Interconnection of genre-stylistic and psycholinguistic types of translation.
The given ways of classification of translations (according to the character of the text to be translated, and according to the character of speech actions of a translator in the process of translation) are based on different principles. The types of translation differentiated do not coincide, of course. Theoretically, any type of the text may be translated either in writing or orally. Practically, however, the specific character of OT lends certain restrictions on the degree of complexity and the size of the translated texts, which is also connected with their functional-genre characteristics. Belles-lettres works, in general, are not translated orally, though some quotations from them may be cited in oral speeches and translated simultaneously or consecutively. The artistic and aesthetic influence in OT with its rigid temporal limits is rather a complicated thing, especially when poetry is cited, and its translation is unknown to the Tr. OT is not applied to large-size informative texts, because the duration of OT is restricted not only by the possibilities of translation, but also by a short length of oral communication at all. Physically it is impossible to speak, listen and remember without stop during a long period of time.
Lecture 4. EQUIVALENCE IN TRANSLATION I: EQUIVALENCE OF TRANSLATION IN RENDERING THE FUNCTIONAL-SITUATIONAL CONTENTS OF THE ORIGINAL
The notion of translation equivalence.
Characteristics of equivalence of the first level.
Characteristics of equivalence of the second level.
Causes of changing the way of describing the situation in translation.
Characteristics of the third level of equivalence.
Main kind of semantic variations in the framework of the third level of equivalence.
The role of the functional-situational contents of the utterance in reaching equivalence in translation.
The notion of translation equivalence.
38. One of the main tasks of a translator is the maximum full rendering of the contents of the original. As a rule the actual identification of the contents of the original and the translation is rather considerable.
One should differentiate between (1) a potentially reachable equivalence, which is understood as the maximum identity of the contents of the two texts - source and target, that is made permissible by the differences in languages in which these texts are created; and (2) translation equivalence - i.e. a real semantic identity of the texts (source and target), reached by a translator in the process of translation. The limit of translation equivalence is the maximum possible (linguistic) degree of preservation of the contents of the original in translation, but in every particular case the semantic identity of the translation with the original is in different degrees and by different means approximates the maximum.
|
|
|
The differences in the systems of the SL and the TL and the peculiarities of the creation of texts in each of them may confine the possibility of a full preservation of the contents of the original in the translation. That's why translation equivalence may be based on the preservation (or loss) of various elements of the contents of the original. Depending on the fact, which part of the contents of the original is rendered in the translation to ensure its equivalence, one distinguishes different levels (types) of equivalence.
Characteristics of equivalence of the first level.
39. Any text fulfils some communicative function: it informs the Receptor of some facts, expresses emotions, establishes contact between the communicants, demands of the Receptor some reaction or actions and so on. Presence of such aim in the process of communication determines the general character of pieces of information rendered and their verbal shape. Compare such chunks of speech as: На столе лежит яблоко, Как я люблю яблоки!, Дай мне, пожалуйста, яблоко, Ты слышишь, что я сказал? In each of these utterances besides the meanings of separate words and structures and the concrete contents of the whole of the message one can find also a generalized functional contents: statement of some fact, expressiveness, inducement, searching for contact. A text may consecutively or simultaneously perform several communicative functions – the cited utterances may constitute a whole coherent text, but it cannot but have in its functional task (purport of communication) without losing its being communicative, i.e. without seizing to be the result of the act of verbal communication.
|
|
|
40. The part of the contents of the text (utterance), indicating to the general speech function of the text in the act of communication is its PURPORT OF COMMUNICATION. The purport of communication is nothing more than a derived (implied or transferred) meaning, which is present in the text in a would-be concealed way, derived from the text as a meaningful whole. Separate lingual units take part in creation of such sense not directly through their own meaning, but indirectly, making with other units a meaningful whole, which serves the basis for the expression with its help of an additional meaning. Preserving such utterance the Receptor must not only understand the meaning of lingual units and their relationship with each other, but also make certain conclusions from the whole of the contents, derive from it an additional information, which does not only inform of what the Source is telling, but also why he is doing it," what he wants to render by it".
41. Equivalence of the first level means preservation of that part of the contents of the Original, which makes up the purport of communication:
| (1) Maybe there is some chemistry between us that doesn't mix. | Бывает, что люди не сходятся характерами. |
| (2) That's a pretty thing to say. | Постыдился бы! |
| (3) Those evening bells, those evening bells, how many a tale their music tells. | Вечерний звон, вечерний звон, как много дум наводит он. |
In example 1 the purport of communication is to render the transferred meaning, which makes up the main part of the contents of the utterance. The communicative effect here is reached by the peculiar artistic reflection of human relations equalled to the interaction of chemical elements. Such oblique description of this information was considered unacceptable by the translator for the TL and was substituted in the translation by another, a bit less imaginary utterance, ensuring however the due communicative effect.
In example 2 the purport of communication is the expression of the speaker's emotions, who is indignant at the previous utterance of the interlocutor. To render this purport in the translation the translator used one of stereotyped phrases, expressing indignation in the Russian language, though lingual phrases constituting it do not correspond to the units of the original.
|
|
|
In example 3 the general function of the original, that the translator by all means wanted to preserve is poetic influence, based on the sound, rhyme and metre. For the sake of rendering this information the source information is substituted by the other, which has the necessary poetic qualities.
As seen from the cited examples, the purport of communication is the most general part of the contents of the utterance, which is characteristic of the utterance as a whole and defines its role in the act of communication.
42. Relations between the original and the translation of this type are characterized by:
(1) absence of correspondence of lexical units and syntactic arrangement;
(2) impossibility to connect the words and the structure of the original and the translation with relations of semantic periphrasis and syntactic transformation;
(3) absence of real and direct logical ties between the message of the original and the translation, which would make it possible to assert, that in both cases "the same thing is described";
(4) the least identity of the contents of the original and the translation in comparison with all other translations, that are treated as equivalent ones.
Thus, in this type of equivalence the translation does not convey either "what the original text is about", or "what is said in it". This conclusion is true for the whole of the utterance, even if one or two words in the original have direct or oblique corresponding units in the translation. To this type we may refer the example of the translation: (4) "She lifted her nose up in the air" – Она смерила его презрительным взглядом., though the subjects of these sentences are directly related.
43. Translations at this level of equivalence are effected in cases, both when a more detailed rendering of the contents is impossible, and when such rendering may lead the Receptor to wrong conclusions and evoke in him associations different from those of the Receptor of the original, leading thus to the wrong rendering of the purport of communication.
|
|
|
The English proverb (5) "A rolling stone gathers no moss" describes the situation which is easily rendered in the Russian translation as Катящийся камень мха не собирает (мхом не обрастает). But the R will not derive the purport of communication of the original from this translation. For him the situation does not show clearly well, how he should treat it. Is it good or bad that there is no moss. For an English R moss means wealth, and its absence is a negative phenomenon. So, the situation described by the English proverb implies that one should not wander about, but keep the house and save his wealth. An equivalent will be the translation, having the same emotive charge and rendering the stylistic (poetic) function of the original, i.e. a proverb form. The translator should use a message, describing another situation, approximately Кому дома не сидится, тот добра не наживет.
Дата добавления: 2018-04-15; просмотров: 518; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!