A comparison on cohesive devices between the gift of the magi and its two vietnamese translation versions

Vinh university Foreign languages departmentA comparison on cohesive devices between the gift of the magi and its two Vietnamese translation versions So sánh các phép liên kết giữa bản g

Vinh university Foreign languages department

A comparison on cohesive devices

between the gift of the magi and its

two Vietnamese translation versions (So sánh các phép liên kết giữa bản gốc và hai bản dịch

Tiếng Việt của truyện ngắn Món quà của các Đạo sĩ)

Graduation thesis

Field: applied Linguistics

Student : Mai Thị HuệSupervisor: Nguyễn Thị Lan Phương , M.A

Vinh, 2009

Part I: introduction

1 Rationale of the Study

Vietnam is more and more integrating deeply into the world in manyfields, of which there is literature As a matter of fact, once foreignliterature is more available in the market, Vietnamese reader’s tastes forliterature are also changing – they are becoming more interested in foreignworks Even with those who do not speak foreign language, the enjoying offoreign literature is still made possible thanks to translators It can be saidthat translated literature has become an important part in Vietnam literaturenowadays This, naturally, leads to the fact that there are differenttranslated versions for the same foreign work, and, accordingly, there exists

a comparison between them However, to non-linguistic people, it isdifficult to exactly tell why they prefer this than the other, they might justinstinctively feel the difference Deriving from this, many studies havebeen done on different aspects in order to find out the reasons for success

of this translation and the failure of the other

There have been some works that analysed and contrasted cohesionbetween English and Vietnamese so far The purpose of these works is topoint out the similarities and differences between the two languages interms of cohesive devices This research is, by no means, an exception

Having read one typical short-story by O.Henry, The Gift of The Magi, and

two translated versions, the author has been attracted with the idea ofcomparing two translated versions on textual equivalence

According to Callow (1992) each language has its own pattern toconvey the interrelationships of persons and events; in no language maythese patterns be ignored, if the translation is to be understood by itsreaders This is the reason why cohesion gained a great deal of concernfrom applied linguists

Among many linguists, Halliday and Hasan (1976) make a detailedclassification of cohesive devices in English These authors distinguishbetween grammatical and lexical cohesion It is obvious that those outlineddevices are common to almost language Baker states that differentlanguages have different preferences for using specific devices morefrequently than others or in specific combination which may notcorrespond to English pattern of cohesion (1992, p.219)

O Henry was a prolific American short-story writer, a master ofsurprise endings, who wrote about the life of ordinary people in New YorkCity A twist of plot, which turns on an ironic or coincidental circumstance,

is typical of O Henry’s stories This is also the reason why he got the love

from lots of Vietnamese readers Apart from The Last Leaf, the readers have known The Gift of the Magi as a typical short- story by O Henry It is

translated into Vietnamese by many translators and each Vietnamesetranslation version has an interesting characteristic, giving the researcher adesire to conduct this study This study focuses on textual equivalencebetween the source and two target language texts One is translated by Dac

Le in the “Love of life” book that includes The selected American short

stories by The World Publisher, Ha Noi, 1994 The other is from the O Henry short stories by Ngo Vinh Vien, that has been republished many

times This paper chooses the translation version in 2005 in the same book

by Literature Publisher, Hanoi.

2 Aims of the Study

The aims of the thesis are:

- To provide an overview of cohesive devices

- To study cohesion in translation in a particular text type

- To identify the cohesive markers in The Gift of the Magi and its

3 Scope of the study

The study focuses on the textual equivalence between The Gift of the

Magi by O Henry and its two translation versions More detailedly, the

study focuses on cohesion only Themantic and information structures,another important aspect of textual equivalence will not be covered in thescope of the study The ground for doing this research is the system ofcohesive markers suggested by Halliday and Hasan (1976) and Diep QuangBan (2005) and the definition equivalence proposed by Baker (1992)

- What kind of cohesive markers are preferred in The Gift of the Magi

and by the translators in Vietnamese translation? Which one is the mostpopular in each translation?

- Which is more popular, the translation version by Dac Le or the one

by Ngo Vinh Vien?

5 Methods of the Study

- The study is carried out using the quantitative method withcollecting, analyzing and clarifying the procedure of collecting data inorder to answer the research questions.

- Review of the theories related to cohesion and translation

- Analysis and synthesis of the collected data

6 Design of the Study

The thesis consists of three parts:

Part I: Introduction states the reasons for choosing the topic, the

aim, its scope, the research question and method of the study

Part II: Development consists of 3 chapters:

Chapter 1: Theoretical background states the theoretical background

of cohesion, cohesion and coherence, type of cohesion, translation theory,O.Henry and The Gift of The Magi

Chapter 2: Identification of cohesive markers in the original text,such as reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, lexical cohesion andthe summary in general

Chapter 3: Handling of cohesive markers in the Vietnamesetranslations conclude handling of reference, substitution, ellipsis,conjunction, and handling of lexical cohesion and general remarks

Part III: Conclusion summarizes the main points of the thesis, states

the application and presents including remarks

Part II: development

Chapter 1: Theoretical background

1.1 Some Related Concepts of Discourse Analysis

1.1.1 Cohesion

A text, generally speaking, can be recognized as a sentence or agroup of sentences because of its clear relationship of ideas Yet, how toidentify what makes a text coherent? What makes a cohesive grammaticalunit different from a random collection of sentences? Halliday and Hasan

(1976) pointed out by defining text as “… not just a string of sentences It

is not simply a large grammatical unit, something of the same kind as a sentence; but differing from it in size – a sort of supersentence a semantic unit” (p.291) Because it is a semantic unit, the state of being a text (its

texture) is dictated by its interpretation within a particular context, orenvironment Let’s see this example:

[1:1] Woodrow Wilson was twenty-fifth President of the United

States He will be always remembered for his work to establish world

peace

(The History of The US in brief)

This text is coherent because He in the second sentence refers back to

Woodrow Wilson in the first one In fact, the second sentence without itscontextual reference would not make much sense

The concept of cohesion is a semantic one, it refers to relations of

meaning that exist within the text and that define it as a text “Cohesion

occurs where the interpretation of some elements in the discourse is dependent on that of another The one presupposes the other, in the sense that it can not be effectively decoded except by recourse to it When it happens, a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, the

presupposing and the presupposed, are thereby at least potentially integrated into a text (Halliday and Hasan ,1976, p.4)

Returning to the example, the word He in the second sentence creates

the cohesion by itself in the text and the two sentences combine together,leading to unity

It seems that Halliday and Hasan’s idea has similarity with Diep

Quang Ban’s Ban in Ngữ PhápTiếng Việt (2005) states that cohesion is in

the links between two semantic elements which lies in two sentences or intwo clauses of a sentence Therefore, they explain to each other In otherwords, cohesion is the semantic relation in which to understand the specificmeaning of this element, we must base on the meaning of the other

[1: 2] Bản tuyên ngôn nhân quyền và dân quyền của Cách MạngPháp năm 1791 cũng nói: “Người ta sinh ra tự do và bình đẳng về quyền lợi

và phải luôn luôn được tự do và bình đẳng về quyền lợi” Đó là những lẽ

phải không ai chối cãi được

(Tuyên ngôn độc lập, Hồ Chí Minh)

The readers do not make sense Đó in the second sentence if they do

not base on the meaning of the first sentence In other words, the second

shares the link with the first to be made sense.Similarly to viễn cảnh ấy in

the following example:

[1: 3] Tới đây ta mới hiểu thế nào là sự sợ hãi khi phải vĩnh viễn

xa P Đừng, lạy chúa, viễn cảnh ấy đừng bao giờ xảy ra cả, đừng, mà ta

sống với ai, sống trơ trọi và cô đơn thế, ta làm sao sống nổi

(Mãi mãi tuổi hai mươi, Nguyễn Văn Thạc)

Another example:

[1: 4] Ông sống một thân, một mình Ông tứ cố vô thân.

(Thầy Khiển, Ma Văn Kháng)

Một thân một mình in the first sentence and tứ cố vô thân in the

second one are synonymous because they explain meaning to each other

[1: 5] Đồi bạch đàn vẫn thong thả đồng ca bài hát cổ xưa của

mình Bạch đàn ơi, bỡ ngỡ gì mà em xòe lá? Hương bạch đàn, nhựa bạch

đàn gợi điều gì mơ mộng quá … Em ở đâu chẳng về anh dắt tay em…

(Mãi mãi tuổi hai mươi, Nguyễn Văn Thạc)

Bạch đàn in the second sentence is repeated in the second one,

creating lexical cohesion in the text

Halliday and Hasan (1976) make a detailed classification of thecohesive devices in English These authors as well as Ban (2005)distinguish between grammatical and lexical cohesion According to them,grammatical cohesion embraces four different devices: Reference,substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction and lexical cohesion consists ofrepetition, synonymy, superordinate, hyponymy, metonymy andantonym…

1.1.2 Cohesion and Coherence

According to Lam (2007) in the Discourse analysis, Cohesion is a

guide to coherence, and coherence is something created by the reader in theact of reading the text Coherence is the feeling that a text hangs together,that it makes sense, and is not just a jumble of sentences

Coherence relations are meaning relations connecting two textsegments A defining characteristic for these relations is that theinterpretation of the related segments needs to provide more information

than is provided by the sum of the segments taken in isolation Hoey points

out the differences between cohesion and coherence as follows: “Cohesion

is the objective capable in principle automatic recognition, while coherence is subjective and judments concerning it may vary from readers

to readers” (cited in Baker, 1992, p.218) In other words, cohesion is only

the clues to coherence, consisting of grammatical and lexical links in thetext while coherence is in the reader’s mind and they have to createcoherence by themselves Let’s consider the example:

[1: 6] Clare loves potatoes She was born in Ireland

It is clear that cohesion approach to connectedness is inadequate.According to Nguyen Hoa (2002) cohesion can be understood as means toindicate coherence but it is completedly wrong when whoever considersthey are one Between them, there is not exists a one-to-onecorrespondence In the example:

[1: 7] A: My car’s broken down

B: There’s a garage down there

The readers do not see any cohesive devices in the example but theystill get the meaning of sentences thanks to its coherence

1.1.3 Type of Cohesion

Halliday and Hasan (1976) identified five different types of cohesion:

1.1.3.1 Reference

Reference is an act in which a speaker or a writer uses linguistic forms

to enable a listener, or reader, to identify something It refers to thesemantic relationship between a word and what it points to in the realworld Let’s see the category of reference

[1:8] Robin was really a hero rather than a criminal He robbed the

rich and gave to the poor

(English Pronunciation Made Simple)

Robin is a concrete linguistic element, implying a name of a man He

in the second sentence is understood as an identified element Thanks tothis element, two sentences stick together

Halliday and Hasan (1976) outlined three sub-types of referentialcohesion: personal, demonstrative and comparative

a Personal Reference

Personal reference can be seen as a function in the speech situation It

is expressed through pronouns and determiners They serves to identifyindividuals and objects that are named at some other point in the text Hereare the category of person by Halliday and Hasan (1976)

Speech roles Other roles

Speaker addressee Specific

Human humanNon

-One I me

my mine You you

your yours

He himhis his It its

[its] itsShe her

hers her One one

one’sMore than We us They

theirs

ThemTheirone ours our

(Halliday and Hasan, 1976, p.44)The category points out all the personal references in details

Halliday states that personals referring to the speech roles (speaker and

addressee) are typically exophoric (situational), including I and you, and

we mean you and I In fact, they sometimes become anaphoric, specially in

written languages such as narrative fiction Let’s see example:

[1:9] My rich dad, on the other hand, always referred to himself as rich.

He would say things like, “I am a rich man, and rich people don’t do this”

I in the second sentence refers back to “My rich dad” in the first

sentence and He in the second sentence.

From the category above, we see that the third person forms She, He,

It, They can be anaphoric

However, there are varieties of personal in Vietnamese Ban (2001)indicated the personal references in the table follow:

Pronounce Meaning ofThe 1st

Chúng,chúng nó, bọn

- Lạy chị, em nói gì đâu?

