методичка 3 (1)
.pdfits equivalent counterpart in the TL, may be referred to one of the language levels. Hence translation can be performed on the following levels:
phoneme level;
morpheme level;
word level;
phrase level;
clause or sentence level;
paragraph level;
text level;
pragmatic, or sociocultural, level.
Phonemes are not meaningful units; they possess simply a distinctive function. But there are cases when the phoneme appears to be the unit of translation. Thus, the English word “Mister” sounds in Ukrainian as “Містер”, “Smith” as “Сміт”, “London” as “Лондон” etc, so the English phonemes are replaced by the closest equivalent in articulation phonemes of the Ukrainian language.
There are sometimes cases when each morpheme of the SL unit corresponds to a certain morpheme of the TL unit.
Ex: skier – лижнік (er – ік) teacher – вчитель (er – ель) boys – хлопці (s – і)
In most cases the morphological structure of semantically equivalent words does not coincide in different languages and translation on this level is very rare.
The following English sentences and their correspondences in Ukrainian may be taken for illustration of the translation on the word level:
He lives in Kyiv – Він живе у Києві.
She returned home late. – Вона повернулася додому пізно.
Word-for-word translation is limited in practice because only a part of words gets word-for word correspondences while other words of a sentence are translated on a higher level.
A typical example of translation on the word-combination level becomes the unit of
11
translation. In a free word-combination the components retain their primary meaning and the meaning of the whole word combination is quite transparent:
He did very well in the exam. – Він відмінно витримав екзамен.
The talk had done him good. – Розмова заспокоїла його.
He did well in the war. – Він прославився на війні.
(to do well –w-c level ;, he, in the war – w. level (досл. переклад )
In some cases the translator resorts to the translation of a sentence as a whole (usually such sentences are idiomatic):
No bees, no honey; no work, no money – під лежачий камінь вода не тече.
The pot calls the kettle black – Сам хороший!
The meaning of the sentences is perceived and the sentences are taken as a single whole. This kind of translation also takes place when translating forms of politeness, various inscriptions and signs:
Fragile! – обережно, скло!
Many happy returns on the day! – З днем народження!
Pragmatics is the study of language as it is used in a sociocultural context, including its effect on the participants in the process of communication. Sociocultural means involving social and cultural factors. The translator must be aware of the situational aspects of language usage in order to produce authentic translation. The translator has to work at all these levels of text analysis and synthesis at the same time. For academic purposes ST and TT used in this course will be first broken down into their constituent meaningful components (analysis) and then reassembled as finished products (synthesis).
Literature
Комиссаров В.Н. Теория перевода (лингвистические аспекты): Учеб. пос.
для ин-тов и ф-тов ин. яз. / В.Н. Комиссаров. − М. : Высш. шк., 1990. − С. 6-42.
Комиссаров В.Н., Коралова А.Л. Практикум по переводу с английского языка на русский: Учеб. пос. для ин-тов и ф-тов ин. яз. − М. : Высш. шк., 1990. − С. 4-10.
Корунець І.В. Теорія і практика перекладу (аспектний переклад):
12
Підручник / І.В. Корунець. − Вінниця : Нова книга, 2000. − С. 10-15.
Латышев Л.К. Перевод: проблемы теории, практики и методики преподавания: Кн. для учителя шк. с углубл.. изуч. нем. яз. / Л.К. Латышев. −
М. : Просвещение, 1988. − С. 6-13.
Мірам Г. Алгоритми перекладу: Вступ. курс з формалізації перекладу (англ.
мовою) / Г. Мірам. − К. : Твім інтер, 1998. − С. 32-33.
Федоров А.В. Основы общей теории перевода (лингвистические проблемы): Учеб. пос. для ин-тов и ф-тов ин. яз. / А.В. Федоров. − М .: Высш.
шк., 1983. − С. 9-23.
Хельбиг Г. Общие вопросы конфронтативной лингвистики //
Конфронтативная лингвистика. − К. : Лыбидь, 1990. − С. 5-25.
Чернов Г.В. Основы синхронного перевода / Г.В. Чернов. – М. : Высшая школа, 1987. – 256 с.
Швейцер А.Д. Контрастивная лингвистика и теория перевода//
Сопоставительная лингвистика и обучение неродному языку. − М. : Наука,
1987. − С. 157-166.
Bassnett-McGuire, S. Translation studies / S. Bassnett-McGuire. − London,
1980.
Beaugrande, R. de. Factors in The Theory of Poetic Translating / R. de
Beaugrande. − Assuan, 1978.
Bell, Roger T. Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. − London, NY : Longman, 1991. − P. 21-32.
Jacobson, R. On the Linguistic Aspect of Translation // Theories of Translation.
− Chicago : The University of Chicago Press, 1992. − P. 144-151.
Newmark, P. About Translation / P. Newmark. − Clevedon, Buffalo, Toronto, Sydney : Multilingual Matters Ltd., 1991. − P. 14-60.
