Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and applicationsChapter 1 Main issues of translation studies1.1 The concept1)Translation can refer to the general subject, the product or the act of translating. It involves changing an original written text in original language intoa written text in target language.2)Czech structuralist Roman Jakobson’s categories:A.intra-lingual translation, or rewording: an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language;B.inter-lingual translation, translation proper: an interpretation of signs by means of some other language";C.Inter-semiotic translation,transmutation: by means of signs of non-verbal sign systems.3)Intralingua translation occurs when rephrase, explain or clarify. Intersemiotic translation occurs if a text were translated into music, film or painting.1.2 Translation studies?○1Throughout history, translations have played a crucial role in inter-human communication, providing access to important texts of academic and religious value. ○2Yet translation as an academic subject begun only fifty years ago, the Dutch-based US scholar James S. Holmes in 1972 describes the then nascent discipline as being concerned with the problems clustered round the translating and translations. ○31988, Marx Snell-Hornbs wrote that the breathtaking development and prolific international discussions call for translation studies as an independent discipline. ○4Mona Baker says the exciting new discipline bringing together scholars from a wide variety of traditional disciplines. Now, the discipline continues to develop from strength to strength.There are two very visible ways in which translation has become more prominent.1)The proliferation of translating and interpreting courses. In 1999/2000, there were at least 20 postgraduate translation courses in the UK and several Centers of Translation, at least 250universities in over 60 countries offering commercial translation courses, and still other courses, in smaller numbers, focus on literary translation.2)The 1990s also saw numerous conferences, books and journals on translation in many languages. Long-standing international journals such as Babel, Meta have been joined by, Literature inTranslation, The Translator, Perspectives (France), as well as a whole host of comparative literature. John Benjamins, Routledge and St Jerome published a number of books. In addition, there are professional publications include Interpreting and In Other Words. Other smaller periodicals give details of forthcoming events, International translation conferences were held in many countries.Translation and training translators (Bratislava, Slovakia);Literary translation (Mons, Belgium);Legal translation (Geneva, Switzerland);Gender and translation (Norwich, UK);Translation and meaning (Maastricht, the Netherlands);Research models in translation studies (UMIST,Manchester, UK);Translation as/at the crossroads of culture (Lisbon,Portugal);Translation and globalization (Tangiers, Morocco);The history of translation (Leon, Spain);Trans-adaptation and pedagogical challenges (Turku,Finland):Translation-focused comparative literature (Pretoria,South Africa and Salvador, Brazil).The abundance of translation activities indicates that it has now become one of the most active and dynamic new areas of research.1.3 A brief history1)Writings on translating go far back in history, for example, Cicero, Horace have exerted important influences. St Jerome’s approach would affect laterScriptures translations, which was the battle- ground of conflicting ideologies for over1000 years.2)Although translating practice is long established, the study was not an academic discipline until the 2nd half of 20th century. Before that,grammar-translation method had dominated secondary schools which centered on the rote of grammatical rules of the foreign language. The gearing of translation to language teaching partly explain why academia considered it to be of secondary status. Study of translated works was generally frowned upon once a student mastered skills to read the original.3)USA promoted translation in 1960s. Based on I. A. Richardss reading and creative writing workshops, translation workshops were established in Iowaand Princeton, intended as a platform for introduction and discussion of finer translation principles. Parallel to this approach was comparative literature, necessitating translation.4)Contrastive analysis attempts to identify differences between languages, although useful, seldom incorporate sociocultural and pragmatic factors.5)In 1950s and 1960s. A number of linguistic studies of translation not only demonstrated their gut link with translation, but also began to mark out theterritory of translation. Nida used the word science.1.4 The Holmes/Toury map1)Holmes’s paper the name and nature of translation studies is the founding statement. He noticed that translation