Moving from theory to practice, I have devoted a reasonable length to discussing some of the m ain problems related to th e translation of th e nominal group from[r]
Trang 1NOMINALSATION IN SCIENTIFIC DISCO URSE AND
THE PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE TRANSLATION OF
THE NOMINAL GROUP FROM ENGLISH INTO VIETNAMESE
1 In trod u ction
T ranslating is a very complex
process It is complex because it involves
many problem-solving and decision
m aking task s which seem to strike the
tra n sla to r’s mind sim ultaneously during
the tran slatin g process Furtherm ore,
w hat seems to be more problematic for
the tra n sla to r is th a t w hen tra n sla tin g a
text, s/he will have to create in the
targ et language (TL) an equivalent
context which is foreign to the TL itself
To p u t it more specifically, the problem
lies in the seemingly contradictory view
th a t in tra n sla tin g a text from English
into Vietnam ese, we have to create in
V ietnam ese a context th a t is foreign to
V ietnam ese w ith an aim th a t the
V ietnam ese reader will u n d erstan d the
m eaning th a t is sim ilar to the meaning
in the w riter’s original text W ith regard
to th e tra n sla tio n of scientific texts,
w hat seem s to be a problem for the
tra n sla to r is th a t scientific discourse is a
kind of language for the expert not for
lay people, one which, according to
H alliday in H alliday & M artin (1993: 67)
m akes explicit th e tex tu al and logical
interconnections b u t leaves m any local
am biguities H alliday (ibid.) points out
th a t th e am biguities arise especially in
two places: (1) in strings of nouns (i.e.,
heavily loaded nom inal groups), leaving
n Assoc.Prof., School of Graduate Studies, VNU, Hanoi.
H oang Van V a n (,)
explicit th e sem antic relatio n s (namely
th e tra n sitiv ity relations) am ong them
an d (2) th e re la tio n a l verbs which are often in d e te rm in a te an d m ay face both ways It is th e first of th ese issues th a t I
am concerned w ith in th is paper As a way of s ta rt, I will look briefly a t the
n a tu re of nom inalization in scientific
te x tu a l environm ent T hen I will discuss some length the m ain problem s related
to th e tra n s la tio n of th e nom inal group from E nglish into V ietnam ese
2 The N ature o f N om in alization
E n v ir o n m e n t
As tra n sla to rs, w hen we tra n sla te a scientific tex t from one language into another, we te n d to th in k th a t the problem s lie in th e tra n sla tio n of technical term inology T his tendency is clearly reflected in N ew m ark’s
Approaches to T ranslation (1988a) and A Textbook o f T ranslation (1988b) For
N ew m ark, term inology is th e only criterion th a t d istin g u ish es technical tra n sla tio n from o th er forms of tra n sla tio n From our point of view, we concede th a t technical term s are an essen tial p a rt of scientific language which m ay cause problem s to the tra n s la to r an d th a t it would be
im possible to c reate a discourse of
1 1
Trang 212 Hoang Van Van
organised knowledge w ithout them
However, technical term s are not the
whole story in scientific tran slatio n even
though they are the lexical resources
which are highly visible’ (Halliday &
M artin 1993: 7) W hat is equally, if not
more significant both for th e discourse
analyst and the tra n sla to r is not so
much the term s them selves as the
potential th a t lies behind them Halliday
& M artin (1993) claim th a t th ere is
another aspect of scientific language
th a t is ju st as im portant as technical
terminology He term s it “technical
gram m ar” The scope of th is paper does
not perm it to discuss in detail w hat
technical gram m ar is Therefore, w hat I
should do is to focus only on some of the
features which I think m ight be of
in terest to the translator
‘According to H alliday & M artin
(1993), technical gram m ar possesses two
potentialities: (1) tu rn in g verbs and
adjectives into nouns, m aking them
become technical term s and (2)
expanding the scope of th e nominal
group - including the potential of
combining the two together This process
of nominalization is referred to as
‘gram m atical metaphor* which is defined
as ‘the transform ation of one class of
word to another with the words (the
lexical items) rem aining th e sam e’ or
‘the substitution of one gram m atical
class, or one gram m atical stru ctu re, by
another* (Halliday & M artin 1993: 79)
N om inalization as a form of
gram m atical m etaphor can be traced
back to early scientific w riting It has
been suggested th a t ancient Greek
scientists exploited the potential for
