the type of languageused and even the grammatical structures (passive voice, impersonal verbs often used to disclaimresponsibility) in each case may be evidence of different points of view The intention of the text representsthe SL writer's attitude to the subject matter A piece about floors may be 'pushing' floor polishes; aboutnewspapers, a

condemnation of the press; about nuclear weapons, an advertisement for them -always there is a point of view,somewhere, a modal component to the proposition, perhaps in a word - 'unfortunately', 'nevertheless','hopefully' What is meant by 'That was clever of him'? Is it ironical, openly or implicitly? (In a text showingthat BBC Radio 2 is a pale imitation of commercial radio, the irony may only be implicit and obscure to anon-British reader, and the translator may want to make the point more explicitly.) 'Clemente, notre justicerepressive?',

writes a journalist meaning 'Our repressive judicial system is far from lenient', or is it a bluff, mainlynonsense, for amusement? It may be 'iceberg' work to find out, since the tone may come through in a literaltranslation, but the translator has to be aware of it Again, in a detailed, confused piece about check-ups onelderly patients who may have to undergo chemotherapy the author's intention is to show that patients musthave a thorough physical check-up before they start a course of drugs: if physical problems are cleared upfirst, there may be no need for psychiatry A summary of this nature, which uses only a few key words fromthe original, appears to be isolated from the language, simply to show what happens in real life, and it isindispensable to the translator But he still has to 'return' to the text He

still has to translate the text, even if he has to simplify, rearrange, clarify, slim it of its redundancies, pare itdown

THE INTENTION OF THE TRANSLATOR

Usually, the translator's intention is identical with that of the author of the SL text.

But he may be translating an advertisement, a notice, or a set of instructions to show his client how suchmatters are formulated and written in the source language rather than how to adapt them in order to persuade

or instruct a new TL reader- ship And again, he may be translating a manual of instructions for a lesseducated readership, so that the explanation in his translation may be much larger than the 'reproduction'

TEXT STYLES

Following Nida, we distinguish four types of (literary or non-literary) text:

(1) Narrative: a dynamic sequence of events, where the emphasis is on the verbs or, for English, 'dummy' or'empty' verbs plus verb-nouns or phrasal verbs ('He made a sudden appearance', 'He burst in')

(2) Description, which is static, with emphasis on linking verbs, adjectives, adjectival nouns

(3) Discussion, a treatment of ideas, with emphasis on abstract nouns (concepts),

verbs of thought, mental activity ('consider', 'argue', etc.), logical argument and connectives

(4) Dialogue, with emphasis on colloquialisms and phaticisms

THE READERSHIP

On the basis of the variety of language used in the original, you attempt to characterise the readership ofthe original and then of the translation, and to decide how much attention you have to pay to the TL readers.(In the case of a poem or any work written primarily as self-expression the amount is, I suggest, very little.)You may try to assess the level of education, the class, age and sex of the readership if these are 'marked' Theaverage text for translation tends to be for an educated, middle-class readership in an informal, not colloquialstyle The most common variety of 'marked' error in register among student translators tends to be 'colloquial'and 'intimate', e.g use of phrases such as 'more and more' for 'increasingly' (deplus en plus), 'above all' for'particularly' (surtout); 'job' for 'work'; 'got well' for 'recovered' and excessively familiar phrasal verbs ('get out

of, 'get rid of) The other common error, use of formal or official register (e.g 'decease' for 'death'), also showssigns of translationese These tokens of language typify the student- translators instead of the readership theyare translating for; they may epitomise their degree of knowledge and interest in the subject and theappropriate culture, i.e how motivated they are All this will help you to decide on the degree of formality,generality (or specificity) and emotional tone you must express when you work on the text

SETTING

You have to decide on the likely setting: Where would the text be published in the

TL? What is the TL equivalent of the SL periodical, newspaper, textbook, journal, etc?, or Who is the clientyou are translating for and what are his requirements? You may have to take account of briefer titles, absence

of sub-titles and sub-headings, shorter paragraphs and other features of the TL house-style You have to makeseveral assumptions about the SL readership From the setting of the SL text, as well as the text itself, youshould assess whether the readership is likely to be motivated (keen to read the text), familiar with the topicand the culture, and 'at home' in the variety of language used The three typical reader types are perhaps theexpert, the educated layman, and the uninformed You then have to consider whether you are translating forthe same or a different type of TL readership, perhaps with less knowledge of the topic or the culture, or alower standard of linguistic education Finally, if you are translating a poem or an important authoritative

statement, should you consider the TL reader at all, apart from concessions or cultural 'scraps' to help him out(e.g translating 'a half- holiday' as un apres-midi libre)?

THE QUALITY OF THE WRITING

You have to consider the quality of the writing and the authority of the text, two

critical factors in the choice of translation method The quality of the writing has to be judged in relation tothe author's intention and/or the requirements of the subject-matter If the text is well written, i.e., the manner

is as important as the matter, the right words are in the right places, with a minimum of redundancy, you have

to regard every nuance of the author's meaning (particularly if it is subtle and difficult) as having precedenceover the reader's response - assuming they are not required to act or react promptly; on the contrary, assuminghopefully that they will read your translation at least twice Deciding what is good writing is sometimescriticised as 'subjective' but it is a decision, like many others, not subjective but

with a subjective element (the area of taste) which you have to make, using any experience of literarycriticism you may have had but bearing in mind that the criterion here is meaning: to what extent does the web

of words of the SL text correspond to a clear representation of facts or images? If a text is well written, thesyntax will reflect the writer's personality - complex syntax will reflect subtlety (Proust, Mann) - plain syntax,simplicity Words will be freshly used with unusual connotations A badly written text will be cluttered withstereotyped phrases, recently fashionable general words and probably poorly structured Note that

language rules and prescriptions have nothing much to do with good writing What matters is a freshreflection of the reality outside language or of the writer's mind The authority of the text is derived from goodwriting; but also indepen- dently, unconnectedly, from the status of the SL writer If the SL writer isrecognised as important in his field, and he is making an ex-cathedra or official statement, the text is alsoauthoritative The point is that 'expressive' texts, i.e serious imaginative literature and authoritative andpersonal statements, have to be

translated closely, matching the writing, good or bad, of the original Informative texts, statements that relateprimarily to the truth, to the real facts of the matter, have to be translated in the best style that the translatorcan reconcile with the style of the original

Nida, Eugene A - Contexts in Translating.

Contexts in Translating combines elements of contextual analysis with areas such as culture and language.Eugene Nida, author of Towards a Science of Translating, and Componential Analysis of Meaning explainshow strict adherence to context creates a satisfactory translation The book has a fragmentary, though concise,format, placing each topic in easily identifiable categories and subcategories The chapters include: “What isTranslating?” “Language and Culture,” “Words in Context,” “Relations Between Words,” “TranslatingTexts,” “Representative Treatment of Translating,” and “Three Major Types of Translation Theories.” Thebook also contains a complete glossary, bibliography, and index Of these seven chapters, chapters three andseven best define Nida’s ideas Chapter three, “Words in Context,” focuses strongly on context in translation

It explains how words are used in diverse contexts, a reference to cultural and geographical origins Nidasummarizes the ways in which words hold different meanings and levels of significance between distinctcultures and regions, emphasizing that a word’s origin determines its exact definition Nida believes thatwords are strongly linked to their contexts and proposes that it is the responsibility of the translator todetermine what is being addressed in order to produce a valid translation The subsection in chapter threeentitled, “Contexts involving Cultural Values,” demonstrates how a word may take on a completely differentdefinition or value from one region or culture to another Therefore, the translator must realize thesedifferences to create a meaningful translation According to Nida, “Correct technical terminology serves to

mark a statement as reliable and the writer as knowledgeable.” This is evident in professional language as well

as in street language and slang, all of which Nida incorporates in his study This knowledge helps to protectthe translator from insulting the culture or group being “decoded.” Nida states that a translator shouldn’t need

a dictionary, for if he/she does, then it is evident that he/she is not a master of the other language and therefore

is not an efficient translator Translating a work, first and foremost, believes Nida, respects cultural contextand value In chapter three, Nida discusses how the setting and purpose of discourse define a word’s capacity

to assume different degrees of seriousness How the word is presented determines the way it is perceived ForNida, the contextual perception of a culture is essential to producing an adequate translation from thatculture’s perspectives Chapter seven, “Three Major Types of Translation Theories,” is divided into threesections: “Theories Based on Philological Insights,” “Theories Based on Linguistic Insights,” and “TheoriesBased on Sociosemiotics.” Philological insights are the primary basis for discussing translations theories andpractice and are concerned with the study and evaluation of written texts, including all aspects from form tocultural influences Cicero, Horace, Catullus, and Quintilian are noted for their theories of free translation vs.literal, which reflect written texts in different manners He also mentions the analyses that have stemmed fromthese and other translators, including the theory of free translation defended by Matthew Arnold This sectionthen makes reference to the philological insights of the 20th century, a time when language is looked upon as

an integral part of culture as a kind of code For a variety of reasons, many philologists have felt that the act oftranslating is impossible Linguistic insights consider the differences between the source and target texts Nidarefers to Vinay and Darbelnet’s consideration of French and English as a basis for translating Nida presentsGoodnough’s work on Trukese semantic categories as an example of how cultural anthropology can provideinsights into translation The “communication theory”, which describes the importance of interlingualcommunication also appears in this section For an in-depth look at linguistic orientation in translating, Nidanotes the research of Labov and Hymes Theories based on sociosemiotics respect the rules of all systems ofsigns used by different societies It is, in Nida’s words, “the most pervasive and crucial contribution to anunderstanding of translation” The ideas of Plato and Aristotle are important antecedents to this line ofthought Nida gives a great deal of attention to associative and designative meanings because signs of all typesmust be recognized in relation to all other verbal signs within a text or associated expressions Nida advisestranslators to seek the advice of Hofstadter’s concept of isomorphs when problems arise in symbol translation.Nida finishes this section by stating that the most effective way to learn how to translate is through studyingwhat expert translators have already accomplished Nida is concerned with context in regards to effectivetranslating His principle ideas in Contexts in Translating are contained in chapters three and seven: chapterthree provides insights into Nida’s theory of the importance of contextual analysis in translating; chapterseven addresses the concepts of translation, in general, and the influences they may have on each other.Contexts in Translating presents a wide range of sophisticated, though sometimes overly anecdotal, ideasconcerning the role of contexts in the process of translation This text is probably most appropriate for use in agraduate college course specializing in translation studies

Eugene Nida, on the other hand, used Chomsky's transformational generative grammar in translating Heclaimed that generative grammar was the most effective way to deal with translation problems, provided thatsuch a grammar made full use of transformations His approach to translation can be summarized as follows: a) to reduce the source text to its structurally simplest and most semanticaUy evident kernels;

b) to transfer the meaning from source language to receptor language on a structurally simple level; and

c) to generate the stylistically and semantically equivalent expression in the receptor language (1964:68)

In fact, he devised a back-transformation model, consisting of the procedures of analysis, deep-structuretransfer, and restructuring, identifying model kernel sentences as the

transitional stage between SL and TL structures to explain the process of translating

Nida's theory of translating consists of the three procedures of analysis, deep structure transfer, andrestructuring His refined theory (1969) includes one more stage, namely testing Analysis consists essentially

in back-transformation to a near-kernel level In this stage, the SLT must be read and studied carefully, andmeaning must be extracted Nida devises several stages of analysis, though in practice they overlap They are:(1) lexicogrammatical features of the immediate units, (2) discourse context, (3) communicative context, (4)cultural context of the SL, and (5) the cultural context of the receptor language

After analysing the SLT into its basic kernels, the result of The analysis is transferred into the TL Thisstage is not as simple as it seems to be In actual practice, the transfer of messages from the SL into the TLtakes place at various sub-surface levels depending on the extent to which the two languages underconsideration have corresponding semantic and grammatical structures In fact, in the stage of transfer, thetranslator continually fluctuates between the stage of analysis and that of restructuring That is to say there is

no clear-cut division between these stages in the actual process of translating Preserving the meaning of the

SL message is of top priority to the translator Nida underlines this point by saying that transfer is not merelythe transference of individual, disconnected kernels, but occurs at a point where these kernels are connectedinto meaningful series:

This means that we must modify slightly our diagram, so that after having analyzed the basiccomponents into their simplest relationships within kernels, we 'back up' to the point where these kernels arecarefully and properly related to each other (Nida and Taber 1969)

Restructuring the message involves adjustments at different levels: grammatical and semantic In thisstage, the translator should pay attention to the divergences of the two languages in terms of voice, wordclasses, connectors, etc Other adjustments are required in terms of language varieties or styles Metaphoricalexpressions and idioms must also be modified to fit in with the TL culture The final stage in the process oftranslating is testing It includes accuracy of rendering, readability, stylistic equivalence, etc But in Nida'sview, it is dynamic equivalence rather than verbal correspondence which should be the focus of attention The length of the translation compared to the original is also important According to Nida (1969: 163),'there is a tendency for all good translations to be somewhat longer than the originals.' Cultural and linguisticredundancies are ascribed by Nida to the desire of the translators to include all information stated in theoriginal communication Nida applied certain methods to test ease of comprehension, predictability andreadability One such method is the Cloze technique where the degree of predictability, i.e to guess the rightword in the appropriate context, and readability of texts are measured, a concept derived from informationtheory Nida also suggested other practical tests such as: reaction to atternatives,

explaining the contents, reading the text aloud, and the publication of sample material, all of which proved to

be very helpful and easy to apply Nida concludes that the ultimate criterion in distinguishing goodtranslations from bad translations is dynamic equivalence In

translations which use the Dynamic Equivalence Method, on the one hand, the form is structured to preservethe same meaning by deploying different syntax and lexicon In bad translations which use formalcorrespondence, on the other hand, the form is preserved by sticking to the same word classes and word orderwhile the meaning is lost or distorted Bad translations also result from using techniques like paraphrase byaddition, deletion, or skewing of the message

Nida (1976) classifies theories of translating into three main categories:

1- Philological

2- Linguistic

3- Sociolinguistic

The three main categories of Nida’s Theories of Translating.

