Translation Theory Revision Essay
Translation Theory Revision
Translation – The process of translation between two different languages involves the translator changing an original text (the source text – ST) in the original verbal languages (the source languages – SL) in a different verbal language (the target language – TL) S. Bassnet def: Translation is rendering of a SL text into the TL so as to ensure that: 1) the surface meaning of the two will be approximately similar, and 2) the structures of the SL will e preserved as closely as possible but not so closely that the TL structures will be seriously distorted.
Susan Basset: Telling the same things in a different language in a way that sounds natural, getting the point across. Translation types: Semiotic classification: Intralingual – an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language Interlingual – an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language Intersemiotic – an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of non-verbal sign systems. Binary classifications:
Free translation – translator replaces a social, or cultural, reality in the source text with a corresponding reality in the target text Literal – rendering of text from one language to another “word-for-word”. Overt – is a TT that does not mean to be an original. The individual text function cannot be tha same for TT and ST since the cultures are different. Covert – ST is not linked to the ST culture or audience; both ST and TT address their respective receivers directly.
Domestication vs foreigization: translation methods that move “the writer toward [the reader]”, i.e. , fluency, and those that move the “reader toward [the author] (domestication) “, i. e. , an extreme fidelity to the foreignness of the source text (foreignization). Documentary (preserve the original exoticizing setting) vs instrumental (adaptation of the setting to the target culture) Text Type Theory:
Katharina Reiss. Determine, what kind of text you are dealing with: • Informative – plain facts (newspaper article) • Expressive – creative composition (poetry) • Operative – including behavioural responses (ads) • Multi/audio-medial (films or visual/oral ads).
Equivalence: Dynamic equivalence (also known as functional equivalence) attempts to convey the thought expressed in a source text (if necessary, at the expense of literalness, original word order, the source text’s grammatical voice, etc. ), while formal equivalence attempts to render the text word-for-word (if necessary, at the expense of natural expression in the target language). J. C. Catford • A formal correspondent – any TL category which van be said to occupy the ‘same’ place in SL • A textual equivalent – any TL text or part of text that van be said to be the equivalent of the ST Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS)
• A firmly empirical (kogemuslik) discipline • Describes and maps translations • Proposes hypotheses as why the translations are like they are • Avoids being prescriptive The aim of DTS is to acquire insight into the nature and function of translation as a cultural and historical phenomenon DTS leading figures: Gideon Toury, Andre Lefevere Early translation theory Cicero – senise-for-sense. Synthesized in Latin Greek philosophers. The founder of Western translation theory. The 1st to comment on the process of translation. Translation serves as the study and imitation of rhetorical models.
Free translation that is focused on the meaning. Horace model – target orientation. Aesthetically pleasing and creative translation. Art of Poetry. Quintilian – remarks on translations are v much in the Ciceroian tradition. Makes a difference between: metaphrasis – replacing a single word with a single word; paraphrasis – replacing a phrase with a phrase. Jerome model – translation Bible –> latin „Vulgate“ (405. y). Translated sense-for-sense, rather that word-for-word. German Romanticism: individual author’s vision. Author is a creator. Shlegel: all writings in act of translation:
Schleiermacher: translator could take the reader along and make him walk with the author or in the other way around.. Word-for-word translation onorthodox view of translation. • Herder, Goethe, Humbolt, the Shlegel brothers, Shleiermacher • translations of Homeric epics, the Greek tragedies and Shakespeare • Emergence of the German tradition as opposed to the French • strive for an independent literary culture Goethe: 3 stages of translation: 1) aquainted us the foreign language in his own terms (Luther Kings’s Bible) 2) French tradition – use of its own criteria, own rules.
3) The same idendity between source and target language. Eugene Nida. Formal equivalence – attention to the transfer of message, both form and content Dynamic / functional equivalence – seeks the closest natural equivalence for the source language message Principles: 1. making sense 2. conveying the spirit and manner of the original 3. having a natural and easy form of expression 4. producing a similar response • 1. give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work. • 2. reproduce the style and manner of writing of the original. • 3.
have all the ease of the original composition. Nida’s equivalent effect criticized: • too concerned with the word level • difficult or impossible to achieve • overly theological Nida differentiates between: • Linguistic meaning. the meaningful relationship between words, phrases and sentences. • Referential meaning. “the words as symbols which refer to objects, events, abstracts, relations” Methods: hierarchical structuring, componential analysis, semantic structure analysis • Emotive meaning Toury? s norm theory: Defines social norms. Preliminary norm: concerned with translation policy.
The initial norm: expressed through operational norms which direct actual decisions made during the translating process. Corpus studies • Corpus – compurerized collection of documents • A token – each word as it occurs • A type – each different word The type-token ratio is a text? s lexical density(tihedus) Postcolonialism: • Resist domination • Emphasis on the impact and significance of translation in a context of political, military, economic and cultural power differentials (vahe) • Is characterizied by hybridity (ristandumine) and self-reflection.
English theory Early English translation of the Bible: John Wycliffe – published Bible’s English version (late 14th c). Tried to translate the meaning, but preserve its form. William Tyndale – 1525 Bible’s German version (Greek) The King James Bible 1611 Bible’s English version Early translations of the Bible in English • Wycliffe Bible 1380-1384 revised by John Purvey in 1408 . Published Bible English version. Trying to translate the meaning but preserve its form (w-for-w) • William Tyndale 1525 (w-for-w) • Bishop’s Bible 1568.
• The King James Bible the Authorized Version 1604 -1611 John Dryden on translation: 1) metaphrase – word-for-word; 2) paraphrase – sense-for-sense 3)imitation – absolute freedom. Tytler 18th c: 1) translation should give source language complete context. 2) style and manner should be similar. 3) reader should see it as fluid as original text. Essays on the translations, self-standing thoughts on translations, artistic activity = transl. Edward Fitzgerald: Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam: Persian poetry, imperial attitude. quatrain rhyme scheme: AABA Early theory and practice of translation in England: draws on two traditions:
• Classical Latin translation, from the Greek • Early Christian Latin translation from the Scriptures, the Hebrew, Aramaic King Alfred (871-99) and his policy of translation. • Augustine’s Soliloquies and Gregory’s Pastoral Care • Gregory’s Dialogues • Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People Benedictine reform – a revival of monasticism, ?lfric’s homilies – a need to educate the uneducated.