RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 4b515c-YTVlO



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION

Description:

RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1900s - 1930s: W. Benjamin, E. Pound, Jorge Luis Borges, Ortega y Gasset 1940s - 1950s: Vladimir Nabokov, Jean ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:175
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 29
Provided by: litUgalR
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION


1
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION
2
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION
  • 1900s - 1930s W. Benjamin, E. Pound, Jorge Luis
    Borges, Ortega y Gasset
  • 1940s - 1950s Vladimir Nabokov, Jean-Paul Vinay
    and Jean Darbelnet, Willard van Orman Quine, R.
    Jakobson
  • 1960s - 1970s E. Nida, J.C. Catford, Jiri Levy,
  • K. Reiss, James Holmes, G. Steiner, Itamar
    Even-Zohar, Gideon Toury, Hans Vermeer, Andre
    Lefevere, William Frawley, Philip Lewis, Antoine
    Berman, Soshana Blum-Kulka, Lory Chamberlain
  • 1990s Ernst-August Gutt, Basil Hatim and Jan
    Mason, Keith Harvey, Lawrence Venuti

3
TRANSLATION THEORY
  • a complete theory of translation has three
  • components
  • specification of function and goal
  • description and analysis of operations
  • critical comment on relationships between goal
    and operations
  • (Kelly 19791)

4
TRANSLATION THEORY
  • ? presumes a systematic theory of language with
  • which it overlaps completely or from which it
    derives
  • as a special case according to demonstrable rules
    of
  • deduction and application.
  • (Steiner 1975 280, emphasis in the original)

5
TRANSLATION THEORY
  • always rests on particular assumptions about
    language use, even if they are no more than
    fragmentary hypotheses that remain implicit or
    unacknowledged.
  • assumptions seem to have fallen into two large
    categories instrumental and hermeneutic
  • (Kelly 1979, in Venuti 2000 5)

6
TRANSLATION THEORIES
  • product-oriented ? concerned with a
    "text-focused" empirical description of
    translations, and with larger corpuses of
    translations in a specific period, language or
    discourse type.
  • function-oriented ? introduced a cultural
    component which affected the reception of the TT.
  • process-oriented ? concerned with the problem of
    the "black box", i.e. what was going on in the
    translator's mind.
  • (Holmes 1972, 197512-14)

7
TRANSLATION THEORIES
  • product-oriented ? emphasis laid on the
    functional aspects of the TL text in relation to
    the SL text
  • process-oriented ? emphasis on the analysis of
    what actually takes place during the translating
    process.

8
TRANSLATION THEORIES AREAS OF INTEREST
  • The History of Translation ? investigates the
    theories of translation and translation criticism
    at different times, the methodological
    development of translation, and the analysis of
    the work of individual translators.
  • Translation in the TL Culture ? investigates
    single texts or authors, the influence of a text,
    or author on the absorption of the norms of the
    translated text into the TL system and on the
    principles of selection which operate within that
    system.
  • Translation and Linguistics ? concerned with the
    comparative arrangement of linguistic elements of
    the SL and TL texts regarding the phonemic,
    morphemic, lexical, syntagmatic and syntactic
    levels ?it includes the problems of linguistic
    equivalence, linguistic untranslability, and the
    translation problems of non-literary texts.
  • Translation and Poetics ? the literary
    translation theory and practice.
  • (Bassnett-McGuire 19917-8)

9
THE MISERY AND SPLENDOUR OF TRANSLATION
  • great translation must carry with it the most
    precise sense possible of the resistant, of the
    barriers intact at the heart of understanding
    (Steiner 1975 378).
  • translation ? renders in the target language what
    the source language tends to silence (Venuti
    2000 54, Popa 2008 35)
  • the misery of translation ? its impossibility,
    because of the linguistic and cultural
    differences between languages
  • the splendour of translation ? the translators
    ability to manipulate these differences and force
    the reader to go into the tradition and universe
    of the foreign language text

10
THE MUSTS OF A GOOD TRANSLATION
  • Tytler' s rules ? normative prescriptions
    deriving from the subjective and evaluative
    description of a "good translation
  • ? the translation should give a complete
    transcript of
  • the ideas of the original work
  • ? the style and manner of writing should be of
    the
  • same character with that of the original
  • ? the translation should have all the ease of
    the original composition.
  • a "good translation" ? the translation in which
    the merit of the original is so completely
    transfused into another language, as to be as
    distinctly apprehended, and as strongly felt by a
    native of the country to which that language
    belongs, as it is by those who speak the language
    of the original work
  • (Tytler 179179, quoted by R. Bell 199111).

