Cet article a pour objectif de cerner la notion de technique de traduction entendue comme un des instruments d’analyse textuelle qui permet d’etudier le fonctionnement de l’equivalence par rapport a l’original. Nous rappelons tout d’abord les differentes definitions et classifications qui ont ete proposees ainsi que les confusions terminologiques, conceptuelles et de classification qui en ont decoule. Nous donnons ensuite notre definition de la technique de traduction en la differenciant de la methode et de la strategie de traduction et proposons une approche dynamique et fonctionnelle de celleci.
Pour terminer, nous definissons chacune des diverses techniques de traduction existantes et en presentons une nouvelle classification. Cette proposition a ete appliquee dans le cadre d’une recherche sur la traduction des elements culturels dans les traductions en arabe de Cent ans de solitude de Garcia Marquez. ABSTRACT The aim of this article is to clarify the notion of translation technique, understood as an instrument of textual analysis that, in combination with other instruments, allows us to study how translation equivalence works in relation to the original text.
First, existing definitions and classifications of translation techniques are reviewed and terminological, conceptual and classification confusions are pointed out. Secondly, translation techniques are redefined, distinguishing them from translation method and translation strategies. The definition is dynamic and functional. Finally, we present a classification of translation techniques that has been tested in a study of the translation of cultural elements in Arabic translations of A Hundred Years of Solitude by Garcia Marquez.
translation technique, translation method, translation strategy, translation equivalence, functionalism 1. TRANSLATION TECHNIQUES AS TOOL FOR ANALYSIS: THE EXISTING CONFUSIONS The categories used to analyze translations allow us to study the way translation works. These categories are related to text, context and process. Textual categories describe mechanisms of coherence, cohesion and thematic progression. Contextual categories introduce all the extra-textual elements related to the context of source text and translation production. Process categories are designed to answer two basic questions.
Which option has the translator chosen to carry out the translation project, i. e. , which method has been chosen? How has the translator solved the problems that have emerged during the translation process, i. e. , which strategies have been chosen? However, research (or teaching) requirements may make it important to consider textual micro-units as well, that is to say, how the result of the translation Meta, XLVII, 4, 2002 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 498 11/21/02, 2:15 PM translation techniques revisited 499 functions in relation to the corresponding unit in the source text. To do this we need translation techniques.
We were made aware of this need in a study of the treatment of cultural elements in Arabic translations of A Hundred Years of Solitude1. Textual and contextual categories were not sufficient to identify, classify and name the options chosen by the translators for each unit studied. We needed the category of translation techniques that allowed us to describe the actual steps taken by the translators in each textual micro-unit and obtain clear data about the general methodological option chosen. However, there is some disagreement amongst translation scholars about translation techniques.
This disagreement is not only terminological but also conceptual. There is even a lack of consensus as to what name to give to call the categories, different labels are used (procedures, techniques, strategies) and sometimes they are confused with other concepts. Furthermore, different classifications have been proposed and the terms often overlap. This article presents the definition and classification of translation techniques that we used in our study of the treatment of cultural elements in Arabic translations of A Hundred Years of Solitude.
We also present a critical review of earlier definitions and classifications of translation techniques. 2. THE DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO CLASSIFYING TRANSLATION TECHNIQUES 2. 1. Translation Technical Procedures in the Compared Stylistics. Vinay and Darbelnet’s pioneer work Stylistique comparee du francais et de l’anglais (SCFA) (1958) was the first classification of translation techniques that had a clear methodological purpose. The term they used was ‘procedes techniques de la traduction. ’ They defined seven basic procedures operating on three levels of style: lexis, distribution (morphology and syntax) and message.
The procedures were classified as direct (or literal) or oblique, to coincide with their distinction between direct (or literal) and oblique translation. Literal translation occurs when there is an exact structural, lexical, even morphological equivalence between two languages. According to the authors, this is only possible when the two languages are very close to each other. The literal translation procedures are: • • • Borrowing. A word taken directly from another language, e. g. , the English word bulldozer has been incorporated directly into other languages. Calque.
A foreign word or phrase translated and incorporated into another language, e. g. , fin de semaine from the English weekend. Literal translation. Word for word translation, e. g. , The ink is on the table and L’encre est sur la table. Oblique translation occurs when word for word translation is impossible. The oblique translation procedures are: • • 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 Transposition. A shift of word class, i. e. , verb for noun, noun for preposition e. g. , Expediteur and From. When there is a shift between two signifiers, it is called crossed transposition, e. g. , He limped across the street and Il a traverse la rue en boitant.
Modulation. A shift in point of view. Whereas transposition is a shift between grammatical categories, modulation is a shift in cognitive categories. Vinay and Darbelnet 499 11/21/02, 2:15 PM 500 Meta, XLVII, 4, 2002 • • postulate eleven types of modulation: abstract for concrete, cause for effect, means for result, a part for the whole, geographical change, etc. , e. g. , the geographical modulation between encre de Chine and Indian ink. Intravaia and Scavee (1979) studied this procedure in depth and reached the conclusion that it is qualitatively different from the others and that the others can be included within it.
Equivalence. This accounts for the same situation using a completely different phrase, e. g. , the translation of proverbs or idiomatic expressions like, Comme un chien dans un jeu de quilles and Like a bull in a china shop. Adaptation. A shift in cultural environment, i. e. , to express the message using a different situation, e. g. cycling for the French, cricket for the English and baseball for the Americans. These seven basic procedures are complemented by other procedures. Except for the procedures of compensation and inversion, they are all classified as opposing pairs. • • • • • • • 01. Meta 47/4.
Partie 1 Compensation. An item of information, or a stylistic effect from the ST that cannot be reproduced in the same place in the TT is introduced elsewhere in the TT, e. g. , the French translation of I was seeking thee, Flathead. from the Jungle Book Kipling used the archaic thee, instead of you, to express respect, but none of the equivalent French pronoun forms (tu, te, toi) have an archaic equivalent, so the translator expressed the same feeling by using the vocative, O, in another part of the sentence: En verite, c’est bien toi que je cherche, O Tete-Plate. Concentration vs. Dissolution.
Concentration expresses a signified from the SL with fewer signifiers in the TL. Dissolution expresses a signified from the SL with more signifiers in the TL, e. g. , archery is a dissolution of the French tir a l’arc. Amplification vs. Economy. These procedures are similar to concentration and dissolution. Amplification occurs when the TL uses more signifiers to cover syntactic or lexical gaps. According to Vinay and Darbelnet, dissolution is a question of langue and adaptation of parole, e. g. , He talked himself out of a job and Il a perdu sa chance pour avoir trop parle.
The opposite procedure is economy, e. g., We’ll price ourselves out of the market and Nous ne pourrons plus vendre si nous sommes trop exigeants. Reinforcement vs. Condensation. These are variations of amplification and economy that are characteristic of French and English, e. g. , English prepositions or conjunctions that need to be reinforced in French by a noun or a verb: To the station and Entree de la gare; Shall I phone for a cab? and Voulez-vous que je telephone pour faire venir une voiture? Mallblanc (1968) changed Vinay and Darbelnet’s reinforcement for over-characterization, because he found it was more appropriate for the traits of French and German.
He pointed out that German prepositions, such as, in can be translated into French as dans le creux de, dans le fond de, or, dans le sein de. Explicitation vs. Implicitation. Explicitation is to introduce information from the ST that is implicit from the context or the situation, e. g. , to make explicit the patient’s sex when translating his patient into French. Implicitation is to allow the situation to indicate information that is explicit in the ST, e. g. , the meaning of sortez as go out or come out depends on the situation. Generalization vs. Particularization.
Generalization is to translate a term for a more general one, whereas, particularization is the opposite, e. g. , the English translation of guichet, fenetre or devanture by window is a generalization. Inversion. This is to move a word or a phrase to another place in a sentence or a paragraph so that it reads naturally in the target language, e. g. , Pack separately … for convenient inspection and Pour faciliter la visite de la douane mettre a part …. 500 11/21/02, 2:15 PM translation techniques revisited 501 Table 1 Vinay and Darbelnet’s translation procedures Borrowing Bulldozer (E) ? Bulldozer (F) Calque Fin de semaine (F) ?
Week-end (E) Literal translation L’encre est sur la table (F) ? The ink is on the table (E) Transposition Defense de fumer (F) ? No smoking (E) Crossed transposition He limped across the street (E) ? Il a traverse la rue en boitant (F) Modulation Encre de Chien (F) ? Indian Ink (E) Equivalence Comme un chien dans un jeu de quilles (F) ? Like a bull in a china shop (E) Adaptation Cyclisme (F) ? Cricket (E) ? Baseball (U. S) Compensation I was seeking thee, Flathead (E) ? En verite, c’est bien toi que je cherche, O Tete-Plate (F) Dissolution Tir a l’arc (F) ? Archery (E) Concentration Archery (E) ? Tir a l’arc (F)
Amplification He talked himself out of a job (E) ? Il a perdu sa chance pour avoir trop parle (F) Economy Nous ne pourrons plus vendre si nous sommes trop exigeants (F) ? We’ll price ourselves out of the market (E) Reinforcement Shall I phone for a cab? (E) ? Voulez-vous que je telephone pour faire venir une voiture? (F) Condensation Entree de la garde (F) ? To the station (E) Explicitation His patient (E) ? Son patient / Son patiente (F) Implicitation Go out/ Come out (E) ? Sortez (F) Generalization Guichet, fenetre, devanture (F) ? Window (E) Particularization Window (E) ? Guichet, fenetre, devanture (F) Articularization.
In all this immense variety of conditions,… (E) ? Et cependant, malgre la diversite des conditions,… (F) Juxtaposition Et cependant, malgre la diversite des conditions,… (F) ? In all this immense variety of conditions,… (E) Grammaticalization A man in a blue suit (E) ? Un homme vetu de blue (F) Lexicalization Un homme vetu de blue (F) ? A man in a blue suit (E) Inversion Pack separately […] for convenient inspection (E) ? Pour faciliter la visite de la douane mettre a part […] (F) 2. 2. The Bible translators From their study of biblical translation, Nida, Taber and Margot concentrate on questions related to cultural transfer.
They propose several categories to be used 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 501 11/21/02, 2:15 PM 502 Meta, XLVII, 4, 2002 when no equivalence exists in the target language: adjustment techniques, essential distinction, explicative paraphrasing, redundancy and naturalization. 2. 2. 1. Techniques of adjustment Nida (1964) proposes three types: additions, subtractions and alterations. They are used: 1) to adjust the form of the message to the characteristics of the structure of the target language; 2) to produce semantically equivalent structures; 3) to generate appropriate stylistic equivalences; 4) to produce an equivalent communicative effect.
• • • Additions. Several of the SCFA procedures are included in this category. Nida lists different circumstances that might oblige a translator to make an addition: to clarify an elliptic expression, to avoid ambiguity in the target language, to change a grammatical category (this corresponds to SCFA’s transposition), to amplify implicit elements (this corresponds to SCFA’s explicitation), to add connectors (this corresponds to SCFA’s articulation required by characteristics of the TL, etc. ). Examples are as follows.
When translating from St Paul’s Epistles, it is appropriate to add the verb write in several places, even though it is not in the source text; a literal translation of they tell him of her (Mark I:30) into Mazatec would have to be amplified to the people there told Jesus about the woman, otherwise, as this language makes no distinctions of number and gender of pronominal affixes it could have thirty-six different interpretations; He went up to Jerusalem. There he taught the people some languages require the equivalent of He went up to Jerusalem. Having arrived there, he taught the people.
Subtractions. Nida lists four situations where the translator should use this procedure, in addition to when it is required by the TL: unnecessary repetition, specified references, conjunctions and adverbs. For example, the name of God appears thirty-two times in the thirty-one verses of Genesis. Nida suggests using pronouns or omitting God. Alterations. These changes have to be made because of incompatibilities between the two languages. There are three main types. 1) Changes due to problems caused by transliteration when a new word is introduced from the source language, e. g., the transliteration of Messiah in the Loma language, means death’s hand, so it was altered to Mezaya.
2) Changes due to structural differences between the two languages, e. g. , changes in word order, grammatical categories, etc. (similar to SCFA’s transposition). 3) Changes due to semantic misfits, especially with idiomatic expressions. One of the suggestions to solve this kind of problem is the use of a descriptive equivalent i. e. , a satisfactory equivalent for objects, events or attributes that do not have a standard term in the TL. It is used for objects that are unknown in the target culture (e. g., in Maya the house where the law was read for Synagogue) and for actions that do not have a lexical equivalent (e. g. , in Maya desire what another man has for covetousness, etc. )
Nida includes footnotes as another adjustment technique and points out that they have two main functions: 1) To correct linguistic and cultural differences, e. g. , to explain contradictory customs, to identify unknown geographical or physical items, to give equivalents for weights and measures, to explain word play, to add information about proper names, etc. ; 2) To add additional information about the historical and cultural context of the text in question.