research was dispersed. He stressesthe need to forge channels, cutting across disciplinary gaps to reach all scholars working in the field. He puts forward an overall framework, and has subsequently been presented by Israeli Gideon Toury.2)General theories should seek to describe or account for every type of translation and to make generalizations for all.3)Descriptive translation studies: examination of (l) the product, (2) function and (3) the process:A.Product-oriented DTS examines existing translations. E.g. an analysis of a single ST-TT pair or a comparative analysis of several TTs of thesame ST. smaller-scale studies look at a specific period, language or text type. Larger-scale can be either diachronic or synchronic.B.Function-oriented DTS, cultural oriented translation studies, a study of contexts rather than texts. E.g. which books were translated when andwhere, and what influences.C.Process-oriented DTS: the psychology of translation, i.e. it is concerned with what happens in the mind of a translator. Some later researcheswork on think-aloud protocol.4)Partial theories: restricted according to the parameters discussed below.A.Medium-restricted theories: machine translation and human translation, whether the machine/computer is working alone or as an aid to humantranslators, written or spoken, whether spoken translation (interpreting) is consecutive or simultaneous.B.Area-restricted theories are restricted to specific languages or groups of languages and/or cultures.C.Rank-restricted theories are restricted to a specific level of (normally) the word or sentence, or text.D.Text-type restricted theories look at discourse types or genres; e.g. literary, business and technical translation.E.Time-restricted theories.F.Problem-restricted theories, specific problems such as equivalence, universals of translated language.5)The applied branch of Holmess framework concerns:A.Translator training: teaching methods, testing techniques, curriculum design;B.Translation aids: dictionaries, grammars and information technology;C.Translation criticism: evaluation, the marking of student translations and the reviews of published translations.D.Translation policy: the place of translation in society, i in the language teaching and learning curriculum.6)Theoretical, descriptive and applied areas do influence one another.7)The main merit: allow a clarification and a division of labor between various areas, yet flexible enough to incorporate recent advances.8)Translation policy would nowadays far more likely be related to the ideology. The different restrictions, might well include a discourse type.Additionally, Holmes’s map omits any mention of individual style, decision-making processes.1.5Developments since 1970sContrastive analysis fell by the wayside, the concept of equivalence also declined. The linguistic-oriented science of translation continued strongly in Germany, then text types and text purpose flourished, after which the Hallidayan influence has been prominent; Then comes the descriptive approach. Even-Zohar and Gideon Toury pursued the idea of the literary polysystem; Hermans founded the Manipulation School; The dynamic, culturally oriented approach held sway for much of the following decade; Then 1990s saw n Canadian-based gender translation by Sherry Simon, the Brazilian cannibalist school by Else Vieira, postcolonial translation theory by Bengali scholars Tejaswini Niranjana and Spivak and, the cultural -oriented analysis of Lawrence Venuti.For years, translation was considered to be derivative. Now it is making swift advances worldwide, though still denied parity with other researches.Chapter 2 Translation theory before the 20th century1．Word-for-word or sense-for-sense?1)The central recurring theme of word-for-word and sense-for-sense translation is a dominating debate. Translation theory is locked in a sterile debateover literal, free and faithful translation (George Steiner). Such debate goes back to Cicero (1st century BC) and St Jerome (late 4th century CE).2)Cicero outlined his approach to translation of the speeches of the Attic oratorsI did not translate as an interpreter but as an orator, keeping the same ideas and forms, in language which conforms to our usage. And in so doing, Idid not hold it necessary to render word for word, but I preserved the general style and force of the language. an orator tried to move the listeners.3)Horace underlines the goal of producing an aesthetically pleasing and creative text in the TL.4)St Jerome, the most famous of all, in a letter addressed to a senator, defending himself:In translating from the Greek - I render not word-for-word, but sense-for- sense, except in the case of the Holy Scripture, where even the syntax contains a mysteryTo illustrate the TL taking over the sense of the ST, he uses a military image of the original text marched into the TL like a prisoner by its conqueror. 2．Martin Luther1)Issues of free and literal translation were bound up with religious and philosophical texts for over 1000 years.2)Any translation diverging from the accepted was likely to be deemed heretical. The French humanist Etienne Dolet was burned at the stake for addingthe phrase rien du tout.3)Later, non-literal translation was used as a weapon against Church. E.g. Luther infused the Bible translation with the language of ordinary people.You must ask the mother at home, the children in the street, the man in the market and look at their mouths, how they speak, and translatethat way; then they’ll understand and see that you’re speaking to them in German.4)He rejects word-for-word translation since it would be sometimes be incomprehensible.3．Faithfulness, spirit and truth1)Flora Amos sees the history of the translation theory was generally unconnected;e.g. many prefaces and comments often ignored most of what had been written before:2)Early translators often differed in terms such as faithfulness, accuracy and even the word translation itself.3)Kelly traces the history of fidelity, spirit and truth. Fidelity had initially been dismissed as literal translation by Horace. At the end of 17 century, itbecame semantic faithfulness. The Latin word spiritus denotes creative energy or inspiration, but St Augustine used it to mean Holy Spirit, and St Jerome employed it in both senses. For St Augustine, spirit, truth and content are a continuum; for St Jerome, truth meant the authentic Hebrew text. It was not until the 20 century that truth was fully equated with content.4．Early attempts at translation theory: Dryden, Dolet and Tytler1)Cowley deplores the inevitable loss of beauty in poetry translation, suggests using wit or invention to create new beauty and reproduce the spirit.Cowley even proposes imitation for this.2)For Amos (1920), the England of the 17 century marked an important step forward in translation theory with reasoned statements.3)John Dryden reduces all translation to three Categories: (author-oriented description) IMPA.Metaphrase: word by word and line by line;B.Paraphrase: translate with latitude, while keep the author in view, follow his sense closely;C.Imitation: forsake both words and sense, more or less adaptation.D.Dryden criticizes Ben Johnson as a verbal copier: "Tis much like dancing on ropes with fettered legs.E.He also rejects imitation, where the translator supposes what author would have done in our age and our country. It allows the translator tobecome more visible, but does the greatest wrong to the reputation of the dead.5)Etienne Dolet set out five principles in order of importance: AAAUKa)Understand the sense and material of the original author.b)Knowledge of both SL and TL, so as not to lessen the majesty of the language.c)Avoid word-for-word renderings.d)Avoid Latinate and unusual forms.e)Avoid clumsiness, liaise words eloquently.6)Alexander Fraser Tilter s Essay on the principles of translation (1797) is TL-reader-oriented: idea, style, easeA.The merit of the original is so completely transfused as to be distinctly felt,as it is by those who speak the language of the original.B. A complete transcript of the ideas of the original.C.The style and manner.The first two laws are the poles of faithfulness of content and form.D.Have all the ease of the original composition.E.Tytler ranks his three laws in order of importance. The discussion of translation loss and gain is in some ways presaged by him. 5．Schleiermacher and the valorization of the foreign: issues of translatability or untranslatability.1)Friedrich Schleiermacher, the German theologian: ST meaning is couched in culture-bound language and to which the TL can never fully correspond.2)In 1813, he wrote On the different methods of translating, adopted a romantic approach based on inner feeling and understanding.3)Two types of translator:A.the interpreter, who translates commercial texts;B.the translator, works on scholarly artistic texts. (On a higher creative plane, breathing new life)4)There are only two paths open to bring ST writer and TT reader together. He preferred moving reader towards writer, giving the same impression.Either the translator leaves the writer alone and moves the reader toward the writer, or he leaves the reader alone as much as possible and moves the writer toward the reader. (Schleiermacher 1813/1992: 41-2)To achieve this, the translator must adopt an alienating method, valorize the foreign.a)to seek to communicate the same impression, the level of education and understanding of the TT readers also influence;b) a language of translation may be necessary,compensating here with an imaginative word while elsewhere make do with a hackneyed expression.5)His consideration of different text types, alienating and naturalizing opposites, vision of a language of translation, hermeneutics. 6．Translation theory of the 19 and early 20 centuries in BritainIn Britain, that period focused on the status of the ST and the form of the TL. Matthew Arnold in his lecture On Translating Homer, advocated a transparent translation method. Arnold advises his audience to put their faith in scholars, who are the only ones qualified to compare the effect. Such an élitist attitude led both to the devaluation of translation (TT could never reach the heights of an ST and preferable to read the original work) and to the marginalization of translation.7．Towards contemporary translation theoryGeorge Steiner: very small range of theoretical ideas covered in this period:We have seen how translation theory pivots monotonously around undefined alternatives: letter or spirit, word or sense.Chapter 3 Equivalence and equivalent effect1 Roman Jakobson: the nature of linguistic meaning and equivalence1)American structuralist Roman Jakobson follows Saussure. The signifier and signified form the linguistic sign, but that sign is arbitrary or unmotivated.2)Translation involves substituting messages in one language for entire messages in some other language, i.e. two-equivalent messages in two different codes.Since two different sign systems partition reality differently, there is ordinarily no full equivalence. Thus, equivalence focuses on structure and terminology differences rather than inability of one to render a message in another.Examples: gender,aspect: in Russian, the verb morphology varies according to whether the action has been completed or not; semantic fields, e.g. uncle 3)Only poetry - where form expresses sense, where phonemic similarity is sensed as semantic relationship - is untranslatable2 Nida and the science of translating1)Nida attempts to move translation into a more scientific era. He borrows from semantics, pragmatics and generative-transformational grammar.2) A word acquires meaning through its context and produce varying responses with different cultures. Context is especially important when dealing withmetaphorical meaning and cultural idioms, where the sense often diverges from the sum of the individual elements.3)There are linguistic,referential (the denotative dictionary meaning) and emotive (or connotative) meaning.4)In determining the meaning, hierarchical structuring, componential analysis and Semantic structure analysis are used.5)Chomsky’s generative-transformational model analyzes sentences into a series of related levels governed by rules:A.Structure relations are universal feature of human language.B.Phrase-structure rules generate a deep structure, Transformed by TG, relating one deep structure to another (e.g. active to passive), to produceC. A final surface structure, which itself is subject to phonological and morphemic rules.D.The most basic sentences are kernel sentences, simple, active, declarative that require minimum transformation.a)Kernel is the basic structural elements out of which language builds its elaborate surface structures.b)All languages agree easier on the level of kernels than on surface.E.The surface structure of the ST is analyzed into the basic elements of the deep structure; then transferred and restructured semantically andstylistically into TT surface structure (analysis, transfer and restructuring).pared to attempts to draw up a fully comprehensive list of equivalences.6)Formal and dynamic equivalence and equivalent effect, correspondence in meaning must have priority over style.A.Formal equivalence: Focuses on message in both form and content. ST structure determines accuracy and correctness. E.g. gloss translations.B.Dynamic equivalence: based on effect, which of TL should be the same as that in SL,a graded concept.a)The message has to be tailored to the receptor’s needs and cultural expectation and aims at the closest natural equivalent.b)Adaptations of grammar, lexicon and cultural references is essential to achieve naturalness.C.The success of the translation depends on achieving equivalent response.a)Making sense; conveying the spirit and manner of the originalb)natural and easy;7)Discussion of Nida’s workA.It inevitably entails subjective judgment from the translator or analyst. His equivalence is overly described at the word levelB.Nida pointed a road away from word-for word equivalence. His model introduced a receptor-based orientation.C.Van den Broeck and Larose consider equivalent effect to be impossible (how to measure and on whom?). Qian Hu demonstrated theimpossibility of achieving equivalent effect when meaning is bound up in form. Nida is aware of the artistic sensitivity which is anindispensable ingredient in any first-rate translation.D.It remains debatable whether a translator follows these procedures in practice.E.Gentzler denigrates Nidas work for its theological and proselytizing standpoint.F.However, Nida achieved what few of his predecessors attempted: he factored into the translation equation the receivers of TT and theircultural expectations.3 Newmark: semantic and communicative translation(Newmark 1981)1)Equivalent effect is illusory and loyalty conflict will always remain as the overriding problem.2)He also raises questions concerning dynamic equivalence, asking if they are to be handed everything on a plate, with everything explained for them.3)Newmark suggests narrowing the gap with semantic and communicative translation:municative translation: equivalent effect, inoperant if the text is out of TL space and time, e.g. HomerB.Semantic translation: render as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of SL allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original.C.Semantic translation differs from literal translation in that it respects contextD.Provided that equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is the best, only valid method.E.If there is a conflict between the two forms of translation, namely if semantic translation would result in an abnormal TT or would not secureequivalent effect, then communicative translation should win out.4)A.Denotative equivalence: content invariance.B.Stylistic equivalence: the lexical choices,especially between near-synonyms.C.Text-normative equivalence is related to t ext types.municative equivalence, is oriented towards the receiver of the text or message.E.A.Mona Baker, in In Other Words, equivalence is influenced by a variety of linguistic and cultural factors and is therefore always relative.B.Kenny: equivalence is supposed to define translation, and translation, in turn, defines equivalence.Chapter 4 The translation shift approach1 Vinay and Darbelnets model (2000)1)Direct translation:a)Borrowing: The SL word is transferred directly to the TL to fill a semantic gap.b)Caique: the SL expression or structure is transferred in a literal translation.仿造c)Literal translation: word-for-word translation, the most common between languages of the same family and culture.只有下列情况例外，(a) gives a different meaning or no meaning; (b) Impossible for structural reasons; (c) not have a corresponding expression within the metalinguistic experience of the TL; (d) corresponds to something at a different level of language.2)Oblique translation.In cases where not possible, the strategy of oblique translation must be use d. This covers a further four procedures:a)Transposition: a change of one part of speech for another without changing the sense, probably the most common structural change.b)Modulation调节: changes the semantics and point of view of the SL:A.Obligatory: e,g. the time when--- le moment où [lit. the moment where];B.Optional, linked to preferred structures of the two languages:e.g. it is not difficult to show , il est facile de démontrer [lit. it is easy to show].C.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: 抽象具体、因果、局部整体、局部替换，倒置，否定，主被动转换、时空Change of symbol (including fixed and new metaphors).c)Equivalence等值: Cases where languages describe the same situation by different stylistic or structural means, particularly useful in translatingidioms and proverbs (the sense, not the image, of comme un chien dans un jeu de quilles [lit. like a dog in a set of skittles] can be rendered as like a bull in a china shop).d)Adaptation改编: Changing the cultural reference when a situation in the source culture does not exist in the target culture. For example, thegame of cricket might be best translated into French by a reference to the Tour de France.3)These operate on three levels:a)the lexicon; connectors, discourse markers, deixis and punctuationb)syntactic structures; word order and thematic structurec)the message：The utterance and its metalinguistic situation or context.4) A further important parameter is that of servitude and option:A.Servitude: obligatory transpositions and modulations for difference between language systems;B.Option: non-obligatory changes for style and preferences.C.It is option, the stylistic realm that should be the translator’s main concern. Translator should choose among the available options toexpress the nuances of the message. Five steps for options:a)Identify the translation units.b)Evaluating the descriptive, affective and intellectual content of the units.c)Reconstruct the metalinguistic context of the message.d)Evaluate the stylistic effects.e)Produce and revise the TT.The authors reject the individual word to favor units. Translation units are combination of lexicological unit and unit of thought: the smallest utterance segment whose signs are linked in such a way that they should not be translated individually.To facilitate analysis where oblique translation is used, Vinay and Darbelnet suggest numbering the translation units in both the ST and IT. The units can then be compared to see which translation procedure has been adopted.2 Catford and translation shifts1)Catford follows Firthian and Hallidayan model, analyzes language as communication, operating functionally in context and different levels and ranks2) A formal correspondent: a system-based concept. Any TL category occupy the same place of TL as the given SL category occupies in SL.3) A textual equivalent: any TL text (portion of text) equivalent to a given SL text, tied to a particular ST-TT pair4)Translation shifts are departures from formal correspondence in translation.a) A level shift: expressed by grammar in one language and lexis in anotherb)category shifts:A.Structural shifts: The most common, mostly a shift in grammatical structure.B.Class shifts: These comprise shifts from one part of speech to another. a medical student.词类转换C.Unit or rank shifts: the equivalent TL is at a different rank. 级阶转换D.Intra-system shifts: SL and TL possess similar systems but involves a non-corresponding term.E.g. advice5)His analysis of intra-system shifts was later heavily criticized for its static comparative linguistic approach. Henry considers it to be of historicalacademic interest only. ○1Equivalence depends on communicative features rather than just linguistic criteria. ○2deciding what is functionally relevant is a matter of opinion. ○3His examples are almost all idealized and decontextualized. ○4He never looks above the sentence level.3 Czech writing on translation shifts(60年代)1)○1Levý sees literary translation as both reproductive and creative, with the goal of equivalent aesthetic effect. ○2Denotative meaning, connotationstylistic arrangement, syntax, sound repetition (rhythm, etc.), vowel length and articulation should be factored into equivalence and their importance depends on text type. ○3He also looks to game theory for inspiration. ○4real-world translation is pragmatic: MINIMAX STRATEGY: The translator resolves for that one which promises a maximum of effect with a minimum of effort.2)František Miko maintains that retaining the expressive style of ST is the main goal of translator. He suggests an analysis under categories such asoperativity, iconicity, subjectivity, affectation, prominence and contrast. An analysis of expression shifts, applied to all levels, will bring to light the general system of the translation, with its dominant and subordinate elements.3)Popovičrelates shifts to literal vs. free debate, they arise from the tension between original text and translation ideal. The entry adequacy issynonymous with both faithfulness to the original stylistic equivalence. The latter is functional equivalence aiming at identical meaning.4 Van Leuven-Zwarts comparative-descriptive model of translation shifts1)Kitty van Leuven-Zwart of Amsterdam draws on Vinay and Darbelnet and Lev, attempting to systematize comparison and build a discourseframework for fictional texts above sentence level.2)The descriptive model borrows from narratology and stylistics, attempts to interweave the concepts of discourse level (the fictional linguisticexpression) and story level with three linguistic meta-functions.3)The analytical model involves totaling the number of each kind of shift.4)The comparative model involves a detailed comparison of ST and TT and a classification of all the microstructural shifts:A.First divides selected passages into comprehensible units--transemes;B.Next, defines the Architranseme, the invariant core sense of ST transeme.parison of separate transeme with the Architranseme and establish relationship between the two transemes.D.If both transemes have a synonymic relationship with the Architranseme, no shift occurred.E.The absence of a synonymic relationship indicates a shift in translation;a)Modulation：One of the transemes tallies with the Architranseme, but the other differs semantically or stylisticallyb)Modification：Both transemes show some form of disjunction (semantically, stylistically, syntactically, pragmatically)c)Mutation：When impossible to establish an Architranseme because of addition, deletion or some radical change in meaning in TT5)Drawbacks：A.The comparative model is extremely complex. There are 8 different categories and 37 subcategories, not all clearly differentiated.B.Keeping track of all the shifts throughout a long text is also difficult.C.The use of the Architranseme as an equivalence measure encounters the same kind of problem concerning its subjectivity.Chapter 5 Functional theories of translation1 Katharina Reisss in 1970s1)Views texts as the level at which communication is achieved and equivalence sought.a)informative:Plain facts communication: information, knowledge, opinions, etc. Thelanguage is logical or referential, the content is the main focus.b)expressive:Creative composition: aesthetic dimension. The author, message form isforegrounded.c)appellative: Inducing behavioral responses: appeal to or persuade the reader to act in acertain way. The language form is dialogic.d)Audiomedial texts, films and advertisements which supplement the other three functions.。