1 Philological Theories of translating:

Philological theories of translating (also called 'pre-linguistic) evolved before the development ofmodern linguistics, approximately before the Second World War They were

formulated at a time when philology was the discipline that shouldered the responsibility of studyinglanguage Philological theories of translation focus primarily on literary texts taking no interest in other fieldssuch as science and technology, commerce, and law Philological theories of translating deal with the problem

of the equivalence of literary texts by comparing and contrasting the SL and the TL They also focus on theliterary quality, i.e the form

of the text and its stylistic features and rhetorical devices One of the major preoccupations of philologicaltheories of translating is the discussion of literary works of high quality such as Shakespeare's works

Another major issue in philological theories of translating is the problem of equivalence of literarygenres between the SL and the TL The question whether poetry should be translated as poetry or prose orwhether an epic in the SL should be rendered as such in

the TL was one of the main obsessions of such theories One can safely include here all the old controversies

on translation, e.g whether translation is an art or a science, whether it should concentrate on the form or thecontent of the message, and the aims of translation In fact, traditional rules and directives for translators were

on a philological basis

Nida lists a number of works as representative of philological theories of translation Nida also regardsmost articles published in Babel as philological in perspective

2 Linguistic Theories of Translating:

According to Nida: Linguistic theories of translation are based on a comparison of linguistic structures ofsource and receptor texts rather than on a comparison of literary

genres and stylistic features (1976: 69)

These theories developed as a result of the great development in modern linguistic theories, and thetendency to study language scientifically The findings of these linguistic theories were applied to otherrelated areas such as language teaching and translating However, little benefit came out of these theories,since they were confined to the study of idealized constructions, with meaning left out of account

One major difference between linguistic theories of translating and philological theories of translating isthat linguistic theories are descriptive rather than prescriptive They demonstrate how people translate ratherthan how they should translate This does not imply that all linguistic theories are the same, or there would beone standard theory only They differ in terms of focus or perspective

According to Nida: The principal differences between various linguistic theories (or semi-theories) oftranslation lie in the extent to which the focus is on surface structures or

corresponding deep structures Theories based on surface-structure comparisons involve the use of less elaborate sets of rules for matching roughly corresponding structures (1976)

3 Sociolinguistic Theories of Translating:

Sociolinguistic theories of translating emerged out of the dissatisfaction with linguistic theories oftranslating, and the growing interest in communication Such interest resulted from

the work of anthropologists who recognized the role of text recipients in the process of translating Thosechanges are demonstrated in Nida (1964) Generally speaking, some linguistic theories of translating havedemonstrated sociolinguistic influences by referring to the context of communication Sociolinguistic theories

of translating relate linguistic

structures to a higher level where they can be viewed in terms of their function in communication Whendiscussing a text, the sociolinguist is concerned particularly with its author, its historical background, thecircumstances involved in its production, and the history of its interpretation, for such elements figure in thesocial setting of communication

Nida and Taber (1969), for example, have pointed out that the old focus on the form of the message intranslating has shifted to the receptors, i.e the readers Therefore, it is the reader's response to the translatedmessage that determines the correctness of that message They set the average reader as the only criterion formeasuring correctness in translating Correctness, in their view, is not only the possibility of understanding themessage by readers but rather the impossibility of misunderstanding it In their The Theory and Practice ofTranslation (1969: 12fl, Nida and Taber are fully aware of certain social factors such as age, sex, educationallevels, occupation, social class, and religious affiliation Such factors affect linguistic variation and need to beaccounted for in translating Drawing on Martin Joos's distinction of different styles, Nida and Taber produce

a similar list which comprises the following: technical, formal, informal, casual, and intimate Formal style,for example, is designed for a relatively wider audience than that of technical style Technical style, on theother hand, is used among specialists; hence it is intended for a restricted audience, because it utilizescomplicated vocabulary and complex grammatical constructions Therefore, when

translating, one should be aware of the fact that there are several styles at work which must be rendered intothe TL

In observing different styles in translating, the translator is achieving a near dynamic equivalence.Accordingly, 'lyric poetry should sound like poetry and not like an essay; letters should sound like letters andnot like some technical treatise on theology.' (Nida and Taber 1969:129) Similarly, to measure this dynamicequivalence, in Nida and Taber's view:

We can only rightly compare the equivalence of response, rather than the degree of agreement betweenthe original source and the later receptors, for we cannot presume that the source was writing for this'unknown audience' or that the monolingual receptors in

the second language have enough background to understand the setting of the original communication Onedifference between sociolinguistic theories of translating

and linguistic ones is that in sociolinguistic theories lan g ue the language system, is as important as parolethe actual use of language Like linguistic theories of translating, sociolinguistic theories are descriptive 'Theresponse of the receptors must be in terms of the actual response to similar types of texts, and in terms of whatmight be regarded as judicial or legal norms.' (Nida 1976: 77)

Nida concludes that such classification of theories of translating does not exist in actual practice Thetranslator selects the theory and method of translating that he regards most appropriate to the kind and type oftext he is dealing with This does not imply that he cannot change to other theories or methods if that isnecessary For a prospective theory of translating, Nida (ibid.: 78) believes it should be primarilysociolinguistic 'because translating always involves communication within the context of interpersonalrelations' Such a comprehensive theory will be reliable, and will be able to deal with all the factors that areinvolved in and influence the nature of translating It might be useful to mention that Nida's classification oftheories of translating is general, since the labels he has adopted to describe these theories cover manytheories For example, linguistic theories subsume all theories which focus on both deep and surfacestructures The majority of modern linguistic

theories have a communicative dimension (e.g Catford) By the same token, sociolinguistic theories have abearing on linguistic theories

External Factors on Translation activities

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 3:21 PM

.1 Sender

“The sender of a text is the person (or institution, etc.) who uses the text in order to convey a certainmessage to somebody else and/or to produce a certain effect, whereas the text producer writes the textaccording to the instructions of the sender, and complies with the rules and norms of text production valid inthe respective language and culture” (Nord, 1991, p 43) As it has been said before, the categories of senderand text producer often overlap The translator then finds himself in a situation comparable to the one of the

text producer He has to produce a text having the same effect on TT recipients as the ST had on STrecipients, and he will exert himself to produce a text which would be in compliance both with the ST and the TT norms (unless there exist other instructions from the translation initiator) This, however, is not todiscredit translator‟s creativity in translation.

1.2 Intention

Intention determines structuring of a text (what to mention and what to omit) and its form (e.g thechoice of a TT text type, non-verbal elements, etc.) It is the sender who defines the intention, and thetranslator should exert himself to adhere to it when creating a TT Christiane Nord (1991) adds, “At thesame time, the particular organization of a text marks the text type and is a pre-signal which tells the recipient

in which function he is expected to use the text” (p 48) The category of intention is especially important forliterary texts (since a non-literary text, namely a technical one, tends to be as clear as possible, not ambiguous,without any hidden meanings), which is not the case of the present analysis

1.3 Recipient

At this stage of the analysis, a text recipient is in question; later (Ch 5.2.2), it will particularly be the

ST recipient followed by the TT recipient These two are, according to Nord (1991), different from each other

at least in two aspects – cultural background and linguistic community (p 52) Though, in the present thesis,both the ST recipient and the final TT recipient share the same background and community However, it isstill vital to take their characteristics into account when translating Adjustments concerning the TT recipientshould be found only in the texts translated into English

1.4 Medium

This extratextual factor can be defined as a “medium or vehicle which conveys the text to the reader”(Nord, 1991, p 56) On the basis of the medium through which the message comes to its recipient, he buildscertain presuppositions (or expectations) which are based on his experience with the medium (e.g offensivelanguage certainly has a different effect in a film dubbing, or even in subtitles, and in a textbook) Thetranslator should thus bear in mind the prospective recipient‟s presuppositions

1.5 Place

The dimension of place can be ambiguous because not everyone shares the same image when thinkingabout the term On account of this, it ought to be said that the place stands not only for the place ofproduction, but also for the place of reception (Nord, 1991, p 60) The place factor is, undoubtedly, closelyconnected to the medium since a person would not search for a book in a cinema theatre Likewise, a closeconnection can be found between the place and time because of e.g the political influence on literature at acertain time When considering the place, the translator should account for linguistic aspects as well ascultural and political conditions The dimension of place grows in importance when there exist more languagevarieties used in different regions

of the same language culture (Nord, 1991, p 61)

1.6 Time

The time dimension is important for the text analysis performed before every translation for tworeasons, the first of which is generally applicable on literary texts rather than technical ones Firstly,summarised by Nord (1991), “Certain text types are linked to a particular period (e.g oracles and epic poems

as opposed to weather reports and television plays), and, of course, text-type conventions also undergochange” (p 63) Secondly, the translator should consider, whether the information given in the source text is still valid (Nord, 1991, p 64) If so, it can be considered a “modern” piece of work (e.g the probability thatthe text will contain more than just a few adverbial participles, in case of Czech, is quite low) written by a

“contemporary” author, and its

translation can thus, according to Popovič (1981), be regarded a synchronous one The translator should alsobear in mind that, especially with technical texts, the field terminology is constantly undergoing minor ormajor changes (e.g computer science) It goes hand in hand with development as it attempts to name newinventions, events, etc 23

1.7 Motive

The category of motive represents the reasons why a sender decided to establish communication with arecipient/s This also includes the occasion for which the text was produced (Nord, 1991, p 67) The motivemay signal conventions that will “guide the recipient‟s expectations” (Nord, 1991, p 68)

1.8 Text Function

Assumingly, the most significant of all the external factors, the text function, is the key for an acceptable translation as “it is only by analysing the ST function that the translator can decide which TTfunction(s) will be compatible with the given ST” (Nord, 1991, p 72) Yet, it is still the recipient whocompletes a particular communicative situation and thus defines the text function (Nord 1991, p 16) Thismeans that the only limitation to the number of possible text functions is the number of recipients The text function can be described, according to Nord (1991), as the communicative function “which a text fulfils inits concrete situation of production/reception” (p 70) Two different types of translation – documentary andinstrumental (Nord, 1991, p.72) – may serve as an example of the connection between the text function and atranslation The more frequent instrumental translation represents conveyance of a message from a ST author

to a TT recipient directly, whereas the documentary translation is only a document of the communicationbetween a ST author and a ST recipient (which bears some resemblance to House‟s [1981] overt and coverttranslation)

Internal Factors on translation activities (1)

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 3:23 PM

2.1 Subject Matter

Subject matter, in other words the main topic of a text, is vital for the text analysis for several reasons.First, if the analysis proves that there is a subject which dominates a text then the whole text is, in allprobability, coherent (Nord, 1991, p 85)

Second, the subject matter can be embedded in a cultural context and indicate some of the readers‟presuppositions (Popovič, 1981) If so, the translator has to take the fact into account

Third, as little as the subject matter can give the translator a hint about the content and terminology– the two deciding factors of whether he possesses the expert knowledge to understand and translate a text(Nord, 1991, p 86) It can also give him an initial clue about the amount of research he is about to conduct (in case he lacks specialised knowledge), and whether it is worth conducting (since a good translator should

be aware of his own professional limits) In the case of students‟ translations, the ability to perform detailedresearch will probably be more relevant than possessing expert knowledge, even though the texts wereselected with regards to the students‟ level of competence, and they do not differ much from the texts whichmay be, at some point, presented to them in their future professional careers Really the key ability here seems to be the risk analysis (Pym, 2004) – to decide which translation units bear a higher degree of risk (asdiscussed in Ch 3.3)

Fourth, from the subject matter analysis, the translator may gain information about the role (function)

of the headline and sub-headlines which differs culture from culture (Nord, 1991, p 86)

Finally, “the elicitation of the subject matter occasionally yields some

information about certain extratextual factors (e.g., sender, time, text function), where these have not alreadybeen ascertained by external analysis” (Nord, 1991, p 86) Further, the expectations concerning the subjectmatter developed in the course of the external factors analysis may be confirmed or adjusted

2.2 Content

In most cases, being a translator presupposes a good command of a source language and a target langue

as well as knowledge of the rules and norms governing text production This leaves little space for possiblemisunderstanding caused by ST (content) comprehension Still, Christiane Nord provides some usefulguidelines for determining the precise content of a text; mostly on the level of lexical items To start with,

she defines content as “the reference of the text to objects and phenomena in an extralinguistic reality”(Nord, 1991, p 90), and adds that such reference is generally

expressed by the semantics of the lexical and grammatical structures These structures work well together(ideally), complement each other and significantly contribute to the coherence of the text (and also the coherence of the text and other texts in the same language culture) By the lexical and grammatical structures,the author means: linking devices (including anaphora, cataphoric reference, substitution, recurrence,paraphrase, etc.), other logical connections, theme-rheme relationship, functional sentence perspective, wordsand phrases, sentence patterns, tense, mood, etc (Nord, 1991, p 91) This corresponds (not fully overlaps, for

it contains more than just a mere analysis of cohesion) with the concept of cohesion presented by Hallidayand Hasan (1976) as it takes into account all the five sources of cohesion suggested by the scholars: cohesionthrough reference (anaphoric reference, cataphoric reference ), substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexicalitems (repetition, hyponyms and hypernyms )

At least two more things ought to be mentioned when describing the category of content – thedenotative vs connotative meaning of a word and the “internal situation” of a text Nord (1991) very clearlystates, “The amount of information verbalized in a text includes not only denotative but also connotative (or

