Scarica Understanding Word Equivalence and Translation Strategies for Non-Equivalence e più Appunti in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
IN OTHER WORDS
2 Equivalence at word level Between two or more languages there is a lack of equivalence at word level: there is often no word in the target language which expresses the same meaning as the source language word. But before we look at specific types of non-equivalence and the various strategies which can be used for dealing with them, it is important to establish what a word is, whether or not it is the main unit of meaning in language, what kinds of meaning it can convey, and how languages differ in the way they choose to express certain meanings but not others 2.1.1 What is a word The word is the smallest unit of language that can be used by itself. We can define the written word as any sequence of letters with an orthographic space on either side. Many of us think of the word as the basic meaningful element in a language: this is not strictly accurate. Meaning can be carried by units smaller than the words. If you consider a word such as “rebuild”, you will note that there are two distinct elements of meaning in it: “re” and “build” (to build again) 2.1.2 Is there a one-to-one relationship between word and meaning? Elements of meaning which are represented by several orthographic words in one language may be represented by one orthographic word in another, and vice versa. This suggest that there is no one-to-one correspondence between orthographic words and elements of meaning within or across languages. 2.1.3 Introducing morphemes In order to isolate elements of meaning in words and deal with them more effectively, some linguists have suggested the term morpheme to describe the minimal formal element of meaning in language , which may or may not contain several elements of meaning. An important difference between morphemes and words is that a morpheme cannot contain more than one element of meaning and cannot be further analysed. Some morphemes have grammatical functions such as
- marking plurality (funds)
- gender (manageress)
- tense (considered)
- Other change the class of the word (like - > likeable) or add a specific element of meaning such as negation to it (unhappy). An orthographic word may therefore contain more than one formal element of meaning, but the boundaries of such elements are not always clearly marked on the surface. 2.2 Lexical meaning The lexical meaning or lexical unity is the most outstanding individual property of the word. The lexical meaning of a word or lexical unit may be thought of as the specific value it has in a particular linguistic system and the “personality” it acquires through usage within that system. We can distinguish four main types of meaning in words and utterances: **1. propositional meaning
- expressive meaning,
- presupposed meaning**
- evoked meaning. 2.2.1 Propositional vs expressive meaning The propositional meaning of a word or an utterance arises from the relation between it and what it refers to or describes in a real or imaginary world, as conceived by the speakers of the particular language to which the word or utterance belongs. This type of meaning provides the basis on which we can judge if an utterance is true or false. When a translations described as “inaccurate”, it is often the propositional meaning that is being called into question. For instance, the propositional meaning of “shirt” is “a piece of clothing worn on the upper part of the body”. Expressive meaning relates to the speaker’s feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. Two or more words or utterances can therefore have the same propositional meaning but differ in their expressive meanings. This is true not only of words and utterances within the same language, but also for words and utterances from different languages. The difference between “famous” in English and “fameux” in French lies in their expressive meanings: both items basically mean “well-known”, but “famous” is neutral in English: it has no inherent evaluative meaning or connotation. “Fameux”, on the other hand, is potentially evaluative and can be readily used in some contexts in a derogatory way (for example, “une femme fameuse” means, roughly, “a woman of ill repute”). Words which contribute solely to expressive meaning can be removed from an utterance without affecting its information content.
2.2.2 Presupposed meaning Presupposed meaning arises from co-occurrence restrictions (restrictions on what order words or expressions we expect to see before or after a particular lexical unity) these restrictions are of two types:
- Selectional restrictions : these are a function of the propositional meaning of a word. We expect a human subject for the adjective “studious” and an inanimate one for “geometrical”. Selectional restrictions are deliberately violated in the case of figurative language.
- Collocational restrictions : these are semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically from the propositional meaning of a word. For instance, laws are “broken” in English, but in Arabic they are “contradicted”. In English, teeth are brushed, but in German and Italian they are “polished”, in Polish they are “washed”, and in Russian they are “cleaned”. The difference between selectional and collocational restrictions is not always as clear cut as the examples given about might imply 2.2.3 Evoked meaning Evoked meaning arises form dialect and register variation. A dialect is a variety of language which has currency within a specific community or group of speakers. It may be classified on one of the following bases:
- Geographical (es. Scottish dialect, British English ecc.)
- Temporal
- Social Register is a variety of language that a language user considers appropriate to a specific situation. Register variation arises from variations in the following:
- Field of discourse : this is an abstract term for “what is going on” that is relevant to the speaker’s choices, that are made by different speakers depending on what kind of action other than the immediate action of speaking the see themselves as participating in it. For example, linguistic choices will vary according to whether the speaker is taking part in a football match or discussing football
- Tenor of discourse : an abstract term for the relationships between the people taking part in the discourse/ an abstract term for the relationship between the people taking part in the discourse. Again, the language people use varies depending on such interpersonal relationships as mother-child, doctor-patient….
- Mode of discourse : an abstract term for the role that the language is playing (speech, essay, lecture, instructions) and for its medium of transmission. Of all the types of lexical meaning explained above, the only one which relates to the truth or falsehood of an utterance and which can consequently be challenged by a reader or hearer s propositional meaning. 2.3 The problem of non-equivalence Based on the above discussion, we can now begin to outline some of the more common types of non-equivalences which often pose difficulties for the translator and some attested strategies for dealing with them. First, a word of warning. The choice of a suitable equivalent in a given context depends on a wide variety of factors. Some of these factors may be strictly linguistic, while other factors may be extra-linguistic: the choice of a suitable equivalent will always depend not only on the linguistic system or systems being handled by the translator, but also on the way both the writer of the source text and the producer (the translator) of the target text choose to manipulate the linguistic systems in question. 2.3.1 Semantic fields and lexical sets – the segmentation of experience The words of a language often reflect not so much the reality of the world, but the interest of the people who speak it. It is sometimes useful to view the vocabulary of a language as a set of words referring to a series of conceptual fields. These fields reflect the divisions and sub divisions “imposed” by a given linguistic community on the continuum of experience. In linguistics, the divisions are called semantic fields. Fields are abstract concepts. An example of a semantic field would be the field of “speech”, or “plants”, or “vehicles”. Most, if not all, languages will have fields of “distance”, “size”, “shape”, “time”, “emotion”, “beliefs”, “academic subjects”, and “natural phenomena”. The actual words and expressions under each field are sometimes called lexical sets. Each semantic field will normally have several sub-divisions or lexical sets under it, and each sub-division will have further sub-divisions and lexical sets. So, the field of “speech” in English has a sub-division of “verbs of speech” which includes general verbs such as speak and say and more specific ones such as “mumble”, “murmur”, “mutter”, “whisper”. It seems reasonable to suggest that the more detailed a semantic field is in a given language, the more different it is likely to be from related fields in other languages. The idea of semantic fields works well enough for words and expressions which have fairly well- defined propositional meanings, but not for all (jest, nevertheless..) Limitations aside, there are two main areas in which an understanding of semantic fields and lexical sets can be useful to a translator:
2.3.2.2 Strategies used by professional translators We can now look at examples of strategies used by professional translators for dealing with various types of non-equivalence. a) Translation by a more general word : this is one of the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non- equivalence, particularly in the area of propositional meaning. It works equally in most languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic fields is not language-specific. A general word is used to overcome a relative lack of specificity in the target language compared to the source language b) Translation by a more neutral/less expressive word: when there is a possibility to avoid conveying the wrong expressive meaning, the translator opt for a more general word c) Translation by cultural substitution : this strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a target- language item which does not have the same propositional meaning but is likely to have a similar impact on the target reader. The main advantage of using this strategy is that it gives the reader a concept with which s/he can identify. On an individual level, the translator’s decision to use this strategy will largely depend on (a) how much licence is given to him/her by those who commission the translation and (b) the purpose of the translation. On a more general level, the decision will also reflect the norms of translation prevailing in a given community d) Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation: this strategy is particularly common in dealing with culture- specific items, modern concepts, and buzz words. Following the loan word with an explanation is very useful when the word in question is repeated several times in the text. Once explained, the loan word can then be used on its own e) Translation by paraphrase using a related word: this strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source item is lexicalized in the target language but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the target language f) Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words: if the concept expressed by the source item is not lexicalized at all in the target language, the paraphrase strategy can still be used in some contexts. Instead of a related word, the paraphrase may be based on modifying a superordinate or simply on unpacking the meaning of the source item g) Translation by omission: this strategy may sound rather drastic, but in fact it does no harm to omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. If the meaning conveyed by a particular item or expression is not vital enough to the development of the text to justify distracting the reader with lengthy explanations, translators can and often do simply omit translating the word or expression in question h) Translation by illustration: this is a useful option if the word which lacks an equivalent in the target language refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly if there are restrictions on space and if the text has to remain short, concise, and to the point. 3 EQUIVALENCE ABOVE WORD LEVEL What happens when words start combining with other words to form stretches of language? Words are not strung together at random in any language; there are always restrictions on the way they can be combined to convey meaning. Restrictions which admit no exceptions, and particularly those which apply to classes of words rather than individual words, are usually written down in the form of rules. One of the rules of English, for example, is that a determiner cannot come after the noun Some restrictions are more likely to admit exceptions and apply to individual words rather than classes of words. These cannot be expressed in terms of rules, but they can nevertheless be identified as recurrent patterns in the language. Lexical patterning will be dealt with under two main headings: collocation and idiom ands and fixed expressions 3.1 Collocation When we discussed lexical meaning, we made a brief reference to collocation under presupposed meaning and defined it tentatively as “ semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically from the propositional meaning of a word ”. Another way of looking at collocation would be to think of it in terms of the tendency of certain words to co-occur regularly in a given language. At one level, the tendency of certain words to co-occur has to do with their propositional meanings. (for example “cheque” is more likely to occur with bank, pay, money, rather than moon). However, meaning cannot always account for collocational patterning. If it did, we might expect carry out, undertake, or even perform to collocate with visit. Moreover, word which we might think of as synonymous or near-synonyms will often have quite different sets of collocate. English speakers typically “break rules” but they do not break regulations; they typically talk of wasting tie but not of squandering time When two words collocate, the relationship can hold between all or several of their various forms, combined in any grammatically acceptable order. It would seem, then, that the patterns of collocation are largely arbitrary and independent of meaning. This is so both within and across languages.
Differences in collocational patterning among language are not just a question of using, say, a different verb with a given noun: they can involve totally different ways of portraying an event. Pattern of collocation reflect the preferences of specific language communities for certain modes of expressions and certain linguistic configurations. Some collocations are in fact a direct reflection of the material, social, or moral environment in which they occur. BUY A HOUSE is a frequent collocation in English, but in German it is very rare because the practice of house-buying is very different in the two cultures. LAW AND ORDER is a common collocation in English, that reflects the high respect accorded by English speakers place on order (but arabs to the concept of tradition) 3.1.1 Collocational range and collocational markedness Every word in a language can be said to have a range of items with which it is compatible, to a greater or lesser degree. Range here refers, to the set of collocates, that is other words, which are typically associated with the word in question. Two main factors can influence the collocational range of an item. The first of its level of specificity : the more general a word is, the broader its collocational range. The second factor which determines the collocational range of an item is the number of senses it has. Most words have several senses and they tend to attract a different set of collocates for each sense (ex. Run). New and unusual combinations of words occur frequently, and we do not necessarily dismiss them as unacceptable. The reason for this is that collocational ranges are not fixed. Word attract new collocates all the time The difference between compulsive gambler and heavy gambler is that the first is a common collocation in English, whereas the second represents an attempt to extend the range of heavy to include heavy gambler, heavy smoker, and heavy drinker. This kind of natural extension of a range is far less striking than marked collocations which involve deliberate confusion of collocational ranges to create new images, a marked collocation being an unusual combination of words, one that challenges our expectations as hearers or readers A marked collocation being an unusual combination of words, one that challenges our expectations as hearers or readers. Marked collocations are often used in fiction, poetry, humour, and advertisements precisely for this reason: because they can create unusual images, produce laughter and catch the reader’s attention. To sum up, we create new collocations all the time, either by extending an existing range or by deliberately putting together words from different or opposing ranges. The established patterns in a language can therefore be used as a backdrop against which new images and new meanings can be invoked. 3.1.2 Collocation and register Collocational patterns are not always typical/untypical in relation to the language system as a whole. You may have noted that all the examples used so far have been of common, everyday collocations which are more or less familiar to all of us, regardless of our occupations, special interests or hobbies. Some collocations may seem untypical in everyday language but are common in specific registers. Register specific collocations are not simply the set of terms that go with a discipline. They extend far beyond the list of terms that one normally finds in specialized dictionaries and glossaries. It is not enough to know that “data” in computer language forms part of compound terms such as “data processing” and “data bank” and to become familiar with the dictionary equivalents of such terms in the target language. 3.1.3 Collocational meaning What we do when we are asked to give an account of the meaning of a word in isolation is to contextualize it in its most typical collocations than its rare ones. For example, the expressions dry wine, dry voice, dry country has unique meanings. This suggests that what a word means often depends on its association with certain collocates. When the translation of a stretch of language is criticized as being inaccurate or inappropriate in a given context, the criticism may refer to the translator’s inability to recognize a collocational pattern with a unique meaning different from the sum of the meanings of its individual elements. A translator who renders “dry voice” for instance as “a voice which is not moist” would be mistranslating dry in this context, having failed to recognize that when it collocates with voice it means cold, in the sense of not expressing emotion Likewise, a translator who renders RUN A CAR as “drive a car fast” would be mistranslating run in this context, that in English means “to own, use and be able to maintain financially”
As far as idioms are concerned, the first difficulty that a translator comes across is being able to recognize that s/he is dealing with an idiomatic expression. There are various types of idioms, some more easily recognizable than others. Those which are easily recognizable include expressions which violate truth conditions. They also include expressions which seem ill-formed because they do not follow the grammatical rules of the language. Expressions which start with “like” also tend to suggest that they should not be interpreted literally. These include idioms such as “like a bat out of hell” and “like water off a duck’s back”. Generally speaking, the more difficult an expression is to understand and the less sense it makes in a given context, the more likely a translator will recognize it as an idiom. There are two cases in which an idiom can be easily misinterpreted if one is not already familiar with it: a) Some idioms are “misleading”: they seem transparent because they offer a reasonable literal interpretation and their idiomatic meanings are not necessarily signalled in the surrounding text b) An idiom in the source language may have a very close counterpart in the target language which looks similar on the surface but has a totally or partially different meaning. A translator must also consider the collocational environment which surrounds any expression whose meaning is not readily accessible. Idiomatic and fixed expressions have individual collocational patterns. They form collocations with other items in the text as single units and enter into lexical sets which are different form those of their individual words. 3.2.3 The translation of idioms: difficulties The main difficulties involved in translating idioms and fixed expressions may be summarized as follows: a) An idiom or fixed expression may have no equivalent in the target language. The way a language chooses to express, or not express, various meanings cannot be predicted and only occasionally matches the way another language chooses to express the same meanings. Idioms and fixed expressions which contain culture-specific items are not necessarily untranslatable b) An idiom or fixed expression may have a similar counterpart in the target language, but its context of use may be different; the two expressions may have different connotations, or they may not be pragmatically transferable c) An idiom may be used in the source text in both its literal and idiomatic senses at the same time. Unless the target-language idiom corresponds to the source-language idiom both in form and in meaning, the play on idiom cannot be successfully reproduced in the target text. d) The very convention of using idioms in written discourse, the contexts in which they can be used, and their frequency of use may be different in the source and target languages. 3.2. 4 The translation of idioms: strategies The way in which an idiom or a fixed expression can be translated into another language depends on many factors. 3.2.4.1 Using an idiom of similar meaning and form This strategy involves using an idiom in the target language which conveys roughly the same meaning as that of the source-language idiom and consist of equivalent lexical items. 3.2.4.2 Using an idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar form It is often possible to find an idiom or fixed expression in the target language which has a meaning similar to that of the source idiom or expression, but which consists of different lexical items. 3.2.4.3 Translation by paraphrase This is by far the most common way of translating idioms when a match cannot be found in the target language or when it seems inappropriate to use idiomatic language in the target text because of differences in stylistic preferences of the source and target languages. 3.2.4.4 Translation by omission As with single words, an idiom may sometimes be omitted altogether in the target text. This may be because it has no close math in the target language, its meaning cannot be easily paraphrased or for stylistic reasons. 3.2.4.5 Translation by compensation Strategy of compensation means that one may either omit or play down a feature such as idiomaticity at the point where it occurs in the source text and introduce it elsewhere in the target text. This strategy is not restricted to idiomaticity or fixed expressions and may be used to make up for any loss of meaning, emotional force, or stylistic effect which may not be possible reproduce directly at a given point in the target text.
4 GRAMMATICAL EQUIVALENCE
Lexical resources are not the only factor which influences the way in which we analyse and report experience. Another powerful factor which determines the kind of distinctions we regularly make in reporting experience is the grammatical system of our language Grammar is the set of rules which determine the way in which units such as words and phrases can be combined in a language and the kind of information which has to be made regularly explicit in utterance. A language can express any kind of information its speakers need to express, but the grammatical system of a given language will determine the ease with which certain notions such as time reference or gender can be made explicit 4.1 Grammatical vs lexical categories Grammar is organized along two main dimensions: morphology and syntax. Morphology covers the structure of words; the morphological structure of a language determines the basic information which must be expressed in that language. Syntax covers the grammatical structure of groups, clauses, and sentences : the lexical sequences of class of words such as noun, verb, adverb, adjective, and functional elements suche as subject, predicator and object, which are allowed in a given language. Choices made from closed systems, such as number system (singular/plural), or the pronoun system in English are grammatical. Those made from open-ended sets of items or expressions are lexical. Grammatically choices are normally expressed morphologically, as in the case of singular/plural The most important difference between grammatical and lexical choices is that grammatical choices are largely obligatory while lexical choices are largely optional. 4.2 The diversity of grammatical categories across languages Languages therefore differ widely in the way they are equipped to handle various notions and express various aspects of experience, possibly because they differ in the degree of importance or relevance that they attach to such aspects of experience. Time is regarded as a crucial aspect of experience in English, so this is virtually impossible to discuss any event in English without locating in the past, present or future. Differences in the grammatical structures of the source and target languages often result in some change in the information cintent of the message during the process of transation. This change may take the form of adding to the target text information which is not expressed in the source text. This can happen when the target language has a grammatical category which the source language lacks. The change in the information content of the message may be in the form of omitting information specified in the source text itf the target language lack a grammatical category which exists in the source language, the information expressed by the category may have to be ignored. Jakobson suggests that no lack of grammatical device in the language translated into maked impossible a literal translation of the entire conceptual information contained in the original 4.2.1 Number Not all languages have a grammatical category of number, and those that do not necessarily view countability in the same terms. A translator working from a language which has number distinctions into a language with no category of number has two main options: s/he can (a) omit the relevant information on number, or (b) encode this information lexically. 4.2.2 Gender Gender is a grammatical distinction according to which a noun or pronoun is classified as either masculine or feminine in some languages. Gender distinctions are generally more relevant in translation when the referent of the noun or pronoun is human. Gender distinctions in inanimate objects such as “car” or “ship” and in animals such as “dog” and “cat” are sometimes manipulated in English to convey expressive meaning, particularly in literature, but they do not often cause difficulties in non-literary translation. 4.2.3 Person The category of person relates to the notion of participant roles. The most common distinction is that between first person, second person and third person. 4.2.4 Tense and aspect Tense and aspect are grammatical categories in a large number of languages. The form of the verb in languages which have these categories usually indicates two main types of information: time relations and aspectual differences. Time relations have to do with locating an event in time. The usual distinction is between past, present and future. Aspectual differences have to do with the temporal distribution of an event, for instance its completion or non-completion, continuation, or momentariness.