(Dế mèn phiêu lưu kí, Tô Hoài)

In the example, Mày in the second sentence and em in the third one refer back to Dế Choắt.

Ban states that personal references in Vietnamese includes kinshipnoun and social position word, mostly the first and the second personal in

respective To translate exactly meaning of personal references from English to Vietnamese requires a deep knowledge of personal references in Vietnamese

Example:

[1:12] Tôi hỏi:

- Anh ơi! Anh ốm thế nào mà còm nhỏm như vậy?

Anh nhăn mặt:

- Chú nói be bé chứ không có anh váng cả đầu Không, anh không ốm, tạng người anh nó thế.

(Dế mèn phiêu lưu kí, Tô Hoài)

b Demonstrative Reference

Demonstrative reference keeps track of information through location using proximity reference, expressed through determiners and adverbs Halliday outlined the system of demonstrative reference as follows:

(Halliday and Hasan, 1976, p.57)

Neutral the

near

far near far

this that singular

plural these those

place here there

time now then

participation

circumstance selective

These items in the system are all demonstrative reference They canpresent a singer word or phrase, or much longer chucks of text – rangingacross several paragraphs or even several pages.

[1:13] Recognizing that his country had to change, Gowbacheycould have become a cautious modernizer in the Chinese fashion,promoting economic reform and sponsoring new technology while holding

firm against political change This did not happen.

(Discourse analysis)

[1:14] He felt defeated and disheartened, a sad, inept creature,doomed to a miserable life with no possibility for tomorrow, and that, quite

simply, was that.

This and that in these examples above refer anaphorically to an

extended passage of text

However, there is a difference in terms of demonstrative comparedwith that in Vietnamese In Vietnamese, demonstrative seems to be morelimited than that in English because demonstrative reference is the order of

words like: này, kia, ấy, nọ after nouns in earlier sentence.

Example: Bà ấy, anh kia, cái bàn này, cái đó, con ấy, …

[1:15] Không viết nổi P ạ, không sao viết nổi, vì nỗi thương cảm sâu

xa bóp nghẹt trái tim T Khuôn mặt dịu dàng ấy sao hôm nay im lặng thế,

xôn xao lòng ta, là vần thơ của nhà thơ nào, lâu lắm không nhớ rõ, cứ lanlan…

(Mãi mãi tuổi hai mươi, Nguyễn Văn Thạc)

Khuôn mặt dịu dàng ấy in the second sentence is non-definite,

causing ambiguity but its meaning depends on the preceding sentence,

refers back to “P” and cohesion is established.

c Comparative Reference

Comparative reference keeps track of identity and similarity throughindirect references It serves to compare items within a text with some

words such as: same, equal, identical(ly), similar, such, so, likewise,

similarly, more, fewer, etc

Example:

[1: 16] She is more beautiful girl than I am

Comparative reference is also used cataphorically Reference points

for more beautiful which lies in the following sentence.

The expressions such as same, equal, identically, similar, such, so,likewise, similarly, more, fewer, etc… are serves to compare items within atext

[1:17] Have another coffee?

[1:18] And such a shame that, back then, the Guiness Book of World

Records people weren’t around to document the third day when, without asingle rest, he whipped out another daily distance record by mid- afternoon

1.1.3.2 Substitution

According to Halliday and Hasan substitution is the placement of oneitem by another, creating the link between sentences

[1:19] The Lion was about to reply when suddenly they came to

another gulf across the road But this one was so broad and deep that the

Lion knew at once he could not leap across it

In the example one substitutes for gulf.

There are three types of substitutions in English: nominal, verbal andclausal

a Nominal substitution

[1:20] I had two fathers, a rich one and a poor one.

b Verbal substitution

[1:21] A: Did Mary take that letter?

B: She might have done.

(Discourse analysis)

c Clausal substitution

[1:22] A: Does Susan love Peter?

B: I think so.

In each example above, one, do, so replace respectively part of the

preceding text However, these words can only be interpreted in relation towhat has gone before

1.1.3.3 Ellipsis

Ellipsis is the omission of an item, that is, one of the identicallinguistic elements is omitted In fact, ellipsis is described as a form ofsubstitution in which the original item is replaced by zero The structurehas a “missing” element which, however, is supplied by the context

[1:23] The children will bring the small boxes, the adults the large

[1:25] The problem was, the rich man was not rich yet and the poor

man not yet poor Both (0) were just starting out on their careers, and both

were struggling with money and families

(Rich dad, poor dad, Robert T Kiyosaki)

Men here has been omitted However, the readers can catch the

meaning by refering back to the first sentence Then cohesion occurs

b Verbal ellipsis

[1:26] A: Will anyone be waiting?

B: Jim will (0), I should think.

c Clausal ellipsis

[1:27] A: Why’d you only set three places? Paul’s staying for adinner, isn’t he?

B: Is he? He didn’t tell me (0).

[1:28] A: Could I have a seat?

B: Yes.(0)

1.1.3.4 Conjunction

The last of these relationships, conjunction, as described by Bloor

and Bloor (1995: 98) acts as a “cohesive tie between clauses or sections of

text in such a way as to demonstrative a meaningful pattern between them”.

However, Halliday and Hasan (1976, p.227) indicate that conjunctiverelations are not tied to any particular sequence in the expression Itfunctions somewhat differently than the other relationships because it is notstrictly semantic or anaphoric rather, it is related to the entire environment

of sentences together There are several kinds of conjunction: single-wordconjunction, phrasal and clausal ones For example:

[1:29] There were no children there, and it was right time, but he

addressed all who might be dreaming of the Neverland and who weretherefore nearer to him than you think

and originates an additive conjunctive relation, creating cohesion in

the text

 Additive conjunctions act to structurally coordinate or link by

adding to the presupposed item and it is signaled through “and, also, too,

furthermore, additionally…

Additive conjunction may also act to negate the presupposed item and

is signaled by “nor, and … not, either, neither”

[1:30] From a marketing viewpoint, the popular tabloid encourages

the reader to read the whole page instead of choosing stories And isn’t that

what any publisher wants?

 Adversative conjunctions act to indicate “contrary to expectation”

(Halliday and Hasan, 1976, p 250) and are signaled by: yet, though, only,

but, in fact, rather, etc.

[1:31] I’m afraid I’ll be home late tonight However, I won’t have to

go in until late tomorrow

 Causal conjunctions express “result, reason and purpose” and are

signaled by “so, then, for, because, for this reason, as a result, in this

aspect.etc.

[1:32] Chinese tea is becoming increasingly popular in restaurants,

and even in coffee shops This is because of the growing belief that it has

several health- giving properties

 Temporal conjunctions exist when the events in a text are related interms of the timing of their occurrence, that is, a link by signaling sequence

in time Some temporal conjunctive signals are: then, next, after that, nextday, until then, at the same time, at this point,etc

[1:33] President Roosevelt reacted to Japan’s invasion of Indochina

by taking three major steps First, he took control of all Japanese money in

the United States Second, he brought the armed forces of the Philippines under American command And third, he closed the Panama Canal to

[1:34] In a little district west of Washington Square the streets

have run crazy and broken themselves into a small strips called “places” These “places” make strange angles and curves.

(The Last Leaf, O Henry)

However, the repetition of lexical items doesn’t need to be in the same

morphological shape For example “hunting” and “hunted” in the following

sentences:

[1:35] Britain’s green and pleasant meadows yesterday became

“killing field” with the start of the fox cub hunting season More than 6,000

young foxes enjoying the first flush of life will be hunted down in the next

three months to give experienced young hounds a blood lust

(from News on Sunday, 2 August 1987, p.10 )

buildings His pictures appeared to represent the true of his subjects He

also took many photographs of cultural objects called folk art.”