transform ing verbs and adjectives into nouns In th is way, they generated ordered sets of technical term s, abstract entities which had begun as the nam e of process or properties or in some cases as the nam es of relations between processes Then these scientists developed th e modifying potential of the Greek nom inal group, the resources of extending th e nom inal group with embedded clauses and prepositional phrases In th is way, they generated complex specifications of bodies and figures This process of nominalization was tak en over and fu rth er extended in English and in other European languages I t has also been found in Chinese and other Asian languages as well (for a more detailed discussion, see Halliday in Halliday & M artin 1993: 124-132)
Below is an extract tak en from Halliday in H alliday & M artin (1993) to illu strate how the two potentialities of technical gram m ar work in English
I f the hum ours o f the eye by old age decay, so as by shrinking to make the cornea and coat o f the crystalline
hum our grow f l a t t e r (1) than before, the
light will not be r e fr a c te d (2) enough and for w ant o f a sufficient re fra c tio n (2*) w ill not converge to the bottom o f the eye but to some place beyond it, and by consequence p a in t in the bottom o f the eye a con fu sed (3) picture, and
according to the in d is tin c tn e s s (39) of
this picture the object w ill appear confused This is the reason for the decay
° f sight in old men, and shews why their sight is mended by spectacles For some
co n v e x (4) glasses supply the defer* o f
VNU, Journal of Science, Soc., 5c/., Human., NJE, 2006
Trang 3p lu m p n e s s ( l 9) in the eye i f the glass
has a due degree o f c o n v e x ity (49) A n d
the contrary happens in short-sighted
men whose eyes are too plum p.
In the above extract, there are four
pair: (1) : (1’), (2) : (2’), (3) (3’), and (4)
(4’) In each of the pairs, a verb or an
adjective in the first expression has been
reworded in the second as a noun This
process of nom inalization can be
represented as follows:
flatter ► plum pness
refracted .► refraction
confused ► indistinctness
convex ► convexity
A close exam ination of th is process
reveals th a t in each case gram m atical
process has tak en place which enables a
piece of discourse th a t was previously
presented as New inform ation to be re
used as Given in th e course of the
succeeding argum ent This is an
im portant feature of scientific discourse
th a t the tra n sla to r should be aw are of
when tra n sla tin g a scientific text
According to technical gram m ar, the
process of tu rn in g verbs and adjectives
into nouns which is the first step in the
nom inalization process is term ed the
“process of objectification” This process
consists of two in terd ep en d en t sub
process: (1) creating technical term s and
(2) nom inalizing the gram m ar The
interdependency of these two features
can be explained as follows:
C reating a technical term is itself a
gram m atical process; and w hen the
argum ent is constructed by the gram m ar
in th is way, the words th a t are turned
□into nouns tend thereby to become
technicalised (H alliday in H alliday &
M artin 1993: 8)
The second step is to nominalise not only the process b u t also any participants and circum stances th a t go
w ith it: th a t is, gram m atically expanding the nom inal group still fu rth er to include some or all the elem ents of the clause; for example:
Over recent yearsy gram m ar has been restored from its temporary exile
► The restoration o f gram m ar from
its temporary exile over recent years
In the above example, there is a complex process of nom inalization The
process restored has become a noun
restoration; the goal in the process gram m ar has become its Possessor o f gram m ar functioning as Qualifier in the
nom inal group; and the two
circum stances from its exile and over
recent years have retain ed th eir original
forms, b u t function as its Qualifiers
W hen wording are packaged in this way, they tu rn th e clause into a nominal group, enabling it to function in another clause This helps to construe the phenomenon as if it were a thing because nom inalization downgrades the gram m atical sta tu s of m eaning so th a t
“w hat m ight be construed as a combination of interdependent clauses in the spoken mode is reconstrued as edifice of words an d phrases in writing” (Halliday & M a rtin 1993: 39) And in this way, th e m eaning comes to function
a t the lower ra n k in the gram m ar - at the ran k of group/phrase and word, instead of a t th e ran k of clause This opens up a v a st potential for the
VNU, Journal o f Science, Soc., Sci., Human., NJE, 2006
Trang 4nom inalised form to function in the
clause: the nom inalised form can be
placed in the clause as T hem e or New; it
can be made both as T hem e an d New; it
can be exclusively identified as New or
Theme and so on; for exam ple:
Theme: The restoration o f gram m a r
from its tem porary exile over
recent years h as attracted
m uch attention fro m language
teaching m ethodologists.
