Introducing Translation Studies Theories and applications Jeremy Munday Chapter 1: Main issues of translation studies: 1.

Jacobson’s categories of translation: a. Intralingual; b. Interlingual; c. Intersemiotic (verbal  non-verbal). 2. History of the discipline: a. From the late 18th to the 1960s – grammar-translation method (replaced by communicative approach in the 1960s and 1970s); b. The USA 1960s – translation workshop concept based on Richards’s reading workshops and practical criticism approach that began in 1920s; running parallel to this approach was that of comparative literature; c. The USA 1930s-1960s/70s – contrastive analysis; d. More systematic, and mostly linguistic-oriented, approach 1950s-1960s: i. J.-P. Vinay and J. Darbelnet (French/English); ii. A. Malblanc (French/German); iii. G. Mounin (linguistic issues of translation); iv. E. Nida (based on Chomsky’s generative grammar). v. James S. Holmes’s “The name and nature of translation studies” is considered to be the ‘founding statement’ of a new discipline. vi. Hermans’s ‘Manipulation School’ vii. Vieira’s Brazilian cannibalist school viii. Postcolonial theory ix. Venuti’s cultural-studies-oriented analysis
The Holmes/Toury ‘map’ of translation studies1: Translation studies: 1 ‘Pure’ a) Theoretical (translation theory) i) General ii) Partial (1) Medium restricted (a) By machine: Alone/With human aid (b) By humans: Written/Spoken: consecutive/simultaneous (2) Area restricted (specific languages) (3) Rank restricted (word/sentence/text) (4) Text-type restricted (genres: literary, business, technical translations) (5) Time restricted (periods) (6) Problem restricted (specific problems e.g. equivalence) b) Descriptive (DTS) i) Product oriented (examines existing translations) ii) Process oriented (what happens in the mind of a translator) iii) Function oriented (a study of context / ’sociotranslation studies’ / cultural-studies-oriented translation)
1

2

‘Applied’ a) Translator training i) Teaching evaluation methods ii) Testing techniques iii) Curriculum design b) Translation aids i) IT applications (1) translation software (2) on-line databases (3) use of internet ii) Dictionaries iii) Grammars c) Translation criticism i) Evaluation of translations ii) Revision of students’ translations iii) Reviews of published translations

Holmes mentions also translation policy (the translation scholar advising on the place of translation in society).

‘free’ and ‘faithful’ translation Cicero1 ‘Interpreter’ St Jerome ‘Word-forword’ Ancient China ! 750-1250 Baghdad ! More than Western society ! 1000 years after St Jerome The French Etienne Dolet Avoid humanist. Arnold ! for elite Throughout the centuries debate on form vs. Britain M. . content occurred. BC 4th century ‘sterile’ debate over the ‘triad’ of ‘literal’. Traduttore.Chapter 2: Translation theory before the 20th century: Literal Up until the second half of the 20th century 1st cent. traditore = ‘the translator is a traitor’ ‘Adopt the very soul of the author’ (spirit) !The reader toward the The writer toward the into writer (alienating. Tytler England 19th century Metaphrase Schleiermacher (divided texts business philosophical) 19th-early 20th F.F. reader (naturalizing. who was burnt in 1546 16th century Martin Luther Before century From century 17th 17th Fidelity Letter Free Adaptation !2‘Orator’ !‘Sense-forsense’ ! ! Heretical (Etienne Dolet) ! !everyday speech style Truth Spirit Fidelity to meaning / truth / spirit !Imitation !Paraphrase Imitation 17th century Cowley England 17th century John Dryden England 18th century A. and foreignization – Venuti) domestication .Venuti) ! for a wide audience 1 2 +Horace Preferred form. Newman ! cent.

4. . Accuracy of reproduction of the significance of ST Communicative translation (craft) Subjective. Semantic translation differs from literal in that it ‘respects context’. 6. Koller’s Korrespondenz and Äquivalenz: Source language. Nida’s division inoperant if the text is out of TL space and time. Dynamic (equivalent response of: t2 reader on t2 as t1 reader on t1) (closest natural equivalent). among them those of meaning and equivalence. Literal translation is to be the best approach in both semantic and communicative translation. 2. but messages. Meaning: the signifier=the signal of the signified (the concept). angel. b. Ways of determining meaning: a. 2. cow etc). Dynamic equivalence: are readers ‘to be handed everything on a plate’? 4. ‘Loyalty’ to TL forms. interprets and explains (metaphors). Reader-based orientation. 2. Referential (dictionary meaning). Parameter Transmitter/addressee focus Culture Time and origin Relation to ST Use of form of SL Form of TL Appropriateness Criterion evaluation 1 2 for Semantic translation (art) Transmitter as an individual. should help TT reader with connotations if they’re crucial. Semantic structure analysis (spirit can mean demon. oriented towards a specific lg and culture. c. important (e. 5. Equivalence: a. alcohol etc)  meaning depending on context. May be better. c. ‘Loyalty’ to ST author. Meaning: a. autobiography. then communicative translation should win out.Chapter 3: Equivalence and equivalent effect: In the 1950s and 1960s the place of circular debates around literal and free translation took the new debate revolved around certain key linguistic issues. Emotive (connotative). Nida’s ‘science of translating (subjective): 1. Linguistic. Replaces Nida’s division with semantic (resembles formal equivalence) and communicative (resembles dynamic equivalence) translation. new translation for every generation. Target language. Jakobson: 1. we should substitute not words. technical. TT reader focused. Tendency to overtranslate.g. Over the following 20 years many further attempts were made to define the nature of equivalence. Componential analysis (grandmother. There is no full equivalence between code-units of different languages. cousin etc). So. political) statement. TL Rooted in its own contemporary context. Tendency to undertranslate. Newmark’s semantic and communicative translation: 1. mother. Hierarchical structuring (animal  dog. popular fiction. Inferior: ‘loss’ of meaning. If semantic translation would result in an ‘abnormal’ TT or would not secure equivalent effect in the TL. informative. god. 3. b. 3-stage system of translation (Chomsky’s influence: deep/surface structure of a language): SL1  (analysis)  X  (transfer)  Y  (restructuring)  TL2 4. Accuracy of communication of ST message in TT. b. 3. Formal (form and content). Jakobson in 1959. ‘Correspondence in meaning must have priority over correspondence in style’. publicity. Only poetry is considered ‘untranslatable’ and requires ‘creative transposition’. ethos. 3. SL Not fixed. ghost. Non-literary. discussed by R. Serious literature.

plain). geographical origin. metaphor and other stylistic form How attainable Analysis of correspondences and their interaction with textual factors The most difficult Text-normative Pragmatic Formal Text types Nida’s dynamic equivalence Related to the form and aesthetics of the text Functional text analysis First of all: particular readership An analogy of form un TL. technical). evaluation. using the possibilities of it and creating new ones Tertium comparationis. frequency.g. emotion Usage in different communicative situations Communicative conditions for different receiver groups Rhyme. slang). stylistic effect (archaic. . an invariant against which 2 text segments can be measured to determine variation. between near-synonyms Science of translation Equivalence phenomena (hierarchy of utterances and texts in different lgs according to equivalence criterion) parole Translation competence Research focus Lexis Formality (poetic.Field Research area Knowledge Competence Type of equivalence Denotative Connotative Contrastive linguistics Correspondence phenomena (corresponding structures and sentences of different lgs) Langue L2 competence What Equivalence of the extralinguistic content of a text Lexical choices e. range (general. social usage.

literal translation (word-for-word) b. borrowing 2. clause. modulation 6. equivalence 7. the message 9context) 4. A category shift: i. A level shift (sth is expressed by grammar in one lg and by lexis in another) 2. deixis (pronouns and demonstrative pronouns) and punctuation] d. Class shifts (word category). word order and thematic structure 5. calque 3. designed for the analysis of translated literature). morpheme).Chapter 4: The translation shift approach: 1. Structural shifts. word. Unit/rank shifts (sentence. clauses and phrases). iv. the lexicon 2. option (non-obligatory) 2. Intra-system shifts (systems are similar. The 7 categories operate on 3 levels: 1. a translation shift occurs – a departure from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL to the TL. b. discourse markers. 2 possibilities: 1. . iii. b. Vinay and Darbelnet’s taxonomy: a. but not always corresponding). Oblique translation: 4. Direct (=literal) translation: 1. syntactic structures 3. connectors [cohesive links. adaptation c. 3. The descriptive model (a macrostructural model. There are 2 kinds of shift: 1. The comparative model (a detailed comparison of ST and TT and classification of all the microstructural shifts within sentences. Distinction between: formal correspondence (a particular ST-TT pair) and textual equivalence (a pair of lgs). van Leuven-Zwart’s microlevel/macrolever translation shifts: a. group. When the 2 concepts diverge. Catford’s linguistic approach (shifts) a. servitude (obligatory 4 and 5) 2. transposition 5. ii.

c. f. The TT producer.Chapter 5: Functional theories of translation: K. 2. poem) Express sender’s attitude Aesthetic Form-focused Transmit aesthetic form ‘identifying (perspective author) method of ST Operative (e. effect equivalent Audiomedial (e. Vermeer’s skopos theory: knowing the purpose and the function of translation is crucial (adequacy over equivalence). Documentary translation (a reader knows that he’s reading a translation). J. Instrumental translation (a reader doesn’t know that). Ch. reference work) Represent objects and facts Logical Content-focused Transmit referential content ‘plain prose’ Expressive (e. Cohesive elements. b. 2. e.g. The commissioner (contacts the translator). Terminology. Reiss’s text types: Text type Lg function Lg dimension Text focus TT should Translation method Informative (e. 3 aspects of functionalist approaches particularly useful in translator training: a. Factual information.g. . advertisement) Make an appeal to text receiver Dialogic Appellative-focused Elicit desired response ‘adaptive’. The ST producer. Content: a. The importance of the translation commission. b. 2 kinds of translation: a. d. b. The role of ST analysis.g. Form: a.g. Nord’s translation-oriented text analysis: 1. Overall communicative strategy. greetings). The functional hierarchy of translation problems. c. The TT receiver. Holz-Manttari’s translational action model for non-literary translations with 1. The TT user.g. film) ‘supplementary’ method (supplementing written words with visual images and music) Nord adds to 3 types of language function a fourth ‘phatic’ function. b. its roles and players: a. 3. covering lg that establishes or maintains contact between parties involved in the communication (e. The initiator. b.

b.Chapter 6: Discourse and register approaches: Halliday’s model of language and discourse based on systemic functional grammar (lg=communication): Influence: Sociocultural environment ↓ Genre ↓ Register (field1.g. interpersonal. Stable (translated fairly literally). . Scheme for analyzing and comparing original and translation texts: Field (subject matter and social action) Language/text Tenor (participant relationship: -author’s provenance and stance -social role relationship -social attitude) Register ↓ Individual textual function Mode (-medium [simple/complex] -participation [simple/complex]) Genre (generic purpose) ↓ 2. Who is communicating and to whom. 3 The form of communication e. Presupposition (what the speaker supposes a listener should know). Dynamic (not). tenor2. mode3) ↓ Discourse semantics (ideational. Hatim and Mason’s semiotic level of context and discourse: Text elements: 1. Coherence (depends on receiver’s expectations and experience of the world). Textual function 2. theme-rheme/cohesion) Tenor ↓ Interpersonal ↓ Modality Field ↓ Ideational ↓ Transitivity Mode ↓ Textual ↓ Thematic and information structures/cohesion House’s model of translation quality assessment: 1. Cohesion 3. Implicature (what the speaker implies). written. textual) ↓ Lexicogrammar (transitivity. c. 2. Pragmatics: a. Chapter 7: Systems theories: 1 2 What is being written about. Overt. b. Covert. Baker’s text and pragmatic level analysis: 1. modality. Translation: a.

Directness of translation (ST  TT. Preliminary data. 2. Of growing standardization (tending to TT common options). Subjection to target culture norms  acceptable translation. Compare the ST and the TT for shifts. Matricial norms (completeness of TT). 2. literary and historical framework. cultural. b. Preliminary norms: a. b. ‘Laws’ of translation: 1. The accountability norm (an ethical norm). 3. 2. Product or expectancy norms. Draw implications for decision-making in future translating. 2. looking at its significance or acceptability. reviewers and other participants in the translation act Norms: 1. Initial norm (general translator’s choice): a. 2. c. Translation policy (text selection). 3. Subjection to source culture norms  adequate translation. Other DTS models: 1. Operational norms (the presentation and linguistic matters of the TT): a. c. The examinations of texts. Of interference (ST options transferred to TT. The ‘relation’ norm (a linguistic norm). ST  t2  TT).Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory: a literary work as apart of a literary system in the social. Toury and descriptive translation studies (DTS): 1. The explicit statement made about norms by translators. Chesterman’s translation norms: 1. 2. . and attempting generalizations about the underlying concept of translation. Situate the text within the target culture system. publishers. negatively or positively). Lambert and van Gorp – the scheme for the comparison of the ST and TT literary systems and for the description of relations within them: a. Manipulation School (‘a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical case studies’). Macro-level. Systemic context (data compared and norms identified). Textual-linguistic norms (TT linguistic material). Process or professional norms: a. The communication norm (a social norm). b. identifying relationships between ‘coupled pairs’ of ST and TT segments. d. Micro-level. Norms of translation behaviour can be reconstructed from: 1. b. It’s important [for choosing the translation strategy] if translated literature has a primary or secondary position in given literature. b.

