Translation Studies 2 Summary PDF

CHAPTER 1: MAIN ISSUES OF TRANSLATION STUDIES CONCEPT OF TRANSLATION: -​ Translation: (written) -​ Interpretation: (oral) >> It is a new discipline, born during Ancient Rome with the studies of Ancient Greek, Latin and the Bible (also studies not based...

CHAPTER 1: MAIN ISSUES OF TRANSLATION STUDIES CONCEPT OF TRANSLATION: -​ Translation: (written) -​ Interpretation: (oral) >> It is a new discipline, born during Ancient Rome with the studies of Ancient Greek, Latin and the Bible (also studies not based on sacred texts). “Translation” → Latin: “translatio” = “to carry over”. 3 MEANINGS: Phenomenon of translating, Translated text, the process of translation. >> The process of translating between two different written languages involves the changing of the original written text (ST) in the original verbal language (SL) into a written text (TT) in a different language (TL).​ ​ ​ ​ ST in SL —> TT in TL -​ ST: source text; -​ TT: target text; -​ SL: source language; -​ TL: target language. - ROMAN JAKOBSON: Russo-American structuralist who distinguished 3 types of translation in his work “On linguistic aspect of translation”. 1.​ Intralingual: “rewording/paraphrase”, interpretation by means of the same language (i.e summary in different register of the same language); 2.​ Interlingual: “translation proper”, interpretation by means of some other language (traditional focus of translation studies); 3.​ Intersemiotic: “transmutation/different mode” interpretation by means of non-verbal sign systems. ​ ​ >> Language is but one. The correct term is semiotics because translation is not always limited to verbal languages. - MARIA TYMOCZKO: “We can’t always use lexical fidelity to the ST, so the TT will have a big change in terms of form.” WHAT IS “TRANSLATION STUDIES” ?: Academic research area that has expanded in the recent years thanks to: -​ The expansion in specialized translating and interpreting programs; -​ Proliferation of conferences, books and journals about translating; -​ More demand for general and analytical instruments -​ Increase in international organizations. HISTORY OF THE DISCIPLINE: Translation was fundamental for the dissemination of religious texts. The first to talk about it were Horace, Cicero (1st Century BCE) and St. Jerome (4th Century CE). ​ >> in Europe: ideological conflicts especially during the Reformation (16th Century). PHASES OF TRANSLATION STUDIES: 1.​ Linguistic Stage: 18th Century-1960s, translation was studied as a language learning methodology + grammar translation was common; 2.​ Communicative Stage: from 1950-60s, with the aid of workshops, comparative literature (studying and comparing literature transitionally/culturally) and constructive linguistics (studying 2 languages in contrast to find differences) spread; more systematic and linguistic oriented approaches were developed and translation was viewed in a scientific way; - JAMES HOLMES/GIDEON TOURY’S MAP: “The name and nature of translation studies” was written by James Holems. He felt the need to forge ‘other communication channels, cutting across the traditional disciplines to reach all scholars working in the field, from whatever background’. He created a framework describing what translation studies covers later on presented by his scholar Gideon Toury. a.​ Translation Studies: i.​ Pure: ii.​ Applied: b.​ Pure: i.​ Theoretical: the ii.​ Descriptive: the description of establishment of general the phenomena of principles to explain and translation. predict such phenomena; c.​ Theoretical: the results of DTS evolve into: i.​ General: writings that seek to describe or account for every ii.​ Partial: theoretical studies are type of translation and to restricted according to the make generalizations that will parameters described below. be relevant for translation as a whole; d.​ Descriptive: it examines the product, the function and the process. i.​ Product oriented (DTS) examines existing translations. ii.​ Function oriented (DTS): the study of contexts rather that texts, the description of the function of translation in the recipient sociocultural context/situation; iii.​ Process oriented (DTS) psychology of translation, trying to find out what happens in the mind of the translator. e.​ Partial: i.​ Medium restricted: subdivides by humans and machines; ii.​ Area restricted: restricted to specific languages or groups of languages; iii.​ Rank restricted: restricted to a level of the word or sentence; iv.​ Text-type restricted: refers to types and genres;  v.​ Time restricted: limited to specific time frames and periods; vi.​ Problem restricted: refers to certain problems (i.e. equivalence). f.​ Applied: concerns applications to the practice of translation i.​ Translator training: teaching methods, testing techniques, curriculum design; ii.​ Translator aids: dictionaries and grammars; iii.​ Translation criticism: evaluation of translations, marking of students translations and the reviews of published translation - TOURY’S MAP SUMMARY: James S. Holmes, American-Dutch poet, translator and translation scholar, proposed both name and structure. His book “The name and nature of translation studies” is considered the statement for the discipline which he thought has limitations because it is still linked to other disciplines. >> He developed a framework in which he describes what translation covers. - VAN DOORSLAER CONCEPTUAL MAP (2007): This map draws a line between “translation” and “translation studies”, reflecting the different interests of research. -​ Translation: the act of translating, divided into: -​ Lingual mode: interlingual, intralingual, … -​ Media: printed, audiovisual, electronic, … -​ Mode: convert/overt translation, direct/indirects translation, mother/other tongue translation, pseudo-translation, retranslation, … -​ Field: political, journalistic, technical, literary, … -​ Translation studies: divided into: -​ Approaches: cultural approach, linguistic approach, … -​ Theories: general translation theory, polysystem theory, … -​ Research methods: descriptive, empirical, … -​ Applied translation studies: criticism, didactics, … CHAPTER 2: TRANSLATION THEORY BEFORE THE 20TH CENTURY “LITERAL” VS “FREE” DEBATE: Word-for-Word VS Sense-for-Sense? A sterile debate over “triadic model of literalism”, “paraphrase” and “free imitation”. The distinction between “word-for-word” (literal) and “sense-for-sense” (free) goes back to Cicero (106-43 AC) and St. Jerome (347-420 AC) and has dominated translation theory before the 20th Century. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ pre-linguistic period of translation ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ (Cicero 46 AC/1960 AC 364) The translation studies often read the “interpreter” as being the literal (word for word), while the “orator” produces a speech for the listeners (sense for sense). ​ ​ >> In Roman tradition word-for-word translation was more common. - HORACE: He criticized word-for-word translation and influenced ST. Jerome (most famous of western translators), who cites Cicero to justify his own translation of the Bible. >> St. Jerome: translated the new testament, correcting the earlier Latin translations from Greek and returned to Septuagint for the old testament. ​ ​ ​ >> translation of the Hebrew Bible. >> “De Optimo genere interpretandi”: here he says that he translated sense-for-sense and defined word-for-word translation as literal and sense-for-sense translation as free. ​ ​ >> rejected because it did not maintain the sense of the ST. CHINESE TRANSLATION OF THE BUDDHIST SANSKRIT SUTRAS (148-1100 CE): -​ First phase (148-265 CE): word for word; -​ Second phase (256-589 CE): free translation/sense for sense translation; -​ Third phase (589-1100 CE): Xuan Zang was the key figure here; >> The choice: “make a free polished and shortened version adapted to the taste of the Chinese public, or a faithful, literal, repetitious and therefore unreadable translation”. Dao’an (312-385 CE): “5 losses to the original” Dao’an was a religious leader who directed the extensive translation “programme” of the Buddhist sutras. This led the Buddhist translator to a dilemma: whether to make a FREE or LITERAL version. He lists 5 elements called “shiben” where the meaning is subject to a change in translation. 1.​ The foreign words are entirely reversed, and to make them follow the Chinese word order is the final loss of the original. >> Copying with the flexibility of the Sanskrit syntax by reversing to a standard Chinese order; 2.​ The foreign sutras esteem raw material, whereas the Chinese are fond of elegant style; if the transmission is to fit the feeling of the many, it will have to match elegant style. This is the second loss to the original. >> The enhancement of the literariness of the ST to adapt to an elegant Chinese style; 3.​ The foreign sutras are minutely detailed, and regarding their recitative exclamations and repeated exhortations, they do not shy away from reiterating them three or four times. Now, cutting them off is the third loss to the original. >> The omission of repetitive exclamation; 4.​ In the foreign sutras, there are commentaries which elucidate meaning that truly seem like disorderly phrases. Removing about 1.500 words of the words of the commentaries entails the fourth loss of the original. >> The reduction of the commentaries that accompany the TTs; 5.​ After the subject is completed, it is approached once more from another side, and the authors jump back to previous sentences; and what once was previous, now becomes the  new discourse, which has been completely omitted, and that is the fifth loss to the original. >> Reduction or restructuring to ensure more linear and logical flow. He also lists 3 factors (buyi) that necessitated special care: 1.​ The directing of the message to a new audience; 2.​ The sanctity of the ST words; 3.​ The special status of the STs themselves as the cumulative work of so many followers. ABBASID PERIOD (750-1250 CE): The “literal” and “free” poles surface again in the translation tradition of the Arab world, mostly during the “Abbasid Period” where 2 methods were adopted. -​ Literal: highly literal and consists of translating each Greek word with its corresponding Arabic word, borrowing the Greek word into the Arabic if an equivalent is absent; -​ Free: translating “sense for sense”, making a fluent TT that conveys the meaning of the ST without distorting the TL. Salama Carr notes how “translation strategies helped establish a new system of thought that was to become the foundation of Arabic-Islamic culture, both on the conceptual and terminological levels”. HUMANISM AND PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Before the printing press in Europe (15th Century), texts were copied by hand and so were full of errors (St. Jerome’s Bible was unstable due to 1. the many attempts to correct the translation 2. Latin being controlled by the Church). >> The European Humanist Movement: wanted the language to be free from the Church and recover classical Latin and Greek. >> 15th Century: Protestant Reforms led to a schism within the Christianity causing the Bible to be translated into various vernacular languages. >> Every book risked being judged heretical and then banned by the Church (this also meant that the Bible translations dominated the book production). >> Non-literal translation as a weapon: the most famous example of it being a threat to the Church is Martin Luther’s translation into East Central Germany of both the Old and New Testament. >> He used a regional but socially broad dialect to reinforce the variety of the German Language as standard. >> Was also accused of altering the Holy Scriptures but defended himself in “Circular Letter on translation of 1530” >> Rejects literal word-for-word translation. FIDELITY, SPIRIT AND TRUTH: - FLORA AMOS: In the text “Early theories of Translation”, the author Flora Amos says that early translators often differed in the meaning they gave to words like “faithfulness”, “accuracy” and also”translation” itself.  >> concepts later investigated by Louis Kelly, a professor of classics and linguistics at the University of Ottawa. - LOUIS KELLY: Louis Kelly traces in “The True Interpreter” the history of these terms: 1.​ Fidelity: the figure of the “”faithful interpreter”, faithfulness to the meaning rather than the words; 2.​ Spirit: two meanings, “Spiritus” (from Latin) denotes creative energy and inspiration, Saint Augustineused it to refer to the Holy Spirit and St. Jerome used it to refer to both; 3.​ Truth: for St. Augustine spirit and truth were connected (truth = content), for St. Jerome meant the authentic Hebrew Bible. ​ ​ >> all of these three count in translation. In Ancient Rome, the study of languages was divided in two parts: 1.​ Grammar: use of words and sentences; 2.​ Rhetoric: use of words as communication, mostly to persuade. EARLY ATTEMPT AT SYSTEMATIC TRANSLATION THEORY: - JOHN DRYDEN: John Dryden (2nd half of 1600), English poet and translator who wrote a brief description of translation process, he reduced it to 3 categories: 1.​ Metaphrase:word by word and line by line translation (literal); 2.​ Paraphrase: faithful or sense-for-sense translation; 3.​ Imitation: (today called adaptation) free translation. >> 1. criticized, 2. preferred, 3. rejected. - ETIENNE DOLET: Etienne Dolet: “La manière de bien traduire d’une langue en autre” (1540) A French humanist (1509-1546) who wrote “the way of translating well from one language into another” where he sets out 5 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 translator should avoid Latinate and unusual forms; 5.​ The translator should assemble and liaise words eloquently to avoid clumsiness. >> The concern is to reproduce the sense and so to avoid “word for word” translations. - ALEXANDER TYLER: Alexander Tytler: “Essay on the principles of translation” (1790), the first comprehensive and systematic study of translation. He defines a “good translation” as being oriented to the TL reader. > He gives 3 general rules or laws: 1.​ The translator should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work; 2.​ The style and manner of writing should be the same character with that of the original; 3.​ The translator should have all the ease of the original language. >> Tytler’s 1st = Dolet’s 1st and 2nd (perfect knowledge) ​ Tytler’s 2nd = Dolet’s 5th (style) ​ Tytler’s 3rd law talks about having “all the ease of composition” >> the most difficult task. The translator should “adopt the very soul of his author” but it remains unclear how to. - YANFU: Tytler’s law has influenced the work of the Chinese thinker and translator Yan2 Fu4 (1854-1921). He states his 3 principles: -​ Xin4: fidelity/faithfulness/trueness; -​ Da2: fluency/expressiveness/intelligibility/comprehensibility; -​ Ya3: elegance/gracefulness. VALORISATION OF THE FOREIGN: - FRIEDRICH SCHLEIERMACHER: Friedrich Schleiermacher, founder of modern Protestant theology and modern hermeneutics, delivered the lecture “Über die verschiedenen Methoden des Übersetzens". His hermeneutics expounded an approach based on the individual’s feelings and understanding. He distinguishes 2 different types of translator: -​ Dolmetscher: translators for commercial texts; -​ Ubersetzer: translators for scholarly and artistic works. ​ ​ >> Uebersetzer is more creative. He goes beyond the issues of “word for word” or “sense for sense” and considers 2 paths: > His preferred strategy is to move the reader towards the writer. -​ Naturalizing method: brought the foreign text in with the typical patterns of the TL. In this way the translator can help the less competent but intelligent German reader to appreciate the ST (similar to Dryden’s formula); -​ Alienating method: blends the TL word-usage to ensure faithfulness and imports culture and foreign concepts. >> This approach has several consequences:  1.​ The impression of the ST might change based on the education and understanding of the TT readership; 2.​ A special language may be necessary (imaginative words) to compensate where the translator cannot convey the impression of the foreign. TRANSLATION THEORY OF THE 19TH CENTURY AND EARLY 20TH CENTURY IN BRITAIN: Focused on the status of the ST and the form of the TL. - POLEMIC NEWMAN VS ARNOLD: -​ Newman: proposes foreignness of the work by the archaic translation and also a translation that could perfectly reach the audience; -​ Arnold: believes the audience should put their faith into scholars who are the only people qualified to compare the TT to the ST. >> in this period, translation was just for a selected elite. CHAPTER 3: EQUIVALENCE AND EQUIVALENT EFFECT: EQUIVALENCE AND INVISIBILITY: - JAKOBSON & SAUSSURE: Roman Jakobson describes 3 different kinds of translations: intralingual, interlingual and intersemiotic, with interlingual referring to translations between two different written sign systems. He goes on to examine the issues of this type of translation, linguistic meaning and equivalence. ​ >> Equivalence in difference is the cardinal problem of language and the concern of linguists. Jakobson follows the theory of language proposed by Ferdinand Saussure (1857-1913), a Swiss linguist who distinguished between: -​ The signifier: the phonic component of the word; -​ The signifies: the mental concept of the word; -​ The sign: signifier + signifies. >> the sign is completely arbitrary. And also differentiated: -​ The linguistic system: langue; -​ Specific individual utterance (expression): parole. Jakobson also talks about the problem of equivalence in meaning between words in different languages: he points out that “there is ordinarily no full equivalence between code-units” >> Code-units will be different because they belong to different sign systems or languages, which partition reality differently. >> He theorized that: 1.​ Linguistic universalism: there is a shared way of thinking and experiencing the world; 2.​ Linguistic relativism / linguistic determinism: differences in languages shape different conceptualisations of the world. >> 2. TRANSLATABILITY (traducibilità) For him, interlingual translation involved substituting messages in one language for entire messages in some other languages, ST and TT will necessarily be different because they belong to two different sign systems. >> main difference between languages: gender, aspect, semantic fields. “The central problem of translation practice is that of finding TL translation equivalents” ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ - J. C. Catford. THE SCIENCE OF TRANSLATION: - EUGENE NIDA: Pioneer in translation theory and linguistics, in the 1940s he attempted to move Bible translation into a more scientific era by incorporating linguistics. >> Systematic approach: theoretical concepts and terminology from semantics, pragmatics + Chomsky’s work on syntactic structure. ​ ​ ​ >> sentences = series of related levels by rules. His theory took form in two major works in the 1960s: -​ “Towards a Science of Translating”; -​ “The Theory and Practice of Translation”. >> borrows theoretical concepts and terminology from Noam Chomsky’s work on syntactic structure which formed the theory of a universal generative-transformational grammar. >> this universal generative-transformational model analyses sentences into a series of related levels governed by rules. ​ Phrase structure rules → DEEP STRUCTURE + transformational rules = Surface structure ​ ​ ​ >> Kernel sentences are the most basic structures. Nida creates 3 stage system of translation: 1.​ Analysis; 2.​ Transfer; 3.​ Restructuring. A word acquires meaning through context and culture. - There are 3 main types of meaning: 1.​ Linguistic: relationship between different linguistic structures; 2.​ Referential: denotative dictionary meaning; 3.​ Emotive/connotative: associations produced by a word. - 3 techniques to help determine the meanings: 1.​ Hierarchical structuring: differentiates words according to their level; 2.​ Componential analysis: identifies specific features of a range of related words; 3.​ Semantic structure analysis: analyzes different meanings of a word. - 2 basic orientations/types of equivalence: 1.​ Formal equivalence: focuses the attention on the messages itself, in both form and content;  2.​ Dynamic equivalence: based on Nida’s “equivalent effect”, where the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptor and the message. >> To be successful a translation must: make sense, convey the spirit and manner of the ST, have a natural and easy form of expression, and produce a similar response. SEMANTIC AND COMMUNICATIVE TRANSLATION: - NEWMARK: Newmark was an English professor of translation influenced by Nida but departed from the receptor-oriented view. The main problem in translation theory is the gap between emphasis on SL and TL. He introduces two new terms to narrow the gap: 1.