11
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1920s - 1930s
  • translation ? recreating the values accruing to
    the foreign text over time and his utopian vision
    of linguistic harmony (Benjamin 1923)
  • the translators happy and creative infidelity
    (Borges 1935)
  • translation ? a distinctive linguistic practice,
    as a literary genre apart. (Ortega. Y. Gasset
    1937) the cause of the enormous difficulty of
    translation ? all peoples silence some things
    in order to be able to say others (Ortega. Y.
    Gasset 1937)

12
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1950s
  • translation theories ? focused on the concept of
    translatability
  • Willard van Orman Quines (1950) later pragmatic
    view of translation ? centered on meaning as
    conventional, socially circumscribed, the
    translated (foreign) text being rewritten in
    accordance with the values, beliefs and
    expressive means of the foreign language culture
  • the process of dissemination of meaning, time,
    people, cultural boundaries becomes the necessity
    of demonstrating that any language could always
    be shadowed or possessed by another (Nabokov
    1974 qtd by Bontila 2006, in Gonzales and Tolron
    2006 144).

13
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1960s -1970s
  • translating ? a process of communicating the
    foreign text by establishing a relationship of
    identity or analogy with it (Venuti 2000 121).
  • based on the concept of equivalence ? provided
    standards to evaluate translations faithful
    vs. bad translations
  • beautiful vs. ugly translations
  • G. Mounin (1963) ? the concept of equivalence is
    based on universals of language and culture.
  • equivalence ? submitted to lexical, grammatical
    and stylistic analysis.
  • text typology and text function ? essential in
    establishing the degree of equivalence between
    the ST and TT

14
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1960s -1970s
  • Koller (1979 186-191, 1989 99-104) ? main
    concern was equivalence typology
  • TYPES OF EQUIVALENCE
  • ?denotative depending on an invariance of
    content
  • ?connotative depending on similarities of
    register, dialect and style
  • ?text-normative based on usage norms specific
    to the text type
  • ?pragmatic related to the degree of
    comprehensibility in the TC ?
  • ? PRAGMATIC EQUIVALENCE ? made the TT
  • easily comprehensible in the TC
  • ? FORMAL EQUIVALENCE ? caused linguistic and
    cultural approximations

15
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1960s -1970s
  • J. C. Catford (1965) ? gave a thorough
    description of the grammatical and lexical shifts
    in translation, which were departures from
    formal correspondence.
  • J. Levy (1965) considers that pragmatic
    translation involves a gradual semantic
    shifting due to the fact that translators have
    to choose from many possible solutions. In his
    opinion, shifts work to generalize and clarify
    meaning, changing the style of a literary work
    into a dry and uninspiring description of things
    and actions (Levy 1965 78-80, qtd. in Venuti
    2000 122).
  • A. Popovic (1970) ? shifts in translation do not
    occur because the translator wishes to change a
    work, but because he strives to reproduce it as
    faithfully as possible, the kind of faithfulness
    he has in mind being functional, with the
    translator using suitable equivalents in the
    milieu of his time and society (Popovic 1970
    80,82, qtd. in Venuti 2000 122).

16
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1970s -1980s
  • K. Reiss (1971) ? the functionally equivalent
    translation needs to be based on a detailed
    semantic, syntactic and pragmatic analysis of
    the foreign text (Venuti 2000 122).
  • Venuti argues, the pragmatic translator doesnt
    simply analyse the linguistic and cultural
    features of the foreign text, but reverbalizes
    them according to the values of a different
    language and culture, often applying what House
    calls a filter to aid the receptors
    comprehension of the difference (Venuti 2000
    122).
  • I. Even-Zohar and G. Toury ? considered
    literature as a polysystem of interrelated
    forms and cannons that represented norms
    constraining the translators choices and the
    translation strategies.
  • Even Zohar argued that translation may adhere to
    norms rejected by the source language.

17
RECENT VIEWS ON TRANSLATION 1980s
  • translation is not a sealed, "nomological"
    science but a
  • "cognitive/hermeneutic/associative" one (Wills
    1982 16).
  • A translation theory is based upon
  • a) the concept of a universal language
  • b) a belief that deep-structure transfer is
    possible by a hermeneutic process
  • c) a qualitative ranking of texts, from a high
    level incorporating art and science texts to a
    low level including business and pragmatic
    texts.
  • translation research must develop a frame of
    reference to view a text as a communication-orient
    ed configuration with a thematic, functional and
    text-pragmatic dimension.

18
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
19
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • intralingual translation/ rewording ? an
    interpretation of verbal signs by means of other
    signs in the same language
  • interlingual translation/ translation proper ? an
    interpretation of verbal signs by means of some
    other language, which describes the process of
    transfer from SL to TL
  • intersemiotic translation/transmutation ? an
    interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs
    of nonverbal sign systems.
  • (Jakobson 1959232-9)

20
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • rank-bound translations ? the selection of TL
    equivalents is deliberately confined to one rank,
    used in machine translation, usually at word or
    morpheme rank
  • Rank-bound translations set up word-to-word or
    morpheme-to-morpheme equivalences, but not
    equivalences between high-rank units such as the
    group, clause, or sentence such translations are
    often "bad" in that they involve using TL
    equivalents which are not appropriate to their
    location in the TL text, and which are not
    justified by the interchangeability of SL and TL
    texts in one and the same situation (Catford
    196525)
  • unbounded translations, i.e. normal, total
    translations in which equivalences shift freely
    up and down the rank scale. (Catford 196524-5)

21
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • full vs. partial translations, referring to the
    extent in a
  • syntagmatic sense
  • full vs. restricted translations related to the
    levels of
  • language involved in the translation process.
  • TOTAL TRANSLATION ? the replacement of SL
    grammar and lexis by equivalent TL grammar and
    lexis with consequential replacement of SL
    phonology / graphology by (non-equivalent) TL
    phonology / graphology.
  • RESTRICTED TRANSLATION ? the replacement of SL
    textual material by equivalent TL textual
    material at only one level (either phonological
    or graphic), or only at one of the two levels of
    grammar and lexis. (Catford 1965)

22
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • free translation
  • ? is always unbounded, as equivalences shunt up
    and down the rank scale, but tend to be at the
    higher ranks, sometimes between larger units than
    the sentence.
  • ? characterised by lexical adaptation to TL
    collocational or "idiomatic" requirements
  • word-for-word translation ? is rank - bound at
    word rank
  • literal translation
  • ? may start from a word-for-word translation but
    may make changes in keeping with the TL grammar
    (e.g. inserting additional words, changing
    structures at any rank, etc)
  • ?may also be a group-group, or a clause-clause
    translation.
  • ? tends to remain lexically word-for-word, i.e.
    to use the highest probability lexical equivalent
    for each lexical item.
  • (Catford 1965)

23
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • dynamic /functional (Nida and Taber 1969) vs.
    formal equivalence (Nida 1964)
  • DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE ? equated with the readers
    shadowy presence in the mind of the translator
  • FORMAL EQUIVALENCE ? equivalence of both form and
    content between the two texts.
  • the equivalent effect ? the desirable result
    rather than the aim of the translation (Newmark
    1981)
  • achieving the equivalent effect is unlikely if
  • ? the purpose of the SL text is to affect and
    the purpose of the TL text is to inform
  • ? there is a clear cultural gap between SL text
    and TL
  • text (in fact, translation merely fills a gap
    between two cultures if, felicitously, there is
    no insuperable cultural clash).

24
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • covert vs.overt translations (House 1977)
  • ? House insisted on how much the foreign text
    depends on its own culture for intelligibility.
  • ? if the significance of a foreign text is
    peculiarly indigenous, it requires a translation
    that is overt or noticeable through its reliance
    on supplementary information, whether in the form
    of expansions, insertions or annotations (House
    1977 24).

25
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • communicative translation
  • ? reader-oriented
  • ? pragmatic-oriented
  • ? functionally-oriented
  • semantic translation
  • ? the translator may translate less important
    words by culturally neutral third of functional
    terms but not by cultural equivalents (Newmark
    198846)
  • ? the translator is faithful to the ST ignoring
    the real world of the target culture
  • (Newmark 1977/1981/1988)

26
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • paraphrastic? offering a free version of the
    original, with omissions and additions prompted
    by the exigencies of form, the conventions
    attributed to the consumer, and the translators
    ignorance
  • lexical ? rendering the basic meaning of words
    and their order
  • literal ? rendering, as closely as the
    associative and syntactical capacities of another
    language allow, the exact contextual meaning of
    the original.
  • (Nabokov 1974,1,vii-viii,qtd. in Bontila 2006
    145)

27
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • general translation? the translation or
    interpretation of non-specific language that does
    not require any specialized vocabulary or
    knowledge.
  • specialized translation ?specific to different
    domains of activity
  • financial translation
  • literary translation
  • medical translation
  • scientific translation
  • technical translation
  • legal translation

28
TYPES OF TRANSLATION
  • literary translation ? translation of literary
    texts (poetry, drama, novels, memoires, etc.)
  • non-literary translation ? translation of
    non-literary, or pragmatic texts
  • (Ionescu 200037)
  • The difference between literary and non-literary
    translation
  • is that the latter translates what is in the
    text, whereas the
  • former must translate what the text implies.
  • (Ionescu 200038)
About PowerShow.com