Общая теория / Modern TS Theories

3.1. Translation quality assessment model

3.2. Text and pragmatic level analysis

Mona Baker, 1992

Applies systemic approach to thematic structure and text cohesion, as well as to the pragmatic level of text in translation.

1) Draws attention to relative markedness of thematic and information structures in the ST and the necessity to consider this in translation balancing concerns for information dynamics and basic syntactic patterns that vary a lot in SV and VS languages.

Translators should take into account the density and progression of cohesive ties throughout a text and make changes corresponding to differences btw SL and TL in this area. The TT should hang together in a way typical for the TL (eg. Portuguese prefers lexical repetition to pronoun substitution).

2) Pragmatic aspect of translation is viewed in terms of coherence, presupposition and implicature

Coherence depends on the receiver’s expectations and experience of the world which may vary for ST and TT readerships (лекции по ядерной физике для солистов балета).

Presupposition is pragmatic inference based on the info the sender assumes the receiver to have in order to retrieve to text message (повторить судьбу ЮКОСа, Охотный ряд боится «синих ведерок»).

Implicature is what the speaker means/implies rather than says. Includes Paul Grice’s maxims that govern normal co-operative conversation (quality, quantity, manner, relevance, politeness) (In a US-Japan political talks: a phrase in Japanese meaning I’ll deal with it as well as I can realizes not the maxim of relevance as can be interpreted but the maxim of polite end of conversation)

Translators should be aware of intercultural difference in co-operative principles.

3.3. The semiotic level of context and discourse

Hatim and Mason, 1990, 1997

Focus on ideational and interpersonal functions, on changes in transitivity patterns and modality in translation which lead to the change in text message (a more active character becomes less so and a possibility (rumour) is presented as a fact).

Their semiotic definition of discourse (modes of speaking or writing which involve social groups in adopting a particular attitude twds areas of sociocultural activities (racist discourse, bureaucratese)) results in research of changes in translation that lead the TT with changed attitudes (ideology). Peculiarities of idiolect and dialect are viewed as important in this respect.

BUT! Did not come up (so far) with an applicable text-analysis model.

In Venuti 1998 linguistic-oriented approaches are viewed as “a conservative model of translation that would unduly restrict translator’s role in cultural innovation and change”

§4. (Literary) Systems Theories: the status of translated literature

A focus on the link between translation and target cultures, TT-oriented TS, development of Descriptive TS

4.1.The polysystem theory of Even-Zohar 1970/1990

4.2.Descriptive translation studies Toury 1995

4.3.Chesterman’s translation norms

4.4.International Comparative Literature Association (the Manipulation School) Theo Hermans, Jose Lambert and Hendrik van Gorp 1985

4.1. The polysystem theory

Even-Zohar, 1970

Down with prescriptions! TT-oriented approaches.

Deals with whole system of literary translation rather than individual texts.

Describes translated literature is a system within a TC (viewed as a polysystem).

The position of translations within the polysystem conditions the translator’s strategy.

If it is primary, the translators do not feel constrained to follow Tliterature models and are more prepared to break conventions.

If translated literature is secondary, translators produce more ‘no-adequate’ translations following TC models more closely.

4.2 Descriptive translation studies

Toury, 1995

A call for a properly systematic descriptive branch of TS aimed at reconstructing the norms operating during the translation process as well as situating the text within the TC and drawing implications for future decision-making.

He introduces the concept of norms of translation behavior and attempts to reconstruct the norms operating in the translation

Norm – the translation of general values and ideas shared by a community (what’s right or wrong) into performance instructions appropriate to particular situations. Norms are sociocultural constraints unlike rules and idiosyncrasies.

Initial norm is a general choice between ST or TT norms (the resulting products are termed adequate and acceptable translations and form a continuum.

Preliminary norms (selection of texts for translation + intermediacy of a third language)

Operational norms (matricial (omission, addition or relocation of passages, footnotes) + textual-linguistic (lexical unit, phrases and stylistic features).

Toury uses the term equivalence as a relation assumed btw ST and

TT.

Gedion Toury

‘Laws’ of translation

The law of growing standardization – textual relations of the ST are modified, even ignored in favour of habitual TC options.

The law of interference – lexical and syntactic patterns get copied ‘positively’ or ‘negatively’ and are tolerated for the prestige of the SL

His three-phase methodology includes

1)Placement of TT within TC system

2)Mapping ad hoc TT elements into their ST equivalents

3)Drawing some generalizations about translation strategies employed and the norms at work

4.3. Chesterman’s translation norms

Product or expectancy norms

Are established by the expectations of readers of a translation concerning what a translation (of a certain type) should be like. They allow evaluative judgments of a translation since readers are aware of what is appropriate and acceptable translation of the specific text variety.

Can be validated by the norm-authority such as a teacher, a literary critic, a publisher’s readership

Process or professional norms which regulate the translation process, are dependent on the above and include:

the accountability norm which is ethical and sets professional standards of integrity and thoroughness (translator’s responsibility for his work);

the communication norm is social – the translator ensures maximum communication btw the parties;

the relation norm is linguistic - the translator establishes relations btw segments of ST and TT taking into account a number of factors such as text-type, the nature of the commission, intentions of the ST author, expectations of the reader.

4.4. The Manipulation School

Theo Hermans, 1985

International Comparative Literature Association (Jose Lambert and Hendrik van Gorp) “The Manipulation of Literature:

Studies in Literary Translation”

A scheme for the comparison of the ST and TT literary systems based on the analysis of ST and TT.

1)Preliminary data (info on title page, preface, general translation strategy (partial or complete?)

2)Macro-level (the division of the text, titles, the internal narrative structure and overt authorial comment)

3)Micro-level (identification of shifts of lexical, grammatical nature, in the narrative, modality and point of view)

4)Systemic context – comparison on microand macro-levels, theory to identify norms and to describe intextual (relations with other texts) and intersystemic relations (relations with other genres, codes)

§5. Cultural Studies: ‘the cultural turn’ in TS

A focus on the ‘new translation ethics’

(e.g. Bassnett and Lefevere 1990; Venuti 1995; and postcolonialists)

The move from translation as text to translation as culture and politics.

The study of changes in translation standards over time.

These proposals aim to raise awareness of the fundamental (ideological) role of translation and translators in society.

Focus on the social repercussions of the exchange thru translation - that is, on truly cultural issues

5.1.Translation as rewriting

5.2.Translation and gender (feminine writing in translation)

5.3.Post-colonialism

5.4.The invisibility of translator (Lawrence Venutti)