The role of extralinguistic context in translation

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Kamianets-Podilskyi Ivan Ohiienko National University

THE ROLE OF EXTRALINGUISTIC CONTEXT IN TRANSLATION

Svider I.A. Candidate of Philological Sciences,

Associate Professor at the English Language Department

Annotation

The purpose of the article is to clarify the role of the extralinguistic context in the translation process. Solving this task involves considering translation as an interaction of linguistic and extralinguistic factors to identify the content of the message in different languages, despite the lack of full understanding of the pragmatic level of literary text by the translator.

To analyze the extralinguistic context in the translation process, the author used the functional method that involves the study of language in action. Pragmatic analysis was conducted to identify the communicative-pragmatic effect of translated texts on the recipient, the transference of emotions in the process of translation, cultural and mental differences of communicators. Cognitive-onomasiological analysis was conducted in the study of cognitive-gender factors, namely: cognitive abilities of the translator, the interaction of translator and reader, the peculiarities of the translation of any communicative act.

Literature review confirmed the scholars' broad interpretation of the concepts of “extralinguistic context” and “extralinguistic factors” in the translation process. In scientific literature, researchers of extralinguistic factors do not only describe their impact on the overall development of language and its functioning in the society, but also distinguish their communicative significance (as with situation of silence or nonverbal transmission of emotions), and describe their impact on successful translation in situational and linguisticcultural context of communication.

We've suspected the idea of the ambiguity and multicomponent structure of the extralinguistic context in modern translation science and its important role in the process of reproducing the pragmatic potential of the original text. To provide an adequate translation, it is necessary to take into account the extralinguistic context of the original text, which includes many differences, including the difference between the world pictures of the original author, the reader and the translator; the difference in their background knowledge; differences in linguistic and communicative competencies; cultural and mental differences of communicators, their gender, emotional state, level of culture and value system. We have also identified subjective and objective extralinguistic factors that expand and clarify the concept of extralinguistic context.

Key words: context, translation, competence, communication, extralinguistic, pragmatics.

Анотація

РОЛЬ ЕКСТРАЛІНГВІСТИЧНОГО КОНТЕКСТУ В ПРОЦЕСІ ПЕРЕКЛАДУ

Свідер І. А. кандидат філологічних наук, доцент кафедри англійської мови Кам'янець-Подільський національний університет імені Івана Огієнка Кам'янець-Подільський, Хмельницька область, Україна

Мета статті передбачає висвітлення ролі екстралінгвістичного контексту в процесі перекладу. Реалізація мети передбачає розгляд перекладацької діяльності як взаємодії мовних та екстралінгвістичних чинників, які уможливлюють ототожнення змісту повідомлення різними мовами, незважаючи на відсутність повного розуміння прагматичного рівня художнього тексту перекладачем.

Для аналізу екстралінгвістичного контексту в процесі перекладу автором був застосований функціональний метод, що передбачає дослідження мови у дії. Прагматичний аналіз проводився для виявлення комунікативно-прагматичного ефекту текстів перекладу на реципієнта, передання емоцій у процесі перекладу, культурних та ментальних відмінностей учасників комунікації. Когнітивно-ономасіологічний аналіз використовувався у дослідженні когнітивно-гендерних факторів, а саме: когнітивних здатностей самого перекладача, взаємовпливу перекладача та читача, особливостей перекладу акту комунікації.

Здійснений огляд літературних джерел підтвердив широке трактування науковцями понять «екстралінгвістичний контекст» та «екстралінгвістичні фактори» у процесі перекладу. В науковій літературі дослідники екстралінгвістичних факторів не тільки описують їх вплив на загальний розвиток мови та її функціонування у соціумі, а й вирізняють їх комунікативну значущість (як у випадку із ситуацією мовчання чи невербальним переданням емоцій), описують їх вплив на здійснення акту успішного перекладу в ситуативному та лінгвокульторологічному контексті спілкування.