​ Communicative translation: produce on readers an effect as close as possible to the one detained on readers of the original; 2.​ Semantic translation: render the exact contextual meaning of the original text. EQUIVALENCE RELATIONS: - WERNER KOLLER: He differentiated: -​ Equivalence: equivalent items in specific ST-TT pairs and contexts; -​ Correspondence: contrastive linguistics, compares two language systems and describes differences and similarities contrastively. The 5 types of equivalence relations: 1.​ Denotative equivalence: related to equivalence of the extralinguistic content of a text. -​ The equivalence between SL and TL words is established on the basis that they refer to the same thing in the real world >> Rabbit – Coniglio; 2.​ Connotative equivalence: related to lexical choices, especially between near–synonyms. -​ The equivalence is established on the basis that the SL and TL words used trigger the same or similar associations in the minds of native speakers of the two languages >> Bunny – Coniglietto; 3.​ Text-normative equivalence: related to text types,with different types of texts behaving in different ways. -​ The equivalence is established on the basis that the SL and TL words chosen are used in the same or similar contexts in their respective languages; 4.​ Pragmatic/communicative equivalence: oriented towards the receiver of the text or message -​ The equivalence is established on the basis that the SL and TL words used have the same effect on their respective readers. It is similar to Nida’s dynamic equivalence; 5.​ Formal equivalence: related to the form and aesthetics of the text, includes wordplays and the individual stylistic features of the ST. -​ It is NOT to be confused with Nida’s formal equivalence. Equivalence is said to be achieved if SL and TL words happen to have similar orthographic or phonological features. Types of Equivalence: -​ One to one equivalence >> Bread – Pain; -​ One-to-Many equivalence: More than -​ One-to-part-of-one equivalence: >> one TL expressions are equivalent to a Mouton – Sheep, Mouton – Mutton; single SL expression >> Bamboo – -​ Nil equivalence: >> Privacy – Privacy. truc, nura, mai, vau; Grammatical Number: -​ English: singular and plural; -​ Chinese: No distinctions between -​ Papua New Guinea: Singular – Plural – singular and plural; Trial – Quadral – Paucal – Plural; Gender: Some languages have gender distinctions. -​ Masculine: German, English; -​ No Gender: Chinese, Japanese, -​ Feminine: Italian, French Russian; Turkish. Familiarity: There are different degrees of familiarity: -​ Tu/Vous – French; -​ Formal Spanish singular: usted – -​ Du/Sie – German; Spain; -​ Informal Spanish singular: Tu – Spain; -​ Informal/forma plural: vosotros – -​ Informal Spanish singular: Vos – South Spain, ustedes – South America. America; Tense: -​ In Russian, Arabic, Hebrew and Hungarian, “to be” is often NOT used in the present tense; -​ English and other Germanic languages: no simple future tense. Future must be expressed through other auxiliary words (will, etc); -​ Russian: no pluperfect (I had gone to the store before he came over to my house); -​ Chinese and Burmese: “tenseless languages” – tense given through adverbs; -​ Hopi (Arizona, USA) 1.​ Timeless truths: the sun is round; 2.​ Known or presumed events: Paris is the capital of France; 3.​ Uncertain events: they will arrive tomorrow. Voice: -​ Many languages have “passive forms”: Latin, Greek, German, English, French; -​ Some languages don’t have “passive forms”: Tagalog, Oneida, Cree, and other Native American languages. Honorifics:  -​ Javanese: there are 3 different ways of saying “house” according to the status level of the person spoken to. -​ Korean: there are 6 different “speech styles” with related grammatical specific forms: -​ Plain style; -​ Polite style; -​ Intimate style; -​ Deferential style. -​ Familiar style; -​ Semiformal style; Word Order: -​ Strict: English, Chinese; -​ Less strict: Arabic,Eskimo, Finnish, German, Russia Non-equivalence: -​ Culture-specific concepts: -​ A concept unknown or -​ English term “Speaker” (of the unlexicalized in target culture; House of Commons); -​ English term “privacy”; -​ Portuguese “Saudade”. -​ Source language concept is known, but not lexicalized in the target language; -​ “Savoury”; -​ “Standard” (e.g. “standard range of products”, not in Arabic); -​ “Win by a landslide”. -​ Source-language word is semantically complex: -​ Portuguese ‘arruação’: “clearing the ground under coffee trees of rubbish and piling it in the middle of the row in order to aid in the recovery of beans dropped during harvesting”. -​ Source and target languages make different distinctions in meanings: -​ Indonesian makes a distinction between going out in the rain without the knowledge it is raining (kehujanan) and going out in the rain with the knowledge that it is raining (hujanhujanan). -​ The target language lacks a specific term: -​ More categories of a word in one language than another (e.g. all the words in English for “house” or “article”). -​ Differences in expressive meaning: -​ The source language word may be neutral – e.g. homosexual, while the target language word, e.g. in Arabic, is pejorative. -​ Differences in form: -​ Suffixes, prefixes (translationese, boyish). -​ Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms: -​ “Ing” form in English, which is less used in other languages. -​ Loan words, false friends: -​ College/colegio (Spanish); -​ Sympathetic/sypathetique (French). Dealing with non-equivalence: -​ Translation by a more general word: -​ Orbit -> revolve (back translation in Spanish); -​ Shampoo -> wash (back translation in Arabic). -​ Translation by a more neutral/less expressive word: -​ Mumbles -> suggests (back translation in Italian). -​ Translation by cultural substitute: -​ Cream tea -> pastry (back translation in Italian). -​ Translation using a loan word: -​ Cornish Cream Tea -> Cream tea (German). -​ Translation using paraphrase: -​ Creamy -> that resembles cream (Arabic). -​ Translation paraphrase using unrelated words: -​ Affidavit -> written communication supported by an oath (Arabic). -​ Translation by omission: Cultural differences: -​ Color of death: (Black in the West, white in the East); -​ Nodding head agreement in Western Europe, disagreement in Turkey; -​ Lucky days: (Friday the 13th (France), Tuesday the 13th (Spanish speakers), Friday the 17th (Italians)). LATER DEVELOPMENTS IN EQUIVALENCE: - ANTHONY PYM: Pym defines two types of equivalence: 1.​ Natural equivalence: focuses on identifying naturally occurring terms in both SL and TL; 2.​ Directional equivalence: analyzing and rendering the ST meaning. >> Tertium Comparationis: invariant that can be used to measure two text segments and to gauge (measure) variations from a core meaning. CHAPTER 4: STUDYING TRANSLATION PRODUCT AND PROCESS: - VINAY AND DARBELNET: Since 1950s there were a variety of linguistic approaches to the analysis of translation, for example: 1.​ Vinay and Darbelnet’s “Comparative Stylistics of French and English”: classic model and much impact; 2.​ Catford’s linguistic approach: introduction of the term “translation shift”. >> 1) looked at and compared two texts both in English and French, noting differences and identifying translations strategies and procedures: -​ Strategies: overall orientation of the translator; -​ Procedures: specific techniques or methods used. They identified: -​ 2 translation studies: -​ Direct: literal translation; -​ Oblique: free translation. >> 7 procedures in them (they operate on 3 levels of translation lexicon, syntactic structure, message) (first three → direct, last four → oblique): -​ Borrowing: SL word directly transferred into the TL; -​ Calque: SL expression/structure transferred to a literal translation; -​ Literal translation: word-for-word, most common between languages of the same family; -​ Transportation: change of one part of the speech without changing the sense (can be obligatory or optional and it’s the most commonly found structure change); -​ Modulation: changes the semantic point of view of the SL (can be obligatory or optional, justified when a literal translation is unsuitable in the TL); -​ Equivalence/idiomatic translation: when languages describe the same situation by different stylistic or structural means; -​ Adaptation: changing the cultural reference when it doesn’t exist in the target culture. ​ ​ >> Also large number of techniques: -​ Amplification: TL uses more words; -​ False Friend: structurally similar term in SL and TL which makes the used think they have the same meaning; -​ Loss, Gain and Compensation; -​ Explicitation; -​ Generalisation. ​ ​ >> Levels of translation: -​ Lexicon; -​ Syntactic structures; -​ The message. ​ ​ >> Two further terms introduced which look above world level are: -​ Word order and thematic structure; -​ Connectors: cohesive links, discourse markers, deixis and punctuation marks. ​ ​ >> Servitude vs Option: -​ Servitude: obligatory transposition and modulation; -​ Option: non-obligatory changes ​ ​ >> 5 analytical steps: -​ Identifying the units of translation; -​ Examine the SL text; -​ Reconstruct the metalinguistic context of the message; -​ Evaluate the stylistic effects; -​ Produce and revise the TT. TRANSLATION SHIFTS: Translation shifts are linguistic changes occuring in translation of ST to TT. This term seems to originate in Catford’s “A Linguistic Theory of Translation”. - CATFORD: Makes a distinction between (later developed by Koller too): -​ Formal correspondence: any TL category that can be said to occupy the same place in the SL; -​ Textual equivalence: any TL text which is equivalent to the SL text. And: -​ Shifts of level: something expressed by grammar in one language and lexis in another; -​ Shifts of category: -​ Structural: most common, shift in grammar structure; -​ Class: from one part of the speech to another; -​ Unit/rank: translation equivalent is another rank in SL; -​ Intrasystem: SL and TL have almost corresponding systems but the translation involves a selection of non corresponding terms. COGNITIVE PROCESS OF TRANSLATION: Interpretative model, championed in Paris in the 60s, explains translation as an overlapping three-stage process which involves: -​ Reading and Understanding; -​ Deverbalization: to avoid transcoding and calques; -​ Re-expression. ​ >> there is a fourth stage, added later, which is verification. - ERNST AUGUST GUTT: He says that translation is an example of communication based on a cause and effect model of inference and interpretation: the communicator gives communicative clues which make the inference possible. Translators need to decide whether to translate descriptively or interpretively (decision made based on the cognitive environment of the reader). Think-aloud process: the translator is asked to verbalize his thought process while translating or immediately afterwards (latter known as retrospective protocol). CHAPTER 5: FUNCTIONAL THEORIES OF TRANSLATION: TEXT TYPES AND TEXT FUNCTIONS: - KATHARINA REISS: Katharina Reiss’ work in the 1970s built on the concept of equivalence (from the German linguist Karl Bhuler) but views the text (instead of the word or sentence) as the level at which communication is achieved. She links three functions to their corresponding “dimensions” and to the text types or situation in which they are used.  1.​ Informative function; 2.​ Expressive function; 3.​ Appellative function. >> All linked to the communicative situation in which they’re used. The different text types are: 1.​ Informative: logical or referential language; 2.​ Expressive: aesthetic dimension; 3.​ Operative: appeal or persuade the reader; 4.​ Audio-medial: films and spoken advertisements. >> hybrid types: a biography could be between the informative and expressive. Specific translation methods: 1.​ Informative: TT in plain prose; 2.​ Expressive: identifying method; 3.​ Operative: adaptive method; 4.​ Audio-medial: supplementing words with visual images and music. Criteria to assess the adequacy of the TT: -​ Linguistic components; -​ Non-linguistic determinants INTEGRATED APPROACH: - MARY SNELL-HORNBY: Stratificational model based on text types preceding from most general (A) to most specialized (F): a.​ Level A: Literary, general language and special language translation; b.​ Level B: Prototypical basic text types (literary translation → Bible); c.​ Level C: Non-linguistic disciplines bond up with translation; d.​ Level D: Translation process; e.​ Level E: Areas of linguistics relevant to translation; f.​ Level F: Phonological aspects. >> Technological Developments favored the development of multimodal genres and text types (ex:e-mails, web pages,etc…). TRANSLATORIAL ACTION MODEL: - HOLZ-MANTTARI: Translation as a purpose-driven, outcome-oriented human interaction. ​ >> Communicative process involving a series of roles and players: 1.​ Initiators: need the translation; 2.​ Commissioner; 3.​ ST producer: writes the ST; 4.​ TT producer; 5.​ TT user; 6.​ TT receiver. >> TT must be functionally communicative for the receiver. Content vs Form: -​ Content: factual information and overall communicative strategy; -​ Form: terminology and cohesive elements. SKOPOS THEORY: - HANS VERMEER: The term “skopos” comes from Greek “aim” and was introduced in the 1970s by Hans Vermeer. >> The action has to be negotiated and performed, and must have a purpose and a result: The TT must be fit for purpose (functionally adequate) knowing why the TT is going to be translated and the future function of the TT is crucial. Rules: -​ Translational action is determined by its skopos; -​ ST and TT are related to their functions in their respective linguistic and cultural contexts; -​ The function of a TT in the target culture is not necessarily the same as the ST; -​ TT must be internally coherent; -​ TT must be coherent with the ST >> Skopos theory allows texts to be translated in different ways according to its purpose. - CHRISTIANE NORD: In her text “Text analysis on Translation” she makes a distinction between two basic type of translation process and product: 1.​ Documentary translation: access to ideas of the original but the reader is aware that it is a translation; 2.​ Instrumental translation: the recipient is NOT aware of the translation. CHAPTER 6: DISCOURSE AND REGISTER ANALYSIS MODEL OF LANGUAGE AND DISCOURSE: - HALLYDAY: Hallyday’s model of language and discourse is based on the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL): Socio-cultural environment influences the discourse and the genre. >> the genre helps determining other elements like “register”, which includes 3 elements: 1.​ Field: what the text is about; 2.​ Tenor: relationship between participants; 3.​ Mode: form of communication; ​ The corresponding metafunctions are: 1.​ Ideational: representation of the world; 2.​ Interpersonal: social relationships; 3.​ Textual: makes a text hang together. ​ Lexicogrammatical realizations: 1.​ Ideational strand: subject-specific terminology; 2.​ Interpersonal strand: pronouns, modality, etc..; 3.​ Textual strand: cohesion. MODEL OF TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT: - HOUSE: Systematic comparison of ST and TT analysis leading to assessment of the quality to highlight mismatch and errors. ​ >> Lexical, syntactic and textual means used to construct register: 1.​ Field: subject matter and social action; 2.​ Tenor: addresser’s temporal, geographical and social provenance 3.​ Mode: channel (spoken/written), degree of participation (monologue,...) >> Overt translation: TT does not pretend to be the original and is not directed to the TT audience; >> Cover translation: both ST and TT are directed to their respective audiences, to reproduce in the TT the function of the original. BAKER’S TEXT AND PRAGMATIC LEVEL ANALYSIS: Cohesion is produced by grammatical and lexical links which help a text hold together. >> there are 5 types of cohesion: 1.​ Reference: a semantic relation where meaning needs to be interpreted through reference to something else, linked using a pronoun, demonstrative, …; 2.​ Substitution: a grammatical substitution within the text; 3.​ Ellipsis: a kind of zero substitution, where an element needs to be supplied; 4.​ Conjunction: a semantic relation indicating how what follows is linked to what has gone before; 5.​ Lexical Cohesion: a lexical relation where cohesion is produced by the selection of vocabulary; these can be through reiteration (some form of repetition or linkage) and/or collocation (the typical co-occurrence of lexical items). ​ Pragmatics is the study of language in use: >> its 3 major concepts are: 1.​ Coherence: may not be the same for ST and TT readers; 2.​ Presupposition: linguistic and extralinguistic knowledge the sender assumes the receiver to have;  3.​ Implicature: what the speaker means or implies. >> 3) concept developed by Paul Grice who described a set of rules that operate in normal conversations: -​ Quantity: give the right amount of information; -​ Quality: say only what you know to be true; -​ Relevance: what you say should be relevant to the conversation; -​ Manner: say what you need to say in a way that is appropriate to the message you wish to convey and which will be understood by the receiver -​ Politeness: (added by some theorists). LEVELS OF CONTEXT AND DISCOURSE: - HATIM AND MASON: “... the extent to which translator (or interpreters) intervene in the transfer process, feeding their own knowledge and beliefs into their processing of a text” -​ Hatim, Mason (1997:147) The Translator as Communicator, London and New York: Routledge. In their work “The Translator as Communicator” they pay extra attention to the realization of ideational and interpersonal functions (instead of textual function) and incorporate into their model the level of discourse. After an examination of a passage: ​ >> Changes in the transitivity structure result in shifts in the ideational functions. EX: verb changes from active to passive to highlight the passivity of the main character (passivity is, according to the translator, a key trait). Hatim and Mason also consider shifts in modality (the interpersonal functions) which altered the truth value of the message in the TT. They also give us a new definition for discourse: >> “Modes of speaking and writing which involve social groups in adoption a particular attitude towards areas of sociocultural activity” They concentrate on identifying “dynamic” and “stable” elements in the text. - dynamic: requires free translation - stable: requires literal translation. CHAPTER 7: SYSTEM THEORIES POLYSYSTEM THEORY: - EVEN-ZOHAR: 1970s: polysystem theory saw translated literature as a system operating in the larger system of the target culture. The polysystem theory was developed by Even-Zohar, who borrows from formalists and structuralists.​ ​ ​ ​ literary work studies as a part of a literary system, > Polysystem: system of various systems which intersect with each other using concurrently different options. >> Interaction and positioning of systems determined by a dynamic hierarchy which changes according to historical moments so the position of translated literature is not fixed. >> 3 major cases where translation literature is at first place: -​ A young literature is being established and looks for already existing models; -​ A literature is peripheral or weak and imports the types that is lacking; -​ There is a turning point in literary history or there is a vacuum. >> If translated literature occupies a secondary position, then it is a peripheral system within the polysystem.​ ​ >> Zohar says it’s its natural position. >> The position occupied by translated literature conditions the translation strategy. -​ If it’s primary, translators do not feel constrained and can break conventions; -​ If it’s secondary, translators use existing target culture models. Polysystem theory → important advances in translation studies 1.​ Literature is studied alongside social, historical and forces; 2.​ Even-Zohar moves away from isolated study. DESCRIPTIVE TRANSLATION STUDIES (DTS): (see chap.1 toury’s map) - GIDEON TOURY: 3 phase methodology for systematic DTS: 1.​ Locate the text within the target culture system; 2.​ Undertake a textual analysis of ST and TT to identify relationship between corresponding segments; 3.​ Attempt generalizations about identified patterns. >> Toury’s aim is to distinguish trends of translation and reconstruct the norms that have been operating in translation.​​ These norms can be reconstructed from two types of source: -​ Examination of texts; -​ Explicit statements made about norms ​ ​ ​ ​ There are different types of norms: -​ Initial norms: general choices; -​ Preliminary norms: translation policies and directness of translation; -​ Operational norms: matricial norms and textual-linguistic norms. >> Probabilistic laws of standardization: 1.​ Law of growing standardization: description of ST patterns and selection of linguistic patterns common in TL; 2.​ Law of interference: ST features copied in the TT. TRANSLATION NORMS: - CHESTERMAN: 1.​ Expectancy norms: what a translation should be like; 2.​ Professional norms: regulate the translation process. ​ >> 2) they can be: -​ Accountability norm: the translator has to take responsibility; -​ Communication norm: ensure maximum communication; -​ Relation norm: linguistic aspects. MANIPULATION SCHOOL: A group of scholars of the international comparative literature association, they view literature as a complex and dynamic system. They think there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical case studies. - LAMBERT AND VAN GORP: They proposed a scheme for ST and TT literary system, divided in 4 sections: 1.​ Preliminary data: general strategy; 2.​ Macro-level: internal narrative structure; 3.​ Micro-level: shifts on different linguistic fields; 4.​ System context: micro and macro are compared. CHAPTER 8: CULTURAL AND IDEOLOGICAL TURNS: Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere focus on the interaction between translation and culture (which impacts and constraints translation) >> Cultural turn: move to translation as culture and politics. TRANSLATION AS REWRITING: - ANDRÉ LEFEVERE: "Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame” (1992). He focuses on the examination of very concrete factors that systematically govern the reception, acceptance or rejection of literary texts. These issues include:  -​ Power; -​ Institution; -​ Ideology; -​ Manipulation. >> People involved in such power positions are seen rewriting literature and governing its consumption by the general public. The rewriting can be of two motivations: 1.​ Ideological: conforming to or rebelling against the dominant ideology; 2.​ Poetological: conforming to or rebelling against the dominant poetics. In his work he claims: “The same basic process of rewriting is at work in translation, historiography, anthologization, criticism and editing”. “Translation is the most obviously recognizable type of rewriting, and … it is potentially the most influential because it is able to project the image of an author and/or those works beyond the boundaries of their culture of origin ” For Lefevere, the literary system in which translation functions is controlled by two main factors: 1.​ Professionals within the literary system: who decides on the poetics and at time influence the ideology of the translated text (includes critics and reviewers, academics and teachers and translators); (POETICS) 2.​ Patronage outside the literary system: the powers that can further or hinder the reading, writing, and rewriting of literature (includes influential and powerful individuals, groups of people, institutions which regulate the distribution of literature and literary ideas). (IDEOLOGY) Lefevere identifies 3 elements to this patronage: 1.​ The ideological component: the choice of the subject and the form of its presentation; 2.​ The economic component: concerns the payment of writers and rewriters; 3.​ The status component: occurring in many forms. Patronage is termed: -​ Undifferentiated: if all the three components are provided by the same person or group (to maintain stability for example); -​ Differentiated: when the three components are not dependent on each other. TRANSLATION AND GENDER: - SHERRY SIMON: Sherry Simon in her “Gender in Translation: Cultural Identity and the Politics of Transmission” (1996) approaches translation from a gender-studies perspective. She sees a language of sexism in translation studies, with its images of dominance, fidelity, faithfulness and betrayal. Feminists see a parallel between the status of translation (often considered to be inferior to the original writing) and the status of women, repressed in society and literature. The core of feminist translation theory seeks to: -​ Explain and criticize the ideas that put both women and translation at the bottom of the social and literary ladder; -​ Direct fidelity toward neither the author nor the reader, but toward the writing project. POST-COLONIAL TRANSLATION STUDIES: Simon’s focus centers on underlining the importance of the cultural turn in translation which led to the attraction of the attention of many translation studies researchers on postcolonialism. >> Post-colonial translation studies: postcolonialism used to cover studies of the imbalance of power relationships between colonizer and colonized. ​ >> Translatese: eliminates identity of cultures politically less powerful. CHAPTER 9: ROLE OF THE TRANSLATOR INVISIBILITY OF TRANSLATION: In “The Translator Invisibility” (1995/2018), Venuti uses the term “invisibility" to describe the translator’s situation and activity in contemporary British and American cultures. He sees this as typically being produced: 1.​ By creating an “illusion of transparency” (no traces of translator in fluent translations); 2.​ By the omission of translator’s name; 3.​ By the way the translated texts are typically read in the target culture. Fluency: “A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or non-fiction, is judged acceptable by most publishers, reviewers, and readers when it reads fluently , when the absence of any linguistic or stylistic peculiarities makes it seem transparent, giving the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intentions or the essential meaning of the foreign text – the appearance, in other words, that the translation is not in fact a translation but the ‘original’. “ -​ Lawrence Venuti, The Translator’s Invisibility, 1. >> The more fluent the translation, the more invisible the translation, and, presumably, the more visible the writer or meaning of the foreign text. Venuti sees the most important factor for this as being “the prevailing conception of authorship”. Translation is considered as derivative and of secondary quality and importance. Fluent translation: -​ Reviewers of translations constantly note “fluency” & “naturalness”; -​ A “fluent” translation is: -​ Modern; -​ Widely used; -​ Standard -​ No foreign words; -​ No switching between American and British Idioms. The regime of fluent translation: “Under the regime of fluent translation, the translator works to make his or her work “invisible”, producing the illusory effect of transparency that simultaneously masks its status as an illusion: the translated text seems ‘natural’, i.e., not translated”​ ​ ​ ​ ​ - Venuti, 5. DOMESTICATION VS FOREIGNIZATION: - LAWRENCE VENUTI: Lawreance Venuti in his work “The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation” (1995-2008) gives two types of translation where: -​ Domestication: an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to TL cultural values (a transparent, fluent or “invisible” style); -​ Foreignization: translating along lines excluded by dominant culture values in the TL. >> they are considered to be not binary opposites but part of a continuum, and they relate to “ethical choices” made by the translator in order to expand the receiving culture’s range. -​ The terms “domestication” and “foreignisation” are ethical attitudes towards a foreign text or culture ​ ​ ​ ​ WHEREAS -​ The terms “fluency” and “resistancy” indicate discursive features. THE NEGATIVE ANALYTIC OF TRANSLATION: - ANTOINE BERMAN: Translation as an experience in two senses. -​ Target cultures experiencing the foreignness; -​ Foreign text being uprooted from its original context. >> The foreign must be received as foreign, 12 deforming tendencies (negative analytic of translation) that prevent the foreign from coming through: 1.​ Rationalization: modification of syntactic structures; 2.​ Clarification; 3.​ Expansion; 4.​ Endelement; 5.​ Qualitative impoverishment; 6.​ Quantitative impoverishment; 7.​ Destruction of rhythm; 8.​ Destruction of underlying networks of signification; 9.​ Destruction of linguistic patterns; 10.​Destruction of vernacular networks or their exoticization; 11.​Destruction of expressions and idioms; 12.​Effacement of the superimposition of languages. ​ >> counterbalancing there are also positive analytics. POSITION AND POSITIONALITY OF THE TRANSLATOR: - MARIA TYMOCZKO: The ideology of translation resides in the voicing and stance of the translator and in the relevance to the receiving audience. POWER NETWORK OF TRANSLATION STUDIES: Literary translators work from contract to contract often for a modest flat fee, with publishers seeking to minimize translation costs and being reluctant to sharing royalties ​ >> another form of repression. >> Benchmark (punto di riferimento) for success: being published in English (publishers choose works that can be easily assimilated by the TC). RECEPTION AND REVIEWING OF TRANSLATION: - MEG BROWN: Stresses the role of the reviews in informing the public about recently published works; >> Ideas from reception theory: examining the way a work conforms to challenges or disappoints the reader's horizon of expectations (readers’ general expectations of the genres or series to which the new work belongs). CHAPTER 10: PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH TO TRANSLATION Most important authors that influenced translation studies during the 20th Century are: 1.​ George Steiner; 3.​ Walter Benjamin; 2.​ Ezra Pound; 4.​ Derrida. HERMENEUTIC APPROACH: - GEORGE STEINER: Hermeneutic approach, seen as an investigation of what it means to understand a piece of oral or written speech, focuses on the functioning of the mind of the translator; hermeneutics as the act of elicitation. >> 4 moves to the hermeneutics 1.​ Initiative trust: belief that there is something in the ST that can be understood (something could be all of it or); 2.​ Aggression: some texts could be “exhausted” by the translation, while other could be translated so well that are now only read in translation; 3.​ Incorporation: how the ST meaning is transferred to the TL; different types of assimilation: complete domestication or permanent strangeness; importing of the meaning can dislocate or relocate the native structure in two ways: sacramental intake or infection; 4.​ Compensation: ST is enhanced by the act of translation. >> Being distant from ST and culture allows the translator to work without preconceptions, so the determining condition is either resistance difference (translators experience the foreign language differently from their mother tongue) or elective affinity (translators recognize themselves in the text). ENERGY OF LANGUAGE: - EZRA POUND: Experimentalism and the challenge of poetic doctrine continue to inspire many later theorists and translators. TASK OF THE TRANSLATOR: - WALTER BENJAMIN: Language is seen as magical and its mission is to reveal spiritual content; in his essay “Task of the translator” he stated that the translated texts exist separately but in conjunction with the original. >> Translation contributes to the growth of its own language and pursues the goal of pure language, the liberation of which occurs the translator allows the TL to be put powerfully in movement by the foreign language. DECONSTRUCTION: - DERRIDA: Movement born in France in the 1960s, consists of an interrogation of language, terms, systems and concepts that are constructed by that language. ABUSIVE FIDELITY: - PHILIP LEWIS: Translation strategy involving the experimentation with expressive and rhetorical patterns of the language. CHAPTER 11: NEW DIRECTIONS FROM NEW MEDIA AUDIO-VISUAL TRANSLATION: - DIRK DELABASTITA: >> Audio-visual translation: “constrained translation” focusing on non-verbal elements that marked out audio-visual translation. >> “Delabastita’s article” (1989): focuses on identifying important characteristics of this type of translation. - GAMBIER: Identifies different types of audio-visual activity: 1.​ Interlingual subtitling: can be open (integral part of the film) or closed; 2.​ Bilingual subtitling: subtitles are provided simultaneously in 2 languages; 3.​ Intralingual subtitling: for the hard hearing; 4.​ Dubbing; 5.​ Voice-over; 6.​ Surtitling: subtitles projected above the stage. 7.​ Audio description. ​ >> The subtitler must try to respect different aspects of cinematography. >> Subtitling style may vary depending on the genre, but subtitling guidelines are quite universal. >> Norms of audio-visual translation cover: 1.​ Human agents: time-coders, actors, directors, etc…; 2.​ Products: TTs; 3.​ Recipients; 4.​ Mode: characteristics of audio-visual translation; 5.​ Market. MULTI-MODAL TRANSCRIPTION: - CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR’S MODEL: >> Multimodal transcription: how to record and analyze a multimodal product in writing. >> Christopher Taylor’s model for film and TV analysis consists of breaking down film sequences into individual frames which include: -​ Duration of frame and order of presentation; -​ Presentation of visual frames;  -​ Shots: components of visual image + kinesic action of the characters; -​ Phases: dialogue and soundtrack description + metafunctional interpretation of how the film creates films. CODES AND NARRATIVES: - FREDERIC CHAUME: Attempts to create an integrated model of analysis of rules and norms. he focuses on dubbing and identifies 10 codes (1-4 on acoustic channel and other 6 on visual channel); 1.​ Linguistic code: wordplay, presence of multiple languages, etc...; 2.​ Paralinguistic code: preparation of dubbing scripts with the addition of symbols to indicate effects code; 3.​ Musical and special effects code; 4.​ Soundtrack arrangement code; 5.​ Iconographic code; 6.​ Photographic codes; 7.​ Planning code; 8.​ Mobility code; 9.​ Graphic codes; 10.​Synthetic codes.