„secondary‟) meaning, i.e the information expressed by a language element by virtue of its affiliation to acertain linguistic code (stylistic levels, registers, functional style, regional and social dialects, etc.)” (p 92).With respect to this fact, the translator should read and understand a source text and then create the targettext accordingly Last but not least, the information contained in a text can be either “factual” (based onreality – the one that both the sender and the recipient can agree on) or “fictional” (referring to a fictionalworld invented by the author, and therefore separated from the reality of the communicative act) (Nord, 1991,

p 93) This is assumingly the first factor which may lay some foundations for a quantitative analysis oftranslation quality (rather than qualitative, as it was so far) Although, these are only clues since the fact thate.g a target text holds the very same number of particular verb forms as the source text, or that the translatormanaged to use exactly the same variety of conjunctions, does not ensure a high standard of translation Internal Factors on translation activities (2) Các yếu tố nội bộ của hoạt động dịch

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 3:25 PM

Presuppositions

Pragmatic presuppositions are those “implicitly assumed by the speaker, who takes it for granted thatthis will also be the case with the listener” (Nord, 1991, p 95); such presuppositions usually refer to objectsand phenomena of the source culture (p 96) Problems arise if the thesis does not work For example, in caseswhen the target reader is not fully aware of the source culture aspects presented in the ST and transferred intothe TT Therefore, the translator may want to “adjust the level of explicitness to the (assumed) generalbackground knowledge of the intended TT recipient” (Nord, 1991, p 98) Nord also suggests that he will takeadvantage of the translation procedures of „expansion‟ or „reduction‟ It is vital, to mention the problem ofredundancy, too The main aim of the redundancy is to assist comprehension by repeated verbalization (e.g.explanation, repetition, paraphrase, summary, tautology, etc.) Since both texts analysed in the present thesisare technical ones written by experts for experts or almost experts, the redundancy should be minimal

2.4 Text Composition

What Nord means by the text composition is, in short, the structuring of a text; whether it consists ofseveral shorter texts or whether it is a part of a bigger text, etc She builds upon Thiel‟s aspects of text composition: “She [Thiel] suggests that the text has an informational macrostructure (i.e composition andorder of information units) consisting of a number of microstructures” (Nord, 1991, p 100); where themacrostructure is marked by chapters and paragraphs, and the microstructure by syntactic structures, lexicaldevices, or suprasegmental features Both the micro and macrostructure are of great importance for the translation-oriented analysis because, firstly, a text can be comprised of smaller text segments with differentfunctions which may thus require different translation strategies Secondly, the beginning and the end of

a text may play special part in its comprehension, and they thus deserve to be analysed in greater detail (e.g.

do they somehow guide the reception or change the effect of the whole text?) Thirdly, some text types may

be subject to culture-specific conventions concerning text composition (e.g a letter) Fourthly, if a text isvery complex or incoherent in its nature, the analysis of microstructure can yield some information about thesubject matter (Nord, 1991, p 101)

2.5 Non-verbal Elements

Non-verbal elements are various signs which do not belong to any linguistic code and which are used assupplements to them By using such signs, the author aims to illustrate, disambiguate, or even intensify themessage contained in a text or a discourse (Nord, 1991, p 108) Among these are, as for the texts, photos,illustrations, emblems, special types of print, etc The translator‟s task is not only to find such signs, but also

to reveal their specific function within a particular text The non-verbal elements should not be mistaken forsuprasegmental features (punctuation, capitalisation ), discussed

later in the chapter (Ch 4.2.8)

2.6 Lexis

The category of lexis is quite large It may refer to the affiliation of a word to stylistic levels andregisters, word formation, connotations, rhetorical figures (metaphors, repetition of lexical element, metonymy, metaphor), parts of speech, morphological aspects (suffixes, prefixes, compositions, acronyms,abbreviations, etc.), collocations, idioms, addressing, selection of words (with respect to the sender‟sintention, time, place, medium, occasion ), degree of originality (words invented by the author, phrasescoined by him, intentional violation of norms), etc Nord (1991) also states that “the choice of lexis in aparticular text is determined by both extratextual and intratextual factors” (p 112), and Crystal and Davy (1969) add, “In any text, the stylistically

significant characteristics of lexis clearly reflect the extratextual factors of the situation in which the text isused, including the participants using it for communication” (p 81)

2.7 Sentence Structure

Is the sentence structure mainly paratactic or hypotactic? Are the sentences simple or complex? Arethere any deviations from functional sentence perspective? Does the text flow with syntactic figures of speechsuch as aposiopesis (which may indicate certain presuppositions), parallelism, chiasm, rhetorical question,parenthesis, ellipsis, etc (Nord, 1991, p 118-120)? What is their function in the text? Such and otherquestions should be asked and hopefully answered during this part of the analysis The extratextual factorsmay contribute to the image about the sentence structure which the translator builds throughout the course ofthe analysis in a way that e.g the author‟s intention may be realized through various syntactic figures Inother words, as soon as

the intention is analysed, it may indicate the presumable sentence structure Likewise, in all probability, themore complex the subject matter, the more complex the sentence structure

„when [ ] the speaker breaks off his speech before the sense is completed, in order to aggravate the purpose

of his address“ (Boyd, 1860, p 281/282) 28

asyndetic enumerations (higher tempo), theme-rheme structures (e.g stress the most important one by putting

it at the end), selection of words, word order, onomatopoeia, and so forth (Nord, 1991, p 120-124) From theabove list and from other additional aspects, such as rhythmicity, melody, alliteration, rhyme, and tone, it

seems that the suprasegmental features play a bigger role in poems and spoken discourses than in strictlytechnical texts

THE LEVEL OF NATURALNESS

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 3:51 PM

With all that, for all texts for the vast majority of texts, you have to ensure: (a) that your translationmakes sense;

(b) that it reads naturally, that it is written in ordinary language, the common grammar, idioms and words

that meet that kind of situation.

Normally, you can only do this by temporarily disengaging yourself from the SL text, by reading yourown translation as though no original existed

A word on 'naturalness' A translation of serious innovative writing may not sound natural, may not benatural to you

A still new patient, a thin and quiet person, who had found a place with his equally thin and quiet fiancee

at the good Russian Table, proved, just when the meal was in full swing, to be epileptic, as he suffered anextreme attack of that type, with a cry whose demonic and inhuman character has often been described, fellheavily on to the floor and struck around with his arms and legs next to his chair with the most ghastlycontortions

When you are faced with an innovatory expressive text, you have to try to gauge the degree of itsdeviation from naturalness, from ordinary language and reflect this degree in your translation Thus intranslating any type of text you have to sense 'naturalness', usually for the purpose of reproducing, sometimesfor the purpose of deviating from naturalness

In all 'communicative translation', whether you are translating an informative text, a notice or an advert,

'naturalness' is essential That is why you cannot translate properly if the TL is not your language of habitual

usage That is why you so often have to detach yourself mentally from the SL text; why, if there is time, you

should come back to your version after an interval

You have to ask yourself (or others): Would you see this, would you ever see this, in The Times, TheEconomist (watch that Time-Life-Spiegel style), the British Medical Journal, as a notice, on the back of aboard game, on an appliance, in a textbook, in a children's book? Is it usage, is it common usage in that kind

of writing? How frequent is it? Do not ask yourself: is it English? There is more English than the patriots andthe purists and the chauvinists are aware of

Naturalness is easily defined, not so easy to be concrete about Natural usage

comprises a variety of idioms or styles or registers determined primarily by the 'setting' of the text, i.e where

it is typically published or found, secondarily by the author, topic and readership, all of whom are usuallydependent on the setting It may even appear to be quite 'unnatural', e.g take any article in Foreign Trade(Moscow): To put it figuratively, foreign trade has become an important artery in the blood circulation of theSoviet Union's economic organism', or any other example of Soviet bureaucratic jargon; on the whole thismight occasionally be tactfully clarified but it should be translated 'straight' as the natural language ofparticipants in that setting

Natural usage, then, must be distinguished from 'ordinary language', the plain non-technical idiom used

by Oxford philosophers for (philosophical) explanation, and 'basic' language, which is somewhere betweenformal and informal, is easily understood, and is constructed from a language's most frequently used syntacticstructures and words - basic language is the nucleus of a language produced naturally

All three varieties - natural, ordinary and basic – are formed exclusively from modern language.However, unnatural translation is marked by interference, primarily from the SL text, possibly from a thirdlanguage known to the translator including his own, if it is not the target language

'Natural' translation can be contrasted with 'casual' language, where word order, syntactic structures,collocations and words are predictable You have to pay special attention to:

(1) Word order

In all languages, adverbs and adverbials are the most mobile components of a sentence, and their placingoften indicates the degree of emphasis on what is the new information (rheme) as well as naturalness Theyare the most delicate indicator of naturalness:

He regularly sees me on Tuesdays (Stress on 'regularly'.)

He sees me regularly on Tuesdays (No stress.)

On Tuesdays he sees me regularly (Stress on 'Tuesdays'.)

(2) Common structures can be made unnatural by silly one-to-one translation from

any language, e.g.:

(a) Athanogore put his arm under that of the young man: ('under the young man's')

(b) After having given his meter a satisfied glance: ('after giving')

Both these translations are by English students

(c) The packaging having a sufficiently clear label, the cider vinegar consumer could not confuse it with :('as the packaging had .')

(3) Cognate words

Both in West and East, thousands of words are drawing nearer to each other in meaning Many soundnatural when you transfer them, and may still have the wrong meaning: The book is actually in print' Manymore sound odd when you transfer them, and are wrong - avec, sans supplement, le tome VII, 'with, without asupplement, Vol.7' ('without extra charge') Thousands sound natural, have the same meaning, are right.(4) The appropriateness of gerunds, infinitives, verb-nouns (cf 'the establishment

of, 'establishing', 'the establishing of, 'to establish')

(5) Lexically, perhaps the most common symptom of unnaturalness is slightly old-fashioned, now rather'refined', or 'elevated' usage of words and idioms possibly originating in bilingual dictionaries,

Note (a) the fact that the SL expression is now old-fashioned or refined is irrelevant, since you translateinto the modern target language; (b) however, if such expressions appear in dialogue, and are spoken(typically or say) by middle-aged or elderly characters, then a correspondingly 'refined' translationisappropriate; (c) naturalness has a solid core of agreement, but the periphery is a taste area, and the subject ofviolent, futile dispute among informants, who will claim that it is a subjective matter, pure intuition; but it isnot so If you are a translator, check with three informants if you can If you are a translation teacher, welcome

an SL informant to help you decide on the naturalness or currency (there is no difference), therefore degree offrequency of an SL expression

(6) Other 'obvious' areas of interference, and therefore unnaturalness, are in the use of the articles; progressivetenses; noun-compounding; collocations; the currency of idioms and metaphors (cultural factors); aspectualfeatures of verbs; infinitives

How do you get a feel for naturalness, both as a foreigner and as a native speaker? The too obviousanswer is to read representative texts and talk with representative TL speakers (failing which, representative

TV and radio) - and to get yourself fearlessly corrected Beware of books of idioms - they rarely distinguishbetween what is current (e.g 'keep my head above water') and what is dead (e.g 'dead as a door nail')

There is a natural tendency to merge three of the senses of the word 'idiom':

(a) a group of words whose meaning cannot be predicted from the meanings of their constituent words (e.g.dog in the manger);

(b) the linguistic usage that is natural to native speakers of a language;

(c) the characteristic vocabulary or usage of a people, a group of people

The danger of this procedure is that it tends to devalue literal language at the expense of 'idiomatic'language, as though it were unnatural If anything, the reverse is the case

Certainly, idiomatic language can, being metaphor, be more pithy and vivid than literal language, but itcan also be more conventional, fluctuate with fashion, and become archaic and refined ('he was like a cat on ahot tin roof) , and, above all, it can be a way of avoiding the (literal) truth In translating idiomatic intoidiomatic language, it is particularly difficult to match equivalence of meaning with equivalence of frequency Check and cross-check words and expressions in an up-to-date dictionary (Longmans, Collins, COD).Note any word you are suspicious of Remember, your mind is furnished with thousands of words and propernames that you half take for granted, that you seem to have known all your life, and that you do not properlyknow the meaning of You have to start checking them Look up proper names as frequently as words: sayyou get Dax, die de peiiles H.L.M - 'Dax, a small council flat estate' may sound natural, but looking up Daxwill show you it is incorrect, it must be 'Dax, a town of small council flats' - always assuming that 'councilflat' is good enough for the reader

Naturalness is not something you wait to acquire by instinct You work towards it by small progressivestages, working from the most common to the less common features, like anything else rationally, even if younever quite attain it There is no universal naturalness

(7) Naturalness depends on the relationship between the writer and the readership and the topic or situation(context)

What is natural in one situation may be unnatural in another, but everyone has a natural, 'neutral'language where spoken and informal written language more or less coincide

It is rather easy to confuse naturalness with:

(a) a colloquial style;

(b) a succession of cliched idioms, which some, particularly expatriate teachers, think is the heart of thelanguage;

(c) jargon;

(d) formal language

Two approaches to translating Hai cách tiếp cận để dịch

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 3:55 PM

There are two approaches to translating (and many compromises between them): (1) you start translatingsentence by sentence, for say the first paragraph or chapter, to get the feel and the feeling tone of the text, andthen you deliberately sit back, review the position, and read the rest of the SL text; (2) you read the whole texttwo or three times, and find the intention, register, tone, mark the difficult words and passages and starttranslating only when you have taken your bearings

