Các thủ thuật được áp dụng trong việc dịch anh việt ẩn dụ ý niệm trong tiểu thuyết “tiếng gọi nơi hoang dã”

After that, based on the adapted analytical framework on the translation procedures of conceptual metaphors proposed by Al-Harrasi 2001, the study found various translation procedures, i

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATION STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN TUẤN MINH

TRANSLATION PROCEDURES APPLIED

IN THE ENGLISH-VIETNAMESE TRANSLATION

OF THE CONCEPTUAL METAPHORS IN THE NOVEL

“THE CALL OF THE WILD”

(Các thủ thuật được áp dụng trong việc dịch Anh-Việt ẩn dụ ý niệm

trong tiểu thuyết “Tiếng gọi nơi hoang dã”)

M.A MINOR PROGRAM THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 8220201.01

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATION STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN TUẤN MINH

TRANSLATION PROCEDURES APPLIED

IN THE ENGLISH-VIETNAMESE TRANSLATION

OF THE CONCEPTUAL METAPHORS IN THE NOVEL

“THE CALL OF THE WILD”

(Các thủ thuật được áp dụng trong việc dịch Anh-Việt ẩn dụ ý niệm

trong tiểu thuyết “Tiếng gọi nơi hoang dã”)

M.A MINOR PROGRAM THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 8220201.01

Supervisor: Dr Huỳnh Anh Tuấn

HANOI – 2019

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this thesis represents my own work and has not been previously included in a thesis or dissertation submitted to this or any other institution for a degree, diploma or other qualifications

Signature

Nguyen Tuan Minh

June, 2019

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Dr Huỳnh Anh Tuấn,

my teacher and supervisor, whose inspiring and full-of-fun lectures on Cognitive Linguistics and conceptual metaphors had given me inspirations to choose and keep working on this research Also, he provided me with useful advice on research direction and encouragement during the work

Also, I am extremely grateful to Ms Vương Thị Thanh Nhàn, lecturer of Translation & Interpreting Division, Faculty of English Teacher Education, ULIS,

VNU, whose paper on the translation procedures and equivalence on Quan họ terms

had enlightened me on my research goals and who had kindly offered me invaluable advice and materials on translation equivalence and metaphor translation

My deep appreciation also goes to my father, my mother and my younger brother who provided me with money, food, care and encouragement while I was totally devoted to reading materials and writing this paper

ABSTRACT

The translation of conceptual metaphor from English to Vietnamese has been largely ignored In the world, some studies have dealt with the treatment of conceptual metaphors from Arabic to English and from Russion into English, etc However, no studies on the English-Vietnamese translation of conceptual metaphors can be found Therefore, this paper examines some conceptual metaphors available in the novel “The Call of the Wild” and the translation procedures used to translate them from English to Vietnamese Based on the conceptual theory of metaphors proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (2003), a number of conceptual metaphors have been uncovered in the English versions such as DOGS/WOLVES ARE HUMAN, NATURE IS A HUMAN BEING/AN ANIMAL, TIME IS A MOVING OBJECT, STATES ARE LOCATIONS, etc together with some 230 linguistic realizations After that, based on the adapted analytical framework on the translation procedures of conceptual metaphors proposed

by Al-Harrasi (2001), the study found various translation procedures, including keeping the same conceptual metaphor, using another conceptual metaphor, deleting the conceptual metaphor, and converting the conceptual metaphors

Keywords: conceptual metaphors, translating conceptual metaphor, translation

procedures

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

ABSTRACT iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

LIST OF FIGURES vii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale 1

2 Aims and objectives 3

3 Research method 3

4 Scope of the study 4

5 Significance 4

6 Structural organization of the thesis 5

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 6

1 Metaphors and conceptual metaphors 6

1.1 Traditional view of metaphors 7

1.2 The conceptual metaphor in the cognitive view 9

2 Conceptual metaphors in literature 18

3 Translation and translation procedures 19

3.1 Translation 19

3.2 Translation procedures 20

3.3 Translation of metaphors and conceptual metaphor 25

3.4 Previous studies 25

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 27

1.Research questions 27

2 Description of data 27

3 Data collection and data analysis procedures 28

4 Methods of the study 28

5 Analytical framework 29

CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 33

1 The conceptual metaphors and their linguistic manifestations in the novel 33

1.1 Knowledge-based metaphors 33

1.2 Image-schema metaphors 40

2 The procedures applied in translating the conceptual metaphors 41

2.1 Keeping the same conceptual metaphor 42

2.3 Using a different metaphor 44

2.4 Converting the conceptual metaphor 44

2.5 Deleting the expression of the metaphor 45

3 Discussion 45

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION 48

1 Recapitulation of main ideas 48

2 Implications 49

3 Limitations 50

4 Suggestions for further research 51

REFERENCES 52

APPENDIX 0

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Percentage of translation procedures………41

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the reason for choosing the research topic and highlights the purposes and the methods of the study Also, the structure and the scope of the research are also discussed

1 Rationale

The world today has been much closer together thanks mostly to the advances of technology that has helped bridge the great physical distance that seems at first daunting between different places in the world Besides, it would be a great mistake to ignore the crucial role taken by translation, the key player that bring people spiritually and emotionally closer, by boosting the understanding among cultures, “aiding the understanding of an increasingly fragmentary world” (Bassnett, 2002)

The cultural aspects of translation have been a constant emphasis in translation (Bassnett, 2002) Normally, when thinking about the relationship between culture and translation, one may immediately think of cultural words, which are particularly associated with a particular language and cannot be translated literally (Newmark, 1988) and wonders how these culture-rich concepts can be rendered into the target language Therefore, not surprisingly, a large body of research in translation study has been dedicated to this area It does not take one much time to search for a few studies

on translation of culture-specific terms To name a few, Hapsari and Setyaningsih (2013) in their study “Cultural Words and the Translation in Twilight” worked with

100 cultural words related to food, house, artifacts, transportation, clothes, communication such as “madrone trees”, “pelicans”, “crib” and “ravioli”, etc, and various translation procedures applied to render these terms into Indonesian Nhàn

(2015) studied the translation procedures in translating terms used in “Quan họ”, a

traditional way of singing and performing songs in Bắc Ninh, a northern province of Vietnam In this research, she discussed a great number of cultural words, their

translation procedures and their equivalents such as “áo the”, “khăn xếp”, “liền anh”,

“liền chị”, “hát thờ”, “hát canh”,etc

However, another equally important part in culture but often ignored in translation is the pattern of thoughts and ways in which people of different cultures categorize things A famous theory that summarizes the relationship between languages, thought and culture is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis Proposing the idea of linguistic determinism, Sapir and Whorf argue that language determines thought and language is a reflection of culture (Yule, 2006)

Therefore, under the light of cognitive linguistics, there is something more than just cultural terms Evan and Green (2006) maintained that patterns of thought or conceptualization are reflected in language Different groups of people (different cultures), speaking different languages have their own ways of understanding, perceiving and construing their physical environment around them and other experiences In other words, each culture will perceive and understanding reality in different ways or thought is also a product of culture

“The metaphor is probably the most fertile power possessed by man” (Jose Ortega y Gasset, 1948) Metaphors have long been a focal interest for the academic world and widely studied from many perspectives, including traditional views, philosophers’ view and cognitive view, etc Studying metaphors from the cognitive approach and their translations will present certain benefits and new insights as the conceptual metaphor, with its basis in basic physical, physiological and cultural experience of human beings, serves as a powerful tool in revealing these differences in the thinking patterns, allowing the possibility of examining and comparing different ways of construing reality of different groups of people

To some degree, conceptual metaphors have some properties that are the same

as cultural words Although sometimes, two cultures share the same expressions, most

of the time, the expression in a particular language is culture-specific For example, there are numerous “cultural thoughts” in the English language such as THE SUN IS A

HUMAN (the sun-kissed valley) or STATES ARE LOCATIONS (they went from bad

to worse) (phrases taken from The Call of the Wild) What does a translator, as a

traveler from one source to another (Michel Cronin, cited in Bassnett, 2002), do when they work with such metaphors/images? Do they keep the same metaphors; create a new metaphor or what else?

2 Aims and objectives

The overall purpose of this study is to investigate the treatment of conceptual metaphor, in other words, the translation procedures used to translate the conceptual metaphors in the novel “The Call of the Wild”from English to Vietnamese

To achieve this aim, the following objectives are set: (1) identifying the conceptual metaphors present in the English novel and their linguistic expressions; (2) comparing the conceptual metaphors in the English source text and the Vietnamese target text to reveal the translation procedures used

3 Research method

This research adopts both qualitative and quantitative methods to achieve the desired outcomes First, basing on the description offered by Lakoff and Johnson (2003) on conceptual metaphor, the paper investigates the English version to identify the conceptual metaphors available and their linguistic manifestations After that, based on the adapted framework by Al-Harrasi (2001), the Vietnamese translations of these linguistic realizations are examined and compared to the source text to reveal what translation procedures are adopted to deal with those conceptual metaphors Next, quantitative research method will be applied to reveal which translation procedures are the most used

This research aims at answering two questions:

1 What are the conceptual metaphors and their linguistic manifestations in the English novel “The Call of the Wild”?

2 What translation procedures are applied in translating the conceptual metaphors from English to Vietnamese?

Research question 1 aims at identifying the conceptual metaphors in the English novel and their linguistic realizations Based on the results in question 1, question 2 is devoted to deal with the issue of translation procedures

4 Scope of the study

This study closely examines all the seven chapters in the English adventure novel “The Call of the Wild” by the American writer, Jack London to list some conceptual together with their linguistic evidence This study classifies the conceptual metaphors, by their nature, into knowledge-based and image-based metaphors In image-based metaphors, there are two sub-types, image-schema and image metaphors This paper focuses on knowledge-based and image-schema metaphors only

This paper deals only with the translation procedures applied to treat the conceptual metaphors in the process of translation from English to Vietnamese In other words, this study does not aim at making systematic quality assessments on the translation quality but only discusses and argues on the treatment of conceptual metaphors in translation when the translator moves between the two modes of thinking

5 Significance

Normally, when conducting research in conceptual metaphors, one is likely to examine only one type in depth, for example, LOVE IS A JOURNEY However, adopting the cognitive approach to the study of metaphors, this research investigates a wide range of conceptual metaphors that underlie the language expressions in the novel

“The Call of the Wild” Furthermore, the paper hopes to contribute to the large reservoir of translation research by approaching translation from the view of cognitive

linguistics, which is still under-researched compared to other approaches to the study

of metaphor in general Hopefully, this paper will be beneficial to students, teachers and translators who are interested in looking at metaphors from the cognitive perspective, especially in a single work of literature Finally, this paper is an attempt to investigate the translation procedures adopted to deal with the conceptual metaphor during the translation process from English to Vietnamese Therefore, it is extremely useful for those who have the intention of developing their own procedures that are peculiar to the English - Vietnamese translation of conceptual metaphors

6 Structural organization of the thesis

This paper is organized into five chapters Chapter I is responsible for introducing the research gap and the problems the research set out to solve and the possible contributions Chapter II provides the theoretical foundation for the paper by bringing many approaches to the study of metaphors into discussion, placing the arguments against other theories of metaphors made by cognitive linguists at the center Besides, the writer will review some related studies in this chapter Chapter III presents the methods for collecting, analyzing data for this research Chapter IV is reserved for the discussion of results and findings by presenting the answers for the two research questions made at the beginning, together with its implication Finally, Chapter V, Conclusion, summarizes the main findings and arguments in this study, highlighting some of its limitations and proposes some suggestions for further research

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW

The following chapter deals with the theoretical background of this research It provides the conceptual grounds of metaphors, conceptual metaphors and some related issues in translation such as translation procedures used for metaphors Besides, some previous works on conceptual metaphor translation are also discussed

1 Metaphors and conceptual metaphors

The issue of metaphor has been a constant concern for centuries Galperine (1981) states that metaphors have been discussed since the time of ancient Greek and Roman literature, resulting in the definition of metaphor as a transference of meaning from one word to another Furthermore, Jakel (1997) also maintains that “For about three hundred years now, various, mostly European philosophers and linguists have been anticipating the central tenets and findings of the cognitive theory of metaphor”