01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 502 11/21/02, 2:15 PM translation techniques revisited 503 2. 2. 2. The essential differences Margot (1979) presents three criteria used to justify cultural adaptation. He refers to them as the essential differences. 1) 2) 3) Items that are unknown by the target culture. He suggests adding a classifier next to the word (as Nida does), e. g. , the city of Jerusalem or, by using a cultural equivalent (similar to the SCFA procedure of adaptation), e. g. , in Jesus’ parable (Matthew 7:16) to change grapes / thorn bushes and figs / thistles for other plants that are more common in the target culture.
However, he warns the reader that this procedure is not always possible. Taber y Nida (1974) list five factors that have to be taken into account when it is used: a) the symbolic and theological importance of the item in question, b) its fequency of use in the Bible, c) its semantic relationship with other words, d) similarities of function and form between the two items, e) the reader’s emotional response. The historical framework. Here Margot proposes a linguistic rather than a cultural translation, on the grounds that historical events cannot be modified. Adaptation to the specific situation of the target audience.
Margot maintains that the translator’s task is to translate and that it is up to preachers, commentarists and Bible study groups to adapt the biblical text to the specific situation of the target audience. He includes footnotes as an aid to cultural adaptation. 2. 2. 3. The explicative paraphrase Nida, Taber and Margot coincide in distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate paraphrasing. The legitimate paraphrase is a lexical change that makes the TT longer than the ST but does not change the meaning (similar to the SCFA amplification / dissolution. The illegitimate paraphrase makes ST items explicit in the TT.
Nida, Taber and Margot agree this is not the translator’s job as it may introduce subjectivity. 2. 2. 4. The concept of redundancy According to Margot (1979), redundancy tries to achieve symmetry between ST readers and TT readers. This is done either by adding information (grammatical, syntactic and stylistic elements, etc. ) when differences between the two languages and cultures make a similar reception impossible for the TT readers, or by suppressing information when ST elements are redundant for the TT readers, e. g. , the Hebrew expression, answering, said that is redundant in some other languages.
This procedure is very close to SCFA’s implicitation / explicitation. 2. 2. 5. The concept of naturalization This concept was introduced by Nida (1964) after using the term natural to define dynamic equivalence (the closest natural equivalent to the source language message). Nida claims that naturalization can be achieved by taking into account: 1) the source language and culture understood as a whole; 2) the cultural context of the message; 3) the target audience. This procedure is very close to SCFA’s adaptation. 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 503 11/21/02, 2:15 PM 504 Meta, XLVII, 4, 2002 Table 2.
The Bible translators’ proposals Classifier The city of Jerusalem Alteration Messiah (E) ? Mezaya (Loma) Cultural equivalent grapes / thorn bushes and figs / thistles ? other plants that are more common in the target culture Equivalent description Synagogue ? The house where the law was read (Maya) Footnotes 2. 3. Vazquez Ayora’s technical procedures Vazquez Ayora (1977) uses the term operative technical procedures, although he sometimes refers to them as the translation method. He combines the SCFA prescriptive approach with the Bible translators, descriptive approach and introduces some new procedures:
• • Omission. This is to omit redundancy and repetition that is characteristic of the SL, e. g. , to translate The committee has failed to act by La comision no actuo, omitting the verb to fail and avoiding over-translation: La comision dejo de actuar. Desplacement and Inversion. Displacement corresponds to SCFA’s inversion, where two elements change position, e. g. , The phone rang and Sono el telefono. Table 3 Vazquez Ayora’s contribution Omission The committee has failed to act (E) ? La comision no actuo (Sp) Inversion The phone rang (E) ? Sono el telefono (Sp) 2. 4. Delisle’s contribution.
Delisle (1993) introduces some variations to the SCFA procedures and maintains the term procedure for Vinay and Darbelnet’s proposals. However, for some other categories of his own, he introduces a different terminology, e. g. , translation strategies, translation errors, operations in the cognitive process of translating… He lists several of these categories as contrasting pairs. In his review of Vinay and Darbelnet, he proposes simplifying the SCFA dichotomies of reinforcement/condensation and amplification/economy and he reduces them to a single pair, reinforcement/economy.
Reinforcement is to use more words in the TT than the ST to express the same idea. He distinguishes three types of reinforcement: 1) dissolution; 2) explicitation (these two correspond to their SCFA homonyms); and 3) periphrasis (this corresponds to SCFA’s amplification). Economy is to use fewer words in the TT than the ST to express the same idea. He distinguishes three types of economy: 1) concentration; 2) implicitation (these two correspond to their SCFA homonyms and are in contrast to dissolution and explicitation); and concision (this corresponds to SCFA’s economy and is in contrast to periphrasis). 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 504.