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook on Translation / P. Newmark. − London, 1988.
Nida E.A., Taber C.R. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden : E.J.Brill, 1968.
Nietsche, F. On the Problem of Translation // Theories of Translation. − London,
13
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992. − P. 68-69.
ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Define the subject and objectives of the theory of translation.
Give the most practical definition of translation. Explain the reasons of your choice.
Comment on translation as a process of interlingual and intercultural communication.
What are the levels of analysis in translation?
Comment on the phonological aspect of translation.
Comment on the lexical aspect of translation
ВПРАВИ ДЛЯ САМОСТІЙНОГО ОПРАЦЮВАННЯ
Рекомендації щодо обраного способу перекладу.
Частковий переклад застосовується для передачі вихідного тексту з метою загального ознайомлення з його змістом без комунікативно вагомих деталей.
Вибірково частковий переклад здійснюється при інтерпретації доповідей,
ділових листів, стандартних повідомлень, газетних матеріалів тощо. Під час такого перекладу відбувається лише ознайомлення з характером повідомлення і стилем тексту.
Функціонально частковий переклад застосовується для скорочення або спрощення вихідного тексту з метою донести його до непідготованого адресату. Результатом такого перекладу є переказ, адаптація або версія.
ВПРАВА 1: Порівняйте тексти англійською та російською мовами, визначте спосіб перекладу і умови для такого вибору. Перекладіть другий текст за допомогою такого ж самого способу перекладу.
I. Marks Spencer
Dear Sir: I have many items purchased at Marks Spencer by my peripatetic bu-
14
sinessman father, including some beautiful clothes and a fold-up umbrella. Ah, the umbrella! It has never broken, inverted, failed to open or been mislaid without being recognised as mine and returned to me. Having had it for about four years, I call that unusual life span a testimony to British ingenuity.
If Mrs. Thatcher ever decides to hand over the government to Marks Spencer, I may emigrate and change my nationality. Or maybe we could import some MS managers to run our government!
Barbara Pilvin Philadelphia
Барбара Пилвин из Филадельфии в своем письме рассказывает о своем восхищении торговой фирмой Marks Spencer, ссылаясь на пример купленного у них зонта, который вот уже много лет не ломается, не заворачивается при вет-
ре, не заедает и не теряется, что свидетельствует, по ее мнению, о подлинно Британском качестве. Переходя на политические темы, Барбара уверяет, что
MS могли бы возглавить хоть британское, хоть американское правительство.
ІІ. Dear Sir: Last summer, as we hosted a city child through the Fresh Air Fund, a garter snake appeared in our woodpile. Geraldo had never seen a snake. Fascinated, he stood just a foot or so away, watching the snake as it wanned in the sunlight. There aren't any snakes in the urban South Bronx. Gerry murmured that he'd like to catch this snake and put it in a bottle to keep. I replied that I'm opposed to caging wild animals. Gerry looked at me, bug-eyed and gasped, That's a wild animal?'
Rhu M. McBee Brewster, New York
ВПРАВА 2: Перекладіть текст за допомогою часткового перекладу, зберігаючи основне повідомлення й опускаючи зайві деталі.
In February 1987, the real thing happened. A star much larger and much hotter than our sun reached the end of its conventional life. In its core, hydrogen in quantities equal to about six times the mass of the sun had been converted to helium in hel-
15
lish thermonuclear reactions. Helium in turn had fused into carbon and oxygen, which themselves fused into even heavier elements. Eventually the innermost section of the core, about half again as massive as the sun, was turned into almost pure iron. The star was running out of available reactions, and activity in the core slackened, the radiation pouring outward was no longer as strong as the gravitational force pulling inward; the star collapsed, falling inward on itself until it could give no more, and exploded, spewing radiation and most of its mass into space. For astronomers, the supernova (known as Supernova 1987A, or SN1987A for short) was - and is - the story of the century.
16
LECTURE 2
BRANCHES OF TRANSLATOLOGY. TYPES OF CONTEXTS AND
CONTEXTUAL RELATIONSHIPS IN A DISCOURSE
General theory of translation as the core of translatology. Branches of translatology. Bilingual theory of translation.
Text, context and discourse.
Contextual relationships in oral interpretation.
General theory of translation as the core of translatology. Branches of
translatology. Bilingual theory of translation
The core of translatology is the general theory of translation which is concerned with the fundamental aspects of translation inherent in the nature of bilingual communication and, therefore, common to all translation events, irrespective of the languages involved, kind of the text being translated and the circumstances of translation. The general theory of translation deals, so to speak, with translation universals and is the basis for all other theoretical studies in this area, since it describes what translation is and what makes it possible. It describes the basic principles which are good for every translation event. In each particular case, however, translating process is influenced both by the common basic factors and by a number of specific variables which stem from the actual conditions and modes of the translator’s work: type of the original text he has to cope with, the form in which the
ST is presented to him and the form in which he is supposed to submit his translation, some specific requirements to his work etc.