Ми дійшли висновку про неоднозначність та багатокомпонентність структури екстралігвістичного контексту в сучасній перекладознавчій науці та її важливу роль у процесі відтворення прагматичного потенціалу оригінального тексту. Щоб надати адекватний переклад, необхідно враховувати екстралінгвістичний контекст оригінального тексту, який включає низку відмінностей, серед яких відмінність картин світу автора оригіналу, читача друготвору та перекладача; різниця у їх фонових знаннях; розбіжності в лінгвоетнічних та комунікативних компетенциях; культурні та ментальні відмінності комунікантів, їх гендерна приналежність, емоційний стан, рівень культури та система цінностей. Ми визначили також суб'єктивні та об'єктивні позамовні фактори, які розширюють та уточнюють поняття екстралінгвістичного контексту.

Ключові слова: контекст, переклад, компетенція, комунікація, екстралінгвістичний, прагматика.

Introduction

Pragmatics is always in the focus of attention of linguists and translators. This term is understood in its broadest sense as the relationship between language structure and extralinguistic context [20, p. 9]. At the same time, the main difficulties in reproducing the pragmatics of the original text in translation are caused not by the differences in the systems of source and target languages, but by extralinguistic factors, which are to be under consideration in our research.

The concept “pragmatic factors of translation” includes the facts of both linguistic and non-linguistic system. Most often, pragmatic factors of translation contend genre and stylistic features of the texts of the source and target languages, their different pragmatic value, functional role of the verbal sign in a message, pragmatic task of the translator. These factors also include national and cultural specificity of the recipients of the original and translated text, background knowledge of the participants of communication, their socio-psychological characteristics. A. Schweizer wrote that the idea of pragmatic factors is that “the source and final texts are usually addressed to different recipients” [10, p. 15].

Problem statement

Translation has never been an activity isolated from the society, each translation exists in a specific historical, cultural and social context. Extralinguistic factors, which inspire linguistic changes and thus influence the process of translation, are understood as “the whole set of extremely diverse impulses that are caused by the external environment and associated with the historical development of the society, population relocation and migration, unification and disintegration of language groups, changes in forms of communication, cultural and technological progress etc.” [9, p. 220] and may also play a decisive role in solving the most complicated translation tasks [18, p. 487].

The purpose of the article is to determine the importance of extralinguistic context in the process of translation. The author has implemented the functional method that involves the study of language in action. Also, pragmatic and cognitive-onomasiological analyses have been conducted to identify the communicative-pragmatic effect of translated texts, cultural and mental differences of communicators and cognitive-gender factors.

Analysis of the related studies

Knowledge beyond the textual level has been examined in different ways: as background knowledge, extralinguistic knowledge, subject knowledge, encyclopedic knowledge, world knowledge and real-world knowledge (R. T Bell, D. Gile, R. Kim, C. Schдffner, E. Koscialkowska-Okonska, F. L. Dubin & E. Olshtain, M. Wesche, P. L. Carrell, J. Coady, K. Haastrup). These terms focus on cultural factors, field-specific aspects and on more general knowledge and information that translators use during the translation process.

In fact, several studies prove that successful translation is characterized by the extensive use of extralinguistic knowledge as well as linguistic knowledge [22]; that subject knowledge is positively correlated with comprehension [11]; or even that extralinguistic knowledge replaces linguistic knowledge in solving comprehension problems since it appears to ensure deeper comprehension in a more efficient way [17]. Some researchers even insist on the predominance of extralinguistic knowledge over linguistic knowledge. This idea is enhanced by another statement: “If there is no information about extra-linguistic factors, and equivalent vocabulary, the author's intention cannot be revealed and transmitted in translated texts” [16, p. 104]. However, no detailed examination has been made on this subject.