(English Pronunciation Made Simple)

Started is synonymous with begun, pictures with photographs,

creating cohesion in the text without any cohesive devices

However, when we speak of synonym, then, we mean varying degrees

of “loose” synonymy, where we identify not only a significant overlap inmeaning between two words but also some contexts where they can notsubstitute for each other

c Collocation

Collocation pertains to lexical items that are likely to be foundtogether within the same text Collocation occurs when a pair of words isnot necessarily dependent upon the same semantic relationship but ratherthey tend to occur within the same lexical environment (Halliday andHasan, 1976, p 286) The closer lexical items are to each other betweensentences, the stronger the cohesive effect

1.2 Translation Theory

1.2.1 What is Translation?

Translation is described as an art and a science Professionally,however, the term translation is confined to the written (New Mark,1991:35) If confined to a written language, translation is a cover term withthree distinguishable meanings:1) translating, the process (to translate,activity rather than the tangible object); 2) a translation: the product of theprocess of translating (e.g: the translated text) and 3) translation: theabstract concept which encompasses both the process of translating and theproduct of that process.(Bell, 1991:13)

These definitions of translation suggested above simplify thatproducing the same meaning or message in the target language Text asintended by the original author is the main objective of a translator Thisnotion of sameness is often understood as an equivalence relation isgenerally considered the most salient feature of a quality translation

1.2.2 Translation Equivalence

In fact, translation is a branch of applied linguistics, for in theprocess of translation, the translator makes any attempt to compare andcontrast different aspects of two languages to find the equivalents New

Mark (1998) points out that “The over purpose of any translation should be

to achieve equivalent effect i.e, to produce the same effect (or one as close

as possible) on the readership of the original theory” Because the target

text can never be equivalent to the source text at all levels, researchers havedistinguished different types of equivalence

Nida (1964) suggests formal and dynamic or functional equivalence:

 Formal equivalence: focuses attention on the message itself, in

both form and content It requires that the message in the target language

should match as closely as possible the different elements in the sourcelanguage (1964: 159)

 Dynamic equivalence is based on the principle of equivalence

effect where the relationship between the receptor and message should besubstantially the same as that which existed between the original receptorsand message (p.159)

New Mark (1987) makes a distinction between communicative andsemantic translation Like Nida’s dynamic equivalence, communicativetranslation also tries to create the effect on the target text which is the same

as that received by readers of the source language text Koller (1997)proposes denotative, connotative, pragmatic, textual, formal and aestheticequivalence

Munday (2001) descrides these five different types of equivalence asfollows:

 Denotative equivalence is related to equivalence of the

extralinguistic content of a text

 Connotative equivalence is related to the lexical choices,

especially between near- synonyms

 Text- normative equivalence is related to the text types, with texts

behaving in different ways

 Pragmatic equivalence or “communicative equivalence” is

oriented towards the receiver of the text or message

 Formal equivalence is related to the form and aesthetics of the text,

includes word plays and the individual stylistic features of the source text(p.47)

An extremely interesting discussion of the notion of equivalence can

be found in Baker (1992), who seems to offer more detailed list of

conditions upon which the concept of equivalence can be defined Sheshows the notion of equivalence at different levels:

Equivalence can appear at word level and above word level when

translating from one language into another Baker points out thatequivalence at word level is the first element to be taken into consideration

by the translator This means that the translator should pay attention to anumber of factors when considering a single word, such as number, genderand tense

Grammatical equivalence: related to the diversity of grammatical

categories across languages Grammatical rules may vary across languagesand this may pose some problems in term of finding a directcorrespondence in the target language Of those devices in translationBaker focuses on number tense and aspects, voice, person and gender

Textual equivalence: related to the equivalence between a source

language text and a target language text in terms of information andcohesion It is up to the translator to decide whether or not to maintain thecohesive ties as well as the coherence of the source language text Thethree main factors guided are the target audience, the purpose of thetranslation and the text type

Pragmatic equivalence: related to implicatures and strategies of

avoidance during the translation process In order to get the source textmessage across, the translator needs to work out implied meanings intranslation

In conclusion, the concept of equivalence is still one of the mostproblematic and controversial ones in the field of translation theory In fact,when a message is transferred from source language to target language, thetranslator is also dealing with two different cultures at the same time It is

helpful to think that among patterns of equivalence, some are moreimportant than others, some are practical and can be applied to certain kind

of texts and others to other types

1.2.3 Translation Methods

Peter Newmark (1988) states that translation methods relate to thewhole text and that the central problem of translating has always beenwhether to translate literally or freely He proposes the form of flattened V-diagram as follows:

SL emphasis TL emphasis

Word for word translation Adaption Literal translation Free translation Faithful translation Free translation

Semantic translation Communicative translation (Newmark, 1988)

Word-for-word translation: The source language word order is

preserved and the words translated by their most common meanings.Cultural words are translated literally The main use of this method is either

to understand the mechanics of the source language or to construe adifficult text as pre- translation process

Literal translation: The source language grammatical constructions

are converted to their nearest target language equivalents but the lexicalitems are again translated out of context As pre-translation process, itindicates problems to be solved

Faithful translation: It attempts to reproduce the precise contextual

meaning of the original within the constraints of the source languagegrammatical structures It transfers cultural words and preserves the degree

of grammatical and lexical deviation from source norms It attempts to becompletely faithful to the intentions and the text-realization of the sourcelanguage writer.

Semantic translation: It differs from faithful translation only as far as

it must take more account of the aesthetic value of the source text,comprossing on meaning where appropriate so that no assonance, wordplay or repetition jars in the finished version It does not rely on culturalequivalence and makes very small concessions to the readership Whilefaithful translation is dogmantic, semantic translation is more flexible

Adaption translation: This is the freest form of translation mainly

used for plays and poetry: themes, characters, plots preserved, sourcelanguage culture converted to target language culture and text is rewritten

Free translation: It reproduces the matter without the manner, or the

context without the form of the original Usually it is a paraphrase muchlonger than the original

Idiomatic translation: It reproduces to the message of the original but

tends to distort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms

Communicative translation: It attempts to render the exact

contextual meaning of the original in such away that both language andcontent are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the reader

Newmark (1991:10-12) writes of a continuum existing between

“semantic” and “communicative” translation Any translation can be “more

or less semantic – more, or less, communicative-even a particular section orsentence can be treated more communicatively or less semantically”

1.2.4 Translation of Literature

Translation of literature requires that the translator duplicates the

original, finds the most appreciated expression of the writer’s thoughtexpression and reproduces fully and correctly the original in a literarylanguage Literary point and linguistic point of view are two main points toany translators before taking any translation.

Firstly, the translators should have literary point of view It means thattranslators should have a macroscopic point of view-the whole view Theymust translate as vivid as it in the original in terms of form and content.Secondly, translators must have a microscopic point of view Theysatisfy the demand of the original text by choosing how to translatesentences, paragraphs suitably during the process of translating

1.3 O Henry and The Gift of the Magi

O Henry was born William Sydney Porter in Greensboro, NorthCarolina His father, Algemon Sidney Porter, was a physician WhenWilliam was three, his mother died, and he was raised by his parentalgrandmother and paternal aunt William was an avid reader, but the age offifteen he left school and then worked in a drug store and on Texas ranch

He continued to Houston, where he had a number of jobs, including that ofbank clerk After moving in 1882 to Texas, he worked on a ranch inLaSalle County for two years In 1887 he married Athol Estes Roach; theyhad one daughter and one son

"It was beautiful and simple as all truly great swindles are." (from

The Octopus Marooned)

In 1894, Porter started a humorous weekly The Rolling Stone It was at

this time that he began heavy drinking When the weekly failed, he joined

the Houston Post as a reporter and columnist In 1894, cash was found to

have gone missing from the First National Bank in Austin, where Porterhad worked as a bank teller After hearing news that his wife was dying, he

returned in 1897 to Austin In 1897, he was convicted of embezzlingmoney, although there has been much debate over his actual guilt Porterwas sentenced in prison in 1898 at Columbus, Ohio

While in prison, Porter started to write short stories to earn money to

support his daughter Margaret His first work, Whistling Dick's Christmas

Stocking (1899), appeared in McClure's Magazine The stories of adventure

in the U.S Southwest and in Central America gained an immediatelysuccess among readers After doing three years of the five year sentence,Porter emerged from the prison in 1901 and changed his name to O Henry

O Henry moved to New York City in 1902, and from December 1903

to January 1906 he wrote a story a week for the New York World, also publishing in other magazines Henry's first collection, Cabbages and