The effacement of the superimposition of languages. The economic component. Quantitative impoverishment. The status component. 4. Lefevere (1992) treats translation as "rewriting" and identifies ideological and poetological pressures on translated texts. If a-c come from the same source – patronage is undifferentiated. 3. Literary devices. The invisibility of the translator in contemporary Anglo-American culture. 3. The Irish context: postcolonialism in Europe. This chapter also looks at the writing of Simon (1996) on gender in translation. Trivedi’s translational linked to transnational (translation=battleground). 8. Spivak: compares the status of translation throughout the centuries to that of colonies. The destruction of linguistic patternings. Berman’s ‘negative analytic’ of translation that prevents the foreign coming through. 2. 4. their life force invigorating the devourers. ‘Call for action’ – ‘visibility’ + ‘foreignization’. c. Qualitative impoverishment. 6. The destruction of expressions and idioms. Ennoblement. 2. b. Postcolonial translation theories: 1. 7. 11. 3. Patronage outside the literary system: a. Foreignization – ‘the reader towards the writer’ – resistancy – minoritizing (desirable). Expansion. Bassnett and Trivedi 1999). 1 Lg. if not – differentiated. . Translation functions are controlled by the following factors: 1. 3. d. 5. Venuti: 1.126-127) Chapter 8 "Varieties of cultural studies" examines Lefevere (1992). The destruction of vernacular1 networks or their exoticization. 2. Brazilian cannibalism: the colonizers and their lg are devoured. ‘Positive analytic’ = literal translation. and at postcolonial translation theories which stress the part that translation has played in the colonization process and the image of the colonized (cf. 9. ‘Deforming tendencies’: 1. who treats translation as "rewriting" and identifies ideological pressures on translated texts. b. Professionals within the literary system. 10. Chapter 9: Translating the foreign: the (in)visibility of translation: A. The destruction of rhythms. Rationalization. The ideological component. 4. 2. 12. The concept of the role of literature. S. Power relations: translation as the colonizer’s device used against the colonized. Simon compares the status of translation throughout the centuries to that of women’s and presents pro-feminist methods in translation. Spivak: ‘translationese’ eliminates the identity of politically less powerful individuals and cultures. Bassnett and H. The dominant poetics: a.Chapter 8: Varieties of cultural studies: Dziura: brak 2 stron!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (p. The destruction of underlying networks of signification. Clarification. Domestication (dominant in connection with the translator’s invisibility) – ‘the author towards the reader’. who transform it according to their needs.

Chapter 11: Translation studies as an interdiscipline: M. The parts of the hermeneutic motion: 1. umiejętność interpretacji tekstów literackich i źródeł historycznych. nauka. pure language = coexistence of SL and TL. literal rendering of the syntax. Aggression (penetration). Wraz z poetyką i retoryką tworzy swoisty kanon filologiczny. Benjamin’s task of the translator: translation gives the original ‘continued life’. hermeneutyka u Heideggera i Gadamera stała się ogniwem łączącym filozofię z rozumieniem egzystencji. głównym składnikiem ontologicznej struktury rozumienia jako takiego. Tak bowiem jak retoryka chce służyć sztuce mówienia. J. and the revitalization of the past. słowo. także wszelkich treści symbolicznych. 1. 1 Hermeneutyka .w filozofii. the opposition between SL and TL. Snell-Hornby’s integrated approach. Letter=Judaism=justice. a poetyka sztuce poetyckiej i jej ocenie. Ujęta w związku z teorią poznania (epistemologia) i metodyką nauk humanistycznych (metodologia). Compensation (restitution) Ezra Pound’s energy of language: translation as a tool in the cultural struggle. tak też hermeneutyka służy sztuce rozumienia i interpretacji wytworów kulturowych. sztuka.Chapter 10: Philosophical theories of translation: Steiner’s hermeneutic1 approach to translation as ‘the act of elicitation and appropriate transfer of meaning’. . 4. Derrida’s deconstruction: capturing the meaning? No stability in the signified-signifier (meaning-sign) relationship. Incorporation (embodiment). 3. Harvey’s combination of linguistic analysis and critical theory. W. 2. a w szerszym znaczeniu. 2. Spirit=Christianity=mercy. tekst. Initiative trust. jak język.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful