Scarica Translation Studies, Jeremy Munday e più Sintesi del corso in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
Jeremy Munday – Translation Studies
Chapter 1 The English term translation derives either from the Old French translation or more directly from the Latin traslatio (meaning transporting). In the field of languages, translation has several meanings: a) The general subject field or phenomenon b) The product – that is, the text that has been translated c) The process of producing the translation, otherwise known as translating The process of translation between two different written languages involves the changing of an original written text (the source text or ST ) in the original verbal language (the source language or SL ) into a written text (the target text or TT ) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL ). Jakobson made a distinction between different types of translation: a) Intralingual translation or ‘rewording’, the production of a summary or rewriting a text in the same language but also subtitles in the same language b) Interlingual translation or ‘translation proper’, from the ST to TT c) Intersemiotic translation or ‘transmutation’, from a verbal system to another one: from poetry to musical, or the movie version of a book Translation has always been part of human communication, used in particular to transmit religious texts. Only during the second half of 20 th century has become an academic field. It had often been relegated to an element of language learning (known as grammar- translation ) until 1960s/1970s when it was replaced by: a) Communicative approach and direct method , which stressed students’ natural capacity to learn language and attempts to replicate authentic language-learning conditions in the classroom. Translation became to be restricted to university and
academic fields, but during last years translation has been restored also in language teaching environments; b) The USA promoted the translation workshop , which was intended as a platform for the introduction of new translations into the target culture, discussions of principles of translation and of understanding of the texts; c) Comparative literature , in which literature is studied and compared transnationally and transculturally; d) Contrastive linguistics , which is based on the study of two languages in contrast and on identifying general and specific differences between them. The application of linguistic-based models has demonstrated the link between translation with grammar, linguistics and pragmatics. Holmes in The Name and Nature of Translation Studies puts forward an overall framework describing what translation studies cover, dividing them in pure and applied. The objectives of the pure area of research are: a) The description of the phenomena of translation b) The establishment of general principles to explain and predict such phenomena (translation theory) The theoretical branch is divided into general and partial theories; by general Holmes is referring to those writings that seek to describe or account for every type of translation and to make generalizations that will be relevant for the translation as a whole. Partial theoretical studies are restricted according to some parameters: a) Product-oriented – descriptive theoretical studies – DTS , examines existing translations. They may involve description or analysis of a single ST-TT pair, or a comparative analysis of several TTs of the same STs. b) Function-oriented DTS , studies the contexts or sociocultural situations. Researches include which, when and where a text has been translated and the influences that have made the translation in such a way.
influence one another. The crucial role played by Holmes’ paper is in the delineation of the potential of translation studies. Since Holmes the area of translation more theories and studies have been made. Halliday has influenced discourse analysis and systemic functional grammar, which views language as a communicative act in a sociocultural context. The 1970s and 1980s saw the rise of the descriptive approach that had its origins in comparative literature and Russian formalism. Van Doorslaer draws a distinction between translation and translation studies. Translation looks at the act of translating: a) Lingual mode , interlingual/intralingual b) Media , printed/audio-visual/electronic c) Mode , direct/indirect translation d) Field , politic/literary Translation studies are divided into: a) Approaches , cultural/linguistic b) Theories , general/polysystem theory c) Research methods , descriptive/empirical d) Applied translation studies , criticism/didactic One of the key points is the distinction between practice and procedure : the first one refers to the overall orientation of a translated text whereas the latter one to the specific technique used in a text. An interdiscipline challenges the current conventional way of thinking by promoting and responding to new links between different types of knowledge and techniques; translation has the potential for a primary relationship with disciplines such as: linguistics, modern languages and language studies, comparative literature, cultural studies and philosophy. Some current projects like multidisciplinary, involving
the participation of researchers from various disciplines. The problem is the artificial gap between practice and theory: the practice of translation is essential for the translation theorists and trainers.
In 1813 Friedrich Schleiermacher, recognized as a founder of modern Protestant theology and modern hermeneutics, expounded a Romantic approach to interpretation based not on absolute truth but on the individual’s inner feeling and understanding. He first distinguishes two different types of texts: a) Dolmetscher , who translates commercial texts b) Ubersetzer , who works on scholarly and artistic texts It is the second type that Schleiermacher sees as being on a higher creative plane, breathing new life into the language. Although it may seem impossible to translate scholarly and artistic texts, since the ST meaning is couched in language that is very culture-bound and to switch the TL can never fully correspond, the real question is how to bring the ST writer and TT reader together. Schleiermacher’s preferred strategy is to move the reader towards the writer , giving the reader, through the translation, the impression he would have received as a (German) reading the work in the original language. The translator must adopt an alienating method of translation. This emphasises the value of the foreign, by bending TL word usage to try to ensure faithfulness to the ST. There are several consequences of this approach, including: a) If the translator is to seek to communicate the same impression which he or she received from the ST, this impression will also depend on the level of education and understanding among the TT readership, and this is likely to differ from the translator’s own understanding. b) A special language of translation may be necessary, for example compensating in one place with an imaginative word where elsewhere the translator has to make do with a hackneyed expression that cannot convey the impression of the foreign.
Phrase-structure rules generate an underlying or deep structure which is transformed by transformational rules relating one underlying structure to another to produce a final surface structure, which itself is subject to phonological and morphemic rules. The most basic of such structures are kernel sentences , which are simple, active, declarative sentences that require the minimum of transformation. Nida incorporates Chomsky’s model to his science of translation : it provides the translator with a technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding the TT. The surface structure of the ST is analysed into the basic elements of the deep structure; these are ‘transferred’ in the translation process and then ‘restructured’ semantically and stylistically into the surface structure of the TT. Kernels are the basic structural elements out of which language builds its elaborate surface structures. Kernels are to be obtained from the ST surface structure by a reductive process of back transformation. This entails analysis using generative-transformational grammar’s four types of functional class: a) events , often but not always performed by verbs b) objects , often but not always performed by nouns c) abstract , quantities and qualities, including adjectives and adverbs d) relationals , including affixes, prepositions, conjunctions and copulas When it comes to analysing individual words, Nida describes various scientific approaches to meaning related to work that had been carried out by theorists in semantics and pragmatics. Meaning is broken down into: a) Linguistic meaning , the relationship between different linguistic structures; for instance, the following three expressions with the possessive pronoun his all have
different meanings: his house means ‘he possesses a house’, his journey equals ‘he performs a journey’ and his kindness is ‘kindness is a quality of him’. b) Referential meaning , the denotative ‘dictionary’ meaning. Thus, son denotes a male child. c) Emotive or connotative meaning , the associations a word produces. ‘Don’t worry about that, son’, the word son is a term of endearment or may in some contexts be patronizing. A series of techniques are used by linguistics to establish the referential and emotive meaning of words: a) Hierarchical structuring , which differentiates series of words according to their level (for instance, the superordinate animal and its hyponyms goat , dog , etc.). b) Techniques of componential analysis , which seek to identify and discriminate specific features of a range of related words (e.g. family relationship terms according to the values of sex) c) The semantic structure analysis , which separates out visually the different meanings of words in different contexts. Nida stresses the importance of context for communication when dealing with metaphorical meaning and with complex cultural idioms. In general, techniques of semantic structure analysis are proposed as a means of clarifying ambiguities, elucidating obscure passages and identifying cultural differences. They may serve as a point of comparison between different languages and cultures and are proposed by Nida especially for those working with widely differing languages. There are two types of equivalence: a) Formal equivalence , which is focused on the message of the ST, both in form and content.
This chapter has examined important questions of translation raised by linguistics in the 1950s and 1960s. The key terms are ‘meaning’ and ‘equivalence’. These were discussed by Roman Jakobson in 1959 and crucially developed by Nida, whose books analyse meaning systematically and propose that a translation should aim for ‘equivalent effect’ (the same effect on the TL audience as the ST had on the SL audience). Despite the subsequent questioning of the feasibility of that goal, Nida’s great achievement is to have drawn translation theory away from the stagnant ‘literal vs. free’ debate and into the modern era. His concepts of formal and dynamic equivalence place the receiver in the centre of the equation and have exerted huge influence over subsequent theoreticians, especially in Germany. 4.1. The two general translation strategies identified by Vinay and Darbelnet are: direct translation and oblique translation , which hard back to the literal vs. free division. The two strategies comprise seven procedures, of which direct translation covers three: a) Borrowing : The SL word is transferred directly to the TL. This category covers words such as the Russian rouble, datcha, the later glasnost and perestroika, that are used in English and other languages to fill a semantic gap in the TL. Sometimes borrowings may be employed to add local colour (sushi, kimono, Osho–gatsu... in a tourist brochure about Japan, for instance). Of course, in some technical fields there is much borrowing of terms (e.g. computer, internet, from English to Malay). In languages with differing scripts, borrowing entails an additional need for transcription, as in the borrowings of mathematical, scientific and other terms from Arabic into Latin and, later, other languages (e.g. [aljabr] to algebra). b) Calque : This is ‘a special kind of borrowing’ where the SL expression or structure is transferred in a literal translation. For example, the French calque science- fiction for the English. Vinay and Darbelnet note that both borrowings and calques often become fully integrated into the TL, although sometimes with some
semantic change, which can turn them into false friends. An example is the German Handy for a mobile (cell) phone. c) Literal translation : This is ‘word-for-word’ translation, which Vinay and Darbelnet describe as being most common between languages of the same family and culture. Literal translation is the authors’ prescription for good translation. The translator may judge literal translation to be ‘unacceptable’ for what are grammatical, syntactic or pragmatic reasons. In those cases where literal translation is not possible, Vinay and Darbelnet say that the strategy of oblique translation must be used. This covers a further four procedures: a) Transposition : This is a change of one part of speech for another (e.g. noun for verb) without changing the sense. Transposition can be:
- obligatory : French dès son lever [‘upon her rising’] in a past context would be translated by as soon as she got up ;
- optional : in the reverse direction, the English as soon as she got up could be translated into French literally as dès qu’elle s’est levée or as a verb-to-noun transposition in dès son lever [‘upon her rising’]. b) Modulation : This changes the semantics and point of view of the SL. It can be:
- obligatory : e.g. the time when translates as le moment où [lit. ‘the moment where’];
- optional : though linked to preferred structures of the two languages: e.g. the reversal of point of view in it is not difficult to show > il est facile de démontrer [lit. ‘it is easy to show’]. Modulation at the level of message is subdivided along the following lines:
- abstract< >concrete , or particular< >general : She can do no other > She cannot act differently; Give a pint of blood > Give a littleblood
to the fore in the ‘translatorial stylistics’ of the new millennium (Malmkjær 2003). Meanwhile, a different approach to the examination and explanation of translation procedures has been afforded by cognitive theorists, starting with the Paris School of the 1960s and including Gutt (from relevance theory) and Bell (from psycholinguistics and systemic functional analysis). Increasingly, such research methods have made use of technological advances such as think-aloud protocols, key-stroke logging and eye- tracking, although methodological procedures remain to be standardized.
The major work on Skopos Theory is Reiss and Vermeer’s Towards a General Theory of Translational Action. It is based on the purpose of translation and aims at a general translation theory for all texts. The first part sets out a detailed explanation of Vermeer’s skopos theory; the second part, ‘specific theories’, adapts Reiss’s functional text-type model to the general theory. The basic underlying rules of the theory are: a) A translational action is determined by its skopos. b) It is an offer of information (Informationsangebot) in a target culture and TL concerning an offer of information in a source culture and SL. c) A TT does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way. d) A TT must be internally coherent. e) A TT must be coherent with the ST. f) The five rules above stand in hierarchical order, with the skopos rule predominating.
The general skopos ‘rules’ concerning how the success of the action and information transfer is to be judged, on its functional adequacy : the coherence rule, linked to internal textual coherence; and the fidelity rule, linked to intertextual coherence with the ST. These are crucial. The coherence rule states that the TT must be interpretable as coherent with the TT receiver’s situation. In other words, the TT must be translated in such a way that it makes sense for the TT receivers, given their circumstances, knowledge and needs. If the TT does not fit the needs of the TT receivers, it is simply not adequate for its purpose. The fidelity rule merely states that there must be coherence between the TT and the ST or, more specifically, between the ST information received by the translator; the interpretation the translator makes of this information; the information that is encoded for the TT receivers. There needs to be a relationship between ST and TT, and the nature of this relationship is determined by the purpose or skopos. This ‘functionality plus loyalty’ principle underpins Nord’s model. Nord goes on to explain that this means that ‘the target-text purpose should be compatible with the original author’s intentions’, while acknowledging that it is not always possible to be sure of those intentions. For her, loyalty plays the important role in that it ‘limits the range of justifiable target-text functions for one particular source text and raises the need for a negotiation of the translation assignment between translators and their clients’. In spite of criticisms, an important advantage of skopos theory is that it allows the possibility that the same text may be translated in different ways depending on the purpose of the TT and on the commission, which is given to the translator. The skopos needs to be stated explicitly or implicitly in the ‘ commission ’ or ‘brief’. Vermeer describes the commission as comprising a goal and the conditions under which that goal should be achieved (including deadline and fee). Both should be negotiated between the commissioner and the translator. In this way, as the expert the translator should be able to advise the commissioner/client on the feasibility of the goal. The nature of the TT ‘is primarily determined by its skopos or commission’ and adequacy (Adäquatheit) comes to
functions of the literary order which are in continual interrelationship with other orders’. In this sense, literature is part of the social, cultural, literary and historical framework and the key-concept is that of a system. Even-Zohar emphasises that translated literature operates as a system itself both in the way the TL culture selects works for translation and in the way translation norms, behaviour and policies are influenced by other co-systems. Even-Zohar focuses on the relations between all these systems in the overarching concept to which he gives a new term, the Polysystem, which is a multiple system, a system of various systems which intersect with each other and partly overlap, using concurrently different options, yet functioning as one structured whole, whose members are interdependent. The interaction and positioning of these systems occur in a dynamic hierarchy , changing according to the historical moment. This ‘dynamic process of evolution’ is vital to the polysystem, indicating that the relations between innovatory and conservative systems are in a constant state of flux and competition. Because of this flux, the position of translated literature is not fixed either. It may occupy a primary or a secondary position in the polysystem. If it is primary, it participates actively in shaping the centre of the polysystem. He also gives three major cases when translated literature occupies the primary position : a) When a ‘young’ literature is being established and looks initially to more established literatures for ready-made models. b) When a literature is ‘peripheral’ or ‘weak’ and it imports those literary types which it is lacking. This can happen when a smaller nation or language is dominated by the culture of a larger one. c) When there is a critical turning point in literary history at which established models are no longer considered sufficient, or when there is a vacuum in the literature of the country. Where no type holds sway, it is easier for foreign models to assume primacy.
