- •Theory of translation
- •Contents
- •Part I. General issues of translation chapter 1. What Is Translation? § 1. Translation studies
- •§ 2. Semiotic approach
- •§ 3. Communicative approach
- •§ 4. Dialectics of translation
- •Inseparability of form and meaning.10
- •4.Translation and culture are inseparable.
- •§ 5. Translation invariant
- •§ 6. Unit of translation
- •Chapter 2. Types of translation § 1. Classification criteria
- •§ 2. Machine translation
- •§ 3. Translation and interpreting
- •§ 4. Functional classification
- •Chapter 3. Evaluative classification of translation § 1. Adequate and equivalent translation
- •§ 2. Literal translation
- •§ 3. Free translation
- •§ 4. The concept of ‘untranslatability’
- •Chapter 4. Translation Equivalence § 1. Types of equivalence
- •Equivalence
- •§ 2. Pragmatic level
- •§ 3. Situational level
- •§ 4. Semantic paraphrase
- •§ 5. Transformational equivalence
- •§ 6. Lexical and grammatical equivalence
- •§ 7. The levels of equivalence hierarchy
- •Chapter 5. Ways of Achieving Equivalence § 1. Types of translation techniques
- •§ 2. Translation transcription
- •§ 3. Transliteration
- •§ 4. Cаlque translation
- •§ 5. Grammar transformations
- •§ 6. Lexical transformations
- •§ 7. Complex transformations
- •Chapter 6. Translation Models § 1. Translation process
- •§ 2. Situational model of translation
- •§ 3. Transformational model of translation
- •§ 4. Semantic model of translation
- •§ 5. Psycholinguistic model of translation
- •Notes to part I
- •Part III. Grammar problems of translation
- •Chapter 1. Formal differences between source text and target text
- •Chapter 2. Translating finite verb forms §1. Translating tense and aspect forms
- •§2. Translating passive voice forms
- •§3. Translating the subjunctive mood forms
- •Chapter 3. Translating non-finite verb forms §1. Translating the infinitive
- •§2. Translating the gerund
- •§3. Translating the participle
- •§4. Translating absolute constructions
- •Chapter 4. Translating causative constructions §1. Types of causative constructions
- •§2. Constructions with causal verbs
- •§3. Constructions with the verbs to have, to get
- •§4. Causative constructions with non-causal verbs
- •Chapter 5. Translating pronouns §1. Translating personal pronouns
- •§2. Translating possessive pronouns
- •§3. Translating relative pronouns
- •§4. Translating the pronoun one
- •§5. Translating the pronouns каждый / все
- •§6. Translating partitive pronouns some / any
- •§7. Translating demonstrative pronouns
- •Chapter 6. Translating the article
- •§1. Translating the indefinite article
- •§2. Translating the definite article
- •§3. Translating the zero article
- •Chapter 7. Translating attributive clusters §1. Features of the attributive phrase
- •§2. Translating the attributive cluster.
- •Chapter 8. Syntactic changes in translation §1. Communicative structure of the english and russian sentence
- •§2. Word order change due to the functional sentence perspective
- •§3. Sentence partitioning and integration
- •Chapter 9. Difference in english and russian punctuation §1. Principles of punctuation in english and russian
- •§2. Differences in comma usage
- •§3. Using the dash
- •§4. Using quotation marks
- •§5. Using the colon and semicolon
- •§6. Using the ellipses
- •§2. Interaction of word semantic structures
- •§3. Word connotation in translation
- •§4. Intralinguistic meaning
- •Chapter 2. Translating realia §1. Culture-bound and equivalent-lacking words
- •§2. Types of culture-bound words
- •§3. Ways of translating culture-bound words
- •§4. Translating people’s names
- •§5. Translating geographical terms
- •§6. Translating published editions
- •§7. Translating ergonyms
- •Chapter 3. Translating terms §1. Translation factors
- •§2. Translation technique
- •§3. Terms in fiction and magazines
- •Chapter 4. Translator’s false friends
- •Chapter 5. Phraseological and metaphorical translation §1. Metaphor and the phraseological unit
- •§2. Interlingual metaphoric transformations
- •§3. Ways of translating idioms
- •§4. Challenges in translating idioms
- •Chapter 6. Metonymical translation §1. Definitions
- •§2. Lexical metonymic transformation
- •§3. Predicate translation
- •§4. Syntactic metonymic transformations
- •Chapter 7. Antonymic translation §1. Definition
- •§2. Conversive transformation
- •§3. Shifting negative modality
- •§4. Reasons for antonymic translation
- •Chapter 8. Differences in russian and english word combinability §1. Reasons for differences in word combinability
- •§2. Translation of adverbial verbs
- •§3. Translating condensed synonyms
- •Chapter 9. Translating new coinages: differences in russian and english word building
- •§1. Compounds
- •§2. Conversion
- •§3. Affixation
- •§4. Abbreviation
- •Notes to part IV
- •Part V. Pragmatic problems of translation
- •Chapter 1. Translation pragmatics
- •§1. Concept of pragmatics
- •§2. Text pragmatics
- •§3. Author’s communicative intention
- •§4. Communicative effect upon the receptor
- •И молвил он: «в былое время
- •На голове стою.»
- •§5. Translator’s impact
- •Chapter 2. Speech functions and translation §1. Language and speech functions
- •§2. Interpersonal function and modality in translation.
- •§3. Expressive function in translation
- •§5. Conative function in translation
- •Chapter 3. Functional styles and translation §1. Functional style, register: definition
- •§2. Translating scientific and technical style
- •§3. Translating bureaucratic style
- •§4. Translating journalistic (publicistic) style
- •Chapter 4. Rendering stylistic devices in translation
- •§1. Translation of metaphors and similes
- •§2. Translation of epithets
- •§3. Translation of periphrase
- •§4. Translation of puns
- •“Bother! Said Pooh… “What’s that bit of paper doing?”
- •§5. Translation of allusions and quotations
- •Chapter 5. Translation norms and quality control of a translation §1. Norms of translation
- •§2. Quality control of the translation.
- •Chapter 6. Translation etiquette §1. Professional ethics, etiquette, and protocol
- •§2. Code of professional conduct
- •§3. Protocol ceremonies
- •Notes to part V appendix 1. Russian-English Transliteration Chart
- •Appendix 2. Russian-English-Chinese Transliteration Chart
- •Учебное издание Зоя Григорьевна Прошина теория перевода
- •Part II. History of translation Chapter 1. Western traditions of translation § 1. Translation during antiquity
- •§ 2. Translation in the middle ages
- •§ 3. Renaissance translation
- •§ 4. Enlightenment translation (17-18th c.)
- •§ 5. Translation in the 19th century
- •§ 6. Translation in the 20th century
- •Chapter 2. History of russian translation § 1. Old russian culture and translation
- •§2. Translation in the 18th century
- •§ 3. Russian translation in the first half of the 19th century
- •§4. Translation in the second half of the 19th century
- •§5. Translation at the turn of the century
- •§6. Translation in the 20th century
- •Notes to part 2
§4. Translation in the second half of the 19th century
The second half of the 19th century saw a great increase in the volume of translated literature. During this period there was a gradual decline in poetry and a rise of prose. Beginning about 1860, Russian culture was dominated by a group known as the "intelligentsia," a word that the English borrowed from the Russian but which means something rather different in its original Russian usage (‘raznochintsy”).110 They did not speak or read foreign languages, which required a greater number of translations. The quantitative increase led to a qualitative decrease. Most translations of that period were very far from the original texts, as they rendered only the outline of the source text rather than its style.
This period witnessed a change of status for translated literature. In the early 19th century, translation was regarded as part and parcel of the author’s original creative work (it is not by chance that Gnedich, famous for his translations, was portrayed among great Russian authors in Novgorod’s monument to the thousandth anniversary of Russia.) While in the early 19th century foreign literary works were adopted by Russian literature, the situation changed drastically in the late 19th century: translated literature was shunned from the original fiction. Translated works began to be regarded as foreign literature related to Russian literature only by the new language expression they acquired. The second half of the 19th century separated the translator and the author, by subordinating the former to the latter.
One of the most outstanding poets and translators of the time was AfanasyFet, who wrote delicate love lyrics and translated classics (Horace, Virgil, Ovid, Catullus) and German poets. According to K. Chukovsky, Fet the translator and Fet the poet are absolutely incomparable.111Fet the poet is superb. He is superior to Fet the translator. As a translator, Fet took great care of the poetic form, nearly neglecting the sense, so that some of his poems could be understood only with reference to the source text. Fet himself did only word-for-word translations, justifying his position by comparing the translation with a picture: even the worst picture will better familiarize a person with Venus de Milo than can any verbal description. Such is the translation. It might sound clumsy in another language but it should cause the reader to feel the force and magnitude of the original.112
Why is it possible that Fet, such a splendid lyrical poet, could be so clumsy and tongue-tied in translation? Scholars explain this by Fet’s agnosticism, that is, his philosophical belief that nothing can be known in depth, that only perceptible phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.113This attitude of the poet is reflected both in his impressionist poetry where he represented only his own impressions of the intangible world, and in his translations where he reproduced the unattainable content of the source text. Thus Fet, who literally showed in translation somebody else’s feelings, was opposed to Zhukovsky, who gave voice to his own, subjective feelings in translation.
In contrast to Fet’s were the translation principles of Irinarkh Vvedensky, known for his free translation of C. Dickens and W. Thackeray. Vvedensky called translators, first and foremost, to read the source text carefully, to associate themselves with the author and, then, to move the author to our community and answer the question: in what form would the author express his ideas if he lived with us, in this country?114When translating, he would typically add pages which had nothing to do with the source text. While criticizing Vvedensky’s work, K. Chukovsky said that his translation was in fact a sneer at Dickens, uncontested by the Russian educated public.115
Another translation method was characteristic of Alexei K. Tolstoy,who introduced pragmatic requirements into translation. “We should not translate words, and sometimes not even sense; what is important is to convey the impression.”116Translation should have the same impact upon the reader as has the original text.
Tolstoy’s principle was developed by a revolutionary democrat M.Mikhailov, who denied literal translation and even thought it possible to make form substitutions to produce the same effect upon the reader as does the source text. Similar ideas were shared byV. Kurochkin.