.


:




:

































 

 

 

 


Suggested Topics for Discussion 3




meaning of the equivalent-lacking word in ST. After that the translator may freely employ the newly-coined substitute.

There are also quite a number of equivalent-lacking idioms. Such English phraseological units as "You cannot eat your cake and have it", "to dine with Duke Humphrey", "to send smb. to Coventry" and many others have no regular equivalents in Russian. They are translated either by reproducing their form in TL through a word-for-word translation or by explaining the figurative meaning of the idiom, e.g.: People who live in glass should not throw stones. , , ; to see eye-to-eye with srnb. - .*

Equivalent-lacking grammatical forms give less trouble to the translator. Here occasional substitutes can be classified under three main headings, namely:

1. Zero translations when the meaning of the grammatical unit is not rendered in the translation since it is practically identical to the meaning of some other unit and can be safely left out. In the sentence "By that time he had already left Britain" the idea of priority expressed by the Past Perfect Tense needn't be separately reproduced in TT as it is made superfluous by the presence of "by that time" and "already".

2. Approximate translations when the translator makes use of a TL form partially equivalent to the equivalent-lacking SL unit, e.g.: I saw him enter the room , . The Russian language has no complex objects of this type but the meaning of the object clause is a sufficient approximation.

3. Transformational translation when the translator resorts to one of the grammatical transformations (see Part I, Ch. 4), e.g.: Your presence at the meeting is not obligatory. Nor is it desirable (the syntactical integration).

As has been emphasized, equivalents are not mechanical substitutes for SL units but they may come handy as a starting point in search of adequate translation. The translator will much profit if he knows many permanent equivalents, is good at selecting among variable equivalents and resourceful at creating occasional equivalents, taking into account all contextual factors.

Suggested Topics for Discussion

1. What is the result of the structural similarity of ST and TT? Is the

For a more detailed discussion of the problems involved in the translation of English phraseology see Part II, Ch. 2 (2.2).

 

notion of equivalence applicable to the correlated SL mid TL units in these texts?

2. How can regular equivalents be defined? How arc they discovered? How can they be classified? What role do they pby in the translation practice?

3. How are regular equivalents used in the translating process? What is context? What types of context influence the choice of an equivalent? What is an occasional equivalent?

4. What are equivalent-lacking words? What types of words have, as a rule, no regular equivalents? What are the principal ways of rendering the meaning of an equivalent-lacking word in translation?

5. What are equivalent-lacking grammatical forms? What role does the grammatical meaning play in the formation of text semantics? What are the principal ways of rendering the grammatical meaning in translation?

6. What is the role of SL syntactical structures in translation? How does the type of the syntactical structure in SL influence the choice of equivalents in TL? What are the main features of the meaning of the English attributive groups and how are they rendered into Russian?

7. What are the main types of set expressions? What rok do set expressions play in communication? What role do they play in the translating process?

8. What is an idiom? What are the meaningful components of an idiom? In what way can an equivalent to a SL idiom be found in TL? What factors should be considered in selecting such an equivalent?

Text

DIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES

(1) The problem I propose to discuss is rather a hard nut to crack. (2) Why does homo sapiens, whose digestive track functions in precisely the same complicated ways the world over, whose biochemical fabric and genetic potential are essentially common in all peoples and at every stage of social evolution why does this unified mammalian species not use one common language? (3) It inhales, for its life processes, one chemical element and dies if deprived of it. (4) It makes do with the same number of teeth and vertebrae. (5) In the light of anatomical and neurophysiological universals, a unitary language solution would be readily understandable. (6) But there is also another "natural" model. (7) A deaf, non-literate observer approaching the planet from outside and reporting on crucial aspects of human appearance and behaviour, would conclude with some confidence that men speak a small number of different, though probably related, tongues. (8) He would guess at a figure of the order of half a dozen with 26

perhaps a cluster of dialects or pidgins. (9) This number would be persuasively concordant with other major parameters of human diversity. (10) Why, then, this mystery of Babel?

Text Analysis

(1) What is the meaning of the verb "to propose" when followed by an infinitive? What is the figurative meaning of the idiom "a hard nut to crack"?

(2) What is "homo sapiens"? What is the meaning of "fabric" in this context? Who is the author of the "Origin of species"? What is a mammalian? In what sense is man referred to here as "unified"?

(3) Is there any difference in meaning between "to breathe" and "to inhale"? What chemical element is meant here? What does the elliptical phrase "if deprived" stand for?

(4) What is "to make do with smth."? Is the form 'Vertebrae" plural or singular? Is there anything in common between the spine and vertebrae?

(5) What is a "universal"? How can the phrase "a unitary language solution" be paraphrased to make its sense more explicit? Does "understandable" here mean "something that can be understood" or "something that seems quite natural"?

(6) Why is the word "natural" written within inverted commas? How can the sentence be paraphrased to make the sense of "natural" in the sentence more explicit?

(7) Why should the observer be deaf and non-literate to make a wrong conclusion about the number of languages on the earth? What does "outside" mean here? What is the meaning of "crucial"? Is there any difference between "a language" and "a tongue" as used in this text?

(8) Does the phrase "of the order of imply an exact or an approximate number? What is a "pidgin"? In what way does a pidgin differ from a dialect?

(9) What is the origin of "persuasive"? Does "to be concordant" mean "to coincide" or "to correspond"? What is a "parameter"? How can the phrase "human diversity" be paraphrased?

(10) What is the Tour of Babel? What is the figurative sense of "Babel"? Why is Babel spoken of here as a kind of mystery?

Problem-Solving Exercises

A. Types of Equivalents

I. Find the words and word combinations in the text which have permanent Russian equivalents. What part of the English vocabulary do such words belong to?

II. What equivalents can you suggest to the word "fabric" (sentence 2)? Which of them would you choose while translating this sentence?

III. Should word-for-word translation be used in rendering the English phrases "social evolution" and "mammalian species" (sentence 2)? If not, what syntactical transformations would you suggest?

IV. What kind of equivalent should be used to translate the English idiom "a hard nut to crack" (sentence 1)?

V. Suggest an occasion! Russian substitute for the word "unified" in sen-

tence (2) and explain your solution.

VI. Make a word-for-word translation of sentence (3) and then make it syntactically more acceptable by changing the word order.

VII. Can any of the regular equivalents of the word "solution" fit the context of sentence (5)? If not, what can serve as an occasional substitute?

VIII. Make your choice between the permanent equivalent to the English "deaf" (sentence 7) and the occasional substitute . Give your reasons. Suggest a proper substitute for the word "non-literate".

IX. What method would you resort to in order to produce a substitute for the words "pidgins" in sentence (8) and "homo sapiens" in sentence (2)?

X. Use an explanation as an occasional substitute for the phrase "human di-

versity" in sentence (9).

B. Other Translation Problems

XI. Are there any reasons to prefer one of the Russian aspective forms to the other as the substitute for the word "to discuss" in sentence (1) vs. , vs. .

XII. Discuss the pros and cons of the following Russian substitutes for the term "homo sapiens" in sentence (2): , , .

XIII. While translating sentence (4) would you choose the Russian verb or as the substitute for the English "to make do with"? Or would you suggest something else?

XIV. Which of the following Russian words may serve as a substitute for the English "unitary" in sentence (5): , , ?

XV. Can the word "universals" in sentence (5) be translated into Russian as or would you prefer something like , , etc.?

XVI. What errors can you find in the following translation of sentence (5), if any?

.

XVII. What would you prefer for "there is" in sentence (6) , or ? Give your reasons.

XVIII. Why is the Russian word a wrong substitute for the English "natural" in sentence (6)? What is the difference between the words , and ?

XIX. Try to show in your Russian translation of sentence (7) the presence of the definite article before the word "planet". Which of the following will you choose , , ?

XX. Which of the following Russian words would you prefer as the equivalent to the word "aspects" in sentence (7): , , ?

XXI. Which of the Russian substitutes would you prefer for the English "from outside" in sentence (7): , , ?

XXII. Is the meaning of "reporting" in sentence (7) closer to the meaning of the Russian , or ( )?

XXIII. Can the regular equivalent of the English verb "to guess" be used in translating sentence (8)?

XXIV. Would you use the Russian word as a substitute for the English '1 a dozen" in sentence (8) or would you decide in favour of , or -?

XXV. Would you be satisfied with translating "pidgins" in sentence (8) as or do you think it necessary to add the word ? Or may be you will opt for ?

XXVI. Can the usual Russian equivalents of the English "duster" in sentence (8) , , , be applied to such notions as or ?

XXVII. Would you translate "human diversity" in sentence (9) as , ? Or can you suggest something else?

XXVIII. Which of the following is a good substitute for the word "Babel" in sentence (10): , , ?

XXIX. Translate the word "mystery" in sentence (10) first with a Russian noun and then with an adjective. Which do you find more suitable?

XXX. Would you use an elliptical sentence in Russian to translate sentence (10) or will you fill in the missing words?

CHAPTER 4. ASPECTS OF TRANSLATING PROCESS* Basic Assumptions

Description of the translating process is one of the major tasks of the translation theory. Here we deal with the dynamic aspects of translation trying to understand how the translator performs the transfer operation from ST to TT.

Psychologically viewed, the translating process must needs include two mental processes - understanding and verbalization. First, the translator understands the contents of ST, that is, reduces the information it contains to his own mental program, and then he develops this program into TT. The problem is that these mental processes are not directly observable and we do not know much of what that program is and how the reduction and development operations are performed. That is why the translating process has to be described in some indirect way. The translation theory achieves this aim by postulating a number of translation models.

A model is a conventional representation of the translating process describing mental operations by which the source text or some part of it may be translated, irrespective of whether these operations are actually performed by the translator. It may describe the translating process either in a general form or by listing a number of specific operations (or transformations) through which the process can, in part, be realized. Translation models can be oriented either toward the situation reflected in the ST contents or toward the meaningful components of the ST contents.

The existing models of the translating process are, in fact, based on the same assumptions which we considered in discussing the problem of equivalence, namely, the s i t u a t i n a 1 (or referential) model is based on the identity of the situations described in the original text and in the translation, and the semantic-transformational model postulates the similarity of basic notions and nuclear structures in different languages. These postulates are supposed to explain the dynamic aspects of translation. In other words, it is presumed that the translator actually makes a mental travel from the original to some interlingual level of equivalence and then further on to the text of translation.

In the situational model this intermediate level is extralinguistic. It is the described reality, the facts of life that are represented by the verbal description. The process of translating presumably consists in the translator getting beyond the original text to the actual situation described in it. This is the first step of the process, i.e. the break-through to the situation. The

See "Theory of Translation", Ch. VII. 30

second step is for the translator to describe this situation in the target language. Thus the process goes from the text in one language through the extralinguistic situation to the text in another language. The translator first understands what the original is about and then says "the same things" in TL.

For instance, the translator reads in A. Cronin's "Citadel" the description of the main character coming by train to a new place of work: "Manson walked quickly down the platform, searching eagerly for some signs of welcome". He tries to understand what reality lies behind the words "searching eagerly for some signs of welcome". The man was alone in a strange place and couldn't expect any welcome committee or deputation. Obviously, he just wanted to see whether anyone was there to meet him. So, the translator describes the situation in Russian in the following way: , , -.

A different approach was used by E. Nida who suggested that the translating process may be described as a series of transformations. The transformational model postulates that in any two languages there is a number of nuclear structures which are fully equivalent to each other. Each language has an area of equivalence in respect to the other language. It is presumed that the translator does the translating in three transformational strokes. First the stage of analysis he transforms the original structures into the nuclear structures, i.e. he performs transformation within SL. Second the stage of translation proper he replaces the SL nuclear structures with the equivalent nuclear structures in TL. And third the stage of synthesis he develops the latter Into the terminal structures in the text of translation.

