Theme 3. Basic concepts of Translation Studies

If we look at a general dictionary, we find the following definition of the term translation: translation n. 1 the act or an instance of translating. 2 a written or spoken expression of the meaning of a word, speech, book, etc. in another language. (The Concise Oxford English Dictionary)

The first of these two senses relates to translation as a process, the second to the product. This immediately means that the term translation encompasses very distinct perspectives. The first sense focuses on the role of the translator in taking the original or source text (ST) and turning it into a text in another language (the target text, TT). The second sense centres on the concrete translation product produced by the translator.

Translation also exists between different varieties of the same language and into what might be considered less conventional languages, such as braille, sign language and morse code.

This target text (TT, that is the translation) is not fully identical with ST as to its form or content due to the limitations imposed by the formal and semantic differences between the source lan­guage (SL) and TL. Nevertheless the users of TT identify it, to all intents and purposes, with ST - functionally, structurally and semantically. The structure of the translation should follow that of the original text: there should be no change in the sequence of narration or in the ar­rangement of the segments of the text. Of major importance is the semantic identification of the transla­tion with ST. It is presumed that the translation has the same meaning as the original text. The pre­sumption of semantic identity between ST and TT is based on the various degrees of equivalence of their meanings.

The following sstatements express a classical dichotomy in translation between sense/content on the one hand and form/style on the other.

The sense may be translated, while the form often cannot. And the point where form begins to contribute to sense is where we approach untranslatability. This clearly is most likely to be in poetry, song, advertising, punning and so on, where sound and rhyme and double meaning are unlikely to be recreated in the TL.

Translatability is a relative notion and has to do with the extent to which, despite obvious differences in linguistic structure (grammar, vocabulary, etc.), meaning can still be adequately expressed across languages. But, for this to be possible, meaning has to be understood not only in terms of what the ST contains, but also and equally significantly, in terms of such factors as communicative purpose, target audience and purpose of translation.

There are two universals of translation:

1. The law of growing standardization, which states that ‘in translation, textual relations obtaining in the original are often modified, sometimes to the point of being totally ignored, in favour of habitual options offered by a target repertoire.

2. The law of interference, which sees interference from ST to TT as “a kind of default”. Interference refers to ST linguistic features being copied in the TT, either negatively or positively.

Translation process deals with system of languages not only as with abstract objects but as with certain speech creations. For any speech creation the existence of the following factors is necessary:

1) subject («theme») of the message;

2) situation, i.e. the environment where the communication takes place;

3)participantsof the speech act, i.e. «sender» and «recipient».

Basic sources: [1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 11]

Supplementary sources: [15, 17, 25]

Theme 3. Formation and development of Translation Studies before the 20^th century

In the history of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic world, there are three key periods which have determined and defined those three civilizations, and all three periods are characterized by a high level of activity in the field of translation. The first is the beginning of the Christian era. The second begins with the birth of Islam in the seventh century, and culminates in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The third key period is today. All major civilizations of the world are at present in a state of flux. There is another approach to distinguishing the periods of T and TS history.

- Prescientific (aphorisms and sayings of translator, such as Cicero, Jerome, Servantes)

- Theory of translation as a science (60s of the XXth century)

Translation is one of the ancient human activities. It can be supposed that the first translators were women. The innumerous facts demonstrate the long history of translation. Of course, firstly translations were only oral, later on with the development of written texts written translators started to appear.

It is known that either in Babylon or in Assyria there were groups of translators, informing the conquered peoples of the authorities orders. Meanwhile a special translators training school was established in Ancient Egypt. There the first mentioned translator was the priest Anhurmesus (1314-1200 BC). There literature almost didn’t exist, so the translator had the function of business communication. The first grammar books and dictionaries were known to appear in Ancient Sumer. Also there were schools for translators. Translation not only of business texts but also of literary ones started to develop in Ancient Babylon. It illustrated the new translation function – continuing of literary tradition. In Ancient Greece translator played the role of hermeneut. Translations almost didn’t exist. In literary texts translation the main approach was adaptation.

Up until the second half of the twenties century, translation theory seemed locked in what George Steiner (1998) calls A ‘sterile’ debate over the triad of “literal”, “free” and “faithful” translation. The distinction between “word-for-word” and “sense-for-sense” translation goes back to Cicero and St. Jerome and forms the basis of key writings on translation in centuries nearer to our own.

Cicero’s approach: “And I didn’t translate them as an interpreter, but as an orator, keeping the same ideas and forms, or as one might say, the ‘figures’ of thought, but in language which conforms to our usage. And in so doing, I didn’t hold it necessary to render word for word, but I preserved the general style and force of the language”

St. Jerome’s approach: “Now I not only admit, but freely announce that in translating from the Greek – except of course in the case of the Holy Scripture, where even the syntax contains a mystery – I render not word-for-word, but sense-for-sense.”

1) Word-for-word Translation This method is often demonstrated with the target language (TL) immediately below the source language (SL) word. The SL word order is preserved and the words translated singly by their most common meanings, out of context.

2) Sense-for-sense or literal Translation The SL grammatical construction are changed to their nearest TL equivalent, but the lexical words are again translated singly, out of context.

The England of the seventeenth century – with Denham, Cowley and Dryden – marked an important step forward in translation theory with ‘deliberate, reasoned statements, unmistakable in their purpose and meaning’. At that time translation into English was almost exclusively confined to verse renderings of Greek and Latin classics, some of which were extremely free. Such a very free approach to translation produced a reaction, notably from English poet and translator, John Dryden, whose description of the translation process would have enormous impact on subsequent translation theory and practice. Dryden in 1680 reduced all translation to three categories:

1. Metaphase

2. Paraphrase

3. Imitation

Other writers on translation also began to state their ‘principles’ in a similarly prescriptive fashion. One of the first had been Etienne Dolet. He set out five principles in order of importance as follows:

1. The translator must perfectly understand the sense and material of the original author, although he should feel free to clarify obscurities.
2. The translator should have a perfect knowledge of both SL and TL, so as not to lessen the majesty of the language
3. The translator should avoid word-for-word renderings.
4. The translation should avoid Latin and unusual forms.
5. The translator should assemble and liaise words to avoid clumsiness

In English, perhaps the first systematic study of translation after Dryden is Alexander Tytler’s ‘Essay on the principles of translation’ (1797). And where Dolet has five ‘principles’, Tytler has three general ‘laws’ or ’rules’:

1. The translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original works.

2. The style and manner of writing should be of the same character with the original.

3. The translation should have all the ease of the original composition.

Basic sources:[1,2,5, 15]

Supplementary sources: [1, 10, 31]

Theme 4. Formation and development of Translation Studies in the 20^th century

However, although the practice of translating is long established, the study of the field developed into n academic discipline only in the second half of the twentieth century. Before that translation had normally been merely an element of language learning in modern language courses. In fact from the late eighteenth century to the 1060s, language learning in secondary schools in many countries had come to be dominated by what was known as the grammar –translation method. In the USA, translation – specifically literary translation was promoted in universities in the 1960s by the translation workshop concept. Running parallel to this approach was that of comparative literature, where literature is studied and compared transnationally and transculturally, necessitating the reading of some literature in translation. Another area in which translation became the subject of research was contrastive analysis. The contrastive approach heavily influenced other studies, such as Vinay and Darbelnet’s and Catford’s, which overtly stated their aim of assisting translation research. While, in some universities, translation continues to be studied as a module on applied linguistics the evolving field of translation studies can point to its own systematic models that have incorporated other linguistic models and developed them for its own purposes. At the same time, the construction of the new discipline has involved moving away from considering translation as primarily connected to language teaching and learning. Instead the new focus is the specific study of what happens in and around translating and translation.

The more systematic, and mostly linguistic-oriented, approach to the study of translation began to emerge in the 1950s and 1960s.This more systematic and ‘scientific’ approach in many ways began to mark out the territory of the academic investigation of translation. The word ‘science’ was used by Nida in the title of his 1964 book ‘Toward a science of translating’. The surge in translation studies since the 1970s has seen different areas of Holmes’s map come to the fore. Contrastive analysis has fallen by the wayside. The linguistic-oriented ‘science’ of translation has continued strongly in Germany which saw the rise of theories centered around text types. While the influence of discourse analysis and systematic functional grammar, which views language as a communicative act in a socio-cultural context, has been prominent over the past decades, especially in Australia and UK. The late 1970s and 1080s also saw the rise of a descriptive approach that had its origins in a comparative literature and Russian Formalism. For years, the practice of translation was considered to be derivative and secondary, an attitude that inevitably devalued any academic study of the activity. Now, after much neglect and repression, translation study has become well established.

Since the 1050s, there has been a variety of linguistic approaches to the analysis of translation that have proposed detailed lists or taxonomies in an effort to categorize the translation process. The main among them are the translation shift approach, functional theories, discourse and register analysis approaches, systems theories, cultural studies, philosophical theories of T and integrated approach.

Among the contemporary tendencies of translation study is broadening of international contacts where T provides intercultural communication and understanding. Also new technologies are used, such as: machine translation, electronic dictionaries, translation memory applications. Moreover still new T types appear: new equipment for simultaneous T moves it to a new level, communal T, subtitling, live synchronization (video).

Basic sources: [2,5, 15, 17]

Supplementary sources: [1, 10, 31]

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском по сайту: