3.4. The Subject Matter

Translator-practitioner must not only know languages, but the things discussed, i.e. the subject matter. Translator of fiction should know author’s outlook, his aesthetic view and tastes, literary trends, creative methods, epochs, circumstances, social life, material, spiritual culture, etc.

When translating social and political materials, it is necessary to know politics, political atmosphere and other factors, characteristic to the country, where the material to be translated is created, the epoch, it was written.

Translator of scientific and technical texts should have certain knowledge about this subject: biology, physics, astronomy and engineering.

Once again we would love to underline, that sometimes neither vocabulary, nor grammatical constructions will help us to understand the text, but our background knowledge alone. Only one example: in a scientific text the translator came across the following expression:

... investigation of microdocument storage system using fractional wavelength optical reading methods.

This expression is a bright example of the so called syntactical or structural ambiguity. The adverbial participle using can either be attributed here to the word investigation, or the word system. Only in case we know well the subject we’ll translate correctly, because none of the formal grammatical indicators are helpful here. The expert can figure out, which of two possible interpretations is admissible. The translation given below removes the necessity to choose between two options, but the uncertainty remains and may emerge again in some other texts:

Дослідження системи зберігання мікродокументів з використанням оптичних методів зчитування фракційної довжини хвилі.

The following model is also ambiguous:

...the man in armchair reading a newspaper...

We know, that reading refers to the man, and not to armchair and not due to some grammatical indicators, but because we know that only a human being can read.

3.5. Machine Translation

Automatic (machine, computer) translation is complicated through the ignorance of extra-linguistic factors by computer programs. This is a very serious impediment on the way to a high quality translation. Computer translates Clinton’s rule as „правило Клінтона“ in analogy with „правило де Соссюра“, and not правління, though “rule” means both правило and правління. Computer does not know, that Clinton is a statesman of the U.S., its president. If it had known, then the translation could have been correct.

Similarly: “hands of child” and “hands of clock” in both cases will be translated as „руки“, when in the second case it should be translated as „стрілки“. Homonymy is currently being unsettled issue for the automatic translators.

Meanings, which are lexical in one language (expressed in it through the vocabulary units), in another language can be grammatical (expressed “by non-vocabulary means”) and visa versa. (Even within the framework of one and the same language identical meanings in some cases can be expressed both by grammatical and lexical means):

Having entered the room she found out a stranger.

and:

After entering the room she found out a stranger.

Absence of these or those grammatical (as well as lexical) means in one of languages does not create any insuperable hindrances in the process of translation.

The role of the interpreter is very significant, and much is required of him in every way. He should be a highly educated person, have extensive and versatile knowledge. The interpreter of scientific and technical literature, naturally, should know well a given specialty; the interpreter, engaged in translation of newspaper and publicistic materials, should keep abreast of modern international events, to know political system, economy, geography of different countries, etc. Every interpreter should study literature, history, culture of other nations and especially the country, which language he translates from. He should know life, customs of this nation, i.e. he should be familiar with the so-called realities. Realities are understood as features of life, domestic economy, state system of every country, its customs, traditions, believes even prejudices — everything which creates its original, national image. This ignorance results in translation mistakes, discolours it, deprives it of national colouring. It might also result in gross blunders creating false and sometimes repulsive impression of the country and its people.

It’s clear that Leo Winner — the American translator of the novel by L. Tolstoy “War and Peace”, absolutely unfamiliar with Russian customs and traditions of the epoch, described by L. Tolstoy, makes a gross blunder when translating the following passage from the novel:

Графиня, повертаючись у вітальню, подивилась на нігті та й поплювала з веселим обличчям. (Після того, як лікар сказав, що Наташа почувається краще і починає одужувати.)

The countess looked at her nails and spat out, and returned to the drawing-room with a happy face.

L. Tolstoy implies a very peculiar “sign” (as if saving from putting the evil eye — „наврочити“), the interpreter transfers the word „поплювала“ as spat out — „сплюнула“. This mistake creates a wrong picture of culture, life and customs of Russian aristocracy of that epoch.

An interpreter should have general philological knowledge, as many problems of translation can be resolved only on a wide philological basis. Such training can protect the interpreter from mistakes. Interpreter should deeply know both languages. This statement is not a banality. In translation practice, unfortunately, the word-for-word or literal translation frequently occurs, and it still remains very undesirable phenomenon. In the deep knowledge of language the knowledge of its every aspect is implied: phonetics, grammar, lexicology, stylistics. Without them practically none of grammatical, lexical or stylistic problems can be resolved.