Knowledge used in comprehension can be classified into linguistic and extralinguistic. Extra-linguistic knowledge includes world knowledge, domain-specific knowledge, bicultural knowledge etc. [13, p. 181]. Dancette defines three levels in translation: linguistic, textual and notional. His suggests that the translator who can conceptualize “contextual” meaning at the notional level based on linguistic and extralinguistic knowledge may give more successful and creative translation. [11, p. 94]. On the other hand, the translator who remains at the linguistic and textual levels and fails to fully access the notional level (perhaps, with no extralinguistic knowledge) tends to find the “literal” meaning and ends up with less successful translation.

V. Vinogradov notes that extralinguistic information reflects the concepts and ideas about phenomena, facts, objects of reality, characteristics, actions, states, features, qualities, inherent various material and spiritual forms of nature and society [6, p. 55]. Ignoring this fact may greatly reduce the quality of translation. As a result, the word denoting a culture-specific item does not evoke associations in the mind of a person who has never seen this object before [8, p. 19-20]. This fact demands a great responsibility from a translator to fill in the gaps in the world picture of translation recipients [3, p. 10].

We cannot but agree with the statement that “the cognitive approach assumes that the meaning of the word, in addition to features sufficient for word identification, also includes the whole set of knowledge and non-linguistic experience of the language community, a set of linguistic and extralinguistic information” [2, p. 36-37]. Among the non-verbal factors, we consider emotions and empathy to be the most important as a cognitive-affective phenomenon, inextricably linked with emotions and language. We mean that successful translation is determined not only by the high level of linguistic and cultural competencies, but also by other non-linguistic factors, in particular, the cognitive abilities of the translator, the influence of partners, mental and social factors.

In scientific literature researchers do not only describe the influence of extralinguistic factors on the development of language and their functioning in society, but also distinguish the communicative significance of silence, which can be meaningful, provide the schemes of facial expressions of emotional states and determine their influence on communication. One of the most important objective extralinguistic factors of communication is the environment; formality or informality of communication; willingness or reluctance to deal with the situation of communication and the process of translation; limited or unlimited time regulations. Subjective extralinguistic factors influencing the translation process and communication situation include: gender, age, awareness of communicators, their psychological state, temper, attention, memory, erudition, level of upbringing and ideology.

1. Depraetere distinguishes the linguistic context (the clause or sentence in which words are embedded) and the extra-linguistic context in which utterances are made (the setting, including the speaker and potentially his interlocutors, the context of speech, the discourse) [12]. Extra-linguistic context includes the situational context and the cultural context.

Examining the situational context, we may suggest that the interpretation of a situation is, as a rule, subjective and depends on extralinguistic factors such as the translator's competence, environment, culture, etc. The situational model can be used in certain cases, e.g. where the vocabulary units depict certain facets of the culture specific for SL which cannot be rendered in TL. In addition, the translator must be equipped with translation methodology, i.e. knowledge and skills involving problem identification, problem-solving, decision-making, subject research skills etc. A translator's competence might also include self-concept, aptitude and personality, attitudes and affective factors, translation effort, understanding of translation etc. [19, p. 262].

Good practical knowledge of languages is necessary but not sufficient for translating. The translator must know a set of principles worked out by the theory of translation. These principles are connected both with linguistic and extralinguistic aspects. One must imply typological characteristics of both languages and remember that the same idea may be expressed in different ways: lexically in one language and grammatically in the other.

Besides linguistic difficulties, translation may involve a lot of problems caused by numerous extralinguistic factors. The content of any text is based upon extralinguistic reality because the text itself reflects the cultural background of the author and of the whole foreign language community, it also reflects the history of the country, customs and traditions of its inhabitants, specific national way of thinking etc. All these factors should necessarily be taken into consideration in order to make a productive adequate translation.

Pragmatic deformation may be caused by the asymmetry of world cultural picture [7, p. 30]. Since the translator's unadapted rendering of specific cultural features can cause inadequate communicative effect, i. e. misunderstanding or wrong interpretation, unequal emotions, complicated text comprehension, loss in emotional or aesthetic perception [1, p. 6].