Thus if the English sentence "It is very strange this domination of our intellect by our digestive organs" (J.K. Jerome) is translated into Russian as , we presume that the structures "domination of our intellect" and "domination by our digestive organs" were first reduced to the nuclear structures "organs dominate" and "they dominate intellect", respectively. Then they were replaced by the equivalent Russian structures and , after which the nuclear structures were transformed into the final Russian variant.

A similar approach can be used to describe the translation of semantic units. The semantic model postulates the existence of the "deep" semantic categories common to SL and TL. It is presumed that the translator first reduces the semantic units of the original to these basic semantic categories and then expresses the appropriate notions by the semantic units of TL.

Thus if he comes across the sentence "John is the proud owner of a new car", he is first to realize that it actually means that "John has a new car" and that "he is proud because of thaf'. After transferring these basic ideas to Russian and converting them to the semantically acceptable phrases he will get the translation () , .

In describing the process of translating we can explain the obtained variants as the result of the translator applying one or all of these models of action. This does not mean that a translation is actually made through the stages suggested by these models. They are not, however, just abstract schemes. Training translators we may teach them to use these models as practical tools. Coming across a specific problem in ST the translator should classify it as situational, structural or semantic and try to solve it by resorting to the appropriate procedure. If, for instance, in the sentence "He is a poor sleeper" the translator sees that the attributive group cannot be directly transferred into Russian, he can find that the transformational model will do the trick for him here and transform the attributive group into a verb-adverb phrase: .

Another approach to the description of the process of translating consists in the identification of different types of operations performed by the translator. Here the process is viewed as a number of manipulations with the form or content of the original, as a result of which the translator creates the text in the target language. The type of operation is identified by comparing the initial and the final texts.

The first group of operations (or transformations) is characterized by imitation of the form of a word or of a collocation. In the first case the translator tries to represent the pronunciation or the spelling of the foreign word with the TL letters. Thus we get such translations as , , , etc. This method is usually called translational transcription. A number of rules have been formulated as to the choice of Russian letters to represent the English sounds or letters, and the translator is expected to observe them in his work.

hi the second case the translator creates a blueprint collocation in TL by using a loan translation. This results in such forms as (bison trust), (work-to-rule), (people of good will).

The second group of operations includes all types of lexical transformations involving certain semantic changes. As a result, the meaning of a word or word combination in ST may be made more specific, more general or somewhat modified as a way to discovering an appropriate equivalent in TL.

The choice of a more specific word in translation which gives a more 32

detailed description of the idea than does the word in SL is a very common case in the English-Russian translating process. English often makes use of general terms to describe very definite objects or actions. The following sentence refers to a frightened woman trying to hide from an intruder who had suddenly burst into the room where she was pensively looking into the fire:

My mother had left her chair in her agitation, and gone behind it in the corner. (Ch. Dickens)

An attempt to use regular Russian equivalents for such general English verbs as "to leave" and "to go" will produce a ludicrous Russian phrase like this: .

with the problem a contextual substitute may be created by using the detailing technique, i.e. by describing how the woman performed those actions instead of just naming them, e.g.:

.

One more example. Coming home after a long absence a young boy finds everything changed and no longer his own:

My old dear bedroom was changed, and I was to lie a long way off.

A blueprint Russian translation of this sentence would be hardly intelligible. Why should anyone "lie a long way off' from a bedroom? Obviously, "to lie" means "to go to bed" and "a long way off is in some other part of the same house. If so, why not say it in so many words? This is just the way to produce a contextual substitute:

, .

The opposite procedure, i.e. the use of an equivalent with a more general meaning, is not so common in translations from English into Russian, e.g.:

I packed my two Gladstones.

.

For obvious reasons the translator preferred a generic name to the specific name of the kind of suitcase that the Russian reader is unfamiliar with.

Another type of lexical transformations is often called "modulation". It involves the creation of an equivalent by replacing a unit in SL with a TL unit the meaning of which can be logically deduced from it and which is just

2 - 234 33

another way of referring to the same object or an aspect of the same situation. Consider the following sentence:

Manson slung his bag up and climbed into a battered gig behind a tall, angular black horse. (A. Cronin)

It confronts the translator with a number of problems. First, what should be said in Russian for "to sling a bag up"? Second, in Russian it seems so obvious that one gets into a gig behind and not in front of the horse that any mention of the fact is preposterous unless it is implied that the horse was in the gig, too. Third, "an angular horse" cannot be either or .

All these translation problems can be solved with the help of contextual substitutes. "Slinging the bag up" evidently implies that the bag was placed into the gig, "climbing into the gig behind the horse" certainly means that this horse was harnessed to the gig and "an angular horse" is probably a horse with bones sticking out at angles, i.e. a bony or skinny animal. The Russian translation can therefore express these derived ideas to describe the identical situation, e.g.:

, .

In such cases the substitute often has a cause-and-effect relationship with the original:

The window was full of clothes I wouldn't want to be seen dead in.

, .

A dead person is usually put in a coffin and "to be seen dead in a dress" logically implies lying in the coffin in such a dress. One more example.

People who have tried it, tell me that a clear conscience makes you very happy and contented. (J.K. Jerome)

A direct translation of "who have tried it" is hardly possible. But if somebody has tried something he has some experience about it. So, the translation may run as follows:

, , , .

The third group of translating procedures comprises all types of transformations involving units of SL grammar. The translator may solve his problems by preserving the syntactic structure of the source text and 34

using the analogous TL grammatical forms or "a word-for-word translation". This may be called "a zero transformation" and can be easily exemplified, e.g.:

John took Mary by the hand. .

In other cases the translator may resort to various types of grammatical substitutes.

First, we may mention two types of transformations which change the number of sentences in TT as compared to ST.

As a rule, the translator renders the original text sentence by sentence and the number of sentences remains the same. However, it may so happen that the structural and semantic problems of a translation event can be best solved by breaking an original sentence into two parts, i.e. translating it with two sentences in TL. Another type of such partitioning is to replace a simple sentence in the original with a complex one in the translation, comprising one or several subordinate clauses.

The problems that can be solved through this technique are varied. First of all it may come handy in dealing with the English syntactic complexes which pack in two subject-predicate units, each unit making up a sentence or a clause in the Russian translation, e.g.:

I want you to speak English.

, -.

She hates his behaving in this way.

, .

The partitioning of sentences in translation can also be used to overcome the difficulties caused by the idiomatic semantic structure of the original text, e.g.:

This was a man to be seen to be understood.

, .

Sometimes the translator can prefer partitioning to the other possible methods of translation, as producing a variant more suitable stylistically or emotionally. Consider the following examples:

The annual surveys of the Labour Government were not discussed with the workers at any stage, but only with the employers.

The contrast in the last part of the sentence can be best reproduced in Russian by making a separate unit of it, e.g.:

-

. .

And this is how this procedure can be used to reproduce the emotional implications of the original:

How well I recollect it, on a cold grey afternoon, with a dull sky, threatening rain. (Ch. Dickens)

! , , , .

The opposite procedure means integrating two or more original sentences into one or compressing a complex sentence into a simple one. This technique is also used both for structural and semantic reasons.

Sometimes one of the sentences is grammatically too incomplete to warrant its separate reproduction in translation:

It is not possible to do the work in two days. Nor is it necessary. , .

The integration procedure may be necessitated by close semantic ties between adjacent sentences:

We did not want scenery. We wanted to have our supper and go to bed. .

The partitioning and integration procedures may be used together, resulting in a kind of syntactic and semantic reshuffle of sentences in translation. Here is an example:

But occasionally an indiscretion takes place, such as that of Mr. Woodrow Wyatt, Labour M.P., when Financial Secretary to the War Office. He boasted of the prowess of British spies in obtaining information regarding armed forces of the USSR. (J. Gollan) ^





:


: 2016-11-18; !; : 1235 |


:

:

. .
==> ...

764 - | 719 -


© 2015-2024 lektsii.org - -

: 0.104 .