There are two main approaches to this analysis: ◊ the Hallidayan approach treats thematic structure and information structure as separate. ◊ The Prague School approach combine the two structures together. The two approaches can produce completely different analyses of the same clause. 5.1 A GENERAL OVERVIEW BASED ON THE HALLIDAYAN APPROACH TO INFORMATION FLOW 5.1.1 Thematic structure: theme and rheme According to the thematic structure, a clause consists of two segments, the theme and the rheme. This distinction is speaker-oriented , that is, it is based on what the speaker wants to announce as his or her starting point and what he or she goes on to say about it.
- The theme is what the clause is about. It has two functions: it acts as a point of orientation by connecting back to previous stretches of discourse and thereby maintaining a coherent point of view and it acts as a point of departure by connecting forward and contributing to the development of later stretches. Theme is placed on the first position in the clause.
- The rheme is what the speaker says about the theme. It is the goal of discourse. As such, it is the most important element in the structure of the clause as a message because it represents the very information that the speaker wants to convey to the hearer. It is the rheme that fulfils the communicative purpose of the utterance. It is placed after the theme. Every clause has the structure of a message: it says something (rheme) about something (theme). Thematic information is a feature of the context rather that of the language system.
(a) Thematic analysis can be represented hierarchically. Since sentences often consist of more than one clause, each clause
will have its own theme-rheme structure which may subordinate to a larger theme-rheme structure.
(b) Some elements do not quite fit into the analysis. The reason is that some elements are not part of the basic thematic
structure of the text because they are not part of the propositional meaning of the message. These include special linking devices such as however , nevertheless , because , called conjunctions and items that express the attitute of the speaker such as frankly , unfortunately , in my opinion , called disjuncts. In this sense, conjunctions and disjunct are inherently thematic. However, because conjunctions and disjuncts are not part of the propositional content of the message, they are not considered thematic in the same way as the main clause elements subject, predicator, object, complement and adjunct.
(c) There tends to be a very high correlation between the theme-rheme distinction and the subject-predicate distinction in
the Hallidayan model. However, the theme-rheme distinction is text-based and its real value does not lie in explaining the structure of individual sentences, as the subject-predicate distinction does, but rather in shedding light on a number of important areas which control information flow. 5.1.1.1 Thematic structure: grammaticality and acceptability Unlike the subject-predicate distinction, the notions of theme and rheme can be used to account for the acceptability of a given sequence in a given context, that depends on how it fits into its surrounding textual environment. On the contrary, these notions have little to do with the grammaticality of a sequence, which is part of the abstract system of language. Besides grammaticality does not necessarily ensure acceptability or coherence. 5.1.1.2 Thematic structure: text organization and development The theme-rheme distinction can also be useful in explaining methods of organization and development in different types of text. In this area, a great deal of emphasis has traditionally been placed on theme rather than on rheme because theme represents the speaker’s or writer’s point of departure in each clause, which suggests that its organizational role is more important than that of rheme. The choice and ordering of themes plays an important part in organizing a text and in providing a point of orientation and a method of development for a given stretch of language. 5.1.1.3 Thematic structure: marked vs unmarked sequences A further area in which the notions of theme and rheme are useful relates to marked and unmarked structures. This aspect is important in translation because understanding it can help to heighten our awareness of meaningful choises made by speakers and writers in the course of communication. Thematic choice involves selecting a clause element as theme. The main clause elements are subject , predicator , object , complement and adjuncts. In the Hallidayan model, the choice of the theme is expressed by placing one of these elements in the initial position in the clause. The choice of the theme is always meaningful because it indicates the speaker’s or writer’s point of departure. But some choices are more meaningful than others, because they are more marked than others. The degree of markedness depends on two factors. The first factor is the frequency with which the element occurs in theme position, so that the less frequently an element occurs in theme position, the more marked it is and the more meaning it carries, the more often it occurs in that position, the less marked it is and the less significance it will have. For example, in Beautiful were her eyes , rather than Her eyes were beautiful , the complement is marked and suggests that the writer or speaker wanted to highlight this particular element as his or her point of departure. The second factor is the extent to which it is mobile within the clause, so that the more obligatory an element is, the less marked it will be and the weaker will be ist meaning, the less obligatory it is, the less marked it will be and the weaker will be its meaning. For
example, the fact that adjectives have to be placed in front of nouns means that their occurrence in this position has little or no significance because there are not other positions in which they can occur; on the contrary, putting a time or place adverbial at the biginning of the clause carries more meaning because there are other positions in which it can occur. It follows that placing a certain element in theme position does not necessarily constitute a marked thematic choice. Hallidayan linguists identify three main types of marked theme in English : fronted theme, predicated theme, and identifying theme. Fronted theme involves „the achievement of marked theme by moving into initial position an item which is otherwise unusual there“. The book received a great deal of publicity in China. Thematizing place and time adjuncts into the initial position are not highly marked because adverbials are fairly mobile elements in English. In China, the book received a great deal of publicity. The fronting of objects and complements is much more marked than the fronting of adjuncts in English because objects and complements are fairly restricted in position. (object) The fronting of a predicator is the most marked of all thematic choises in English. → They promised to publicize the book in China, and publicize it they did. Predicated theme involves the use of the it-structure (or cleft structure ) to place an element near the beginning of the clause. It was the book that received a great deal of publicity in China. It was a great deal of publicity that the book received in China. It was in China that the book received a great deal of publicity. The theme of an it - structure is not it but rather the element which occurs after the verb to be. The functions of predicated themes are: to imply that the item in theme position is in contrast with the other possible items (in this case, China contrasts with other places where the book did not receive a great deal of publicity) and to signal information structure which the hearer’s or reader’s attention is drawn. Identifying theme is similar to predicated theme. Instead of using an it-structure, it involves the use of the wh-structure (or pseudo- cleft structure ). What the book received in China was a great deal of publicity. Like predicated theme, also identifying theme is associated with implicit contrast. Infact, it tend to imply that the item in rheme position is choosen as the one worthy of the hearer’s or reader’s attention. 5.1.2 Information structure: given and new The information structure makes a difference between what is given and what is new in a message. This is a hearer-oriented distinction , based on what part of the message is known to the hearer and what part is new. A message is divided into two elements: one segment conveys information which the speaker regards as already known to the reader, while the second segment conveys the new information that the speaker wishes to convey to the hearer. The information structure is a feature of the context rather than of the language system. The normal, unmarked order is for the speaker to place the given element before the new one. The given-before-new principle influences other sequencing decisions, such as the tendency to place longer and heavier structures towards the end of the clause, as the endfocus and the end-weight principles do. 5.1.2.1 How are given and new signalled in discourse? According to Halliday and Hasan, information structure is a feature of spoken rather than written English because its domain is the tone group as a phonological unit. The new element is where the tonic accent or the peak of prominence (stress) falls and it carries the information focus. But the boundaries of given and new information are undecidable on phonological evidence alone and we have to look to the context to establish whether an element has already been introduced before or not. Moreover, many of the grammatic and syntactic devices used to signal information status are common to both spoken and written language : definiteness is associated with given information and indefiniteness with new information, given information tends to be subordinate to other information, some items are inherently given because of their meaning, and so on. Finally, punctuation can also be used to signal information structure in written language. 5.1.2.2 How is givenness determined?
- When and when not a certain item of information can be treated as given?
A great deal of publicity the book received in China. Well publicized the book was. (complement)
Example : I gave the book to him I gave him the book him would normally considered thematic in FSP theory. 5.2.2 Linear arrangement and marked structures in FSP It follows that two alternative formulations of the same message can have the same thematic analysis. It follows also that we cannot talk about “marked theme” in FSP theory, since the question of producing a marked theme by putting an element in initial position in the clause assumes that initial position is reserved for theme. FSP theorists do, however, acknowledge there are marked and unmarked structures in every language. They also attempt to explain the difference in terms of theme/rheme. The usual, unmarked order of message segments is that of theme followed by rheme. Sequences which deviate from this order follow a pathetic order which is marked and its function is to convey emotions. Example: Well-publicized the book was. Hallidayan ap.: theme + rheme sequence; fronting of an element to make it thematic; marked. Prague ap.: rheme-theme sequence; reversing the theme-rheme sequence; marked. 5.2.3 The tension between word order and communicative function: a problem in translation? According to FSP theorists, in languages with free word order there will be less tension between the requirements of syntax and those of communicative function, while in languages with fixed word order there will be greater instances of tension between syntax and communicative functions. Moreover, word-order patterns fulfil a number of functions in all languages and different languages give different priorities to each of these functions, depending on how fixed their system of word-order is. So translating between languages with different priorities and different types of syntactic restrictions involves a great deal of skewing of patterns of information flow. Can translators do anything to minimize this skewing? 5.2.4 Suggested strategies for minimizing linear dislocation A number of linguists have suggested a variety of strategies for resolving the tension between syntax and communicative functions in translation and language learning. The voice change involves changing the syntactic form of the verb to achieve a different sequence of elements. An example could be the substitution of active for passive and vice versa. The change of verb involves changing the verb altogether and replacing it with one that has a similar meaning but can be used in a different syntactic configuration. An example could be pairs of verbs that describe an event from different perspectives, as like / please. Nominalization involves replacing a verbal form with a nominal one, for example from describe to description. This can then be followed by a semantically “empty” verb such as give or take. Extraposition involves changing the position of the entire clause in the sentence by, for instance, embedding a simple clause in a complex sentence. Cleft and pseudo-cleft structures provide good examples (5.1.1.3 and 5.1.2.1 paragraphs)
6. TEXTUAL EQUIVALENCE:
COHESION.
Cohesion is the second feature of text organization. It is the network of lexical, grammatical, and other relations which provide links between various parts of a text. These relations organize a text by requiring the reader to interpret words and expressions by reference to other words and expressions in the surrounding sentences and paragraphs. Cohesion is a surface relation: it connects together the actual words and expressions that we can see or hear. The best known model of cohesion was outlined by Halliday and Hasan in Cohesion in English (1976). They identify five main cohesive devices in English : reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction and lexical cohesion. 6.1 Reference The term reference is traditionally used in semantics for the relationship which holds between a word and what indicates in the real world. In Halliday and Hasan’s model of cohesion, reference is used in a similar but more restricted way: instead of denoting a direct relationship between words and extralinguistic objects, reference is limited here to the relationship of identity which holds between two linguistic expressions. For example, in Mrs Thatcher has resigned. She announced her decision this morning the pronoun she points to Mrs Thatcher within the textual world itself. Every language has certain items which have the property of reference in the textual sense. These reference items have the potential for directing the reader to look elsewhere for their interpretation. The most common reference in English are pronouns or items such as the , this and those. One of the most common patterns of establishing chains of reference in English is to mention a participant explicitly in the first instance, for example by name or title, and then use a pronoun to refer back to the same participant. This is the case of third-person pronouns. First- and second-person pronouns instead (I, you, we) do not refer back to a previous expression in the text, but to the speaker, hearer, writer or reader. Anyway, even third-person pronouns may be used to refer to an entity which is present in the immediate physical context of situation ( Put it next to her! ). Another type of reference relation which is not strictly textual is that co-reference. An example of a chain of co-referential items is Mrs Thatcher – The Prime Minister – The Iron Lady – Maggie. It is not a linguistic feature but a matter of real-world knowledge. However it is difficult and not helpful to attempt to draw a line between what is linguistic or textual and what is extra-linguistic or situational. It may be useful to suggest, following Halliday and Hasan, that there is a continuum of cohesive elements that may be used for referring back to an entity already mentioned in the discourse. There’s boy climbing that tree. The boy ’s going to fall if he doesn’t take care. ( repetition ) The lad ’s going to fall if he doesn’t take care. ( synonym ) The child ’s going to fall if he doesn’t take care. ( superordinate ) The idiot ’s going to fall if he doesn’t take care. ( general word ) He ’s going to fall if he doesn’t take care. ( pronominal reference ) 6.2 Substitution and ellipsis Unlike reference, substitution and ellipsis are grammatical rather than semantic relationships. In substitution , an item is replaced by another item such as do , one , the same. I like movies – And I do. Instead, ellipsis involves the omission of an item. In other words, in ellipsis, an item is replaced by nothing. This is a case of leaving something unsaid which is nevertheless understood. It does not include every instance in which the hearer or reader has to supply missing information, but only those cases where the grammatical structure itself points to an item that can fill the slot in question. Here are thirteen cards. Take any. Now give me any three. Ellipted items: card after any in second clause and cards after any three in third clause. 6.3 Conjunction Conjunction involves the use of formal markers to relate sentences, clauses and paragraphs to each other. Unlike reference, substitution and ellipsis, the use of conjunction does not instruct the reader to supply missing information either by looking for it elsewhere in the text or by filling structural slots. Instead, conjunction signals the way the writer wants the reader to relate what is about to be said to what has been said before. Conjunction expresses one of a small number of general relations. The main relations are:
- additive : and, or, also, in addition, furthermore, besides, similarly, likewise, by contrast, for instance, …
- adversative : but, yet, however, instead, on the other hand, nevertheless, at any rate, as a matter of fact, …
- causal : so, consequently, it follows, for, because, under the circumstances, for this reason, …
- temporal : then, next, after that, on another occasion, in conclusion, an hour later, finally, at last, …
- continuatives : now, of course, well, anyway, surely, after all, …
The same conjunction may be used to signal different relations, depending on the context. Moreover, these relations can be expressed by a variety of means; the use of conjunctions is not the only way to express a temporal or causal relation (verbs such as follow or precede to express a temporal relation, verbs such as cause or lead to to express a causal relation).
