Dr. Margherita Dore margherita.dore@uniroma1.it
Translatability and equivalence in meaning Different types of meaning Formal and dynamic equivalence Equivalent effect (focus on the receptor) Semantic and communicative translation Koller s double linkage Tertium comparationis
Saussure s starting assumption: langue -> e.g. English, Italian, Swahili Parole -> I read a book, ho fame Saussure s Theory of Langue Sign = arbitrary signifier + signified (e.g. CHEESE is an acoustic signifier that denotes a food made of pressed curds, that is the signified) We can understand what is signified by a word even if we haven t ever experienced it (e.g. nectar, ambrosia)
There is ordinarily no full equivalence between code-units (Jakobson 1959/2004: 139) (e.g. CHEESE is not identical to the Russian syr or the Spanish queso or the Italian formaggio because it does not Include the concept of cottage cheese) The question of translatability linguistic relativity/determinism, differences in languages shape different conceptualizations of the world linguistic universalism, although languages differ in the way they realise meaning, there is a shared way of thinking and experiencing the world.
Languages differ essentially in what they must convey and not in what they may convey (Jakobson 1959/2004: 141) Differences in terms of equivalence: Gender level: house is feminine in English and neuter in English Aspect level: morphology of verbs Semantic field level: fratelli in Italian means brothers and sisters
Nida (1914-2011) was an American Baptist minister, linguist and translator He had enormous experience organizing the translation of the Bible into indigenous languages. He applied analytical concepts from Noam Chomsky s generative-transformational grammar to his scientific approach towards translation theory and lexical meaning
Nida (1964) and Nida and Taber (1969) scientific approach to the analysis and transfer of meaning is based on the following assumptions: Lexical meaning can be categorised as: Linguistic meaning, relation between different words (his return may mean when he returned) Referential meaning, the dictionary meaning of a word (cf. cheese above) Emotive, or connotative, meaning, the associations a word may have (don t worry about it, son)
Linguists can use a a series of techniques to establish the referential and emotive meaning of words: Hierarchical structuring: superordinate (animal) and hyponims (dog, cat, cow) Compositional analysis: family relationships (mother, grandmother, father, etc.), gender (male, female) Semantic structure analysis: different meanings within different context (e.g. spirit or Holy Spirit)
Formal equivalence (later formal correspondence ) message should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language (Nida 1964: 159) In other words, formal equivalence is focused on the message of the ST, which produces a TT which follows the content and the linguistic structures as closely as possible.
Dynamic equivalence (later functional equivalence ) the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message (Nida 1964: 166, Nida and Taber 1969: 12) In other words, in dynamic equivalence, the message of the ST is transferred in such a way that the effect on the receptor is as similar as possible to the effect on the ST reader. This requires the translator to adjust the text to the target culture.
The relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message (Nida 1964: 159) Q1: But how is this to be achieved when the TT audience is far removed from the ST context? Q2: How does the translator determine who the audience is and what the ST author s intention was?
Friends, Episode 1, Rachel has just run away from her wedding and describes her ex-fiancée Barry by saying: And then, I got really freaked out, and that s when it hit me: how Much Barry looks like Mr Potato Head. Y know, I mean, I always knew he looked familiar, but... E allora mi sono davvero spaventata e mi sono anche accorta di come Barry assomiglia a E.T. Cioè capite, mi era sempre sembrato un viso familiare ma...
Peter Newmark (1916-2011) was a UK-based translation theorist. His approach departs from Nida s receptor-oriented focus and rejects the idea that full equivalent effect can ever be fully achieved in translation (e.g., in the case of very old texts).
Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original (Newmark 1981: 39)
Werner Koller was German translation theorist based in Norway. He proposes a hierarchy of five types of equivalence according to the communicative situation: Denotative equivalence (extralinguistic context) Connotative equivalence (lexical choices) Text-normative equivalence (text types) Pragmatic equivalence (receiver-oriented) Formal equivalence (style and aesthetics)
Correspondence is a concept from contrastive linguistics that describes the resemblance and difference between words and structures in their linguistic forms. In Koller s model, correspondence falls within the field of contrastive linguistics, which compares two language systems, and describes differences and similarities contrastively. For instance, the identification of false friends and signs of interference.
An invariant against which two text segments can be measured to gauge variation from a core meaning ST TT A bit with fire: Desperate situations The medicine for a mad horse require desperate measures Tertium comparationis Strong action is needed to control a difficult person?
Why do you think that there has been such heated debate over equivalence? How can the concepts discussed above be used in translator training today? Newmark (1981: 39, see Further Reading) states: In communicative as in semantic translation, provided that equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
What we studied so far: Munday, Jeremy (2012, Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and Applications, 3rd edition, Routledge, London/New York CHAPTERS 1, 2, 3
Dr. Margherita Dore margherita.dore@uniroma1.it
Translation strategies and procedures Vinay and Darbelnet s model Catford and translation shifts Option, markedness and stylistic shifts The cognitive process of translation Ways of investigating cognitive processing
Jean Paul Vinay (1910-1999) and Jean Darbelnet (1904-1990) In their Stylistique comparée du français et de l anglais (1958, Comparative Stylistics of French and English, 1995) carried out a comparative stylistic analysis between English and French and noted differences between the languages and translation shifts and identified different translation strategies and procedures.
Strategy is an overall orientation of the translator (e.g. towards free or literal translation, towards the TT or ST) Procedure a specific technique or method used by the translator at a certain point in a text (e.g. the borrowing of a word from the SL, the addition of an explanation or a footnote in the TT)
Strategies: Direct translation occurs when two languages show close correspondence in terms of lexis and structure; it uses borrowing, calque and literal translation. Oblique translation applies when restructuring is involved; it uses transposition, modulation, equivalence and adaptation. These categories operate at different levels of language: the lexicon, the syntactic structures and the message.
Strategy Explaination Examples Borrowing Calque : the SL is transferred directly into the TL the SL expression or structure is literally translated perestroika, datcha, sushi, kimono, kebab, computer, mouse Scence-fiction; flea market Finestra a bovindo; Literal Translation Word-for-word rendering The pen is on the table La penna è sul tavolo
Procedure Explaination Examples Transposition Modulation : Equivalence Change of one part of a speech for another Change the semantics or point of view of the SL Same situation by different stylistic or structural means We try harder= Ci facciamo in quattro per voi! For patrons only= Riservato ai clienti. It is not difficult= è facile No smoking = Vietato fumare Like a bull in a china shop= Come un elefante in un negozio d cristalli Adaptation Changing the cultural reference that does not exist in the TC Mr Potato Head= ET* *although it should normally be a target culture reference.
Procedure Explaination Examples Amplification TL uses more words The charge against him= la condanna a suo carico. False Friend Similar term in SL and TL but different meaning Compensation If a ST nuance can t be save in the TL, one can be insert in : another place Explicitation Generalizatio n Implicit information in the ST are made explicit in the TT A more general word is used in the TT This is a library= Questa è una biblioteca (non una libreria) Tu/lei= Mr/Sir; Mrs/Madam The doctor= dottore/dottoressa? Cottage cheese= formaggio fresco
Servitude refers to the obligatory transpositions and modulations due to a difference between the two language systems (e.g. cold water -> acqua fredda) Option refers to non-obligatory changes that may be due to the translator s own style and preferences, or to a change in emphasis. It is option, according to Vinay and Darbelnet, that should be the translator s main concern. (e.g. my mother calls at 6.00pm -> alle 6 mi chiama mia madre)
John C. Catford (1917-2009) In his book A Linguistic Theory of Translation (1965), Catford applies advances in linguistics to translation by following the linguistic model of Firth and Halliday. Catford distinguishes between formal correspondence and textual equivalence in Translation. He also makes a detailed description of the translation shifts that take place in the translation process.
Formal correspondent is defined as any TL category (unit, class, element of structure, etc.) which can be said to occupy, as nearly as possible, the "same" place in the "economy" of the TL as the given SL category occupies in the SL (e.g. belongings= effetti personali) textual equivalent refers to any TL text or portion of text which is observed to be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of text (e.g. he searched through my belongings= controllò la mia borsa) (Catford 1965: 27)
In Catford s own words (1965: 73; 2000: 141), translation shifts are departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL to the TL level shifts (when something is expressed by grammar in one language and by lexis in another, (e.g. due turisti sarebbero stati uccisi= two tourists have been reported killed) Category shifts: structural shifts (grammar structure) class shifts (parts of speech, e.g. adj. vs adv.) unit (or rank) shifts (sentence vs clause) intra-system shifts (advice= consigli) Taxonomies are classifications of such shifts in an attempt to uncover the translation procedures and strategies
Jiří Levý (1926-1967) Literary and translation theoretician. In his book, The Art of Translation he introduces the literary aspect of the expressive function or style of a text and the goal of a translation is achieving and equivalent aesthetic effect. Markedness a choice or patterns of choices that stand out as unusual or prominent Stylistic shifts linguistic fingerprint of the translator
Bob Creeley Translation (from Echoes, 1982) You haven t all the time been here if not seen, not thought of as present, for when I looked I saw nothing, when I looked again, you had returned. This echo, sweet spring, makes a human sound you have no need of, facts so precede, but you hear; you hear it, must feel the intent wetness, mushy. I melt again into you ample presence. Invisibile sei sempre stata Non pensata come presente Perché quando ti cercavo Vedevo niente E quanto guardavo ancora Eri tornata. Eco, dolce sorgente Che crea suono umano Di cui non c è bisogno I fatti lo precedono Ma senti, soltanto Devi sentire l intento Molle umore Mi sciolgo ancora Alla tua immane presenza
Observation of the translation process and what skills and competences are required (Bell) Seleskovitch and Lederer s Interpretive model, initially applied to conference interpreting, explains translation as an overlapping three-stage process of: understanding, to grasp the sense of the ST deverbalization, rephrase the sense of the ST re-expression, create the TT on the basis of the deverbalized sense.
Relevance theory: Gutt describes translation as an example of a communication based around a cause-and-effect model of inferencing and interpretation. Translators need to decide if it is possible to communicate the informative intention, whether to translate descriptively or interpretively, what the degree of resemblance to the ST should be, and so on. These decisions are based on the translator s evaluation of the cognitive environment of the receiver.
Think-aloud protocols is a method of investigating the translation process, coming from the field of psychology and developed by Ericsson and Simon (1984). The translator is asked to verbalize his/her thought processes while translating or immediately afterwards (the latter known as retrospective protocol ), often with no prompting on content. Triangulated with technological innovations: Video-recordings Interviews/questionnaires Key-stroke logging (recording of keyboard activity) Eye-tracking
Translation style, can the translator s linguistic fingerprint be found if the TT is compared to that of the ST and its author s? Examine more closely Seleskovitch and Lederer s Interpretive model of translation. In what ways does the model differ from Nida s three-phase model studied in Chapter 3? Which do you feel has more potential for explaining the translation process?
What we studied so far: Munday, Jeremy (2012, Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and Applications, 3rd edition, Routledge, London/New York CHAPTERS 1, 2, 3, 4