New: W hat has attracted m uch
teaching m ethodologists is the
restoration o f g ra m m a r from
its tem porary exile over recent
years.
Them e It is the restoration o f
& New: g ra m m a r from its temporary
exile over recent years th a t has
attracted m uch attention from
language teaching methodologists.
Theme: T hat the restoration o f
g ra m m a r from its temporary
exile over recent years has
attracted m uch attention from
methodologists is a matter o f fact
Furtherm ore, th e nom inalised form
can be m ade to function as p a rtic ip a n t in
a v ast a rra y of relatio n al clause types
which can be developed to describe, to
classify, to exemplify, to decompose, to
order, to interface, to c o n tra st to prove,
to explain and so on Below are some
examples to illu s tra te th is point:
(1) The restoration o f g ra m m a r from
its temporary exile over recent years
represents a new w ay o f looking at
second I foreign language teaching.
Hoang Van Van
(2) The restoration o f gram m ar from its temporary exile in recent years proves that gram m ar still has its p a rt in second I foreign language teaching.
(3) The restoration o f gram m ar from its temporary exile in recent years leads
to the conclusion th a t gram m ar should not have been ignored.
(4) The restoration o f gram m ar from its temporary exile in recent years has
methodologists.
tra n sla tio n o f the N om inal
V ietn am ese
3.1 I n tr o d u c to r y R e m a rk s
In th is section, an attem pt is made to answ er the question: “W hat are the
m ain problems related to the translation
of the nom inal group from English into
V ietnam ese?” Before answ ering, three points should be mentioned in relation to this question First, as mentioned, tran slatio n is a process full of problem solving tasks (Levy, 1970) T ranslation problems, therefore, have become a common issue for both tran slatio n theorists and translation practitioners However, they differ in how they look a t tran slatio n problems Newm ark (1988a, 1988b), for example, states th a t in scientific and technical tran slatio n , the problems arise mainly from th e new terminology A part from this, he identifies some other related problems such as the varieties of technical stvle, the constraints of register, th e n atu re and the degree of formality of th e text,
VNU, Journal o f Science, Soc., Sci., Human., N ^E , 2006
Trang 5and the differences betw een the TL
readership and the original one H atim
& Mason (1990), on the other hand, after
considering the aids th a t modern
technology may provide to facilitate the
tran slato r, conclude th a t aids to
tran slato rs are im proving all the time,
but th e basic problems faced by
tran slato rs and th eir work rem ain the
same These problems are: (1)
comprehension of the source text (ST)
(parsing of text, access to specialized
knowledge, access to intended meaning),
(2) tran sfer of m eaning (relaying lexical
meaning, relaying gram m atical
meaning, relaying rhetorical meaning,
including implied and inferable
meaning, for potential readers); and (3)
assessm ent of ta rg e t tex t (TT)
(readability, conforming to generic and
discursive TL conventions, judging
adequacy of tran slatio n for specified
purpose) Secondly, from the theoretical
and practical points of view, we are fully
aw are of the fact th a t it would be totally
inadequate to discuss the problems in
tra n sla tin g the nom inal group w ithout
considering such factors as the context of
the ST, the context w here the TT is
placed, the text type, the intention of the
w riter, and so on Space does not perm it
discussion of these factors Hopefully,
some of the inadequacies m ay be
som ew hat circum vented by choosing a
text whose context is likely to be fam iliar
tò m ost teachers and students of
second/foreign languages I shall discuss
the problems related to th e tran slatio n
of the nom inal group from English into
V ietnam ese by tak in g the text “ELT
and EL Teachers: M atters Arising” by
H.G Widdowson which was printed in
th e ELT Jo u rn a l, Volume 43/4, 1992 Then, I will select from th e tex t some long, stru c tu ra lly complex and syntactically am biguous nom inal groups for identifying and discussing tra n sla tio n problem s
The approach I tak e im plies th a t