Therefore, in order to make a successful translation, it is necessary to know the situation, the textual context, the social conditions and cultural differences. Thus, to fully understand the pragmatic level of a literary text, a translator needs appropriate linguistic, cultural and social experience. Especially important is so called background knowledge [4, p. 170].

Short-term background information includes sayings, proverbs, colloquialisms, names of popular cafes, restaurants, names and surnames of famous people, some euphemisms that are common in literary works and are difficult to translate [5, p. 42]. V. Vinogradov explains the term “background knowledge” from the viewpoint of communicative approach and here he means the information common to communicators, which provides mutual understanding in the process of communication [5, p. 34].

Besides above-mentioned extralinguistic factors that affect the accuracy of the reproduction of the pragmatic potential of the original text, the translator may aim to benefit from propaganda or educational purposes, or to be really interested in a certain part of the original and therefore to emphasize it to convey his feelings to the TL reader gradually reducing the level of translation equivalence [14, p. 92]. The translator can make some changes so that to create a subtext in the translated text, embodying his intention to encourage the readership to certain thoughts or behaviors [21, p. 155]. Also there are some suggestions of the linguists that among the factors influencing the communicative and pragmatic effect of translated texts can be the gender characteristics of translators, their personal cultural identity and set of values [15, p. 53].

Conclusions

Summing up, we can make a conclusion that in order to provide an adequate translation it is necessary to take into account extralinguistic context, which may include the difference between the author's, reader's and translator's world picture; the difference in their background knowledge; differences in linguistic and ethnic communicative competencies; cultural and mental differences of communication participants; cognitive abilities of the author and translator; their gender, emotional state, level of cultural identity and value system. Besides the pragmatic attitude of the recipient to the text also depends on translator's intention to use propaganda or set educational goals and to change the source text for some purpose (ideology, ethics and morality etc.).

The availability and the use of extralinguistic context is a major factor in determining the quality of the translation. Specifically, extralinguistic knowledge seems to precede linguistic knowledge in its contribution to translation: it makes it possible for a translator to infer meaning at cognitive levels, leading to in-depth comprehension and thus more productive translation.

Bibliography

1. Алєксєєва І.О. Мовні рівні та комунікативна ситуація: лінгвокультурологічний аспект. Проблеми семантики, прагматики та когнітивноїлінгвістики. 2009. Вип. 15. С. 3-11.

2. Бєссонова О.Л. Оцінний тезаурус англійської мови: когнітивно-гендерні аспекти: монографія. Донецьк: ДонНУ, 2002. 362 с.

3. Бобришева О.В. Мовна картина світу та проблеми перекладу національно-культурних реалій. Вісник ЛНУ ім. Т. Шевченка, 2010. Ч. ІІ, № 14 (201). C. 9-13.

4. Верещагин Е.М., Костомаров В.Г. Язык и культура. Лингвострановедение в преподавании русского языка как иностранного. М.: Изд-во МГУ, 1973. 233 с.

5. Виноградов В.С. Введение в переводоведение (общие и лексические вопросы). Москва: Издат-во ин-та общего среднего образования РАО, 2001. 224 с.

6. Виноградов В.С. Перевод: Общие и лексические вопросы. Москва: КДУ, 2006. 240 с.

7. Карабан В., Ребенко М. Природа перекладацьких деформацій. Вісник КНУ ім. Т. Шевченка. Київ: Вид-во при Київ. ун-ті, 2007. № 41. С. 27-31.

8. Крысало О.В. Языковая картина мира переводного произведения как синтез языковых картин мира автора и переводчика. Вісник Луганського національного університету ім. Т Шевченка. 2009. № 12 (175). С. 16-22. (Серія «Філологічні науки»).

9. Серебренников Б.А. Общее языкознание. Формы существования, функции, история языка. Москва: Наука, 1970. 604 с.