An important part of the theory of translation is the theory of equivalence aimed at studying semantic relations between the ST and the TT. There is a presumption of semantic identity between the translation and its ST. At the same time it is easy to demonstrate that, in fact, there is no such identity for even a cursory examination of any translation reveals inevitable losses, increments or changes of the information transmitted. For instance, “verbal systems may differ in that one puts great emphasis
17
on temporality, whereas another has an overt marking of aspect, a category that does not have the deictic character of temporality. Even if the first language is able to express aspect and the second language temporality, these categories do not have a prominent position, so that there is no real equivalence between the two languages as to temporality and aspect” [Schogt, 1992: 194]. We can observe divergences in the semantic structures of Ukrainian and English if we consider Ukrainian diminutive suffixes conveying the attitude of endearment or sympathy to the object, or if we take the so called units of specific national lexicon. As Roman Jacobson has remarked,
“languages differ essentially in what they must convey and not in what they may convey. Naturally the attention of native speakers and listeners will be constantly focused on such items which are compulsory for their verbal code” [Jacobson, 1992:
149].
Each type of translation has its own combination of factors influencing translating process. In simultaneous interpreting the translator is expected to keep pace with the fastest speakers, to understand all kinds of foreign accents and defective pronunciation, to guess what the speaker meant to say but failed to express because of his inadequate proficiency in the language he speaks. In consecutive interpreting he is expected to listen to long speeches, taking the necessary notes, and then produce his translation in a complete or compressed form, giving all the details or only the main ideas. Thus, the general theory of translation should be supplemented by a number of special translation theories identifying major types of translation activities and describing predominant features of each type.
Of particular interest is the branch of translatology concerned with translating process itself. This direction of translation theory is of considerable practical value for it makes possible the description of particular methods of translation that can be used by the translator to ensure equivalence between the ST and the TT.
One more branch of the theory of translation deals with the pragmatic aspect of translation. The communicants involved in interlingual communication not only speak different languages but they also belong to different cultures, have different general knowledge, different social and historical background. This fact has a
18
considerable impact on the translator’s strategy since the most truthful rendering of
ST contents may sometimes be partially or fully misunderstood by receptors of the translation or fail to produce a similar effect upon them. The translator has to assess the possible communicative effect of the TT and take pains to ensure an adequate understanding of the message by the TR. This may necessitate expanding or modifying the original message to make it more meaningful to the members of a different language community.
The bilingual theory of translation studies separate sets of equivalents within the two languages considered. All bilingual theories of translation proceed from the identical basic assumptions as to classification of equivalents and their role in translation process.
All branches of the theory of translation are concerned with important aspects of the translator’s work and constitute a body of theoretical thought of indisputable practical value.
Text, context and discourse.
Oral communication, in the same way as written, always takes place in a certain context or communicative situation. This situation in its turn is embedded into the macro-context of interaction which includes extralinguistic factors of the ‘world” such as cultural, social, economic, political, historical, religious, etc. In linguistics there are many writers on this issue expressing different points of view (Гальперин
1981; Дейк 1989; Halliday 1961; Hoey 1991) but most of them agree that oral and written texts function in a certain discourse. Most of them also agree that meaning of language units is a linguistic phenomenon (recorded in dictionaries and, therefore, belong to the sphere of language), while sense is born in a communicative situation as a result of interaction of linguistic and extralinguistic contextual factors and belongs to the sphere of speech (Чернов 1987).
For practical reasons of oral bilingual interpretation we will assume the following working definitions of text and discourse (Максимов, Радченко 2001: 6-11):
Text is any verbalized (expressed by means of human language) communicative
19
event performed via human language, no matter whether this communication is performed in written or oral mode.
It means that we will consider all complete pieces of oral verbal communication to be texts.
Discourse is a complex communicative phenomenon which includes, besides the text itself, other factors of interaction (such as shared knowledge, communicative goals, cognitive systems of participants, their cultural competence, etc.), i.e. all that is necessary for successful production and adequate interpretation (comprehension, understanding and translation) of the text.
Therefore text is embedded into discourse and both of them are “materialized” in a communicative situation which, in its turn, is embedded into the macro context of interaction, i.e. cultural, social, economic, political, historical, religious etc. contexts of the world.
Contextual relationships in oral interpretation.
Messages operate within three types of contexts – macro (global) context, communicative context, micro (local) context. Therefore, elements of meaning of each message have to be related to these contexts in some way. It is generally assumed that such contextual relationships of messages may be of three kinds:
anaphoric or “backward” relationships, when the meaning of an element becomes clear through the reference of the preceding elements of the micro or communicative context, e.g.:
China’s President continues his visit to former Soviet republics – this time to
Ukraine. It’s the first official visit by China’s leader to the independent Republic (Euro News)
where the meaning of the independent Republic is determined by the lexical element Ukraine in the previous sentence.
cataphoric or “forward” relationships, when the meaning of an element becomes clear through the reference to the oncoming, “expected” elements of the micro or communicative context, e.g.:
20