Kings, appeared in 1904 The second, The Four Million, was published two

years later and included his well-known stories The Gift of the Magi and

The Furnished Room

During his life time, O Henry published ten collections and over sixhundred short stories His last years were shadowed by alcoholism, illhealth, and financial problems He was a fast writer, like the Russian AntonCheckhov (1860-1904) In 1907, O Henry married Sara Lindsay Coleman,also born in Greensboro The marriage was not happy, and they separated ayear later O Henry died of cirrhosis of the liver on June 5, 1910, in NewYork

In 1918, the O Henry Memorial Awards were established to be givenannually to the best magazine stories, with the winners and leadingcontenders to be published in an annual volume

To Vietnamese readers, The Gift of The Magi which was translated by

many translators has become so familiar However, the author chooses the

translation versions by Dac Le and by Ngo Vinh Vien to investigate withthe aim of finding out the similarity and the difference between the twotranslation versions The two translators have cleared the barrier oflanguage, helped Vietnamese readers know more about the lives ofAmerican, specially the poor

Chapter 2 Identification of COHESIVE markers

in the original text

Identifying textual markers in the original text helps us have a detailedlook at cohesion in the literatural works Let’s see how the cohesive

devices create the textuality in The Gift of The Magi

2.1 Reference

We have found that O Henry used reference as a cohesive devices

most frequently in The Gift of the Magi, 374 times accounting for 71% of

the total cohesive device items The three sub-types of reference, that createtextuality in the original with the number of appearance time is 232, 125and 17 in respective with personal, demonstrative and comparative Indetail, personal reference constitutes 44.1 %, demonstrative referenceconstitutes 23.7 % and comparative is 3.2 % These are shown in the tablebelow:

Reference Personal Demonstrative Comparative

374 times

(71%)

232 times(44.1%)

125 times(23.7%)

17 times(3.2%)

Table 1: The occurrence of reference in the original text

2.1.1 Personal Reference

Most of personal reference in English is anaphora They make up ahigh percentage in the total of cohesive markers Anaphoric appears with ahigh density, even in individual sentences Examples:

[2: 1] Della finished her cry and attended to her cheeks with the powder rag She stood by the window and look dully at a gray cat walking

a gray fence in a gray backyard Tomorrow would be Christmas Day, and

she has only $ 1.87 with which to buy Jim a present She had been saving

every penny she could for months, with this result Twenty- dollars a week doesn’t go far Expense had been greater than she had calculated Her Jim Many a happy hour she had spent planning for something nice for him [2:2] Suddenly she whirled from the window and stood before the glass Her eyes were shining brilliantly, but her face had lost its color within twenty seconds Rapidly, she pulled down her hair and let it full

length

It is obvious that O Henry employed a lot of pronouns in his shortstories This is easily understood thanks to a reasonable explanation ofBaker (1992) that English generally tends to rely heavily on pronominalreference In fact, most of anaphoric reference is the third person pronouns.They often refer back to a proper name or a noun phrase, etc.

[2:3] Had King Solomon been the janitor, with all his treasures piled up the basement, Jim would have pulled out his watch every time he passed, just to see him pluck at his beard from envy

In the [2:3] example, his and he refer back to proper names King

Solomon and Jim However, the employment of a series of third person

pronouns are used cataphorically:

[2:4] She had found it at last It suddenly had been made for Jim and no one else There was no other like it in any of the stores, and she had turned all of them inside out It was a platinum fob chain simple and chaste

in design

It appears many times in the example above to refer forward a platinum fob chain Only when reading the last sentence of the example,

we have already understood what it refers to Obviously, reference creates

the link between sentences or even in the paragraphs, contributing tomaking the cohesion

2.1.2 Demonstrative Reference

Demonstrative reference occurs in The Gift of the Magi 125 times,

accounting for 23.7%, standing secondly after personal reference Definitearticle “the” constitutes a large number with 106 times Let’s have a look atsome examples:

[2:5] Jim was never late Della doubles the fob chain in her hand and sat on the corner of the table near the door that he always enters Then she