CHAPTER 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO TRANSLATION THEORY

Objetives:
1. To dive into the history of translation. From Roman time to the present.
2. To reflect upon why translation is considered both of a science and an art.
3. To learn about the origin and evolution of Translation Studies
4. To underestand that translation is not just the act of transforming words from one
language to another, but also a task that depends on other disciplines and requires
constant updating.

INTRODUCTION

Key concepts:
· The practice of translating is long established, but the discipline of translation studies is new.
· A split has persisted between translation practice and theory. The study of (usually literary)
translation began through comparative literature, translation ‘workshops’ and contrastive analysis.
· James S. Holmes’s ‘The name and nature of translation studies’ is considered to be the ‘founding
statement’ of a new discipline.
· Translation studies has expanded hugely, and is now often considered an interdiscipline.

The term translation itself has several meanings: it can refer to the general subject field, the
product (the text that has been translated) or the process (the act of producing the translation,
otherwise known as translating). The process of translation between two different written
languages involves the translator changing an original written text in the original verbal language
into a written text in a different verbal language.
This type corresponds to ‘interlingual translation’ and is one of the three categories of translation
described by Jakobson:

Three main types of translation (Jakobson 1959):

Intralingual (rewording): interpretation of verbal signs by means of different verbal signs of the
same language. Common: essays
(author persuading), rephrasing, audiovisual translation (subtitling same language).
Interlingual (proper): interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of some other language.
(THIS BOOK)
Intersemiotic translation (transmutation): interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of non-
verbal systems. Examples: a composer
gets inspired by a narrative creates a musical piece; choreographer reads a novel  dance piece.

Intralingual translation would occur, for example, when we rephrase an expression or when we
summarize a text in the same language. Intersemiotic translation would occur if a written text were
translated, for example, into music, film or painting. It is interlingual translation, between two
different verbal languages, which is the traditional, although by no means exclusive, focus of
translation studies.

A REVIEW OF THE HISTORY OF TRANSLATION

SUMMARY: Translators have always played a key role in society. Early medieval translators
contributed to the development of modern languages and national identities around these
languages. Translators went on playing a major role in the advancement of society for centuries.
After being regarded as scholars alongside authors, researchers and scientists for two millennia,
many translators have become invisible in the 21st century. It is time to acknowledge again the
translators’ major impact on society
We have seen that in Roman times there already existed the idea of translating sense for sense,
and not word for word, an idea that has continued until our days (literal versus free translations).
Although the middle ages were also relevant for the history of translation, with the raise of
vernacular literatures, the greatest changes appeared with the invention of the printing press in the
15th century and the growth of vernacular languages in political spheres: languages were taken
outside their own environment, thus promoting their translations. The Renaissance period also
brought along Etienne Dolets five principles of Translation Theory, which are still valid today. The
idea of a lingua franca was brought into life in the 17th century when scientists needed to publish
their work and did not know whether to use their vernacular languages or Latin. During the same
century, we have reviewed John Drydens main translation methods (metaphrase, paraphrase and
imitation) and his preference to use paraphrasing because he saw it as a means to create another
piece of art, which was criticized by other authors such as Alexander Tytler. Other authors of that
time, such as Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, gave way to the famous dichotomy between
foreignization and domestication (that will be discussed in chapter 3). Reader-to-author and author-
to-reader were other ideas put forward during the Romantic period. The 19th century again gave
rise to contrasting ideas such as the near impossibility of creating good literary translations (Percy
Bysshe Shelley) as opposed to new nationalistic ideas during the Industrial Revolution times,
which favored the production of rather literal translations to be read by a minority of cultivated
readers (Matthew Arnold). The latter idea regarded the translator as a mere technician (not a poet
or commentator). The 20th century witnessed the consolidation and professionalism of Translation
Studies, starting with the view of translation as an art (Walter Benjamin) and as a science (Eugene
Nida), moving through great linguistic theories, psycholinguistic views on translation,
communicative and functional approaches, and cultural studies, culminating with George Steiners
idea of translation as an exact art. Today, Translation Studies is considered an interdisciplinary and
transversal science that involves several other disciplines, whose origin dates back to James S.
Holmes and his so-called Holmess map, and the subsequent changes introduced by Gideon Toury.

Roman times, Cicero wrote about the need to translate not word-for-word but sense for sense.
Translations were used to enrich the people’s own cultural, linguistic and literary systems.
After the Romans, Saint Jerome translated the Bible into Latin and his role was key because he
made the distinction between word-for-word (for sacred texts) and sense for sense (other types of
texts).
Middle Ages, translation changed from being the task of a poet to the theologian/philosopher. Most
translations were from Latin, Greek or Arab. They started to be used in education to help improve
style and rhetorical skills. Greatest change: raise of vernacular literatures (and addition of
vernacular glosses to Latin translations). Vernacular translations began to be crucial in instruction
and in the progress of literary translation (Chaucer’s Canterbury tales).
Two types: vertical (from a prestigious language into the corresponding vernacular one) and
horizontal (between languages of a similar status).
Roger Bacon (C13th) lack of qualified translators; absence of foreign-language training  difficult
to draw a line between translation and imitation (originality wasn’t highly considered: plagiarism).
Renaissance, greatest change C15th: invention of the printing press. The political relevance of
vernacular languages grew as a symbol of growing state nations. Early translation theorists
appeared.
William Caxton: 1st English printer; translated the Aeneid which included a discussion on the
problems of translating dialects.
Martin Luther translated the Bible and the New Testament into German and cared about the
reader’s perception of the translated text. He explained how translations should be written using
correct forms that sound natural in the TL.
Juan Luis Vives contributed to didactics of translation and its pedagogical uses.
Etienne Dolet: greatest advance towards a serious theory of translation, five principles of
Translation Theory:
1. The T must understand the sense and material of the original author and feel free to clarify
obscurities.
2. The T should have perfect language knowledge of SLandTL,so as not to lessen the majesty of
the language.
3. The translator should avoid word-for-word renderings.
4. The translator should avoid Latinate and unusual forms.
5. The translator should assemble and liaise words eloquently to avoid clumsiness.
The 17th century, brought the need to the establishment of a lingua franca. Scientists had to
decide in which language they printed their works (most opted for both Latin and vernacular
language). Literary translations became popular and author and translator were seen as equal.
The poet Sir John Denham started to talk about translation as an art but his view was pessimistic.
This line of thought started to lead to freer translations where the essence and spirit of the literary
work were seen as more important than the language.
Abraham Cowley, in the Preface of his translation of The Pindarique Odes, claimed that he had
taken, left out and added what he had pleased.
John Dryden (playwright and literary critic) is considered as the first translation theorist and made a
distinction between three translation types (main translation methods at the time):
• Metaphrase, or turning an author word by word, and line by line, from one language to
another.
• Paraphrase, or translation with latitude, where the author is kept in view by the translator,
so as never to be lost, but his words are not so strictly followed as his sense; and it’s
admitted to be amplified, but not altered.
• Imitation, where the translator assumes the liberty, not only to vary from the words and
sense, but to forsake them both as he sees occasion; and taking only some general hints
from the original, to run division on the ground-work, as he pleases.
Dryden opted for the second type and he conceived the translation as an artist (as a painter).
In the 18 th century, a few authors reacted against this idea of paraphrase. Alexander Fraser Tytler
wrote “Essay on the Principles of Translation” and put forward three general rules:
1. The translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work.
2. The style and manner of the writing should be of the same character with that of the original.
3. The translation should have all the ease of the original composition.
Tytler (and Dryden) discussed the idea of recreating the spirit and nature of the original text.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was the representative of a current of thought that argued that if the
translator wanted to keep the spirit of the ST literary was the only choice, but with the consequence
of an unnatural TT in linguistic terms; but if the translator wanted to write a natural text in the TL,
the spirit of the text would be lost. This is said to be at the origin of the opposition between
foreignization and domestication. August Wilhelm von Schlegel viewed translation as either a
mechanical or a creative task and saw the translatoras a genius.
Romantic period, Friedrich Schleiermacher analysed the concept put forward by Schlegel by
contrasting two translation methods: reader-to-author (accurate and correct, stays close to the SL
keeping elements that are alien to the target readers, who read the TT as a translation) and author-
to-reader (brings the text closer to the TL readers, naturalising elements).
Wilhelm von Humboldt wrote about the idea of untranslatability departing from the linguistic
conception of reality: since languages divide reality in different ways, ideas could never be
transferable; however, he put forward the relevance of translation as a universal tool of
communication among cultures.
The 19th century, the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley showed a pessimistic view on the near
impossibility of good literary translations, which contrasted with the literary critic Matthew Arnold’s
views who addressed learned individuals and defended the pre-eminence of the ST over the TT
versions, producing literal translation to be read by a minority of cultivated readers. This, put
together with the stronger nationalistic feelings of the time of the Industrial Revolution, relegated
the translator to the position of a technician.
The first half of the 20 th century, the philosopher Walter Benjamin argued that languages have a
common core and the translator’s task is finding and reproducing it. In his essay “The Task of the
Translator” defends the role of translation as a form of artistic writing at the level of poetry or
drama. He is considered an example of the conceptualisation of translation as an art VS Eugene
Nida who established the role of translation as a science in his book “Towards a Science of
Translation”. For him, the translated message should be perceived by the TT reader as it is by the
ST reader. He made the distinction between two possible approaches to translation practice:
• Formal equivalence, related to the linguistic content and forms themselves. Implies few
changes between the source and the target texts; ST oriented and helps establish accuracy
and correctness in the translation.
• Dynamic equivalence, considers the necessary changes that need to be made in order to
transfer the messages behind the signs; it is a reader-oriented approach that considers
grammar, lexical and cultural adaptations acceptable if needed, so as to achieve
naturalness in the translated text.
Nida was in favour of dynamic equivalence and wrote about how translation should back-transform
(go from the surface structure to the deep structure in the SL, and from there go to the deep
structure and the surface structure in the TL). Nida’s decoding and recoding concepts are the
precedent for considering translation as a science. Benjamin’s and Nida’s approaches should be
merged so translation is considered both science and art.
It was the time of great linguistic figures and theories. Roman Jakobson’s division (interlingual,
intralingua and intersemiotic). The product/process distinction was also relevant for translation
since traditional approaches had focused on the product, the significance of the process was
considered in this century (translation strategies and techniques, translator’s subjectivity…). The
science of psycholinguistics applied to translation was also introduced, trying to decipher the
translation process and see what goes on in the translator’s mind.

End of the 20 th century, the communicative and functional approaches marked the end of the
century, relating languages to their contexts and underlining the significance of the world
circumstances of the utterances that condition translators’ choices. The functionalist views and the
idea of the communicative purpose redefined translation as a communicative process which takes
place within a social context. In the relationship between translation and cultural studies,
translation helps to shape the target culture, mirroring or distorting the source culture and either
bridging or separating both worlds; it is a weapon that plays an important role in cultural, social and
political progress. The modern philosophical approaches have looked at the essence of translation.
George Steiner’s After Babel is the first systematic investigation of the theory and processes of
translation since the C18th. He reintroduced the concept of hermeneutics which looks at the
translator’s desire to understand the activity of translation itself. The term hermeneutic motion
explores the act of translation in its entirety, considering translation not as science, but as an exact
art. He defines translation as a hermeneutic activity that consist of four parts:
1. Trust represents the initial confidence of the translator on the value of the ST. Without it, no point
in tr.
2. Aggression, second step, the translator invades the ST to take something (words and meaning)
away. The translator “invades, extracts and brings home”.
3. Incorporation (or embodiment): the translator’s action of assimilating the ST into the TL and
culture, conforming to target norms completely, eliminating any trace of the ST.
4. Restitution is the stage where the translator tries to restore the balance his intrusion has
disrupted. He needs to give energy back to the original to compensate for the previous aggression
and incorporation. Twoway interaction between the translator and the ST.

TRANSLATION STUDIES

Translation Studies (TS): the approaches to translation in the C20th pointed towards the need for a
discipline in its own.
Following Nida’s reference of translation as a science other authors continued defending this path,
which led to the emergence of TS, having its origins in the third International Congress of Applied
linguistics (Copenhagen, 1972), where James S. Holmes presented his paper “The Name of
Translation Studies”, where defined TS as a scientific discipline that would deal with a whole
complex of problems clustered round the phenomenon of translating and translations. In the
Holmes’ Map he divided the TS into:
Pure, divided in two sub-branches: descriptive (describing the phenomena of translation) and
theoretical (explaining and predicting such phenomena through the establishment of general
principles).
Applied, concerning translator training, translation aids and translation criticism. He maintained that
TS should be considered as an empirical science. Since the 80s TS has acquired status to be at
the same level as other established linguistic disciplines. Translation is a transversal science that
involves other disciplines (sociology, philosophy, history, psychology, Cultural Studies) and the
boundaries are difficult to set. He considered three possible orientations in terms of Descriptive
Translation (DTS):
a) Product-oriented: descriptive analysis of existing translations (general history of translations).
b) Function-oriented: the function of translation in the target socio-cultural situation, a study of
contexts.
c) Process-oriented: the task of the translation itself. The findings of DTS allow for the formulation
of coherent rules, which define the inherent relationships existing between all the variables that are
relevant to translation, and the formulation of these rules maybe incorporated to the theoretical
branch Theoretical Translation Studies (TTS). Gideon Toury applied methodological and theoretical
changes to Holmes’ model and introduce the notion of norms (which are the translation of general
values or ideas shared by a community into performance instructions appropriate for and
applicable to concrete situations. These instructions specify what is prescribed and forbidden, what
is tolerated and permitted in a certain behavioural dimension.