In human society, translation plays a significant role, which helps realize effective communication among people. Benjamin (as cited in Venuti, 2000) indicates translation is the mode, which plays a function of transmitting information; hence translatability determines whether the information could be effectively and appropriately delivered and is regarded as the “essential quality of certain works”. Throughout history, many scholars have developed translation theories, which provide various effective translation strategies and methods, to explore the translatability. Equivalence theory points out that all languages always share some similarities; hence the languages could be exchanged (Nida, as cited in Venuti, 2000). The skopos theory emphasizes …show more content…
In the 1960s and 1970s, based on the concept of equivalence, many scholars have developed various views and approaches, which has improved and further developed the translation theory. Nida (as cited in Venuti, 2000), one of the most influential linguists in the translation field, defines two different types of equivalence, which are formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses on the form and content of the source text. Dynamic equivalence emphasizes that the translation need to use an unmarked expression, but to provide the same function in the target text. The target text 1 shown in table 1 is an example of using formal equivalence. The Chinese sign ‘注意安全’ has been translated as ‘Attention Safety’. However, due to the differences of the terms between Chinese and English, this target text could be difficult to understand by the target audience. Hence, as Nida (as cited in Venuti, 2000) states by using formal equivalence, it is necessary to use footnotes to help target audience understand these idiomatic terms in the source language. The target text two: ‘Caution!’ is an example of using dynamic equivalence. This translation only translated the first two Chinese characters. The language use of this translation has been made some adjustment to match the context of the target language. However, this translation could provide the same function in the target culture as the function of the source text in the source culture. Thus, Nida’s (as cited in Venuti, 2000) two types of equivalence approach provide some effective methods of translation. After using footnotes or some essential adjustment, the source test could be generally considered as
Ted Chiang’s “Story of Your Life” is a short science fiction story that explores the principals of linguistic relativity through in interesting relationship between aliens and humans that develops when aliens, known as Heptapods, appear on Earth. In the story Dr. Louise Banks, a linguist hired by the government to learn the Heptapods language, tells her unborn daughter what she has learned from the Heptapods as a result of learning their language. M. NourbeSe Philip’s poem “Discourse on the Logic of Language” also explores the topic of language and translations, as she refers to different languages as her “mother tongue” or “father tongue.” Although these two pieces of literature may not seem to have much in common both explore the topics of language and translation and connect those ideas to power and control.
Language, the form of human interaction uses words in a contrived manner, either in writing or verbally. Generally speaking there are about 7,000 languages in the world that depend on the process of semiosis. Without semiosis it would be quite difficult to understand how each individual converses with others within modern day society. The structure of language remotely relies on semantics, sounds, symbols, and grammar. Every unique individual has their own expression of the language in which they live in. The expression of language can define a person in cultural, ethical, and social manner. In essence, language can be a person’s most sacred thing which they carry.
"For the translator, who stands astride two cultures, possesses two different sensibilities, and assumes a double identity" —Husain Haddawy
Every language is unique, with its own words, phrases, syntax, sayings, and other aspects. There are two different ways for something to be translated, literally or “what it actually is.” Literal translations are often impractical and unrelated to the topic. This is due to the fact that the object of translation itself is in a form in which the meaning is unique to the language it is in. By translating something literally, one strips the object of translation of its meaning and purpose. Instead, we are often left with a group of meaningless words that are useless in understanding the original text. However, translating something into what it actually means in the context is difficult. Firstly, it requires a competent translator, one who understands both languages to a certain degree, which will be discussed later...
Language is a very important tool that permits us to communicate with others, and also it helps us to the development of culture, because “What we say influences what we think, what we feel and what we believe” (Budani, n.d.), so it can be said that from language people are able to transmit their thoughts, ideologies and beliefs and Also thanks to its culture can be transmitted and learned over the years through idioms and expressions of a particular place. Language allows the interaction between people from different contexts and creates social relations that create a cultural mix as
The problem with translating words and ideas doesn’t end with the differences in language. If the translator doesn’t fully understand the subject, or fails to grasp the minute distinctions that a guru will often make, then the translation will be wrong.
The third angle of this data analysis is concerned with the occurrence of cultural references-defined above- and the strategies used to render them in the target language in both of the translations.
This book mainly focus on the relationship between translation and culture. It addresses the shift of focus from translated block of text to the binding of translations and the cultures involved in generating these translations. It also covers the significance of translation for cultural planning.
The manner in which things are said has its own undeniable impact on meaning and must be accounted for during translation. The question which presents itself is whether a given instance of linguistic markedness is evaluative (i.e. contextually motivated and functional) or is it merely a systemic matter opted for almost by default, and therefore unworthy of the text receiver’s attention?
Linguistics is the science of a language. Linguists depend on the use of certain aspects in order to analyse, describe and explain a human language; these aspects include semantics and pragmatics.
The procedure we are going to examine here is the equivalence in translation at word level, or, as we will see, the lack of equivalence. This procedure is possible when the translator in able find a SL textual item replacement in the TL, the closest possible to the original meaning and style. Many people could think that this is an easy task and that many languages can be translated by using this particular method; we will see how complicated it can be.
Díaz-Pérez (2014) talked about the Relevance Theory in translating pun. According to such theoretical perspective , a relationship between a translation and its source text is considered to be based on interpretive resemblance, rather than on equivalence (Gutt, 1998, p.2000). Relevance Theory is a cognitive pragmatic approach to communication proposed by Sperber and Wilson in the mid-1980s (Sperber and Wilson, 1986) and it is considered to be a practical way for translating puns. An utterance is said to be “used interpretively when it is intended to represent what someone said or thought” (Gutt ,1998, P.44). Therefore, Gutt (1998, p44) stated that translation is an interpretive use of language, and from the Relevance Theory view, a scientific definition of “translation” would be “interpretive use of language across language boundaries” . Zhonggang (2006, P.46) clarifies that Gutt’s framework the notion of optimal resemblance has to do with how many explicatures and implicatures the original text shares with the translated one. Thus, the more the ST and TT share, the more they interpretively resemble each
It practice of translation instrumental model is often understood dominant over hermeneutic model. Venuti strongly disagrees with this positioning approach and claims that “(…) the hermeneutic model is to be preferred over any instrumental understanding of translation because it offers a much more sophisticated account that is not only comprehensive (it can encompass instrumental concepts) but ethical. (Venuti :8) Cultural and social factors are taken into considerations which allows fullness and accuracy of
Transposition involves “replacing one word class with another without changing the meaning of the message” (Vinay and Darbelnet, 1958/1995: 88). For instance, the ST noun is translated into an adjective or a verb in the TL but it conveys thae same meaning of the ST. Newmark (1988: 85) defines transposition as “a translation procedure involving a change in the grammar from SL to TL.” Newmark gives four types of transposition. The first type is concerned with the form and position of the word. An example is given by Zakhir (2008: 3): “a red car”, "سيارة حمراء"; “a beautiful girl”, "فتاة جميلة". It can be noted from the latter example that the position of the adjective has been changed in the translation and this change depends on the grammatical rules of TL.
One of the most important concepts in Translation Studies is equivalence put forward by Eugene Nida (1964). There are two types of equivalent relationship between the source and the target texts according to him, formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses on reproducing the surface structure, i.e. form and content of the source message. On the other hand, dynamic equivalence emphasizes equivalent effect, which implies that translators should aim to produce a similar response in the target audience to that in the source audience. However, scholars have criticized the concept of equivalent effect for being too vague. Moreover, it is almost impossible to create equivalent effect for readers from a different culture. ()