ETI 319 Translation Theory PDF

**ETI 319 TRANSLATION THEORY** **The following summary is based on the book by Jeremy Munday entitled *Introducing Translation Studies*** Vinay and Darbelnet's taxonomy in *Comparative Stylistics of French and English:* the classic model and one has had a very wide impact. **Vinay and Darbelnet**...

**ETI 319 TRANSLATION THEORY** **The following summary is based on the book by Jeremy Munday entitled *Introducing Translation Studies*** Vinay and Darbelnet's taxonomy in *Comparative Stylistics of French and English:* the classic model and one has had a very wide impact. **Vinay and Darbelnet** - carried out a comparative **stylistic** analysis of French and English. - looked at **texts** in both languages. - noted **differences** between the languages. - identified different translation '**strategies'** and '**procedures'**. These terms are sometimes confusing in translation studies because in technical sense, - a strategy is an **overall orientation** of the translator (e.g. towards 'free' or 'literal' translation, towards the TT or ST, towards domestication or foreignization). However, - a **procedure** is 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 source language, the addition of an explanation or a footnote in the target language). **Two strategies and seven procedures** The **two general translation strategies** identified by Vinay and Darbelnet are - **direct translation** - **oblique translation** which reminds 'literal vs. free' division. 'Literal' is a synonym for direct translation for Vinay and Darbelnet. Direct translation and oblique translation comprise **seven procedures**. **Direct translation** covers three of them: **Direct translation covers borrowing, calque and literal translation as procedures.** **Borrowing:** The SL word is transferred directly to the TL. For example, words *rouble, datcha*, the later *glasnost* and *perestroika* in Russian are used in English and other languages to fill a semantic gap in the TL. Sometimes borrowings may be employed to add local colour (*sushi, kimono, Osho--gatsu*... in a tourist brochure about Japan, for instance). There is much borrowing of terms in some technical fields (e.g. *computer, internet*, from English to Malay). In languages with differing scripts, borrowing requires an additional need for transcription, as in the borrowings of mathematical, scientific and other terms from Arabic into Latin and, later, other languages (e.g. \[*aljabr*\] to *algebra*). **Calque:** SL expression or structure is transferred in a literal translation such as the French calque *science-fiction* for the English. Vinay and Darbelnet note that both borrowings and calques often become fully integrated into the TL. **Literal translation**: This is 'word-for-word' translation and for Vinay and Darbelnet this type is the most common between languages of the same family and culture. Literal translation is the authors' prescription for good translation: 'literalness should only be sacrificed because of structural and **metalinguistic** requirements and only after checking that the meaning is fully preserved'. But, say Vinay and Darbelnet, the translator may judge literal translation to be 'unacceptable' for what are grammatical, syntactic or pragmatic reasons. In the cases where literal translation is not possible, Vinay and Darbelnet say that the strategy of **oblique translation** must be used. Oblique translation covers four further procedures, **transposition, modulation, idiomatic translation** and **adaptation**. **Transposition:** This is a change of one part of speech for another (e.g. noun for verb) without changing the sense. Transposition can be: **\* obligatory:** French *des son lever* \['upon her rising'\] in a past context would be translated by *as soon as she got up*; or **\* optional:** in the reverse direction, the English *as soon as she got up* could be translated into French literally as *des qu'elle s'est levee* or as a verb-to-noun transposition in *des son lever* \['upon her rising'\]. For Vinay and Darbelnet transposition is 'probably the most common structural change that translators prefer. They list at least ten different categories, such as: verb- noun: *they have pioneered* - *they have been the first*; adverb - verb: *He will soon be back* - *He will hurry to be back*. **Modulation:** This changes the semantics and point of view of the SL. It can be: **\* obligatory**: e.g. *the time when* translates as *le moment ou* \[lit. 'the moment where'\]; **\* optional**, though linked to preferred structures of the two languages: e.g. the reversal of point of view in *it is not difficult to show* \> *il est facile* *de demontrer* \[lit. 'it is easy to show'\]. Modulation is a procedure that is justified 'when, although a literal or even transposed, translation results in a grammatically correct utterance. For Vinay and Darbelnet modulation is 'the touchstone of a good translator', whereas transposition 'simply shows a very good command of the target language'. Modulation at the level of message is subdivided along the following lines: **abstract\< \>concrete**, or **particular\< \>general:** *She can do no other \> She cannot act differently*; Give *a pint of blood* \> *Give a little blood* **explicative modulation**, or **effect\< \>cause:** *You're quite a stranger. We don't see you anymore*. **whole\< \>part:** *He shut the door in my face* \> *He shut the door in my nose.* **part\< \>another part:** *He cleared his throat* \> *He cleared his voice* **reversal of terms:** *You can have it* \> *I'll give it to you* **negation of opposite:** *It does not seem unusual* \> *It is very normal* **active\< \>passive:** *We are not allowed to access the internet* \> *they don't allow us to access the internet* **rethinking of intervals and limits in space and time:** *No parking between signs* \> *Limit of parking* **change of symbol** (including fixed and new metaphors): Fr. *La moutarde lui monta au nez* \['The mustard rose up to his nose'\] \> En. *He saw red* \['he became very angry'\]. **Équivalence**, or **idiomatic translation:** Vinay and Darbelnet use this term to refer to cases where languages describe the same situation by different stylistic or structural means. **Adaptation:** This involves changing the cultural reference when a situation in the source culture does not exist in the target culture. For example, Vinay and Darbelnet suggest that the cultural connotation of a reference to the game of cricket in an English text might be best translated into French by a reference to the Tour de France. For Vinay and Darbalnet there are **supplementary translation procedures**: **Amplification:** The TL uses more words, often because of syntactic expansion, e.g. *the charge against him \> the charge brought against him*. The opposite of amplification is **economy**. **False friend:** A structurally similar term in SL and TL which deceives the user into thinking the meaning is the same, e.g. French *librarie* means not English *library* but *bookstore*. **Loss, gain** and **compensation:** Translation inevitably involves some loss, since it is impossible to preserve all the ST nuances of meaning and structure in the TL. However, importantly a TT may make up for ('compensate') this by introducing a gain at the same or another point in the text. **Explicitation:** Implicit information in the ST is rendered explicit in the TT. This may occur on the level of grammar (e.g. English ST *the doctor* explicated as masculine or feminine in a TL where indication of gender is essential), semantics (e.g. the explanation of a ST cultural item or event, such as US *Thanksgiving* or UK *April Fool's joke*), pragmatics (e.g. the opaque and culturally located US English idiom *it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback*) or discourse. **Generalization**: The use of a more general word in the TT such as *computer* \> TT *machine*, or ST *ecstatic* \> TT *happy*. **Levels of translation for Vinay and Darbelnet:** These seven main translation procedures are described as operating on three levels. These three levels are: They are: the **lexicon**; **syntactic structures**; the **message** ('message' is used to mean approximately the utterance and its metalinguistic situation or context.)