If translated literature assumes a secondary position , then it represents a peripherical system within the polysystem. This secondary position is normal one for translated literatures. Even-Zohar suggests that the position occupied by translated literature in the polysystem conditions the translation strategy. If it is primary, translators do not feel constrained to follow target literature models and are more prepared to break conventions. They thus often produce a TT that is a close match in terms of adequacy, reproducing the textual relations of the ST. The influence of the foreign language model may itself then lead to the production of new models in the TL, for non-translated as well as translated languages. The polysystem theory represents an important advantage for translation studies because: a) Literature is studied alongside the social, historical and cultural forces b) Even-Zohar moves away from the isolated study of individual texts towards the study of translation within the cultural and literary systems in which it functions c) The non-prescriptive definition of equivalence and adequacy allows for variation according to the social, historical and cultural situation of the text. Gentzler also outlines criticisms of polysystem theory. These include: a) overgeneralization to ‘universal laws’ of translation based on relatively little evidence; b) An over-reliance on an historically based Formalist model which, following Even- Zohar’s own model of evolving trends, might be inappropriate for translated texts in the 1970s and beyond; c) The tendency to focus on the abstract model rather than the ‘real-life’ constraints placed on texts and translators; d) The question as to how far the supposed scientific model is really objective. Toury focused on developing a general theory of translation and proposed a methodology for the branch of descriptive translation studies (DTS). Toury is continuing and building on the polysystem work of Even-Zohar and proposes the following three-phase
‘potency’ Toury places norms between rules and idiosyncrasies, which could be illustrated on a cline: a) Rules are the strongest constraints, since breaking a rule will normally incur a formal legal penalty or caution. In a professional translation context, this could be the breaking of a confidentiality agreement; or, in textual terms, committing a gross grammatical error in a translation test, where such accuracy is highly valued, and which would usually lead to the loss of marks. b) Norms , as generally agreed forms of behaviour, are partly prescriptive in nature but weaker than rules. Violating them (for instance, writing a very informal translation commentary in an academic setting) might well lead to negative evaluation. c) Conventions are more informal and may be acquired by trial and error. His hypothesis is that the norms that have prevailed in the translation of a particular text can be reconstructed from two types of source: a) from the examination of texts , the products of norm-governed activity (this will reveal ‘regularities of behaviour’ – that is, the trends of relationships and correspondences between ST and TT segments; it will point to the processes adopted by the translator and, hence, the norms that have been in operation); b) from the explicit statements made about norms by translators, publishers, reviewers and other participants in the translation act. However, Toury warns that
such explicit statements may be incomplete or biased in favour of the role played by the informants in the sociocultural system and are therefore best avoided. Toury sees different kinds of norms operating at different stages of the translation process: the initial norm; preliminary norms; and operational norms. The basic initial norm refers to a general choice made by translators. Translators can subject themselves to the norms realized in the ST or to the norms of the target culture or language. If it is towards the ST, then the TT will be adequate; if the target culture norms prevail, then the TT will be acceptable. Lower order norms described by Toury are preliminary norms and operational norms. Their relation to the initial norm is displayed in: Preliminary norms are translation policy and directness of translation. Translation policy refers to factors determining the selection of texts for translation in a specific language, culture or time. Toury does not pursue this area in his case studies. Directness of translation relates to whether translation occurs through an intermediate language. Operational norms describe the presentation and linguistic matter of the TT. These are matricial norms and textual-linguistic norms. Matricial norms relate to the completeness of the TT. Phenomena include omission or relocation of passages, textual segmentation, and the addition of passages or footnotes. Textual-linguistic norms govern the selection of TT linguistic material: lexical items, phrases and stylistic features. Toury hopes that the cumulative identification of norms in descriptive studies will enable the formulation of probabilistic ‘laws’ of translation and thence of ‘universals of translation’. The tentative laws he proposes are listed below:
