WHAT DO WE DO WHEN WE TRANSLATE?
Reading Beyond the Lines: The Translator’s Quest for Extra-Textual Information
Without summoning extra-linguistic knowledge, translators will remain at the surface of the text, whereas they need to thrust their noses deeper into the multi-layered and subtle allusion or reference.
Technology and the information revolution have opened a vast world of knowledge to all of us. Translators must develop work habits and a methodology that allow them to make the best possible use of search tools and other resources. Looking for extra-textual information is an essential component of translation, albeit one often overlooked or taken for granted. As translators and revisers, we often come across translation mistakes or poor renditions that could have been avoided if the translator had looked for additional information. Translators often deal with highly specialized, unfamiliar, or heavily negotiated documents without being involved in the process that generated them. For this reason, they need to complement their substantive information with further research to deliver a reliable translation.
SOME BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
The most basic assumption in translation—whether translators consciously think about it or not—is that all human discourse contains a message (or intended meaning) and that somehow it is possible for a person with the right tools to grasp that message, to extract it from the container that is the source language, and transfer it into a new container, which is the target language. Whether it is possible to understand the message in all its nuances and complexity (comprehension), whether meaning can be separated from its linguistic envelop (deverbalization) without losing at least part of its integrity, and whether equivalences can be found in the target language to convey the message in a wholesome manner (reformulation) are all questions that can be debated.1 However, we do engage in the act of translating, which necessarily implies that we believe there is something in a text, some essence of meaning that can be transferred, and that different languages offer ways to transfer meaning, even though imperfectly.
Aside from this basic assumption that we hold to be universal, it is important to underscore the following additional assumptions about the act of translating, based on our experience as Arabic revisers at the United Nations.
1. A document should be approached as a whole. A sentence to be translated is unlikely to contain all the information needed to extract meaning from it for the purpose of translation. This is why it is necessary for the translator to contextualize different segments of the same text to better comprehend the meaning.
|
|
|
2. A document is always part of a storyline. Being aware of the full story is the best way to arrive at a correct understanding of the message. Since this is not always possible from the translator’s standpoint, seeking extra-textual information, as an integral part of the translation process, becomes the translator’s best guide. It sheds light on the evolution of the topic, resolves any ambiguities, and helps us understand patterns, including patterns of word usage.
3. Cognitive complements are indispensable to the intelligibility of a text. Translators need to mobilize their general culture and resort to other external sources of knowledge to understand the text, including its implicit and explicit elements.
4. A literal approach can never produce a good translation. Literal translation fails to transfer meaning because it produces awkward and unintelligible forms in the target language. By resorting to extra-linguistic knowledge, translators will feel more at ease with the subject and ideas, which will enable them to reformulate these ideas in a more idiomatic and accessible way. As French author Nicolas Boileau said, “What is well understood is clearly enunciated.” When we don’t understand, we automatically take refuge in the literal approach. Instead of trying to make the picture less blurry, we sink even more into the fog.
WHAT DO WE DO WHEN WE TRANSLATE?
Basically, we understand the meaning and then reformulate it in the target language. Put that way, translation may sound like a piece of cake. However, the process itself is much more complex. It involves grasping the message—separating meaning from words, getting as close as possible to what the author intended to say, and even the emotions he or she wanted to convey. This is called deverbalization. This means the translator is aware that the complete meaning is not contained in the utterance and additional research is needed. One salient example of unsuccessful deverbalization due to a lack of knowledge and insufficient research is when a translator spelled out the acronym “CBS” as “community-based services,” when in fact it referred to the Central Bank of Sudan. This mistake could have been avoided if the translator had consulted a list of acronyms included in another part of the document.
|
|
|
Here is another example of an ambiguous sentence requiring further research to settle its fine nuances: “Approves the investment of the Authority’s Endowment Fund for Marine Scientific Research in the Area with the United Nations Treasury.” This sentence, taken from a draft United Nations decision about budget matters, may seem simple on the surface, but an attempt to translate it shows the need for careful research in order to remove the ambiguity created by “with.”
Without summoning extra-linguistic knowledge, translators will remain at the surface of the text, whereas they need to thrust their noses deeper into the multi-layered and subtle allusions or references. By training themselves to be cognitively alert and methodically skeptical, translators will definitely enhance the quality of the output. The greatest risk translators face is to lose their alertness—to grab the first meaning that comes to mind and hold on to it with too much confidence. As William Weaver, best known for his translations of the work of Umberto Eco, Primo Levi, and Italo Calvino, puts it: “The worst mistake a translator can commit is to reassure himself by saying, ‘that’s what it says in the original,’ and renouncing the struggle to do his best.”2 Intellectual laziness is the translator’s worst enemy.
Дата добавления: 2021-05-18; просмотров: 68; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!