Which of the two methods you choose may depend on your temperament, or on whether you trustyour intuition (for the first method) or your powers of analysis (for the second) Alternatively, you may thinkthe first method more suitable for a

literary and the second for a technical or an institutional text The danger of the first method is that it mayleave you with too much revision to do on the early part, and is therefore time-wasting The second method(usually preferable) can be mechanical; a translational text analysis is useful as a point of reference, but itshould not inhibit the free play of your intuition Alternatively, you may prefer the first approach for arelatively easy text, the second for a harder one From the point of view of the translator, any scientificinvestigation, both

statistical and diagrammatic (some linguists and translation theorists make a fetish of diagrams, schemas andmodels), of what goes on in the brain (mind? nerves? cells?) during the process of translating is remote and atpresent speculative The contribution of psycholinguistics to translation is limited: the positive, neutral ornegative pragmatic effect of a word (e.g affecter, 'affect', 'brutal', befremden, drame, comedie, favoriser,denouement, extraordinaire, 'grandiose', grandioznyi, 'potentate', pontif, 'pretentious', 'arbitrary/arbitration',

proposer, exploit, hauteur, 'vaunt') e.g Osgood's work on semantic differentials is helpful, since the differencebetween 'positive' and 'negative' (i.e between the writer's approval and

his disapproval) is always critical to the interpretation of a text The heart of translation theory is translationproblems (admitting that what is a problem to one translator may not be to another); translation theory broadlyconsists of, and can be defined as, a large number of generalisations of translation problems A theoreticaldiscussion of the philosoph; and the psychology of translation is remote from the translator's problems.Whether you produce a statistical survey through questionnaires of what a hundred translators think they thinkwhen they translate, or whether you follow what one translator goes through, mental stage by mental stage, I

do not see what use it is going to be to anyone else, except perhaps as a corrective of freak methods - or ideassuch as relying entirely on bilingual dictionaries,

substituting encyclopaedia descriptions for dictionary definitions, using the best-sounding synonyms forliterary translation, transferring all Graeco-Latin words, continuous paraphrasing, etc But there is never anypoint in scientifically proving the obvious

Levels of translation approaches

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 3:58 PM

THE TEXTUAL LEVEL

Working on the text level, you intuitively and automatically make certain 'conversions'; you transposethe SL grammar (clauses and groups) into their 'ready' TL

equivalents and you translate the lexical units into the sense that appears immediately appropriate in thecontext of the sentence Your base level when you translate is the text This is the level of the literaltranslation of the source language into the target language, the level of the translationese you have toeliminate, but it also acts as a corrective of paraphrase and the parer-down of synonyms So a part of yourmind may be on the text level whilst another is elsewhere Translation is pre-eminently the occupation inwhich you have to be thinking of several things at the same time

THE REFERENTIAL LEVEL

You should not read a sentence without seeing it on the referential level Whether a

text is technical or literary or institutional, you have to make up your mind, summarily and continuously, what

it is about, what it is in aid of, what the writer's peculiar slant on it is: Usually, a more specific reference isdesirable in the translation: the tumour's swelling, deterioration, etc Thus your translation is some hint of acompromise between the text and

the facts For each sentence, when it is not clear, when there is an ambiguity, when the

writing is abstract or figurative, you have to ask yourself: What is actually happening here? and why? Forwhat reason, on what grounds, for what purpose? Can you see it in your mind? Can you visualise it? If youcannot, you have to 'supplement' the linguistic level, the text level with the referential level, the factual levelwith the necessary additional information (no more) from this level of reality, the facts of the matter In reallife, what is the setting or scene, who are the actors or agents, what is the purpose? This may or may not takeyou away temporarily from the words in the text And certainly it is all too easy to immerse yourself inlanguage and to detach yourself from the reality, real or imaginary, that is being described Far more

acutely than writers wrestling with only one language, you become aware of the awful gap between words andobjects, sentences and actions (or processes), grammar and moods (or attitudes) You have to gain perspective(distacco, recut), to stand back from the language and have an image of the reality behind the text, a reality forwhich you, and not the author (unless it is an expressive or an authoritative text), are responsible and liable.The referential goes hand in hand with the textual level All languages have polysemous words and structureswhich can be finally solved only on the referential level, beginning with a few multi-purpose, overloadedprepositions and conjunctions, through dangling participles ('reading the paper, the dog barked loudly') to

general words The referential level, where you mentally sort out the text, is built up out of, based on, theclarification of all linguistic difficulties and, where

appropriate, supplementary information from the 'encyclopaedia' - my symbol for any work of reference ortextbook (Thus in pour le passage de Flore, you find that Flore/Flora was an Italic goddess of flowers andgardens As it is in Claudel you translate: 'for the goddess Flora to pass' and leave the rest to the reader.) Youbuild up the referential picture in your mind when you transform the SL into the TL text; and, being aprofessional, you are responsible for the truth of this picture

Does this mean, as Seleskovitch claims, that 'the (SL) words disappear' or that you 'deverbalize theconcepts' (Delisle)? Not at all, you are working continuously on two levels, the real and the linguistic, life andlanguage, reference and sense, but you write, you 'compose', on the linguistic level, where your job is toachieve the greatest possible correspondence, referentially and pragmatically, with the words and sentences ofthe SL text However tempting it is to remain on that simpler, usually simplified layman's level of reality (themessage and its function) you have to force yourself back, in as far as the readership can stand it, into theparticularities of the source language meaning

THE COHESIVE LEVEL

Beyond the second factual level of translating, there is a third, generalised, level

linking the first and the second level, which you have to bear in mind This is the 'cohesive' level; it followsboth the structure and the moods of the text: the structure through the connective words (conjunctions,enumerations, reiterations, definite article, general words, referential synonyms, punctuation marks) linkingthe sentences, usually proceeding from known information (theme) to new information (rheme); proposition,opposition, continuation, reiteration, opposition, conclusion - for instance - or thesis, antithesis, synthesis.Thus the structure follows the train of thought; determines, say, the 'direction' ofd'ailleurs ('besides', 'further','anyway') in a text; ensures that a colon has a sequel, that ulterieur has a

later reference; that there is a sequence of time, space and logic in the text The second factor in the cohesivelevel is mood Again, this can be shown as a dialectical factor moving between positive and negative, emotiveand neutral It means tracing the thread of a text through its value-laden and value-free passages which may beexpressed by objects or nouns (Margaret Masterman (1982) has shown how a text alternates between 'help'and 'disaster'), as well as adjectives or qualities You have to spot the difference between positive and neutral

in, say, 'appreciate' and 'evaluate'; 'awesome' and 'amazing'; 'tidy' and 'ordered'; sauber

and rein; 'passed away' (indicating the value of the person) and 'died' Similarly you have to spot differencesbetween negative and neutral in say 'potentate' and 'ruler' These differences are often delicate, particularlynear the centre, where most languages have words like 'fair', 'moderate', passable, assez ban whose valuecannot always be determined in the context My third level, this attempt to follow the thought through theconnectives and the feeling tone, and the emotion through value-laden or value-free expressions, is,admittedly, only tentative, but it may determine the difference between a humdrum or misleading translationand a good one This cohesive level is a regulator, it secures coherence, it adjusts emphasis At this level, youreconsider the lengths of paragraphs and sentences, the formulation of the title; the tone of the conclusion.This is where the findings of discourse analysis are pertinent

Phúc đáp | Sao chép

Procedures for translation 1

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 4:00 PM

Direct and oblique translation

Generally speaking, translators can choose from two methods of translating, namely

direct, or literal translation and oblique translation In some translation tasks it may be possible to transposethe source language message element by element into the target language, because it is based on either (i)

parallel categories, in which case we can speak of structural parallelism, or (ii) on parallel concepts, which arethe result of metalinguistic parallelisms But translators may also notice gaps, or “lacunae”, in the targetlanguage (TL) which must be filled by corresponding elements, so that the overall impression is the same forthe two messages It may, however, also happen that, because of structural or metalinguistic

differences, certain stylistic effects cannot be transposed into the TL without upsetting the syntactic order, oreven the lexis In this case it is understood that more complex methods have to be used which at first may lookunusual but which nevertheless can permit translators a strict control over the reliability of their work: theseprocedures are called oblique translation methods In the listing which follows, the first three procedures aredirect and the others are oblique

Procedure 1: Borrowing

To overcome a lacuna, usually a metalinguistic one (e.g a new technical process, an unknown concept),borrowing is the simplest of all translation methods It would not even merit discussion in this context iftranslators did not occasionally need to use it in order to create a stylistic effect For instance, in order tointroduce the flavour of the source langugae (SL) culture into a translation, foreign terms may be used, e.g.such Russian words as “roubles”, “datchas” and “aparatchik”, “dollars” and “party” from American English,Mexican Spanish food names “tequila” and “tortillas”, and so on In a story with a typical English setting, anexpression such as “the coroner spoke” is probably better translated into French by borrowing the Englishterm “coroner”, rather than trying to find a more or less satisfying equivalent title from amongst the Frenchmagistrature, e.g.: “Le coroner prit la parole” Some well-established, mainly older borrowings are sowidely used that they are

no longer considered as such and have become a part of the respective TL lexicon Some examples of Frenchborrowings from other languages are “alcool”, “redingote”, “paquebot”, “acajou”, etc In English such words

as “menu”, “carburetor”, “hangar”, “chic” and expressions like “déjà vu”, “enfant terrible” and “rendez-vous”are no longer considered to be borrowings Translators are particularly interested in the newer borrowings,even personal ones It must be remembered that many borrowings enter a language through translation, justlike semantic borrowings or faux amis, whose pitfalls translators must carefully avoid The decision to borrow

a SL word or expression for introducing an element of local colour is a matter of style and consequently of themessage

As with borrowings, there are many fixed caiques which, after a period of time, become an integral part

of the language These too, like borrowings, may have undergone a semantic change, turning them into fauxamis Translators are more interested in new caiques which can serve to fill a lacuna, without having to use anactual borrowing

Procedures for translation 2

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 4:03 PM

Procedure 1: Literal translation

Literal, or word for word, translation is the direct transfer of a SL text into a grammatically andidiomatically appropriate TL text in which the translators’ task is limited to observing the adherence to thelinguistic servitudes of the TL In principle, a literal translation is a unique solution which is reversible andcomplete in itself It is most common when translating between two languages of the same family (e.g.between French and Italian), and even more so when they also share the same culture If literal translationsarise between French and English, it is because common metalinguistic concepts also reveal physicalcoexistence, i.e periods of bilingualism, with the conscious or unconscious imitation which attaches to acertain intellectual or political prestige, and such like They can also be justified

by a certain convergence of thought and sometimes of structure, which are certainly present among theEuropean languages (cf the creation of the definite article, the concepts of culture and civilization), and whichhave motivated interesting research in General Semantics

In the preceding methods, translation does not involve any special stylistic procedures If this were alwaysthe case then our present study would lack justification and translation would lack an intellectual challengesince it would be reduced to an unambiguous transfer from SL to TL The exploration of the possibility oftranslating scientific texts by machine, as proposed by the many research groups in universities and industry

in all major countries, is largely based on the existence of parallel passages in SL and TL texts, corresponding

to parallel thought processes which, as would be expected, are particularly frequent in the documentationrequired in science and technology The suitability of such texts for automatic

translation was recognised as early as 1955 by Locke and Booth (For current assessments of the scope ofapplications of machine translation see Hutchins and Somers 1992, Sager 1994.)

If, after trying the first three procedures, translators regard a literal translation unacceptable, they mustturn to the methods of oblique translation By unacceptable we mean that the message, when translatedliterally

i gives another meaning, or

ii has no meaning, or

iii is structurally impossible, or

iv does not have a corresponding expression within the metalinguistic experience

do not exist and therefore translators start off with words or units of translation, to which they apply

particular procedures with the intention of conveying the desired message Since the positioning of a wordwithin an utterance has an effect on its meaning, it may well arise that the solution results in a grouping ofwords that is so far from the original starting point that no dictionary could give it Given the infinite number

of combinations of signifier s alone, it is understandable that dictionaries cannot provide translators withready-made solutions to all their problems Only translators can be aware of the totality of the message, whichdetermines their decisions In the final analysis, it is the message alone, a reflection of the situation, thatallows us to judge whether two texts are adequate alternatives

Procedure 2: Transposition

The method called transposition involves replacing one word class with another

without changing the meaning of the message Beside being a special translation procedure, transposition canalso be applied within a language For example: “Il a annoncé qu’il reviendrait”, can be re-expressed bytransposing a subordinate verb with a noun, thus: “Il a annoncé son retour” In contrast to the first expression,which we call the base expression, we refer to the second one as the transposed expression In translationthere are two distinct types of transposition:

(i) obligatory transposition, and (ii) optional transposition

From a stylistic point of view, the base and the transposed expression do not necessarily have the samevalue Translators must, therefore, choose to carry out a transposition if the translation thus obtained fits betterinto the utterance, or allows a particular nuance of style to be retained Indeed, the transposed form isgenerally more literary in character A special and frequently used case of transposition is that of interchange

Procedure 5: Modulation

Modulation is a variation of the form of the message, obtained by a change in the point of view Thischange can be justified when, although a literal, or even transposed, translation results in a grammaticallycorrect utterance, it is considered unsuitable, unidiomatic or awkward in the TL

The difference between fixed and free modulation is one of degree In the case of

fixed modulation, translators with a good knowledge of both languages freely use this method, as they will beaware of the frequency of use, the overall acceptance, and the confirmation provided by a dictionary orgrammar of the preferred expression

Cases of free modulation are single instances not yet fixed and sanctioned by usage, so that the proceduremust be carried out anew each time This, however, is not what qualifies it as optional; when carried out as itshould be, the resulting translation should correspond perfectly to the situation indicated by the SL Toillustrate this point, it can be said that the result of a free modulation should lead to a solution that makes thereader exclaim, “Yes, that’s exactly what you would say” Free modulation thus tends towards a uniquesolution, a solution which rests upon an habitual train of thought and which is necessary rather than

optional It is therefore evident that between fixed modulation and free modulation there is but a difference ofdegree, and that as soon as a free modulation is used often enough, or is felt to offer the only solution (thisusually results from the study of bilingual texts, from discussions at a bilingual conference, or from a famoustranslation which claims recognition due to its

literary merit), it may become fixed However, a free modulation does not actually become fixed until it isreferred to in dictionaries and grammars and is regularly taught A passage not using such a modulation wouldthen be considered inaccurate and rejected In his M.A thesis, G.Panneton, from whom we have borrowed theterm modulation, correctly anticipated the results of a systematic application of transposition and modulation:

Procedure 3: Equivalence

We have repeatedly stressed that one and the same situation can be rendered by two

texts using completely different stylistic and structural methods In such cases we are dealing with the methodwhich produces equivalent texts The classical example of equivalence is given by the reaction of an amateurwho accidentally hits his finger with a hammer: if he were French his cry of pain would be transcribed as

“Aïe!”, but if he were English this would be interpreted as “Ouch!” Another striking case of equivalences arethe many onomatopoeia of animal sounds, e.g.:

cocorico cock-a-doodle-do

miaou miaow

hi-han heehaw

These simple examples illustrate a particular feature of equivalences: more often

than not they are of a syntagmatic nature, and affect the whole of the message As a result, most equivalencesare fixed, and belong to a phraseological repertoire of idioms, clichés, proverbs, nominal or adjectival phrases,etc The method of creating equivalences is also frequently applied to idioms For example, “To talk

through one’s hat” and “as like as two peas” cannot be translated by means of a caique Yet this is exactlywhat happens amongst members of so- called bilingual populations, who have permanent contact with twolanguages but never become fully acquainted with either It happens, nevertheless, that some of these calquesactually become accepted by the other language, especially if they relate to a new field which is likely tobecome established in the country of the TL

Procedure 4: Adaptation

With this seventh method we reach the extreme limit of translation: it is used in those cases where thetype of situation being referred to by the SL message is unknown in the TL culture In such cases translatorshave to create a new situation that can be considered as

being equivalent Adaptation can, therefore, be described as a special kind of equivalence, a situationalequivalence.The method of adaptation is well known amongst simultaneous interpreters: there is the story of

an interpreter who, having adapted “cricket” into “Tour de France” in a context referring to a particularlypopular sport, was put on the spot when the

French delegate then thanked the speaker for having referred to such a typically French sport The interpreterthen had to reverse the adaptation and speak of cricket to his English client

The refusal to make an adaptation is invariably detected within a translation because it affects not only thesyntactic structure, but also the development of ideas and how they are represented within the paragraph Eventhough translators may produce a perfectly correct text without adaptation, the absence of adaptation may still

be noticeable by an indefinable tone, something that does not sound quite right This is unfortunately theimpression given only too often by texts published by international organizations, whose members, eitherthrough ignorance or because of a mistaken insistence on literalness, demand translations which are largelybased on calques

Culture in relation to language

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 4:08 PM

Culture in this discussion should be seen in a broad sense, as in anthropological studies Culture is not onlyunderstood as the advanced intellectual development of mankind as reflected in the arts, but it refers to allsocially conditioned aspects of human life (Snell-Hornby, 1988: Hymes, 1964) In practical wordings,Goodenough (1964: 36) puts:

"As I see it, a society's culture consists of whatever it is one has to know or believe in order to operate

in a manner acceptable to its members, and do so in any role that they accept for any one of themselves.Culture, being what people have to learn as distinct from their biological heritage, must consist of the endproduct of learning: knowledge, in a most general, if relative, sense of the term By definition, we should notethat culture is not material phenomenon; it does not consist of things, people, behavior, or emotions It israther an organization of these things It is the forms of things that people have in mind, their models ofperceiving and dealing with their circumstances To one who knows their culture, these things and events arealso signs signifying the cultural forms or models of which they are material representation."

It can be summarized that this definition suggests three things:

• culture seen as a totality of knowledge and model for perceiving things,

• immediate connection between culture and behavior and events

• culture's dependence on norms It should be noted also that some other definitions claim that bothknowledge and material things are parts of culture

According to Snell-Hornby (1988: 40), the connection between language and culture was first formallyformulated by Wilhelm Von Humboldt For this German philosopher, language was something dynamic: itwas an activity rather than a static inventory of items as the product of activity At the same time language is

an expression of culture and individuality of the speakers, who perceive the world through language Related

to Goodenough's idea on culture as the totality of knowledge, this present idea may see language as theknowledge representation in the mind

In 1973, Humboldt's view was echoed by Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf in their Sapir-Whorfhypothesis This principle states that thought does not "precede" language, but on the contrary thought isconditioned by it

Halliday (in Halliday and Hasan (1985: 5) states that there was the theory of context before the theory

of text In other words, context precedes text Context here means context of situation and culture (Hallidayand Hasan, 1985: 7) This context is necessary for adequate understanding of the text, which becomes the firstrequirement for translating Thus, translating without understanding text is non-sense, and understanding textwithout understanding its culture is impossible

Humboldt's idea, Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, and Halliday's idea have far-reaching implications fortranslation In its extreme, the notion that language conditions thought and that language and thought is bound

up with the individual culture of the given community would mean that translation is impossible We cannottranslate one's thought which is affected by and stated in language specific for a certain community to anotherdifferent language because the system of thought in the two languages must be different Each language isunique If it influences the thought and, therefore, the culture, it would mean that ultimate translation isimpossible

Another point of view, however, asserts the opposite This also goes back to Humboldt's idea boutinner and outer forms of language Later it is developed into the concepts of deep structure and surfacestructure by Chomsky Inner form and deep structure is what generally known as idea and all ideas areuniversal

Cultural Approach

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ sáu, 3/09/2021, 4:14 PM

It has been long taken for granted that translation deals only with language Cultural perspective, however,has been in the last two decade brought into attention in Albanian Translation Studies This can be seen inmost of the following definitions, even thought starting from middle 20th century

The first definition is presented by Catford (1965: 20) He states that translation is the replacement oftextual material in one language by equivalent textual material in another language In this definition, the mostimportant thing is equivalent textual material Yet, it is still vague in terms of the type of equivalence Culture

is not taken into account

Very much similar to this definition is that by Savory (1968) who maintains that translation is madepossible by an equivalent of thought that lies behind its different verbal expressions Next, Nida and Taber(1969) explain the process of translating as consisting of reproducing in the receptor language the closestnatural equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.Brislin (1976: 1) defines translation as the general term referring to the transfer of thoughts and ideas fromone language to another, whether the languages are in written or oral form; whether the languages haveestablished orthographies or do not have such standardization or whether one or both languages is based onsigns, as with sign languages of the deaf."

Actually Nida and Taber themselves do not mention this matter very explicitly Following theirexplanation on "closest natural equivalent", however, we can infer that cultural consideration is considered.They maintain that the equivalent sought after in every effort of translating is the one that is so close that themessage can be well transferred The concept of closest natural equivalent is rooted in Nida's concept ofdynamic equivalent The inclusion of cultural perspective in the definition of translation unfortunately doesnot continue The later ones keep on not touching this matter "Translation involves the rendering of a ST tothe TT so as to ensure that:

• the surface meaning of the two will be approximately similar and

• the structure of the ST will be preserved as closely as possible, but not so closely that the TT structure will

be seriously distorted (McGuire, 1980: 2)

In the following definition, Newmark does not state anything about culture "Translation is a craftconsisting in the attempt to replace a written message and/or statement in one language by the same messageand/or statement in another language" (Newmark, 1981: 7) Finally, Wills defines translation more or lesssimilarly as follows:

"Translation is a transfer process which aims at the transformation of a written text into an optimallyequivalent text, and which requires the syntactic, the semantic and the pragmatic understanding and analyticalprocessing" (Wills in Noss, 1982: 3)

It is known that definitions above only one take cultural aspects into account, the one by Nida andTaber This definition is actually a specific one, rooted from the practice of the Bible translation By nature, it

is understood that the translation should be done to every language As the content addresses all walks of lifeand culture plays an important role in human life, culture, therefore, should be considered The otherdefinitions, however, are meant to explain the experts' view on translation theory to be applied in thetranslation of all types of material, including scientific or technical texts which are not deeply embedded inany culture Thus, it can be momentarily hypothesized that cultural consideration must be taken if the material

to translate is related to culture For material that is not very much embedded into a specific culture, culturalconsideration may not be necessary According to Snell-Hornby (1988: 39), however, this exclusion ofcultural aspect from the discussion of translation theory is due to the view of the traditional approach inlinguistics which draws a sharp dividing-line between language and "extra linguistic reality" (culture,situation, etc.)

Functional Approach

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:34 PM

Functionalists view translation as an act of communication that is done for a specific purpose Although thisidea is held by most functionalists, yet some others go even further in viewing the TT as an independent text.According to this view Vermeer (in Nord, 1997:12) considers translating as producing a text in a target settingfor a target purpose and target addressees in target circumstances For the functionalists, the state of the ST ismuch lower than that in the equivalence based theory since the formers regard ST as “an offer of information”that is turned in part or in whole into an offer of information for the target audience the function of thetranslation takes priority over the other factors

Functionalists follow the same line in that function is viewed as a prospective concept that isdetermined for each translation by the translation brief and the translator with regards to the use of the TT inthe target culture situation (Lauscher, 2000:156) It is worth mentioning here that Nida (1964) was one of thefirst pioneers, who drew attention to this point since, although he does not set a model, he deals with the factthat the reader response has its impact on translation and that the purpose of the author and the translation alsoplay a role in dynamic translation

Wilss (1982:226) on the other hand mentions what might be considered as new steps towardsfunctionalism He first criticizes the old treatment of translation criticism held till the mid 20th century fordemanding ST oriented translation and judging translations accordingly He affirms that the linguisticapproach if it is based on text-related and text-type related critical framework, may be valid since it helps thecritic to systemize and evaluate the linguistic and situational factors in the process But he also adds that forthe assessment to be further developed, the translator’s role must be taken into account seriously He admitsthat this could not be achieved without subjectivity but this should not impede the assessment procedure since,

to Wilss, objectivity is necessary but it is pointless to make the assessment procedures more scientific than issensible; to him translation, after all, is a science, an art and a skill at the same time

Equivalence Approaches

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:35 PM

Proponents of this approach share the view that translation is an attempt to reproduce the ST as closely aspossible by means of different types of equivalence Reiss introduces one of the first systematic approaches totranslation quality assessment To her translating is a balancing process achieved by constructing a TT underthe constant restraint of a ST text The measure here is “equivalence” maintained on the level of text and textunits Thus, the translation is good if it achieves certain equivalence This means that the linguistic togetherwith the situational context and stylistic level on the one hand and the intention of the author, the TT and TTunits have the same values as those of the ST Such procedure involves these stages:

• the analysis of the ST

• comparison between the ST and the TT

Regarding the literary category where the evaluation is made according to text types, the analysisshould be made on the ST first in order to determine the hierarchy of elements which have to be kept invariant

in the translated text

Then an analysis of the TT is made to judge the match or mismatch in this particular point, meaning

to check the invariance of information content in an informative text, the success of achieving the intendedpurpose in a text For the linguistic category, measures introduced by linguists include the following:

• Equivalence of semantic instructions

• Adequacy of lexical instructions

• Correctness of grammatical instructions

• Analogy of stylistic instructions

Again the text type is the determiner for deciding the priority given to each of the points above in that,for example, in an informative text the semantic instructions are to be given priority while in a technical textlexical instructions have to be given more importance and so on

According to Reiss there is the involvement of certain pragmatic categories suggested for the stage ofcomparison:

Comparing between the ST and the TT by means of textual profile using ST as the norm and thefunction for matching and mismatching the ST.

Function is defined in this model as the application or use of the text has in a particular context ofsituation represented by the linguistic properties of the text The translated texts are then divided according tothe strategy used in the process of translating The primary level function, in which the TT must reproduce thefunction of the ST, is achieved by means of covert translation Here, the translator reproduces the ST function

by using an empirically established cultural filter to adopt the TT to the communicative preferences of thetarget audience On the other hand, secondary level function is achieved by following the overt translation inwhich the translator tries to reproduce the function of the ST text by staying close to the ST

Translation as an interlingual transfer

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:37 PM

The task of the linguistic science of translation is defined as the description of the relationships ofequivalence between languages on the system level (langue) And Otto Kade 26 stressed four kinds of

"potential equivalents", such as one-one (total equivalent), one-tomany (facultative equivalence), one part (approximate equivalent), one-to-zero (nonequivalence) or gap (Koller 1992:229) This definition regardsindividual words and is later fulfilled by Contrastive Linguistics and Lexicography At the surface, translationappeared as an exchange of source language material by target language material (Catford 1965), and thustranslation was defined as an “interlingual transfer” of information, requiring a “code-switching process” inthe channel of communication, in order to preserve the information unaltered “Translation is a specific kind

to-of linguistic information processing based on the principle to-of code-switching It is basically characterized bythe interaction of three communicating partners, the ST author, the translator, and the TT reader” (Wilss1996:5) ST TT Source text/information transfer code-switching transfer target text/information The discipline

of Contrastive Linguistics, originally designed for explaining difficulties in learning a foreign language, alsoinfluenced Translation Science as it offered the instruments for translation criticism and error analysis(Spillner 1990), and this was mainly based on Comparative Stylistics first developed in France Manytranslation handbooks still today follow this language-pair model, because it is also a useful instrument fortranslation evaluation in the class room House (1997) has developed a model of translation qualityassessment in the sense of a “scientific translation critique” Its purpose is to measure whether a translationhas an (optimal) equivalence relationship to the original on all linguistic levels, regarding words and sentences

in terms of their deviation from a literal translation “Translation is constituted by a „double-binding‟relationship both to its source and to the communicative conditions of the receiving linguaculture, and it is theconcept of equivalence which catches this relationship” (House 1997:29) The problem of information transferbetween two languages led to the discipline of Stylistique comparée describing the transfer in a particularlanguage pair There are studies for English-French (Vinay/Darbelnet 1958) Comparing existing translations,they described seven procedures applied by the translators, namely emprunt, calque, traduction littérale,transposition, modulation, equivalence, adaptation The first three are a substitution, while transposition andmodulation are a non-literal paraphrasing These procedures are reactions on the syntactic level to thestructure in the source text The translation is seen as a series of technical translation procedures which can beapplied in translations didactics This has determined decisively the orientation of translation pedagogics inthe sixties You can determine every deviation from a literal translation by those procedures The focus in thetranslation technique is on syntax and sentence level, never on whole texts

Analysis of the cognitive translation process

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:39 PM

In the nineties finally, Cognitive Science had its boom, also with an influence on Translation Studies So wemay envisage an analysis of the cognitive ways of thinking by the translator There were analyses of “think-aloud protocols”: translators had to speak aloud all 34 their ideas in mind, then one could analyze their ways

of inferring (Krings 1988) Maybe this will help to change translation didactics Hans G Hönig (1995) pleadsfor a conscious reflection of the translator's constructive activity He mentions that there is an uncontrolledpart in our mind, and a controlled one The problem is that the controlling section, if there are no criticalcategories or strategies, often revises in a negative way the good spontaneous formulation first found So weneed more confidence in the own capacity Psycholinguistic studies analyze intuition and cognition Kußmaul(2000) finally reflects on the role of creativity that is defined as a structural deviation from the source text.Describing associative processes of thinking, he pleads for a change of perspective in order to find newsolutions His aim is also to explore various aspects of the methodology of translation, with a view onteaching translation He sees the translator as a conscious, responsible individual Translation didactics shouldhelp to shape a cognitive landscape It is obvious that the empirical methodology of research is the adequatemeans for cognitive analysis Think-aloud protocols can be combined with questionnaires and introspection,

in order to back-up single results Qualitative, subjective and quantitative, objective data are being combined

in triangulation (Hansen 2006:61), in order to support the information collected from introspection,questioning or observation Key-logging and eyetracking as an observation method of the translational work isparticularly interesting when it offers a comparison between professionals‟ and students‟ work Research inthe translation process will gain more impetus in the future, as more and more data are being collected

The translator’s orientation

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:40 PM

The real difficulty in translation, seen from the hermeneutical translator‟s point of view and not descriptivelyfrom the outside, is the problem of formulating We will have to try several times until we find the adequatewords for what we want to say The wish does not lead in a logically compelling and fully guaranteed way tothe respective action, neither does command The translator will identify with the message understood inempathy, in order to reexpress it as if it were his/her own opinion Translation does not inform about a text,but presents that text in an intelligible way An authentic text will be created in the other language, for whichthe translator can accept responsibility Translation expresses messages and is not a reaction to languagestructures nor a linguistic derivation from the source text Maybe one should better give up the traditionalterms of “source” and “target” texts The message understood from the original – now being cognitivelypresent – finds a new expression in the translation The usual linguistic approach has always been the analysis

of morphemes – semes – lexemes – in texts – as a genre – situated – in a culture This should be reversed Thetranslator does not analyze linguistic objects, he or she is confronted with the voice of an author – in a culture– in a discourse field – as texts – with words – carrying sense Translators are individual human beings havinggathered their own culture and an awareness of the other culture or scientific domain (through languageacquisition, social experience, practical work, travels, specialist studies, learning of facts) Different cultures

as systems of knowledge get into contact within the translator‟s mind, in a “fusion of horizons” In otherwords: the translator has a share in those cultures or domains and may even be part of both of them, ratherthan standing in between the cultures doing a transfer or working on them The translators – in anhermeneutical approach – have to critically distinguish between their own opinion and what the text isactually saying As R Stolze (2003:244) has shown, translators will – for their orientation – look at thesituational background, the discourse field, the conceptual world of key words and the predicative mode of atext, in order to adequately interpret it In following Schleiermacher‟s holistic approach one may apply theinstruments of Applied Linguistics such as semantics, text linguistics, rhetoric etc But understanding is notall, formulating is the crucial issue So the translator will use the available techniques in a holistic viewregarding the medium, stylistics, coherence and function to be realized for the translated text in order toformulate adequately Language proficiency, style awareness and confidence in one‟s own creativity aredecisive This is what original authors are doing also when they think about their intended addressees Inauthors, this process is often unconscious, whereas translators reflect on it critically The hermeneutical

approach to translation presented here includes the idea that the translational dealing with texts is basically thesame for all text genres in literature and in specialist communication – only the required knowledge base andlanguage proficiency is different For any translating person some literary styles or cultural specificities are asstrange as functional styles and technical terms The relevant knowledge in both areas has to be acquired firstand be used in a self-critical manner

Firth, J.R Translation Models (1)

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:41 PM

J.R Firth was a man of his time Born in Keighley, Yorkshire, in late 19th century Britain, when it stillheld much of the world in imperial subjugation, his career was marked by the existence of the BritishEmpire He attended the local grammar school, studied for a BA and MA in history at Leeds University, andbriefly taught the subject at a Leeds teacher training college Just before the First World War, he went toIndia, still part of Britain’s Empire, to work for the Indian Education Service He also undertookmilitary service in India during the war (and in Afghanistan and Africa), returning to the imperial Education Service after the armistice as a professor of English at the University of the Punjab There Firth began his study of the area’s

languages, which were to provide linguistic data for later publications; his time in India had a lastingeffect on his career

He returned to Britain, first for a year, in 1926, then permanently in 1928, to a position in *Daniel Jones’s Department of Phonetics at University College London, interspersing his UCL teaching with part-time work at the London School of Economics, what was to become the School of Oriental and African Studies, and Oxford While at the LSE, he met *Bronislaw Malinowski, then working on languagefrom an anthropological point of view Some of Malinowski’s ideas were influence Firth considerably – much more than those of *Jones, who Firth regarded as theoretically barren and intellectually insular (hedid, however, rate highly the work of

the experimental phoneticians at UCL)

Firth published his only books while at UCL Meant for non-academic audiences, thesenonetheless contain the basics of much of what was later recognised as ‘Firthian’ linguistics The populistapproach of these texts, Speech (1930) and The Tongues of Men (1937), is the first sign of Firth’s constant striving to promote linguistics in Britain Both books end, after a tour through many linguisticissues, with a call for the establishment of linguistic institutes Firth writes on the last page of Speechthat Britain needs to promote the investigation of English (as the only possible world language) and of otherlanguages, together with its “partners in a world empire with hundreds of millions of Asiatics and Africansspeaking hundreds of languages”

The books cover similar points, and such repetition is frequent in Firth’s writing A positive way ofviewing this is to recognise that Firth’s ideas, which were not of the linguistic mainstream, were, with theexception of his phonological work, remarkably consistent throughout his working life

Firth’s main writing interests, can be split into four: (i) the idea that the study of

‘meaning’ and ‘context’ should be central in linguistics, (ii) discussion of the history of linguistics, especially of linguists from Britain, (iii) work on phonology, particularly the development of a modelcalled ‘Prosodic Analysis’, and (iv) linguistic descriptions and encyclopaedia articles on Indian and southern Asian languages, particularly their orthography and phonology Aspects of (i), (ii) and (iv) arepresent in his writing from the start; (iii) only developed later He is best known for (i) and (iii), where

he laid out his views as to how language works and how linguists should approach its analysis While by

no means incompatible, there is, however, no necessary connection between his ideas in these two areas Firth’s ideas on (i) are fundamental to his conception of language, as he considered the analysis of themeaning of utterances to be the main goal of linguistics; this was unusual at a time when contemporaries such

as *Bloomfield were positively excluding meaning from linguistic study Firth rejects any kind of distinctionbetween

‘langue’ and ‘parole’ (as *Saussure made before Firth) or ‘competence’ and ‘performance’ (as

*Chomsky did after him), because, for Firth, language was not an autonomous entity, and was not to bestudied as a mental system Rather, in keeping with the behaviourist and positivist ideas of the contemporary intellectual environment (see the work of *Skinner, for example), Firth saw language as a set

of events which speakers uttered, a mode of action, a way of ‘doing things’, and therefore linguists should focus on speech events themselves This rejected the common view that speech acts are only interesting for linguists to gain access to the ‘true’ object of study – their underlying grammatical systems

As utterances occur in real-life contexts, Firth argued that their meaning derived just as much fromthe particular situation in which they occurred as from the string of sounds uttered This integrationist idea, which mixes language with the objects physically present during a conversation to ascertain the meaning involved, is known as Firth’s ‘contextual theory of meaning’ or his theory of ‘context of situation’, aphrase which he borrowed from *Malinowski Some of Firth’s ideas on meaning were developed in his misleadingly titled article The Technique of Semantics (1935) Much of the article deals with the history ofusages of the term ‘semantics’ and of the study of meaning, although it does make a start at recognising a taxonomy of possible situation types (never developed further) Firth proposes to use the term ‘semantics’

to describe his whole approach to language, which is to link all levels of linguistic analysis (from phonetics to lexicography) with their contexts and situations He does not maintain this usageelsewhere in his writings, but he does extend the meaning of ‘meaning’ in remarkable

ways, writing about the ‘phonological meaning’ of phones and the ‘grammatical meaning’ ofconstituents This was due to his overarching definition of meaning as the function or effect of an item in aparticular context, thus phonological entities have meaning because they can contrast and have relations withother entities in particular phonological environments At a lexical level, this embraces the notion of the ‘collocation’, that is, which other words a particular word consistently co-occurs with (part of the

‘meaning’ of words in collocations, such as ‘an egregious ass’ is that they co-occur together) These usages

of ‘meaning’ allowed Firth to perceive a

fundamental unity among linguistic levels, linked through the search for statements of ‘meaning’ at eachlevel It has frequently been pointed out, not least by Lyons (1966),

that this stretches the meaning of ‘meaning’ until it snaps, and that while situations must be understoodfor the interpretation of utterances, considerably more is required to give a full description of meaning Given Firth’s anti-mentalist views, he expected the analytical levels that

linguists employ to have different properties and to be described in their own terms; no universals orstructural analogies were to be expected or sought The number and nature of entities which could be postulated was unlimited because Firth’s instrumentalism meant that a linguist was not thought to bedescribing the uniquely ‘true’ (or ‘psychologically real’) form of a language; linguists were free to usewhatever theoretical constructs were necessary, and to mix information from different linguistic levels Furthermore, Firth considered it perfectly proper to focus on only one very small subsystem of a language, ignoring other subsystems if it made

descriptive sense to do so, a principle referred to as ‘polysystemacity’

Firth also published several pieces on the phonology of languages such as

Burmese and Tamil while at UCL Following a 15-month research fellowship, spent in India working on languages such as Gujarati and Telugu, Firth moved in 1938 to the Department of Phonetics and Linguistics at London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies (‘SOAS’, then still called the School of Oriental Studies), where he was to stay for the rest of his career, being made a Reader two years later and Head of Department in 1941 The development of SOAS was in part due to theexistence of the British Empire, as SOAS was the UK centre for teaching and research on the culture and languages of vast areas of the world in Britain’s

imperialistic thrall Firth’s expertise in southern Asian languages, gathered from his time in India, fittedSOAS’s remit well, enabling him to prosper there, and the School was to prove an excellent base for Firth’sambitions to establish linguistics on a firm academic footing

The year after Firth moved to SOAS, the Second World War began, oddly strengthening Firth’s position When Japan entered the war in 1941, Firth ran intensive training courses in Japanesefor members of the armed services This led to a substantial increase in the staff employed in hisdepartment, and Firth was awarded the Order of the British Empire in 1946 for this work He had beengiven a Chair in 1944, which meant that he was the first Professor of General Linguistics in Britain (longafter such appointments had been made in other countries) Firth’s department flourished after the war, withcontinued government support following the recognition of SOAS’s strategic importance, given Britain’s imperial interests Firth’s charisma

and inspirational abilities also lured several people to work at SOAS who before the war had worked atUCL

Firth, J.R Translation Models (2)

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:42 PM

Just after the war, Firth published The English School of Phonetics (1946), his main contribution to thehistory of linguistics This illustrates Firth’s conviction that he was working in a long linguistic tradition, stretching back centuries (including Henry Sweet, Alexander Melville Bell, John Hart, and even Orm and Ælfric) The article is coloured by the impression that Firth finds it important to praise thework of those who wrote in England, but Firth’s interests in this area were important in

stimulating other work in the field (for example in co-workers such as R.H Robins)

While at SOAS, Firth developed his ideas on phonology, which many see as his greatest contribution

to linguistics Many of the ideas in ‘Prosodic Analysis’ (or ‘London School Phonology’) were, however, best written about by others, and the most impressive analyses in this framework were published by Firth’s co-workers, (mostly colleagues at SOAS) who formed the ‘London School’, a groupinspired and

encouraged by Firth The first publication where Firth set out his phonological ideas is Sounds and Prosodies(1948), although it is not easy to extract them from the article One fundamental ideas is a rejection of purely phonemic analysis, as practiced by others working in phonology at the time (such as

*Trubetzkoy and *Bloomfield) Some kind of segments still exist in the approach (called ‘phonematic units’), but, crucially, the phonologist can also assign features of phonetic form to ‘prosodies’ whichare nonsegmental entities that can be tied to any piece of phonological structure – spread over a whole word,

or syntactic unit, or part of a syllable, for example The

metaphor ‘spread’ should not be taken dynamically, however, as no notion of ‘phonological process’

is countenanced; rather the static domain of a prosody is described Thus assimilations and vowelharmony are simply described in terms of the span the feature (the ‘prosody’) has in the observable form of an utterance

Phonematic units can be nearly empty of distinctive phonological specification, if this is analysed asprosodic Furthermore, anything which is described with reference to syntagmatic, rather than paradigmaticstructure can be a prosody, including ‘juncture’ phenomena, which mark out linguistic boundaries, andfeatures restricted to particular positions in a syllable

Prosodic Analysis further assumes a clear separation between ‘phonetics’ and ‘phonology’ Phonematic units and prosodies are not assumed to have ‘intrinsic’ or obvious phonetic content They must be accompanied by ‘exponency’ statements which state formally how a particular piece of phonological structure maps onto the phonetics This allowed Firthians to combine an abstract phonology with detailed phonetic description

Firth’s general assumption of instrumentalism and polysystematicity meant that phonologists are free

to recognise a phonological system in any piece of linguistic structure, rather than needing to provide acoherent account of the whole phonological system of a language There is no necessary expectation that the same phonological entities and systems should be relevant in, for example, both syllable onsets and in syllable rhymes, function words and lexical words, Noun Phrases and Adverb

Phrases; this also illustrates the countenanced mixing of linguistic levels

Some of Firth’s phonological ideas are reexpressed in his last major publication,

A Synopsis of Linguistic Theory, 1930-1955 This also repeats many of his other main ideas, quoting directly from Speech and the Tongues of Men, and served as the introduction to a volume of articles

by his colleagues It appeared in 1957, the same year as a collection of Firth’s articles, Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951 These volumes served as a summary of, and practically end-point to his career He had retired from SOAS in 1956 Firth lived only a further four years, leaving, many haveargued, much unwritten, in part because he was already quite ill (although by no means infirm – helectured part-time at Edinburgh)

At the time of his death, Firth was recognised in Britain as a central, distinguished figure in linguistics He had been president of the Philological Society and awarded honorary degrees He hadpublished around 40 items but, notably, had never set out all his ideas in a clear and coherent manner.Firth was well aware of developments in linguistics in continental Europe and America, but his work wasnot influential outside Britain He lectured abroad, attended conferences and was an invited teacher at

a Linguistic Institute of the Linguistic Society of America; nonetheless, some claim that Firth shared some of Britain’s insularity, lacking

ambition to persuade those elsewhere of his ideas He was certainly not understood in the US, except by such figures as Kenneth Pike Within Britain, however, Firth’s personal influence is indisputable Hewas widely acclaimed as an inspiring teacher with organisational skill and the means to get his own way.While his writing is bad, his performance in lectures and personal conversation could be enthralling Ageneration of linguists arose around him; they helped spread linguistics to newly founded departments

in Britain, with an identifiably ‘Firthian’ approach Some recognise both malign and positive aspects ofFirth’s influence, describing

him as autocratic and impolite He controlled what most members of the London School could publish and suppressed linguistic ideas which he disapproved of, for example, the phonology done atUCL This aggressive attitude, coupled with the need for personal contact to perceive his inspirationalness may have contributed to the waning of interest in Firthian ideas Work in Prosodic Analysis continued inBritain in some quantity into the 1960s and 70s, but was then overtaken by the progress of

The true extent of Firth’s posthumous intellectual influence is difficult to assess

Some linguists (mostly tending towards the ‘applied’ end of the spectrum) overtly claim Firth as an inspiration; others work with ideas which are reminiscent of his, although a direct line of influence is not easily recognisable His ideas on meaning and context now find echoes, sometimes with citation, indiscourse analysis, corpus linguistics, pragmatics and sociolinguistics Several fundamental ideas were taken

up by *M.A.K Halliday, who founded Systemic Functional Linguistics, now widely

pursued in the world Halliday’s ideas, originally labelled ‘neo-Firthian’, picked up Firth’s generalapproach of considering the function of language in context, working in realm of grammar (which Firth himself had not), expanding on the notion of linguistic systems as paradigmatic sets of choices, and developing new ideas, arguably compatible with Firth’s (although essentially monosystemic)

Firth is still inspiring work in phonology, especially around a group at the University of York (see Ogden & Local 1994) Furthermore, many contemporary phonological ideas were foreshadowed by Firth’s, although mostly in reinvented form It is now widely accepted that theautonomous phoneme is an untenable object, and there are echoes of London School positions in (a)

the common non-linear, ‘autosegmental’ understanding of segments, (b) the widespread use of information

from other linguistic levels in phonological analyses, (c) many phonologists’ rejection of dynamic phonological ‘processes’, in favour of static description of (and constraints on) the domain-span of a feature, and (d) the assumption among some phonologists (but no longer the majority) that an

‘unnatural’ phonology should be divorced from phonetics

Firth died suddenly on 14th December 1960 in Lindfield, Surrey He had seized

the opportunities which came his way and left British linguistics stronger than when he entered it His connections with the British Empire enabled his career, but he repaid this by working on many underinvestigated languages of the Empire His theories were the product of novel, inspirational thinking: a posthumous festschrift was published 1966, full of ideas

Hermeneutics and translation

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hĩa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:43 PM

At this point there is the hermeneutic approach to translation It asks the question, how does the translatorthink, what are the necessary factors – not of translation, but of translation competence Hermeneuticsconsiders how comprehension is possible The German Protestant theologian and philosopher F D E.Schleiermacher (1768-1834) is seen as the father of Hermeneutics as a language philosophy He had offerednew insight as he reflected on the role of language in the interpretation of texts, with a view to Bibletranslation He argued that neither the logical inference of Rationalism, nor the individualistic evidence ofIdealism in their ahistoric absolutism can be a proof for the certainty of truth in talking about language.Language includes aspects of both objective features in grammar and lexicon uniting all humans in aspeakers‟ community, and subjective features because language is also created and evolves by individualutterances within a culture Both aspects shall never be separated from each other, says Schleiermacher, theyare only seen alternately, in a more or less clear emergence, depending on the individual case of reading Onthe one hand, any contrastive grammar or stylistics or text analysis will only grasp one half of the languagereality, and on the other hand, an individual assurance of having interpreted rightly may be prone to therelativism of a nạve subjectivity Hermeneutics distinguishes – from a personalized world view – betweenobjects/facts with their analysis/cognition and human activity with its inner motivation, i.e betweenobjectivity and subjectivity, analysis and evidence, strategy and impulse, rationale and intuition, inference andimpression, proof and argumentation Schleiermacher stressed that thought and volition do refer to each other

in the acting person, but are also ineluctably separate Any conviction can be contestable Schleiermacher callsfor a combination of “grammatical analysis” with genre comparison within the language, and a “divinatoryunderstanding” of the individual text as a psychological explication of the passage in its context Thedivinatory and the comparative method are closely interlinked, and there is an interplay between rules andintuition There will be phases of understanding more driven by methodology, and others where intuition isthe leading strength 32 For the purpose of backing-up one‟s interpretation of a text to expound its meaning,Schleiermacher established several alternating antinomies of analysis as a method There is, among others, acircle of comprehension or “interpretive circle“ between the whole of the text and the single element in it, or acircle between the constitution and the actual effect of the text, when the author might have had otherintentions than are now visible from the written text to the present reader This methodological approachcorresponds to well-known aspects of text analysis via lexis, semantics and pragmatics usually applied forstrengthening one‟s interpretation (Thiselton 2006: 191) But Schleiermacher maintains that there is always anadditional aspect of intuition, since understanding is an art Truth reveals itself intuitively in a person‟s mind.The basis for this to happen is an awareness of the topics treated and of the language concerned Without anyuniting bond no understanding will be possible The art is based on relevant knowledge, since a nạveinterpretation cannot be acceptable, e.g for responsible translation This means that the translator has to beaware of his personal horizon of experience and knowledge and must open it phenomenologically by learning

and entering into unfamiliar horizons, e.g to foreign cultures and scientific disciplines This is the place of theso-called “hermeneutical circle”: I will only understand something if I already know a part of it, when there is

a common basis This observation is not trivial because it means that a merely linguistic analysis of a text doesnot lead to its meaning, just as the pure perception of a strange phenomenon does not result in its adequateinterpretation This does not fence us in, because we may always learn new things and thus transcend thecircle first given That is what happens in understanding: an enlargement of our horizon, and at the same timethis prepares the basis for further understanding The truth of a text thus revealed is historically determined(Thiselton 2006:747) There is no quasi objective, ever unchanged truth in social communities Truth is onlyfound dialectically, in a discussion process within a group, valid for a certain period of time, ever remainingopen for new interpretation When we have enlarged our own horizon of knowledge, we will be able to grasp

a text‟s message that was written against another horizon Hans-Georg Gadamer (1960) speaks of a “fusion ofhorizons” when comprehension happens And this process is ever dynamic, as individuals are placed in ahistorical situation, and their conscience is continuously growing Fritz Paepcke (1986) first introducedhermeneutical thinking into translation studies, focusing mainly on the aspects of comprehension Theadequate comprehension of a text, i.e when a fusion of horizons has happened to the translator-reader‟ssatisfaction, will create a cognitive representation of that text‟s message And all what is carried in mind canalso to some extent be expressed in another language So the relationship between translation andhermeneutics is evident Outside the German speaking world, the hermeneutical approach is mainlyrepresented by George Steiner He uses (1975:296-300) a very metaphorical language in describing the

“hermeneutic motion” when a translator with an “initiative trust” in the meaningfulness of a text “as a yetuntried, unmapped alterity of statement” comes to a “manoeuvre of comprehension explicitly invasive andexhaustive leaving the shell smashed” The sense, in comprehension, is incorporated “in a completedomestication” and “abducted into another language” Steiner‟s description of the process of understandingneglects the self-critical reflection underlined by Schleiermacher and soon changes into a description of itseffects The assimilation of the foreign sense has an effect both on the translator himself and on the targetlanguage which is being transformed by the importation of the strange sense This idea gave rise tointerpreting translation as a creative act that changes the words and not seldom the original meaning viatranslation It has been seen both in literary translation and in postmodern translation theories as the privilege

of creativity Translations are new creations rather than a representation of the text first given in the sourcelanguage And easily 33 this also may lead into an ideological treatment of texts in translation, emphasizingthe creative energy of language

The translating person

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:44 PM

It is only recently that the translator as a historical person who actually performs translation is beingconsidered, with the aim to analyze factors of translation competence In France there is the translation school

of Danica Seleskovitch & Marianne Lederer (1984) They base their concept of translation on the experience

of interpreting The interpreter hears a sequence of the speech, understands it and verbalizes it, totallyindependent from the word and sentence structure This procedure is called “deverbalisation” They expresslyoppose the also French ideas of Stylistique comparée which compared stylistic forms in a language pair.Rather they state that the translation should grasp sense units and reformulate them freely, thus following thegénie de la langue, the spirit of the language Translation should work in the same way like interpreting:understand and formulate Regarding the question of understanding they refer to the context and situation Aword or an isolated sentence might be ambiguous when taken alone, but it is easily comprehensible whenintegrated into its context After having read a total paragraph, or even better a whole text, its meaning in mostcases will be clear Also, an intelligible source text is usually directed towards the knowledge of the readersand the audience, and of course the translator should have the same knowledge Deverbalisation is animmediate act of understanding, and in that moment the interpreter also finds the right words They stress that

better translations are found when one deviates from literal translation In many examples they show thisstrategy that leads sometimes to totally new sentence structures in the target language Since deverbalisation is

a spontaneous act of intuition, it may not be guided by linguistic methods Jean-René Ladmiral (1993)discusses once again the old alternative of true and free 31 translations He sees the translator faced by theneed to decide: whether to orient the translation at the source, or to orient is at the target readers, sourciers andciblistes The target-oriented “ciblistes” try to make the message and the author's “spirit” comprehensible,instead of repeating the source text structure This idea of spontaneous formulation does not consider the fact,earlier mentioned here, that there is also a purpose, a function of the translation Such pragmatic aspects mustalso be introduced into a translation Based on Relevance Theory, Ernst August Gutt (2000) developed ageneral translation theory that integrates the conversational rules of informative, true, relevant and directspeech into one maxim of relevance The audience is able to understand the “communicator's informativeintention” People intuitively select meaning according to the principle of optimal relevance Therefore unutterance has to be formulated adequately However, cognitive propositions are not always identical to themeaning of utterances A relation of similarity is called interpretive resemblance, and a translation is then an

”interlingual interpretive use” of language (Gutt 2000:105) The translation resembles the source text, but theculturally different context and the background is very important Often, the translator cannot simply use hisown cognitive environment when trying to understand the original; rather he has to metarepresent to himselfthe mutual cognitive environment shared between the original communicator and original audience Anynecessary explanation of foreign elements in the translation would not offence the truth of it

Essence of translation (1)

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:45 PM

Translation has been and nowadays is a mighty means of cultural, political,

economic contacts among nations Translation, as any other phenomenon of nature and human life, presents amany-sided object of study, but since it deals with languages and is an operation performed on languages, itmust be given a thorough consideration from the linguistic point of view

The study of translation or translatology (the study of the theory and practice of

translating and interpreting, especially in an academic context, combining elements of social science andthe humanities) also known as translation studies or traductology is concerned with both theoretical andapplied aspects of translation On the one hand, it places the emphasis on evaluation of the product oftranslation – translation as a result of a certain action, the translated text itself On the other hand,

it seems essential that the systematic study of the process is needed Translation theorists state thatadvances in translation theory cannot be achieved without studies of the process of translation – a certain type

of human activities resulting in a new text, they seek to describe the process of translating and explain it, inother words, to answer the following questions:

a) what happens during the process of translating?

b) why is the process as it is?

The theory of translation is concerned with a certain type of binary relations between languages and isconsequently a branch of linguistics In the process of translation there always exist two texts: the Sourcelanguage text (SL text) & the Target language text (TL text) The target text, that is created by the translatornever perfectly reflects, either in meaning or in tone, the original source text This is due to the constraintsimposed on the translator by the formal and semantic differences between the source language and the targetlanguage Nevertheless, the users of the TL usually accept a translation as the functional, structural, andsemantic equivalent of the original

2 The controversy in the definition of translation

There exist many rather controversial definitions of translation suggested by the representatives ofdifferent schools of linguistics and translation These definitions range from formal, structural approaches to

translation, e.g “translation is substitution of elements or structures of one language by elements or structures

of another language” (A.Oettinger, N.Chomsky, O.Kade, V.Rozentsveig), to semantic and functionaltreatment

of translation, e.g “translation is rendering in the target language of the closest equivalent of the initialmessage from the point of view of its meaning and style” (E.Nide, C.Taber, A.Shveitser)

According to the proposal made by S.Bassnett-McGuire a descriptive rather than a prescriptive approach tothe investigation of the process of translation should be adopted, as a purpose of the translation theory is “toreach understanding of the processes undertaken in the act of translation and not, as is so commonlymisunderstood, to provide a set of norms for effecting the perfect translation” [Bassnett-McGuire, 1980: 37]

In other words, theory of translation must be oriented towards the objective specification of the translator’ssteps, stages through which the translator goes as the source text (ST) is transformed into the target text (TT).But theories and models shouldn’t be exaggerated:

“it is inappropriate to expect that theoretical models of translation will solve all the problems a translatorencounters Instead, theory of translation should formulate a set of strategies for approaching problems andcoordinating different aspects entailed” [Beaugrande de, 1978: 135] Thus, theory of translation can suggestthe following:

models of the dynamics of the process rather than static descriptions of the structure of the product; modelswhich offer probable post factum explanations of what has been done rather than a priori models which claim

to predict what will be done;

indications of the relations between translation, on one side, and such notions as “communicativecompetence”, “discoursal coherence” and appropriateness in the use of the code, on the other.

As Prof Komissarov has remarked, the basis of translation theory is linguistics in the broadest sense ofthe word, that is, macrolinguistics with all its new branches, such as psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, textlinguistics, communicative linguistics, studying the language structure and its functioning in speech in theirrelationship to mind, culture and society Special relations have been established between translatology andcontrastive linguistics As German scholar Helbig has pointed out, translation correspondences make

up the empirical ground for contrastive linguistics [Helbig, 1990: 17] Prof Shveitser favours the samethought: “Translation does a great favour to contrastive linguistics in terms of being the only source of themetalanguage which is essential for contrastive analysis [Shveitser, 1987: 166]

According to this understanding translation is a process of transforming speech messages in the SL intothe speech messages in the TL under condition that their sense and communicative intention remainunchanged (Чернов Г.В., 1987: 6) It is quite natural that in the process of translation the form of themessages can be transformed due to the structural (lexical, morphological and syntactical) differencesbetween languages Such transformations which are inevitable in the process of translation are also called

“code shifting” (substitution of the SL structures by the TL structures)

Essence of translation (2)

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:46 PM

Translation as intercultural communication

As a means of interlingual communication, translation is a transfer of meaning across cultures Morespecifically, translation is the process and result of creating in a TL a text which has approximately the samecommunicative value as the corresponding text in the SL The process of translation is often described as athree-stage pattern (Shveitser 1988:

49; Miram 1998: 57): 1) S1 – R1; 2) code shifting; 3) S2 – R2 According to this scheme there are twointerrelated communicative acts in the process of translation: communication between the initial sender ofinformation and a translator and communication between a translator and the final addressee (receiver of

information) In this process a translator is changing his (her) role all the time, acting as a receiver and as asender of the respective messages Focusing upon the code shifting process, this scheme, however, does notconsider social, cultural, political and other extralinguistic factors of communication Translation may also bedefined as a two-stage process of interlingual and intercultural communication, during which a translator, onthe basis of an analyzed and transformed text in SL, creates another text in TL which substitutes the sourcetext in the target language and culture It should be also added to this definition that translation is a processaimed at rendering communicative effect of the source text modified by the difference

between two languages, two cultures and two communicative situations

So an act of translation appears to be an intercultural communicative event, so far as cultures include thecorresponding languages, languages include texts and texts pertain to specific subject fields (mathematics,politics, law, economics, medicine, etc.)

4 Levels of analysis in translation

It has been stated that in the process of translation there takes place transformation of textual materialwhich results in the changing of form Therefore, it is necessary to know peculiar form of speech patterns ofthe source language text and a target language text and it is important to be able to establish correspondencesbetween them It is possible to do so by breaking down the object of speech, i.e the text However, parts ofthe SL text, as well

as TL text should retain qualities of a single whole

The problem of establishing and defining the unit of translation has been the overcoming of theobstacles in the translator’s work There is still much confusion in defining criteria of the unit of translation

In modern general linguistics the following levels of language hierarchy are distinguished: phonemelevel, morpheme level, word level, word-combination level, sentence level, text level According to prof L.Barkhudarov “practically any unit of the above language levels may be the unit of translation” Thus, anyminimum SL unit, having its equivalent counterpart in the TL, may be referred to one of the language levels.Hence

translation can be performed on the following levels:

pragmatic, or sociocultural, level 

Phonemes are not meaningful units; they possess simply a distinctive function But there are caseswhen the phoneme appears to be the unit of translation There are sometimes cases when each morpheme ofthe SL unit corresponds to a certain morpheme of the TL unit

In most cases the morphological structure of semantically equivalent words does not coincide indifferent languages and translation on this level is very rare

Word-for-word translation is limited in practice because only a part of words gets word-for wordcorrespondences while other words of a sentence are translated on a higher level A typical example oftranslation on the word-combination level becomes the unit of translation In a free word-combination thecomponents retain their primary meaning and

In some cases the translator resorts to the translation of a sentence as a whole (usually such sentences areidiomatic):

The meaning of the sentences is perceived and the sentences are taken as a single whole This kind oftranslation also takes place when translating forms of politeness, various inscriptions and signs:

Pragmatics is the study of language as it is used in a sociocultural context, including its effect on theparticipants in the process of communication Sociocultural means involving social and cultural factors Thetranslator must be aware of the situational aspects of language usage in order to produce authentic translation.The translator has to work at all these levels of text analysis and synthesis at the same time For academicpurposes ST and TT used in this course will be first broken down into their constituent meaningfulcomponents (analysis) and then reassembled as finished products (synthesis)

the core of translatology

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:47 PM

The core of translatology is the general theory of translation which is concerned with the fundamentalaspects of translation inherent in the nature of bilingual communication and, therefore, common to alltranslation events, irrespective of the languages involved, kind of the text being translated and thecircumstances of translation The general theory of translation deals, so to speak, with translation universals and is the basis for all other theoretical studies in this area, since it describes what translation is and whatmakes it possible It describes the basic principles which are good for every translation event In eachparticular case, however, translating process is influenced both by the common basic factors and by a number

of specific variables which stem from the actual conditions and modes of the translator’s work: type of theoriginal text he has to cope with, the form in which the ST is presented to him and the form in which he issupposed to submit his translation, some specific requirements to his work etc

An important part of the theory of translation is the theory of equivalence aimed at studying semanticrelations between the ST and the TT There is a presumption of semantic identity between the translation andits ST At the same time it is easy to demonstrate that, in fact, there is no such identity for even a cursoryexamination of any translation reveals inevitable losses, increments or changes of the information transmitted.For instance, “verbal systems may differ in that one puts great emphasis on temporality, whereas another has

an overt marking of aspect, a category that does not have the deictic character of temporality Even if the firstlanguage is able to express aspect and the second language temporality, these categories do not have aprominent position, so that there is no real equivalence between the two languages as to temporality andaspect” [Schogt, 1992: 194] We can observe divergences in the semantic structures of Ukrainian and English

if we consider Ukrainian diminutive

suffixes conveying the attitude of endearment or sympathy to the object, or if we take the so called units ofspecific national lexicon As Roman Jacobson has remarked, “languages differ essentially in what they mustconvey and not in what they may convey Naturally the attention of native speakers and listeners will beconstantly focused on such items which are compulsory for their verbal code” [Jacobson, 1992:

149]

Each type of translation has its own combination of factors influencing translating process Insimultaneous interpreting the translator is expected to keep pace with the fastest speakers, to understand allkinds of foreign accents and defective pronunciation, to guess what the speaker meant to say but failed toexpress because of his inadequate proficiency in the language he speaks In consecutive interpreting he isexpected to listen to long speeches, taking the necessary notes, and then produce his translation in a complete

or compressed form, giving all the details or only the main ideas Thus, the general theory of translationshould be supplemented by a number of special translation theories identifying major types of translationactivities and describing predominant features of each type Of particular interest is the branch of

translatology concerned with translating process itself This direction of translation theory is of considerablepractical value for it makes possible the description of particular methods of translation that can be used bythe translator to ensure equivalence between the ST and the TT.

One more branch of the theory of translation deals with the pragmatic aspect of translation Thecommunicants involved in interlingual communication not only speak different languages but they alsobelong to different cultures, have different general knowledge, different social and historical background Thisfact has a considerable impact on the translator’s strategy since the most truthful rendering of ST contentsmay sometimes be partially or fully misunderstood by receptors of the translation or fail to produce a similareffect upon them The translator has to assess the possible communicative effect of the TT and take pains toensure an adequate

understanding of the message by the TR This may necessitate expanding or

modifying the original message to make it more meaningful to the members of a

different language community

The bilingual theory of translation studies separate sets of equivalents within the

two languages considered All bilingual theories of translation proceed from the

identical basic assumptions as to classification of equivalents and their role in

translation process

All branches of the theory of translation are concerned with important aspects of

the translator’s work and constitute a body of theoretical thought of indisputable

practical value

Text, context and discourse

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:48 PM

Oral communication, in the same way as written, always takes place in a certain

context or communicative situation This situation in its turn is embedded into the

macro-context of interaction which includes extralinguistic factors of the ‘world”

such as cultural, social, economic, political, historical, religious, etc In linguistics

there are many writers on this issue expressing different points of view (Гальперин

1981; Дейк 1989; Halliday 1961; Hoey 1991) but most of them agree that oral and

written texts function in a certain discourse Most of them also agree that meaning of

language units is a linguistic phenomenon (recorded in dictionaries and, therefore,

belong to the sphere of language), while sense is born in a communicative situation

as a result of interaction of linguistic and extralinguistic contextual factors and

belongs to the sphere of speech (Чернов 1987)

For practical reasons of oral bilingual interpretation we will assume the following

working definitions of text and discourse (Максимов, Радченко 2001: 6-11):

Text is any verbalized (expressed by means of human language) communicative event performed via humanlanguage, no matter whether this communication is

performed in written or oral mode

It means that we will consider all complete pieces of oral verbal communication to

be texts

Discourse is a complex communicative phenomenon which includes, besides the

text itself, other factors of interaction (such as shared knowledge, communicative

goals, cognitive systems of participants, their cultural competence, etc.), i.e all that is

necessary for successful production and adequate interpretation (comprehension,

understanding and translation) of the text

Therefore text is embedded into discourse and both of them are “materialized” in a

communicative situation which, in its turn, is embedded into the macro context of

interaction, i.e cultural, social, economic, political, historical, religious etc contexts

of the world

Contextual relationships in oral interpretation.

Messages operate within three types of contexts – macro (global) context,

communicative context, micro (local) context Therefore, elements of meaning of

each message have to be related to these contexts in some way It is generally

assumed that such contextual relationships of messages may be of three kinds:

anaphoric or “backward” relationships, when the meaning of an element

becomes clear through the reference of the preceding elements of the micro or

communicative context, e.g.:

China’s President continues his visit to former Soviet republics – this time to

Ukraine It’s the first official visit by China’s leader to the independent Republic

(Euro News)

where the meaning of the independent Republic is determined by the lexical

element Ukraine in the previous sentence

cataphoric or “forward” relationships, when the meaning of an element becomes

clear through the reference to the oncoming, “expected” elements of the micro or

communicative context, e.g.: с) exophoric or “outward” relationships, when the meaning of an elementbecomes clear through the reference to the macro context, i.e to the background

knowledge, cultural and subject field (professional) competence of the addressee and

to the knowledge about “the world”, e.g.:

Veteran Nazi hunter Simon Weisenthal has been awarded one of Poland’s top

decorations by President Walesa The 85-year old Auschwitz death camp survivor is

in Poland at Walesa’s invitation

(Euro News)

where general cultural competence will help to translate Auschwitz death camp as

табір смерті Освенцім

Contextual relationships of meaningful elements in oral discourse play a key role

in successful interpretation of messages Thus, anaphoric and cataphoric relationships

provide for lexical coherence of discourse, while exophoric relationships ensure links

with the macro context

The cultural turn in translation

Bởi ThS Nguyễn Thế Hóa - Thứ tư, 8/09/2021, 9:49 PM

Besides the functional approach, that was developed primarily in Germany, there were some post-moderntendencies in the English speaking community of translation scholars Descriptive analysis focuses an externalfactors of translation, such as power relationships, censure, ideological interests, purposes of translation,institutional environment of the production of translations The research object is the reaction of authors,readers and translators to texts from former European colonies and the treatment of their language The literaltranslation was gradually seen as a logocentrical form of colonialism in European ethnocentrism, what lead to

a power relation between the original culture and the target culture of the translation 30 Cultural aspects werediscussed by Venuti (1995) who criticized the work of translators not being visible European or NorthAmerican translations had mainly to be easy to read what conceals cultural divergent thinking Asymmetricalrelations between the cultures become visible Another area of such post-modern studies striving to maketranslators more visible instead of just correlating languages or performing a certain function, is feministtranslation (v Flotow 1997) The conditions under which women writers and translators were working in the