same society, have different experiences of the world and so different views on the way events and situations are related to each other. The coherence of a text is the result of the interaction between knowledge presented in the text and the reader’s own knowledge and experience of the world, he latter being influenced by many factors such as age, sex, race, nationality, education, occupation, and political and religious affiliations. 7.2 Coherence and processes of interpretation: implicature Charolles distinguishes supplemental coherence and explanatory coherence. The former never leads to the explication of a thematic continuity, while the latter justifies this continuity. One of the most important notions which have emerged in text studies is that of implicature , that is, the question of how we come to understand more than is actually said. Grice uses this term to refer to what the speaker means or implies, rather than what he/she literally says. He suggests that a speaker can signal an implied meaning conventionally, through the textual resources which are conventionally understood (such as conjunctions), or non-conventionally, by a general principle of communication, the Co-operative Principle , and its four maxims. This principle occurs by three important features of discourse , that is, it is connected; it has a purpose; it is a co-operative effort. The four maxims which are associated whit the Co-operative Principle are: Quantity DON’T SAY TOO MUCH, DON’T SAY TOO LITTLE
(a) Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange).
(b) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
Quality BE TRUTHFUL Try to make your contribution one that is true.
(a) Do not say what you believe to be false.
(b) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.
Relevance STAY ON TOPIC; DON’T DIGRESS; BE RELEVANT Make your contributions relevant to the current exchange. Manner MAKE SURE WHAT YOU SAY IS CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS Be perspicuous, specifically:
(a) Avoid obscurity of expression.
(b) Avoid ambiguity.
(c) Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
(d) Be orderly.
Conversational maxims and the implicatures that result from observing or flouting them are adapted to serve the purpose of the communication in hand , that will vary according to the situation and participants: it may be conveying information, influencing the opinions or emotions of hearers, directing their actions, and so on. Implicatures are pragmatic inferences. They are aspects of meaning which are over and above the literal and conventional meaning of an utterance and they depend for their interpretation on a recognition of the Cooperative Principle and its maxims. When a language user observes the maxims, he produces a standard implicature. Example: Do you know what time it is? = I do not know the time and I wish to know it. When a language user flouts one or more maxims, he produces a conversational implicature. Example: Do you know what time it is? = You are very late. We do not abandon contributions such as those as irrelevant, but they do not directly explain how we arrive at a particular inference or, in Grice’s terms, a conversational implicature. This is a difficult topic which remains largely unresolved , because conversational implicatures are often indeterminate and because an utterance may be open to several possible interpretations. 7.3 Coherence, implicature and translation strategies Grice details a number of factors which relate not only to working out implicatures but also to the question of coherence in general and to common problems and strategies in translation.
1. The conventional meanings of words and structures. If we do not understand the meanings of the words and structures
used in a text, we cannot work out its implied meanings. Knowledge of the language system may not be sufficient but it is essential to understand what is going on in any kind of verbal communication.
2. The identity of any references that may be involved. The ability to identify references to participants and entities is
essential for drawing inferences and for maintaining the coherence of a text.
3. The Co-operative principle and its maxims. Grice suggests that the Co-operative Principle and its maxims are not arbitrary
but are a feature of any rational behaviour, be it linguistic or non-linguistic. Besides, he suggests that they are universal. However, not all linguists would accept it because, for instance, different cultures have different norms of polite behaviour. Moreover, sex, religion and defecation are taboo subjects in many societies. So a translator may decide to omit or replace whole stretches of text which violate the reader’s expectations. In fact, the suggestion that Grice’s maxims are universal is
difficult to justify. A more plausible suggestion would be that all discourse, in any language, is essentially co-operative, and that the phenomenon of implicature is universal, rather than the specific maxims. The interpretation of specific maxims may differ from one community to another.
4. The context, linguistic or otherwise, of the utterance. The context in which an utterance occurs determines the range of
implicatures that may sensibly be derived from it. Apart from the actual setting and the participants involved in an exchange, the context also includes the co-text and the linguistic conventions of a community in general.
5. Other items of background knowledge. In order to make sense of any piece of information presented in a text, the reader
or hearer has to be able to integrate it with other information he already has. In fact, a text may confirm, contradict, modify, or extend what we know about the world.
6. The availability of all relevant items falling under the previous headings. In order to convey an intended meaning, the
speaker or writer must be able to assume that the hearer or reader has access to all the necessary background information, that is the items just described (1-5), and that it is well within his competence to work out any intended implicatures.