w hen we discuss th e problem s related to the tra n sla tio n of th e nom inal group from E nglish into V ietnam ese, we are a t the sam e tim e considering all th e factors
m entioned above And thirdly, it should
be pointed out th a t tra n sla tio n problems differ from one tra n s la to r to another In tra n s la tin g a text, for an incom petent tra n s la to r th e re m ay be a lot of problem s, w hile for a com petent tra n sla to r, th e re m ay be few or none For th is reason, it would be difficult to
ta lk about tra n s la tio n problem s w ithout settin g a sta rtin g point Shall we discuss the tra n sla tio n problem s experienced by all tra n s la to rs (tra n sla to rs a t all levels
of competence) or only those experienced
by incom petent tra n s la to rs or ju s t the ones th a t are faced by com petent tra n sla to rs? I sh all adopt th e th ird position, ta k in g th e com petent tra n sla to r
as th e sta rtin g p o int for identifying and discussing tra n s la tio n problems A sim ple reason for th is is th a t a certain degree of com petence is an essential condition for being a tran slato r; one cannot be th o u g h t of as a tra n sla to r
w ithout th is basic equipm ent (for a more detailed discussion of th e tra n sla to r’s competence, see Bell 1991: 35-43) From
th is s ta rtin g point, I shall focus on two
m ain tra n sla tio n problem s which, I believe, th e com petent English-
V ietnam ese tra n s la to r m ay experience
VNU, Journal of Science, Soc., 5c/., Human., NJE, 2006
Trang 616 Hoang Van Van
when tran slatin g the nom inal group
from English into V ietnam ese These
are: (1) stru ctu ral complexity and
syntactic am biguity and (2) th e problems
of word choice and ordering of elem ents
in the V ietnam ese tra n sla te d nominal
group (1) is concerned w ith the
problems of comprehension and analysis
of the English nom inal group and (2) is
concerned w ith the problems of
establishing correspondences between
the lexical units in the English nom inal
group and those in the V ietnam ese
counterpart and the problems in
producing n atu raln ess in the
V ietnam ese tra n sla te d nom inal group
3.2 S tru ctu ra l C om p lexity and
S y n ta c tic A m b igu ity
When com petent English-V ietnam ese
tran slato rs come across such nom inal
groups as (1) the first p a r t, (2) the new
language program m e, (3) these two
radical differences and so on; th ere may
be no problems for them because the
lexical item s and the stru c tu re s of these
nom inal groups m ay already be in the
two stores located in th eir b rain s which
Bell (1991) calls “F req u en t Lexis Store”
(FLS) and “F req u en t S tru c tu re Store”
(FSS) (for a detailed discussion of FLS
and FSS, see Bell 1991: 45-53, 141-148)
When presented w ith a nom inal group
like (2), w hat the tra n sla to r h as CO do is
to m atch the V ietnam ese lexical item s
and their orders w ith those in the
English original This m atching process
may be elaborated as follows: the P arser
in the tra n sla to r’s brain will tell him /her
th a t programme which functions as the
Head of the English nom inal group
corresponds to chương trìn h which also
functions as the Head of the V ietnam ese
counterpart; language which functions
as the Classifier and precedes th e Head
(programme) corresponds to học tiếng
which has the sam e function b ut follows the Head (chương trình) in the
V ietnam ese tra n sla te d nominal group;
new which functions as the E pithet and
precedes language programme
corresponds to m ới which h as the same function b u t follows chương trình học
tiếng; and the which functions as Deictic
in the English nom inal group and
precedes new language programm e is not
tran slated because in V ietnam ese there are no lexical item s which may
correspond to the definite article the in
English All these seemingly sim ultaneous operations are based on the tra n sla to r’s contrastive knowledge of the stru ctu res of the English and
V ietnam ese nom inal groups The tran slatio n of th is nom inal group presents no problems for him /her because the order of the elem ents in the nom inal groups of both languages are unm arked
(Deictic AE p ith e tAC lassifierAThing in English and T hingAC lassifierAE pithet in Vietnamese) The resu lt of these tran slatio n operations is th a t the
m eaning which is expressed through the
English nom inal group the new language
Vietnamese as chương trình học tiếng mới.
However, as has been pointed out elsewhere (H V Van 1994, 2005), scientific texts in English do not always contain simple and unm arked nominal groups like the ones we discussed above
In an English scientific text, one may
VNU, Journal of Science, Soc., 5c/., Human., NJE, 2006
Trang 7come across m any long and complex
nominal groups w ith high lexical
density, or to use Bell’s (1991) term,
“high inform ativity” These nominal
groups, according to H alliday in
Halliday & M artin (1993), often m ake it
difficult for the tra n sla to r (reader) to
process the m eaning, analyze the
stru ctu re and in te rp re t the logical
sem antic relations among the elem ents
Below are two exam ples tak en from H.G
Widdowson’s (1992) text: “ELT and EL
Teachers: M atters Arising” to illu strate
the point:
(1) These contents were originally
made a t the concluding session of the
ELT Jo u rn al 45th A nniversary
Symposium (October 1991) which was
entitled ‘T h e changing roles and n atu re
of ELT”
(2) Here, then, are a num ber of
problem atic m atters arising from the
symposium concerning th e n atu re of
ELT an d the role of EL teachers
At the central level (at the level of
the whole nom inal group), th e structures
of th ese nom inal groups look ra th e r
simple If our analysis is appropriate,
the experiential and logical stru ctu res of
these nom inal groups may be
represented as follows:
(1) Deictic A Classifier A Thing A Qualifier
(2) Deictic A T hing A Q ualifier
B A a A B
A close look, however, a t the in tern al
stru ctu re of these nom inal groups will
reveal th a t they are extrem ely complex
This is because each of them consists of different layers of modification which will call for careful analysis and
in terp retatio n from th e tran slato r When presented w ith nom inal groups as such,
if the tran slato r does not in terp ret the logical relationships among its elements correctly, s/he will give wrong analysis, and wrong analysis will certainly result
in wrong tran slatio n In translation practice, we som etim es h e a r translators complain about the fact th a t when they read an English sentence they
u n d erstan d every word in it, but they cannot get its m eaning across And once they cannot get th e m eaning across, they cannot tra n sla te th e sentence into the
ta rg e t language This problem is partly due to the tra n sla to r’s inability to analyze the stru ctu re of th e sentence for its m eaning an d p artly due to its stru c tu ra l complexity which is often the source of syntactic ambiguity In a long and complex nom inal group, syntactic
am biguity can be seen a t every layer of modification Let us consider the nom inal group in exam ple (2) to see how stru c tu ra l complexity creates syntactic
am biguity and how these two factors cause problems to th e tran slato r
The analysis of the nom inal group in example (2) shows th a t it consists of four layers of modification In th e first layer,
num ber functions as the Head of the
whole nom inal group, a functions as Deictic and o f problem atic teachers
functions as Q ualifier In th e second layer, m atters functions as Thing,
problem atic functions as E pithet, arising from the sym posium functions as
Q ualifier 1 and concerning teachers
'NU, Journal o f Science, Soc., Sci., Human., NJE, 2006
Trang 818 Hoang Van Van
functions as Qualifier 2 In the third
layer, Qualifier 1 contains th e nominal
group the sym posium which function as
Deictic and Thing respectively and
Qualifier 2 consists of two P aratactical
nominal groups: (1) the nature o f E L T
and (2) the role o f E L teachers In (1) the
functions as Deictic, nature as Thing and
o f E L T as Qualifier In (2) the functions
as Deictic, role as Thing and o f E L
teachers as Qualifier And in the fourth
layer, E L T functions as Thing (below
nominal group 1) and E L teachers as
Classifier and Thing respectively The
problem here is th a t when faced w ith a
structurally complex nom inal group like
this, even the com petent tra n sla to r may
easily get confused in identifying the
layers of modification which are
inherently syntactically ambiguous
When it comes to the tran slatio n of the
example we have analyzed, one of the
questions the tra n sla to r m ay ask is
‘W hich Head does concerning teaciiers
modify, m atters or sym posium ?\
F urther, because arising is a non-finite
verb in the clause arising from the
sym posium , we do not know exactly
w hether it is in the continuous tense or
the past continuous tense or the prei en t
perfect continuous tense Sim ilarly, if
concerning teachers is in terp reted as
a non-finite embedded clause, we do not
know which tense it is in either Alìó
lexically concerning is ambiguous Even
when concerning teachers is
identified as Post modifier of m atters, it
is still not known w hether it is
concerning the nature o f E L T a nd the
role o f E L teachers or m atters which wer ?
/have been concerned w ith the natufe .
teachers or m atters w hich were I have been about the nature teachers or
m atters which involved I have involved the nature o f E L T an d the role o f E L teachers Can the whole nom inal group
be reworded as a num ber o f problematic
m atters which were I have been (arising from the sym posium ) a n d (concerned
w ith I concerning the nature o f E L T and the role o f E L teachers) or as a num ber of problematic m atters w hich were I have been (arising from the sym posium which
w ith I concerning the nature o f E L T and the role o f E L teachers)? Of course, it
may be difficult to decide
In the pre-modifying position of the English nom inal group, syntactic
am biguity may also cause problems for the tran slato r Suppose th a t the tra n sla to r is tra n sla tin g th e nominal
group in example (1) the concluding
session o f the E L T Jo u rn a l 45th Anniversary Sym posium (October 1991) which was entitled “The changing roles and nature o f E L T and a fte r tran slatin g the concluding session into V ietnam ese
as phiên b ế mạc, s/he now moves on to
tra n sla te th e Qualifier in which s/he
comes across the nom inal group the E L T
Journal 45th Anniversary Sym posium In
term s of th e num ber of words, this nom inal group looks ra th e r simple The whole nom inal group consists of only six
elem ents w ith Sym p o siu m functioning
as Head B ut if we explore its m eaning carefully, we may find th a t it contains a great deal of w hat H alliday (1993) calls
“local am biguity” W hat does the E L T
Journal 45th A nniversary Sym posium
mean? Does it m ean (1) th e symposium which was about the 45th an n iv ersary or
VNU, Journal o f Science, Soc., Sci., Human., NJ E , 2006
Trang 9(2) thie symposium which was held to
celebrrate the 45th anniversary of the
ELT JJournal or (3) the symposium which
was hield on the 45th anniversary of the
ELT Journal? Even w ith the E L T
Jourm al we still do not know w hether it
is thee journal for ELT or the journal
which I is named after ELT Or else, it
may be also possible to in te rp re t the
E L T tfJournal as a specialized journal for
teacheers of English as a second/foreign
languiage All these in terp retatio n s may
be plaiusible because the nom inal group,
exceptt the Deictic the, is made up of
lexicail words, leaving inexplicit the
sem am tic relations among the elements
This vwill certainly give rise to different
sem am tic interp retatio n s and may partly
explaiin why there are different versions
of tram slatio n of one source text
3.3 TThe p rob lem s o f W ord C hoice
anid O rdering o f E lem en ts in th e
V ieetnam ese T ra n sla ted N om in al
Grroup
Wiilss (1982b) introduces the concept
“transslator-specific aspects of translation
equivalence” to account in p a rt for the
fact tth a t different tra n sla to rs produce
differeBnt TL versions of one and the
sam e í SL text According to Wilss, every
tran sliato r, like every hum an being,
stands? in a specific relation to reality
S/He jpossesses a specific linguistic and
extra-llinguistic volume of experience
and a I range of tran slatio n al interests
S/He belongs to a specific language
commiunity, and w ithin th is language
com m iunity s/he belongs to a specific
social group which determ ines his/her
value system, which in tu rn controls
his/heir tran slatio n al production A gainst
this scocial and cultural background, this
m eans th a t tran slatio n is always subject
to interference from the subjectivity of the translator In discussing translation problems we m ust adm it th a t tran slato rs are not ab stract entities, but hum an beings, and as such leave their fingerprints on th eir finished translation products Since in practice no two fingerprints are exactly alike, there are
“no completely identical TL versions of a
SL text which h as been tran slated by various tran slato rs, even if the tran slato rs possess a comparable degree
of tran slatio n competence and even if the outw ard conditions for the translation of th e p articu lar text are identical” (Wilss 1982b: 9)
W ith regard to the tran slatio n of the nominal group, the tra n sla to r’s subjectivity can be seen in the choice of words and the ordering of the elements
in the TL nom inal group Below we shall first consider some of th e nominal groups in the three Vietnam ese translations of an English sentence in H.G Widdowson’s tex t “ELT and EL Teachers: M atters Arising” to see how word choice m ay cause problems for the translator
English text:
These com m ents were originally made a t the concluding session of the ELT Jo u rn al 45th A nniversary Symposium (October 1991) which was entitled “The changing roles and nature
of ELT”
Vietnam ese v ersion Is
(1) N hững lòi bình lu ận này được đưa
ra vào (2) phiên k ế t thúc của hội nghị thảo luận kỷ niệm 45 năm th à n h lập Tạp chí Dạy tiếng Anh với nhan đề “Những
VNƯ, Jovurnal of Science, Soc., Sci., Human., NJ E, 2006
Trang 1020 Hoang Van Van
vai trò đang chuyển đổi và bản chất của
dạy tiếng Anh
Vietnam ese version 2:
(1) Những vấn đề này lần đầu tiên
được đưa ra tại (2) kỳ họp b ế mạc của hội
thảo kỷ niệm 45 năm của Jo u rn al ELT
(tháng 10 năm 1991) m ang chủ đề “Thực
chất và vai trò đang th ay đổi của việc
dạy tiếng Anh
Vietnam ese version 3:
(1) Những nhận xét này nguyên được
đưa ra tại (2) phiên b ế mạc Hội thảo kỷ
niệm lần thứ 45 ngày th à n h lập Tạp chí
ELT (tháng 10 năm 1991) n h an đề “Vai
trò đang thay đổi và bản ch ất của việc
dạy tiếng Anh
It is clear from the three versions of
translation th a t different tra n sla to r’s
choose different words th a t they think
may correspond to the ones in the ST In
nominal group (1), com ments is
tran slated into Vietnam ese as những lời
bỡnh luận (comments), những vấn đề
(m atters/issues), những nhận xét
(remarks) In nom inal group (2), the
concluding session is tra n sla te d as phiên
kết thúc, kỳ họp b ế mạc; Symposium: hội
nghị thảo lu ậ n , hội thảo; en titled : với
nhan đề (with title), m ang chủ đề (carry
topic/theme), nhan đề (entitle); E L T
Journal Tạp chí dạy tiếng A n h , Journal
E L T , Tạp chí E L T and so forth W hat
needs comments here is th a t if we look
a t the three versions of tran slatio n of an
English word or word group, we can see
th a t these three words or word groups
are synonymous or sem antically related;
e.g com m ents: (1) những lời bình lu ậ n ,
(2) những vấn đế, and (3) những nhận
xét T herefore, to choose a w ord or an
expression which may most correspond
to th a t in the ST seems to be a problem for the tra n sla to r because “words don’t find th eir equivalences in the new language, nor do cultural expressions and the tran slato r will never approach a text twice in the same way” (Biguenet & Schulte 1989: Introduction) And since there is no one-to-one correspondence between a word in the SL text and th a t
in the TL text and since no two tran slato rs ca n ever produce th e same version of translation of a ST, the problems of word choice still rem ain
O ur la st issue in th is section concerns the problems of ordering of elem ents in t he tra nslated Vietnamese nom inal group It is generally accepted
in tran slatio n theory and practice th a t one of the most im portant criteria for judging the quality of tran slatio n is readability Readability, according to Hohulin (1982), is dependent on the
n atu raln ess of language use Readability also implies th a t any tra n sla te d text which includes too many gram m atical structures which are closer to the SL structures or use will not be n atu ral because word order, sentence length, ways of presenting inform ation, and so
on, are language-specific (see Wilss 1982b, Ne u b ert 1984, and H atim &
M ason 1990) It is clear from our contrastive knowledge th a t the order of elem ents in the English and V ietnam ese nom inal groups are not similar Therefore, when tra n sla tin g an English nom inal group, especially a long, structurally complex and syntactically ambiguous one into V ietnam ese, the ordering of elem ents so as to assure
n atu raln ess in the tran slated
VNU, Journal o f Science, Soc., Sci., Human., N^E, 2006