11/21/02, 2:15 PM translation techniques revisited 505 The other categories Delisle introduces are: • • • Addition vs. Omission. He defines them as unjustified periphrasis and concision and considers them to be translation errors. Addition is to introduce unjustified stylistic elements and information that are not in the ST, omission is the unjustifiable suppression of elements in the ST. Paraphrase. This is defined as excessive use of paraphrase that complicates the TT without stylistic or rhetorical justification. It is also classified as a translation error. Delisle’s paraphrase and addition coincide with Margot’s illegitimate paraphrase.
Discursive creation. This is an operation in the cognitive process of translating by which a non-lexical equivalence is established that only works in context, e. g. , In the world of literature, ideas become cross-fertilized, the experience of others can be usefully employed to mutual benefit is translated into French as, Dans le domaine des lettres, le choc des idees se revele fecond; il devient possible de profiter de l’experience d’autrui. This concept is close to Nida’s alterations caused by semantic incompatibilities and transliteration. Table 4 Delisle’s contributions Dissolution Reinforcement
Explicitation Periphrasis (+) Addition (–) Paraphrase (–) Concentration Economy Implicitation Concession (+) Discursive creation Omission (–) Ideas become cross-fertilized (E) ? Le choc des idees se revele fecond (F) 2. 5. Newmark’s procedures Newmark (1988) also uses the term procedures to classify the proposals made by the comparative linguists and by the Bible translators, as well as some of his own. These are: • • • 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 Recognized translation. This is the the translation of a term that is already official or widely accepted, even though it may not be the most adequate, e. g., Gay-Lussac’s Volumengesetz der Gase and Law of combining volumes. Functional equivalent.
This is to use a culturally neutral word and to add a specifying term, e. g. , baccalaureat = French secondary school leaving exam; Sejm = Polish parliament. It is very similar to Margot’s cultural equivalent, and in the SCFA terminology it would be an adaptation (secondary school leaving exam / parliament) with an explicitation (French/ Polish). Naturalization. Newmark’s definition is not the same as Nida’s. For Nida, it comes from transfer (SCFA’s borrowing) and consists of adapting a SL word to the phonetic and morphological norms of the TL, e.g. , the German word Performanz and the English performance. 505 11/21/02, 2:15 PM 506 Meta, XLVII, 4, 2002.
Translation label. This is a provisional translation, usually of a new term, and a literal translation could be acceptable, e. g. , Erbschaftssprache or langue d’heritage from the English heritage language. Newmark includes the option of solving a problem by combining two or more procedures (he called these solutions doubles, triples or quadruples). Newmark also adds synonymy as another category. Table 5 Newmark’s procedures Recognized translation Volumengesetz der Gase (G) ? Law of combining volumes (E).
Functional equivalent Baccalaureat (F) ? Baccalaureat, secondary school leaving exam (E) Naturalization Performance (E) ? Performanz (G) Translation label Heritage language (E) ? Langue d’heritage (F) 3. CRITICAL REVIEW OF TRANSLATION TECHNIQUES As we have seen, there is no general agreement about this instrument of analysis and there is confusion about terminology, concepts and classification. The most serious confusions are the following. 3. 1. Terminological confusion and over-lapping terms Terminological diversity and the overlapping of terms make it difficult to use these terms and to be understood.
The same concept is expressed with different names and the classifications vary, covering different areas of problems. In one classification one term may over-lap another in a different system of classification. The category itself is given different names, for example, Delisle uses procedure, translation strategy, etc. 3. 2. The confusion between translation process and translation result This confusion was established by Vinay y Darbelnet’s pioneer proposal, when they presented the procedures as a description of the ways open to the translator in the translation process.
Nevertheless, the procedures, as they are presented in the SCFA do not refer to the process followed by the translator, but to the final result. The confusion has persisted and translation techniques have been confused with other translation categories: method and strategies. In some of the proposals there is a conceptual confusion between techniques and translation method. Vinay y Darbelnet introduced the confusion by dividing the procedures following the traditional methodological dichotomy between literal and free translation.
As they worked with isolated units they did not distinguish between categories that affect the whole text and categories that refer to small units. Furthermore, the subtitle of their book, Methode de traduction, caused even more confusion. In our opinion (see 4. 1. ), a distinction should bemade between translation method, that is part of the process, a global choice that affects the whole translation, and translation techniques that describe the result and affect smaller sections of the translation. 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 506
11/21/02, 2:15 PM translation techniques revisited 507 The SCFA use of the term procedures created confusion wirh another category related to the process: translation strategies. Procedures are related to the distinction between declarative knowledge (what you know) and procedural or operative knowledge (know-how) (Anderson 1983). Procedures are an important part of procedural knowledge, they are related to knowing how to do something, the ability to organise actions to reach a specific goal (Pozo, Gonzalo and Postigo 1993).
Procedures include the use of simple techniques and skills, as well as expert use of strategies (Pozo y Postigo 1993). Strategies are an essential element in problem solving. Therefore, in relation to solving translation problems, we think a distinction should be made between techniques and strategies. Techniques describe the result obtained and can be used to classify different types of translation solutions. Strategies are related to the mechanisms used by translators throughout the the whole translation process to find a solution to the problems they find.
The technical procedures (the name itself is ambiguous) affect the results and not the process, so they should be distinguished from strategies. We propose they should be called translation techniques. 3. 3. The confusion between issues related to language pairs and text pairs Vinay y Darbelnet’s original proposal also led to a confusion between language problems and text problems. Their work was based on comparative linguistics and all the examples used to illustrate their procedures were decontextualized. In addition, because they gave a single translation for each linguistic item, the result was pairs of fixed equivalences.
This led to a confusion between comparative linguistic phenomena (and the categories needed to analyse their similarities and differences) and phenomena related to translating texts (that need other categories). The use of translation techniques following the SCFA approach is limited to the classification of differences between language systems, not the textual solutions needed for translation. For example, SCFA’s borrowing, transposition and inversion, or, Vazquez Ayora’s omission, should not be considered as translation techniques.
They are not a textual option open to the translator, but an obligation imposed by the characteristics of the language pair. 4. A DEFINITION OF TRANSLATION TECHNIQUES Our proposal is based on two premises: 1) the need to distinguish between method, strategy and technique; 2) the need for an dynamic and functional concept of translation techniques. 4. 1. The need to distinguish between method, strategy and technique We think that translation method, strategies and techniques are essentially different categories. (Hurtado 1996). 4. 1. 1. Translation method and translation techniques.
Translation method refers to the way a particular translation process is carried out in terms of the translator’s objective, i. e. , a global option that affects the whole text. There are several translation methods that may be chosen, depending on the aim of 01. Meta 47/4. Partie 1 507 11/21/02, 2:15 PM 508 Meta, XLVII, 4, 2002 the translation: interpretative-communicative (translation of the sense), literal (linguistic transcodification), free (modification of semiotic and communicative categories) and philological (academic or critical translation) (see Hurtado Albir 1999: 32).
Each solution the translator chooses when translating a text responds to the global option that affects the whole text (the translation method) and depends on the aim of the translation. The translation method affects the way micro-units of the text are translated: the translation techniques. Thus, we should distinguish between the method chosen by the translator, e. g. , literal or adaptation, that affects the whole text, and the translation techniques, e. g. , literal translation or adaptation, that affect microunits of the text.
Logically, method and functions should function harmoniously in the text. For example, if the aim of a translation method is to produce a foreignising version, then borrowing will be one of the most frequently used translation techniques. (Cf. This has been shown in Molina (1998), where she analyses the three translations into Arabic of Garcia Marquez’s A Hundred Years of Solitude. Each translation had adopted a different translation method, and the techniques were studied in relation to the method chosen). 4. 1. 2.
Translation strategy and translation techniques Whatever method is chosen, the translator may encounter problems in the translation process, either because of a particularly difficult unit, or because there may be a gap in the translator’s knowledge or skills. This is when translation strategies are activated. Strategies are the procedures (conscious or unconscious, verbal or nonverbal) used by the translator to solve problems that emerge when carrying out the translation process with a particular objective in mind (Hurtado Albir 1996, 1999).
Translators use strategies for comprehension (e. g. , distinguish main and secondary ideas, establish conceptual relationships, search for information) and for reformulation (e. g. , paraphrase, retranslate, say out loud, avoid words that are close to the original). Because strategies play an essential role in problem solving, they are a central part of the subcompetencies that make up translation competence. Strategies open the way to finding a suitable solution for a translation unit. The solution will be materialized by using a particular techniqu.