“What’s a metaphor?” sometimes becomes a difficult question, even to scholars

A somewhat amusing anecdote told by Glucksberg (2001) about a professor, Ray Gibbs, going to a conference on metaphors in Israel, when questioned by a check-in security guard what a metaphor is Failing to answer the question immediately, he got into one-hour interrogation at the airport before rescued by an Israeli conference host

According to Oxford Dictionary (1996), the word “metaphor” comes from the Greek “Metapherein”, which means “to transfer” (“pherein means “to bear”) From that simple definition, metaphors have come to mean many different things for many different people Linguists, psychologists and philosophers may define metaphors in their own ways

The Oxford Dictionary (1996) presented the definition of metaphors with two senses The first sense considers metaphor as a figure of speech in which a name or a word is transferred to an object or action different from, but analogous, that to which it

is literally applicable The second sense regards metaphors as a form of conceptual

representation: “A thing considered as representative of some other (usually abstract) thing: A symbol.” In general, most of the contemporary metaphor definitions address these two senses from different aspects, either as a linguistic expression and a means of communication or as a conceptual representation (Glucksberg, 2001)

Traditionally, metaphor is considered a figure of speech, just like simile, or in other words, a matter of mere language Philosophers think language is literal Some scholars think that the nature of metaphor is just presenting and matching similarities in attributes of two different things It is widely believed so until George Lakoff and Mark Johnson published their book “Metaphors We Live By” in 1980, in which they proved that metaphor is not only a linguist issue but an important apparatus of human understanding and cognition Since then, this view has been supported by numerous scholars such as Croft and Cruse (2004), Kovecses (2002), etc The following section will present and discuss some common approaches to the study of metaphor, including the traditional view and the modern approach of cognitive linguistics

1.1 Traditional view of metaphors

According to Glucksberg (2001), Aristotle, one of the most ancient figure who elaborated on the study of metaphor, in his work “Poetics” (Chapter 21) proposed four types of metaphor, genus for genus, genus for species, species for genus and analogy The common nature shared by the first three types of metaphors is that they involve substituting one word for another An example of the genus for genus type is “Some lawyers are sharks” Here, the word “sharks” is used instead of a word from the same semantic domain, genus, as “lawyers”

Ma & Liu (2008), in their paper “A universal approach to metaphors”, discussed many approaches to metaphor, including several prominent scholars in this field Beardsley (1966) considered metaphor a fascinating phenomenon in language and

metaphors are not only present in poetic works According to him, metaphor has both denotative meaning and connotative meaning

For example, in the sentence “The animal in the pen is a pig” Here “pig” gives

a literal sense (denotation) of an animal with four legs and a long nose However, the word “pig” in another situation, such as “The man over there is a pig” has something more than the literal meaning “Pig” in the second sentence is interpreted metaphorically (denotative meaning): The man is fat, dirty, lazy and so on

Compared to Beardsley, Richards (1967) presented a more profound analysis of metaphor In his paper called “The Command of metaphors”, he argued that the nature

of metaphor requires the comparison of more than two objects He also put forward the two terms for understanding the mechanism of metaphor: tenor and vehicle A tenor is the term, concept, or object that is meant while a vehicle is a thing that carries the weight of the comparison For example, in the metaphor “A city is a beehive”, “city”

is the tenor and “beehive” is the vehicle Moreover, in this paper, Richards also maintained that a word can be both literal and metaphorical at the same time For example, “The man has a wooden leg” Here, “the wooden leg” can be understood as a real physical condition in reality that the man has to suffer from or it can be interpreted metaphorically as a failure to perform some job properly as expected, for example

Searle saw metaphor as a type of indirect communication and metaphorical sense comes from an expression in a specific linguistic and situational context, and therefore, metaphors should be considered at the level of utterance: “The problem of explaining how metaphors work is a special case of the general problem of explaining how speaker meaning and sentence or word meaning come apart…Our task in constructing a theory of metaphor is to try to state the principles which relate literal sentence meaning to metaphorical [speaker’s] utterance meaning“ (Searle (1975) To him, it depends on the listener whether to understand an utterance literally or

metaphorically and metaphorical interpretation of an utterance requires the application

of conversation principles and speech act theory

Among the various definitions provided by the scholars who subscribe their views to the traditional approach, two summaries of this long-establishing strand of metaphor provided by two eminent cognitive linguists, George Lakoff and Kovecses, have captured them all To set a ground before criticizing the traditional approach to metaphor, Lakoff (1992) pointed out that “The word metaphor was defined as a novel

or poetic linguistic expression where one or more words for a concept are used outside

of its normal conventional meaning to express a similar concept”

Kovecses (2002) also summarized the conventional attributes of metaphor First, metaphor is simply a matter of language, not of thought Second, metaphor is used for artistic and rhetorical purposes Third, metaphor is based on resemblances between two entities that are compared and identified Fourth, metaphor is a deliberate use of words and the ability requires special talents to do it well Finally, it is commonly held that metaphor is a linguistic phenomenon, a figure of speech that we can do without Metaphor is used for special effects and not an inevitable part of everyday communication

1.2 The conceptual metaphor in the cognitive view

1.2.1 What counts as a conceptual metaphor?

Cognitive linguistics, a new linguistic field which can be traced back in the early 1970s (Evan & Green, 2006), is an interdisciplinary enterprise because it involves both the study of human language and of the human mind Like other linguistic scholars, cognitive linguists try to describe the systematicity by providing various theories However, the reason behind is that they seek to reveal the links between the human mind and language, holding a belief that human language reflects the thinking patterns in the mind (Evan & Green, 2006)

Since Lakoff and Johnson published their influential book “The Metaphor We Live By” in 1980, the study of metaphor in the direction of cognitive approach has attracted many followers In their book, Lakoff & Johnson (2003) clearly presented their view To them, metaphor is a powerful tool of human cognition: “The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003)

This position is also shared by Hurford et.al (2007) in their book on semantics:

“Metaphors are conceptual (mental) operations reflected in human language that enable speakers to structure and construe abstract areas of knowledge and experience in more concrete experiential terms” (Hurford et al, 2007)

According to this approach, to conceptualize an unfamiliar entity or a field of knowledge, the speaker takes advantage of another already familiar one The former one is known as the target domain and the latter one, source domain Normally, the source domain is understood through the experience in the physical world and there exists a conceptual mapping between the source domain and the target domain to help structure the unfamiliar entity so that the cognitive load will be lessened when humans are trying to conceptualize something new or unknown to us before (Hurford et al, 2007) This modern view takes a wider approach that metaphors are not only present in literary or figurative texts but ubiquitous in our daily life and metaphors do not only exist in language but also in the human mind in the way we experience, act and think about a particular topic Our conceptual system is mainly metaphorical in nature (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003)

Kovecses (2010), in agreement with the above-mentioned scholars, gave a concise definition of conceptual metaphor as understanding one conceptual domain in terms of another conceptual domain The conceptual metaphor is represented as the following formula: CONCEPTUAL DOMAIN A IS CONCEPTUAL DOMAIN B A

conceptual domain is viewed as any organized experience of human beings such as life, journey, time, money, etc The nature of a metaphor in the form of A is B is the mapping of part of our structure of knowledge from domain A to domain B (Lakoff & Turner, 1989)

Lakoff & Johnson (2003) gave some typical examples on metaphors are used in the daily language and how the language shapes people’s ways of thinking

AN ARGUMENT IS WAR

- He attacked every weak point in my argument

- I’ve never won an argument with him

- Your claims are indefensible

- His criticisms were right on the target

Normally, “attack” and “win” usually used when people talk about wars; however, in these examples, they are utilized to talk about arguments The analogies between those two areas enable the speaker to make use of the familiar aspect of one to describe another This relationship is called conceptual metaphors This metaphor allows humans to understand what an argument is by making use of another domain that has been already available and satisfactorily understood: physical battle In the wild, wars are pervasive because animals, as well as human beings are usually involved

in fights for territory, food, sex, etc Therefore, our knowledge of fights is rich with details and this knowledge is transferred or mapped to another domain, less clearly understood, verbal argument

In this example, AN ARGUMENT IS WAR is the conceptual metaphor (mode

of thinking) and one of its linguistic expressions is “Your claims are indefensible” It is noted that linguistic expressions are not the only means of realizing conceptual

metaphors In other words, conceptual metaphors can be manifested in movies, acting, drawings, sculpture, etc (Kovecses, 2010)

Lakoff and Johnson further analyzed this example by considering a different culture in which arguing is not viewed with respect to wars but to dance In the argument, the participants involved do not see themselves as taking sides, defending personal viewpoints, losing or winning but cooperating with each other in a balanced and beautiful way Therefore, bearing the metaphor (ARGUING is DANCING) in mind, perhaps, they would think differently, act differently and talk differently about arguing In that way conceptual metaphors reflect and shape our pattern of thoughts

In short, the new view of metaphor is captured by the following main points as opposed to the traditional method First, metaphor is a property of concept, not of words Second, the major function of metaphor is to better understand a concept, not just for artistic purposes Third, metaphor is often not based on similarity Fourth, metaphor is used in everyday language, not just by talented people Fifth, metaphor is a crucial apparatus of human thought and reasoning (Kovecses, 2010)

1.2.2 The cognitive mechanism of metaphors

Lakoff and Johnson (2003) hold that in conceptual metaphors, there are two conceptual domains, source domain and the target domain Source domain is the domain from which metaphorical understanding is drawn from to understand another conceptual domain The target domain is the conceptual domain that is understood via domain To understand a conceptual metaphor requires comprehending the set of correspondences (mapping) between the source domain and the target domain One major feature of conceptual metaphor is that it highlights and, at the same time, hides certain aspects of the target domain Therefore, one single concept can function as the target domain of a number of conceptual metaphors Take the concept of LIFE, for example Many conceptual metaphors in which LIFE is the target domain have been

listed by Lakoff & Turner (1989), LIFE IS A JOURNEY, LIFE IS A STAGE, LIFE IS BONDAGE, LIFE IS A DAY, etc., Each of these metaphors helps to conceptualize one aspect of life, and therefore, constitutes a coherent system in the understanding of life

If human thought is metaphorical in nature (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003), is it possible for one to understand something non-metaphorcially? This question is partly addressed in the book entitled “More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphors” by John Lakoff and Mark Turner in 1989 Non-metaphorical terms are not structured and organized in terms of another but in its own terms To argue, the two authors took the example of how human beings understand the concept of dog, which can be understood non-metaphorically and metaphorically at the same time depending

on which aspects According to them, the non-metaphorical understanding of dogs includes human conceptualization of the dog’s physical features such as wagging tails, wet black nose and so on However, sometimes, it is possible to comprehend a dog’s tail metaphorically as a flag, but this metaphor is not common and not autonomous Metaphorically, humans understand dogs as being “loyal”, giving a human trait to a dog In other words, we conceptualize some aspects of dogs in human terms and this is metaphorical

There are certain things that we do not understand metaphorically, things that human beings think as straightforwardly physical, such as rocks, trees, arms, legs, etc, because we normally can use our physical body to experience them directly These sources often function as the source domain in a conceptual metaphor Of course, there are also certain sources of concept that are mostly structured metaphorically by making use of or referring to other concepts (metaphorical understanding) such as life (LIFE IS

A JOURNEY, LIFE IS A PLAY, ), death (DEATH IS DEPARTURE, DEATH IS BREAKING FREE OF THE BONDAGE), and time (TIME IS A MOVING OBJECT, TIME IS A THEIF, ) love (LOVE IS A JOURNEY, LOVE IS SICKNESS, ) and so

on The reason is that we structure less clearly delineated and vaguer concepts (and

usually less concrete) in terms of more concrete concepts and more clearly delineated

in our experience (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003)

Kovecses (2010) listed some common source and target domains that are often involved in the creation of conceptual metaphors Some common source domains are the human body, health and sickness, plants, heat and cold, light and darkness, forces, and so on Some common target domains include emotion, desire, thought, nation, human relationship, life, death, religion and so on It is easily noticed from these common source and target domains that they are in line with the explanation provided above by Lakoff and Johnson on why some experiences are structured and comprehended via another The source domain experience and concepts seem to be concrete and clearly outlined in our thought or experienced directly by our body while the concepts in the target domains appear to be vaguer and less clearly delineated

1.2.3 Kinds of conceptual metaphors

Kovecses (2010) presented certain ways in which conceptual metaphors can be classified: according to the conventionality, function, nature, and level of generality

a) By conventionality

According to conventionality, conceptual metaphors together with their linguistic manifestations can be categorized into conventional and non-conventional metaphors Conventionality refers to the degree of how well-established or how deeply entrenched the metaphors are in every day thought and expressions If a conceptual metaphor is said to be highly conventional, people use it to think and talk unconsciously and without effort Kovecses (2010) gave the following examples:

ARGUMENT IS WAR: I defended my argument

LOVE IS A JOURNEY: We’ll just have to go our separate ways

THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS: We have to construct a new theory

IDEAS ARE FOOD: I can’t digest all these facts

SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS ARE PLANTS: The company is growing fast Some examples of non-conventional conceptual metaphor mentioned in Kovecses’s discussion are LOVE IS A COLLABORATIVE WORK OF ART and LIFE IS A MIRROR

b) By the cognitive function of metaphors

According to the cognitive function, conceptual metaphors have three categories: Structural metaphors, ontological metaphors and orientational metaphors These three types often overlap and coincide in certain cases

First, structural metaphors are defined as the metaphors that structure one concept in terms of another, for example, AN ARGUMENT IS WAR By employing the concepts of WAR, the human mind can structure and conceptualize ARGUMENT

to some certain extents

Second, orientational metaphors “organize the whole system of concepts with respect to another” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003) This type of metaphor is called orientation because they deal with special orientation: up-down, in-out, front-back, on-off, deep-shallow, and central-marginal Orientation metaphors give the mind some hints on how to conceptualize abstract ideas with respect to special directions For

example, the metaphor “HAPPY IS UP” is the basis for the expression “I’m feeling up

today” or in contrast, “UNHAPPY IS DOWN” gives rise to the sentence “I’m feeling down today.”

Third, ontological metaphors imply that human mind takes advantage of the tangible and already in existence and visible to visualize and conceptualize the intangible and abstract entities, moving the source domain (physical world) to the target domain (usually the non-physical world).In other words, this type of metaphors

allows us to experience a wide range of invisible things as visible substances and entities so that the tasks of categorizing, grouping and quantifying can be made cognitively easy and convenient

Lakoff and Johnson (2003) give numerous examples on how ontological metaphors are employed in our daily life to facilitate our cognitive tasks in referring, quantifying or identifying entities that are not visible or touchable to us

INFLATION IS AN ENTITY

Inflation is lowering our standard of living

If there’s much more inflation, we’ll never survive

c) By nature of metaphors

Metaphors can be based on knowledge or image By the nature of metaphors, there are three categories: knowledge-based metaphors and image-based metaphors In the latter type, there are two sub-types: image-schema metaphors and image metaphors

Knowledge-based metaphors are based on the knowledge mapping from the source domain to the target domain and the knowledge is very rich in details For example, consider the conceptual metaphor LOVE IS A JOURNEY People experience and knowledge tell them a lot about what it means by a journey, a starting points, a path to travel, a destination, a means of transportation, a companion and obstacles on the way, etc.,

In case of the image-schema metaphor, consider the image schema of in-out suggested by the word “out” in “out of order”, “ out of money”, “pass out”, and so on Very little is mapped from the source to the target domain This type of metaphor is

based on our direct contact with the physical world Some more examples of schema metaphors are given by Kovecses (2010):

image-Image-Schema Metaphorical Extension

in-out I’m out of money

front-back He’s an up-front kind of guy

up-down I’m feeling low

contact Hold on, please (“Wait”)

motion He just went crazy

force You’re driving me insane

Unlike structural and image-schema metaphors, image metaphors (Image-based metaphor) maps one image to another image Here is an example cited in More than Cool Reason by Lakoff & Turner (1989), in which the image of a slowly walking woman to mapped onto the flow of a river, “Now woman-river, Belted with silver fish” (The Peacock’s Egg)

The scope of this thesis does not cover image metaphors (as stated in the scope

of the study)

d) By level of generality

According to the level of generality, metaphors can be either at a specific level

or generic level Specific level metaphors are comprised of specific concepts, which are rich in details, such as life, death, journey, etc., while generic metaphors are made

of general concepts with a small number of properties Here are some examples of these two types of conceptual metaphors given by Kovecses (2010):

Specific level: LIFE IS A JOURNEY, AN ARGUMENT IS WAR, TIME IS A MOVING OBJECT, etc

Generic level: EVENTS ARE ACTIONS, GENERIC IS SPECIFIC, etc

2 Conceptual metaphors in literature

Lakoff & Turner (1989) demonstrated the relationship between ordinary conceptual metaphors in everyday language with those used in novels and poetries They found that most metaphors uncovered in poetries are based on conventional, ordinary metaphors However, poets have manipulated these ordinary metaphors in different ways to generate effects for their works or they rework the metaphors, such as extending (to include an uncommon element in the source domain), elaborating (to elaborate a usual element in the source domain in an unusual way), questioning (to question the appropriateness of conventional metaphors) and combining (to combine numerous conceptual metaphors at a time)

Besides the creative use of ordinary conceptual metaphors, personification is also widely employed in literature Personification allows for the comprehension of a diversity of experiences with non-human entities in terms of human activities, characteristics This example is given by Kovecses (2010, p.56)

TIME IS A PURSUER

But at my back I always hear

Time’s winged chariot hurrying near

(Marvell, “To His Coy Mistress”)

Another characteristic of conceptual metaphors in literature is that the image metaphor, which brings two images together, is quite common This type has been discussed in the section of kinds of conceptual metaphors

Finally, literary works usually involve what is called the “mega-metaphor” or extended metaphor, which means that some metaphors that run through the whole text and makes every micro-metaphor that surfaces coherent (Kovecses, 2010) The micro-metaphor can be told from linguistic expressions

3 Translation and translation procedures

3.1 Translation

There is a wide range of attempts to capture the nature of translation, resulting

in hundreds of definitions However, there are two popular approaches: Linguistic approach put forward by Catford (1965) and functionalist perspective by Nord (1991)

Adopting the linguistic point of view, Catford (1965) considered translation an operation performed on languages: translation is the replacement of textual material in one language (Source language/SL) by equivalent material in another language (Target language/TL) This view is also supported by Newmark (1988) when he defined translation as “rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text.”

The other view is proposed by Nord (1991), who connected the theory of translating with the theory of action From that point of departures, Nord discussed various aspects of translating, such as translation as a translational interaction, translation as an intentional interaction, translation as an interpersonal interaction, translation as a communicative action, translation as an intercultural interaction and translation as a text processing action

For example, stating that translation is a communicative action, Nord (1991) argued that communication involves the use of signs and meaning and the producers of the message need not use the same signs when communicating Therefore, the job of the translator is to create sings that are comprehensible by the target reader

Another facet of translation is that it is an intercultural interaction Translation takes place in a particular setting and involves members from different cultures Moreover, because language is an inherent part of a culture, translators need to be aware of the rich points, which are differences in behavior causing culture conflicts and miscommunication

3.2 Translation procedures

According to Newmark (1988), while translation methods apply to the whole text, translation procedures are used for sentences and smaller unit of language He proposed sixteen translation procedures, including literal translation, transference, naturalization, modulation, etc These procedures are the general ones However, to translate metaphors, Newmark (1985) offered another set of translation procedures, in order of preference

In Newmark’s framework, Object refers to the concept or things described in the metaphor (tenor, target domain), while Image refers to the item in terms of which the object is described (vehicle, source domain) Besides, Sense refers to the literal

meaning of the metaphor or aspects of similarities between the object and the image (point of similarity, mappings)

Reproducing the same image in the target language: This procedure is

used to translate a source language metaphor into a target language metaphor with the same image, which is only possible when the source language metaphor is universal For example, “Silence is golden” can ben translated in to “Im lặng là vàng”

Replacing the image in source language „with a standard target language image which does not clash with the target language culture‟: For example, “As poor as a church mouse” is translated into

“Nghèo rớt mồng tơi”

Translating the metaphor by a simile, „retaining the image‟: For

example, “He is a lion” Nó, như một con hổ, or “In a flash, he struck” is translated into “Nhanh như chớp, nó tấn công”

„Translation of metaphor (or simile) by simile plus sense: It helps to

explain to both laymen and experts For example: “He is a lion” is translated into “Nó có sức mạnh như một con hổ”

Conversion of the metaphor to sense: For example, “He is a lion” is

translated into “Nó có sức mạnh vô địch”

Modification of the metaphor: This procedure is applied when the

metaphor is too bizarre in the target language and the translator uses a synonym to it This is an example by Newmark (1985) In the Italian

language, “bruciare all' altare “, which means to burn at the altar, is

translated into “to sacrifice” in English Deletion: In this procedure, the metaphor together with its sense is

omitted from the translation If the metaphor is redundant (the metaphor’s role has been taken by other expressions in the text), the translator can opt for leaving the metaphor out of the translation together with its sense

Using the same metaphor combined with the sense: This procedure is

employed when the translator wishes to sure the power of the metaphor

on the target language reader and makes sure the readers understand the

metaphor The following example is provided by Newmark “The tongue

is a fire” and the translator adds that “A fire ruins things and what we say also ruins things.”

Another point to note in the translation of metaphor is simile Simile and metaphor have a very close relationship in that a metaphor is considered an implicit simile, according to the traditional views However, simile is supposed to be more

logical than metaphor because simile shows the similarities between the two domains (Al-Harrasi, 2001) In translation, according to some scholars, simile plays an important role in translating metaphors in such a way that it is the most effective way (Nida, 1964), and closest, most preferred ways (Al-Harrasi, 2001) in dealing with metaphor translation

In addition, Al-Harrasi (2001) offered another treatment of conceptual metaphors in translation In this framework, “rich image” means a particular image example/instantiation evoked to a person’s mind when encountering an image schema For example, when one thinks of the MOVEMENT schema, which involves a starting point, a path and a destination, etc., it is possible that one might think of a specific example that instantiates that image schema, for example, a child crawling, a bike moving and so on The MOVEMENT that involves a starting point, and a path, etc is called the image schema The image of a child crawling is called the Rich Image that manifests or instantiates the image schema of MOVEMENT

Instantiating the same conceptual metaphor

 Same Image Schematic Representation: In this procedure, the translator

keeps the same image schematic metaphor in the source language and realizes it in a similar way in the target language

 Concretising an image schematic metaphor: Al-Harrasi gave an example

that the Arabic version is: “Iraq was hit in the center of its entity” and the English translation word for “center” is the heart, which is an image-rich domain However, heart and center evoke to the mind the same image

schema

 Instantiating in the target language only a functional aspect of the image

schema: According to this procedure, the source text employs a metaphor

whose source domain is an image schema However, after the translation, only a functional aspect of that schema is preserved For example, the

Arabic source text uses the image schema of core-peripheral, the English translation made it into “essence” and “essential”, which is some aspects

of function that are assumed to be played by the CORE However, these functional aspects still bring the image schema of CORE to the readers of

the target text

 Same image schema and rich image domains: In this procedure, the

source text uses an image-schema metaphor and the metaphor is realized

by an image-rich domain The target text does the same For example, the source text creates a conceptual metaphor, OMAN IS A SOIL with political activities are viewed as planting seeds In the English version, the image of soil and plants are reproduced

 Same rich image metaphor but alerting the reader to the mapping: This

procedure is similar to the last one but the translator adds more words to

signal to the reader that it is a metaphor, eg “so to speak”

 Using a different rich image that realizes the same image schema

realized by the rich image in the source text: In this procedure, the source

and target texts agree on the image schema but are different in the image linguistic realizations For example, to describe the power struggle between superpowers, the Arabic text uses the image of “tug-of-war”, but the target text uses “the upper hand” However, both of them suggests the

rich-image schema of pulling

 From the rich image metaphor to image schematic representation: The

source text uses an image schema and realizes it with a rich image linguistic realization However, the target text uses only the image schema but not the rich image For example, to describe an underdeveloped city, the source text uses the image of sand dunes preventing movement However, the target text only mentions the

situation by the word “stagnation”

 Same mapping but a different perspective: In this procedure, the source

and target text both realize the same metaphor but from a different perspective For example, talking about the benefits of university education, the Arabic source texts mention the “fruit of science” received

by the students However, the target text makes it what the university

provides

Adding a new instantiation in the target text: In this procedure, the

source text does not realize the conceptual metaphor but the target text chooses to realize it For example, to talk about the political concept of people, the English target text uses the “family”, which is familiar to the

Arabic community, but the Arabic source text does not realize it

Using a different conceptual metaphor: In this procedure, the source

and the target text make use of different conceptual metaphors, though they are equivalent of each other in two different languages For example, the source text uses the conceptual metaphor AMERICA IS THE CORE OF DISBELIEF, but the translation uses the image schema

of POSITION

Deletion of the expression of the metaphor: In this procedure, the

whole metaphor is deleted because the ideological ideas provoked by the source text might be considered negative by the target audience

These two frameworks share some similarities First, they both mention, perhaps, the most preferred procedure, which is keeping the same metaphor in the source text Also, the procedure of deleting the metaphor is also discussed However, there are some differences between the procedures proposed by Newmark and the one

by Al-Harrasi First, while Newmark’s procedures is more likely to be applied to traditional metaphors with the mention of “sense” and “simile”, which gives more focus to words rather than the conceptual or understanding mechanism, the framework offered by Al-Harrasi is exclusively used for conceptual metaphors Another major

difference is that Al-Harrasi’s framework does not mention the case when the conceptual metaphor in the source text is translated but its equivalent target text expression gives rise to no conceptual metaphor at all, whereas Newmark mentioned this case with the procedure of converting metaphor into sense Besides, Al-Harrasi framework is proposed after he studied only the translation of political discourse from Arabic into English

3.3 Translation of metaphors and conceptual metaphor

Metaphor translation has been a concern of research by many scholars For example, Kloepfer (1967) argued that the bolder and more creative the metaphor is, the easier it is to transfer the metaphor into another language However, Dagut (1976) defined metaphor as a one-off image and a violation and the translatability of metaphors does not depend on boldness and originality but the degree of shared cultural experience between the source and target cultures Since the arrival of new findings on the nature of metaphors offered by cognitive linguistics, more scholars have been drawn to this new aspect of translation of metaphor and as a result, more research and books, though under-researched, are produced Mandelblit (1995) argued that the difficulties in translating conceptual metaphors lie in the different mappings between source and target language If the two languages make use of different mappings, the translation problems are not just linguistic but mainly cognitive ones Kovecses (2005) discussed the influences of contexts and different conceptual mappings that lead to translation problems when dealing with conceptual metaphors

3.4 Previous studies

Al-Harrasi (2001) investigated the conceptual metaphors in Arabic and their translations into English in the politic discourse and proposed several procedures for dealing with translating conceptual metaphors such as Keeping the same conceptual metaphors, Adding a new instantiation in the target text, and Using a different conceptual metaphor, etc Another study conducted on the translation of conceptual

metaphor is by Burmakova and Marugina (2014) The framework used is the Cognitive Translation Hypothesis proposed by Maldelblit (1995) This theory suggests two schemes for translating conceptual metaphors, which are similar mapping condition and different mapping conditions The two researchers explored the rendering of conceptual metaphors, especially the mappings between MAN and NATURE, from Russian into English with the data being a collection of short stories by a famous Russian writer Vasily Shukshin They found that there were three procedures used: switching source domains (16%), saving key formula NATURE IS MAN but with more specified source domain (30%), and saving the perspective and the source domain (54%) In addition, Megantara (2017) investigated the procedures employed in translating the conceptual metaphors from Indonesian into English in the novel “Tarian Bumi” The paper is basing on the analytical framework presented by Larson (1998) that there are three procedures used to translate a metaphor, metaphor into metaphor, metaphor into simile, and metaphor into figurative language The result is that around 70% of the conceptual metaphors were translated using the procedures of metaphor into metaphor The procedures of metaphor into non-figurative language and metaphor into simile account for about 25% and 4%, respectively

Despite the popularity of studies of conceptual metaphor in translation in the world, almost none of translation studies have dealt with this issue regarding the Vietnamese and English languages Therefore, this study hopes to set the stage for further studies into the translation of conceptual metaphors from English to Vietnamese and vice versa and to contribute to the general literature of the translation of conceptual metaphors, especially those found in a literary work

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY

This chapter is concerned with the methodology of this research First, the research questions are raised and explained Next, the procedures for data collection, data analysis and the methods applied to conducting this study are presented Finally, the analytical framework used for analyzing conceptual metaphor translation is discussed

1 Research questions

This research aims at answering two questions:

1 What are the conceptual metaphors and their linguistic manifestations in the English novel?

2 What procedures are applied in translating the conceptual metaphors from English

to Vietnamese?

The first research question sets the basis for the whole study as the answer to this question presents the conceptual metaphors available in the source text and their linguistic manifestations From that point of departure, more work such as examining the translations and comparing conceptual metaphors in the source and target texts is conducted to reveal the answer to the second research question The second question separately deals with translation procedures to reach the research aim

2 Description of data

“The Call of the Wild” is an adventure novel by Jack London, a famous

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Call_of_the_Wild) The novel features a dog called Buck with his adventure and adaptation to survive in the harsh, violent nature After being stolen, he became a sled dog and passed many hands until he completely left the human civilization to be the leader of a wild wolf pack

The electronic English version of the novel is achieved from: https://www.ibiblio.org/ebooks/London/Call%20of%20Wild.pdf

The Vietnamese version is translated by Hoàng Hà Vũ under the title “Tiếng gọi nơi hoang dã”, published by the Literature Publishing House in 2016

3 Data collection and data analysis procedures

First, the English novel is thoroughly read to identify the conceptual metaphors and their linguistic manifestations by applying the model of conceptual metaphor by Lakoff and Johnson (2003) Second, the Vietnamese equivalents of these metaphors and linguistic expressions are extracted from the Vietnamese version Next, the Vietnamese linguistic expressions obtained in step 2 are examined to identify the conceptual metaphors that underlie the Vietnamese linguistic expressions, if any by making use of the model by Lakoff and Johnson, again Finally, the English source text and the Vietnamese target text are paired to investigate which procedures have been applied to treat the conceptual metaphors in the source text

In this paper, the conceptual metaphor is written in capital letters while their linguistic realizations are noted down in normal characters

Conceptual metaphor: TIME IS A MOVING OBJECT

The linguistic manifestations: Summer arrived

4 Methods of the study

This study combines both qualitative and quantitative methods

The qualitative method is employed to examine the English source text and the Vietnamese translation to identify the conceptual metaphor available After that, the data collected is brought into comparison to identify the treatment of the conceptual metaphor in the source text or in other words, how they are dealt with by the translator

to identify the relevant procedures

The quantitative method is deployed to make statistics on the most common procedures used by the translator in working with conceptual metaphor translation in this single literature work

5 Analytical framework

First, regarding the identification of conceptual metaphor, this paper adopts the metaphor model offered by Lakoff and Johnson (2003) In the novel, the conceptual

metaphors manifest themselves via linguistic means, which include nouns (e.g bite,

pride), verbs (e.g hate, fell), adjectives (e.g ashamed, hot) or a combination of words

(e.g went from bad to worse) Therefore, all the words and expressions in the seven

chapters of the novel are closely read and investigated to see whether there is any conceptual metaphor underlying them For example, from the linguistic expression “the

roaring fire” and especially with the adjective “roaring”, it is possible to conclude that

the fire is viewed as an animal that is making a long, loud, deep sound Therefore, the conceptual metaphor that underlies this expression is FIRE IS AN ANIMAL

Second, in terms of translation procedures, this study chooses the framework proposed by Al-Harrasi (2001) to analyze the translation of conceptual metaphors from English into Vietnamese However, it is clearly noticed that Al-Harrasi focused heavily

on image-schema metaphors and the data are majorly taken from political discourses Therefore, to suit its purpose, this research reconsiders the specific procedures to deal with image-schema metaphors and opts for the general framework with four major procedures to expand it to another type of conceptual metaphors under the scope of this study: knowledge-based metaphors The procedures include 1) Keeping the same conceptual metaphor, 2) Adding a new instantiation in the target text, 3) Using a different conceptual metaphor, 4) Deleting the expression of the metaphor

After having analyzed the data, the writer noticed that these procedures do not totally suit the English-Vietnamese translation For example, consider the conceptual

metaphor A FIRE IS AN ANIMAL and its linguistic expression, “the roaring fire” In the translation, “ngọn lửa rừng rực”, none of the aforementioned procedures are

present in this translation Simply, the conceptual metaphor in the source text is converted into simple, non-figurative language Therefore, this paper offers another

procedure for analysis, which can be called Converting the conceptual metaphor (from

metaphor into no metaphor (the term is borrowed from Newmark’s procedures) In this

procedure, no conceptual metaphors are found in the target text but the meaning of the source text metaphor is converted, not deleted Some other modifications are presented

in detail below

Therefore, the analysis of data will be based on the following procedures:

1) Keeping the same conceptual metaphor

In this procedure, the conceptual metaphor in the source text is kept intact with little modification Some sub-types of this procedure are presented below

1.1 Keeping exactly the same conceptual metaphor

In this procedure, the conceptual metaphors found in the source text are kept intact without any modification For example, “He felt ashamed” (He refers to the dog Buck)

is translated into “Nó phát ngượng” Both the English expression and its Vietnamese translation suggest the same conceptual metaphor DOGS ARE HUMAN and no modification is added to the metaphor in the Vietnamese translation

1.2 Keeping the same conceptual metaphor but adding more details

In this procedure, the metaphor in the Vietnamese translation is decorated with more details For example, “Buck smiled” and “Buck nhe răng cười” both give rise to the conceptual micro-metaphor of “DOGS ARE HUMANS” However, the Vietnamese translation adds more details to the image of “smiling” with another detail, “nhe răng”

1.3 Keeping the same conceptual metaphor but using a different image

According to this procedure, the Vietnamese translation uses a different image compared with the source text, despite the fact that both the source and target

expressions share the conceptual metaphor For example, “It (the Yukon river) ate

away from the beneath” is translated into “Nó chuyên tâm đào khoét băng bên dưới”

Here, “ate away” became “đào khoét”, but both of them can suggest the same

conceptual metaphor RIVERS ARE HUMAN

1.4 Keeping the same conceptual metaphor but switching perspectives

This procedure keeps the source text metaphor but changes the perspective For

example, “He was become wise” and “Buck chẳng thiếu kinh nghiệm” are both based

on the same conceptual metaphor of DOGS ARE HUMAN and both refer to the attribute of being sensible However, the perspective changes from “being positive” to

“being not negative

1.5 Keeping the same conceptual metaphor but adding another conceptual

metaphor

This procedure maintains the original metaphor but adds another conceptual

metaphor in the translation For example, “But in spite of this great love he bore for John Thornton” is translated into “Dẫu mang nặng một tình yêu lớn lao nhường ấy đối

với John Thornton” Both of these linguistic expressions suggest the conceptual metaphor DOGS ARE HUMAN because the dog is able to show his “love” However, the target piece in Vietnamese creates another metaphor, which is LOVE IS A

BURDEN with the phrase “mang nặng”

2) Using a different conceptual metaphor

In this procedure, the idea or meaning of the conceptual metaphor in the source

text is conveyed through a different metaphor in the target text For example, “The

sun-kissed Santa Clara Valley”, manifesting THE SUN IS A HUMAN, became “Thung

lũng Santa Clara ngập nắng”, which gives rise to a different metaphor, LIGHT IS WATER (đầy)

3) Converting the conceptual metaphors

According to this procedure, the metaphor is translated but the translation

contains no conceptual metaphors For example, the expression “The two man in bad

tempers” with the metaphor STATES ARE LOCATIONS became “Còn hai ông chủ đang nhăn nhó”, which presents no metaphor

4) Deleting the expression of the metaphor

In this procedure, the translator chooses not to translate the metaphor and leave

out the metaphor For example, “When the long winter nights come on” is translated

into “Những đêm đông dài lãnh lẽo” Here, the phrase “come on”, which evokes the conceptual metaphor TIME IS A MOVING OBJECTS is omitted from the translation