10. Швейцер А.Д. Теория перевода: Статус, проблемы, аспекты. Москва, 1988. 216 с.

11. Dancette J. Mapping Meaning and Comprehension in Translation: Theoretical and Experimental Issues. Cognitive processes in translation. London: Sage Publications, 1997. P. 77-103.

12. Depraetere I. Meaning in Context and Contextual Meaning: A Perspective on the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface Applied to Modal Verbs. Anglophonia; French Journal of English Linguistics, 2019. №28. URL: https://journals. openedition.org/anglophonia/245 (Last accessed:.

13. Ghaemi, H. & Sadoughvanini, S. H. The role of task-based translation teaching in the development of translation competence: A study of Iranian translation trainees. Applied Linguistics Research Journal, 2020. 4 (5), P. 168-183.

14. Gudmanyan A. G., Sydoruk G. Basics of Translation Theory. K.: NAU, 2007. Part II. 114 p.

15. Hatim B., Munday J. Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. London, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2004. 373 p.

16. Kim H. R. Difficulties in translation of Korean literary texts (extralinguistic and linguistic-cultural aspects). Russian Linguistic Bulletin, 2020. Issue 1 (21), P.102-104.

17. Kim R. The Cognitive Processes of English-Korean Translation by a Translator and a Language Learner. Conference Interpretation and Translation, 2001, № 3. P. 59-86.

18. Khukhuni, Georgy T., Valuitseva Irina and Osipova Anna A. Cultural Words in Sacral Text and their Translation: Linguistic and Extra-Linguistic Factors. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 2019. 23 (2). P. 487-508.

19. Laukkanen J. Affective and Attitudinal Factors in Translation Processes. Target: International journal of translation studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1996. Vol. 8. P. 257-274.

20. Levinson Stephen C. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. 420 p.

21. Nida E. Principles of Correspondence. The Translation Studies Reader. NY: Taylor & Francis Group, 2004. P. 153-167.

22. Tirkkonen-Condit S. The Interaction of World Knowledge and Linguistic Knowledge in the Process of Translation: A Think-aloud Protocol Study. Translation and Meaning. Maastricht: Tykswgeschoot Maastricht, 1992. Part II. P. 433-440.

References

1. Alieksieieva I. O. (2009) Movni rivni ta komu-nikatyvna sytuatsiia: linhvokulturolohichnyi aspekt. [Language levels and communicative situation: lingua-cultural aspect]. Problemy semantyky, prahmatyky ta kohnityvnoi linhvistyky. Vol. 15. P. 3-11. [in Ukrainian].

2. Biessonova O. L. (2002) Otsinnyi tezaurus anhliiskoi movy: kohnityvno-henderni aspekty: monohrafiia. [Evaluative thesaurus of the English language: cognitive-gender aspects: monograph]. Donetsk: DonN. 362 p. [in Ukrainian].

3. Bobrysheva O. V. (2010) Movna kartyna svitu ta problemy perekladu natsionalno-kulturnykh realii. [Linguistic picture of the world and problems of translation of national and cultural realia]. Visnyk LNU im. T. Shevchenka. Vol. II, № 14 (201). P. 9-13. [in Ukrainian].

4. Vereshhagin E. M., Kostomarov V. G. (1973) Jazyk i kul'tura. Lingvostranovedenie v prepodavanii russkogo jazyka kak inostrannogo. [Language and culture. Country studies in teaching Russian as foreign language]. Moscow: Izd-vo MGU. 233 p. [in Russian].

5. Vinogradov V. S. (2001) Vvedenie v perevodovedenie (obshhie i leksicheskie voprosy). [Introduction to translation studies (general and lexical issues)] Moscow: Izdat-vo in-ta obshhego srednego obrazovanija RAO. 224 p. [in Russian].

6. Vinogradov V. S. (2006) Perevod: Obshhie i leksicheskie voprosy. [Translation: general and lexical issues]. Moscow: KDU. 240 p. [in Russian].

7. Karaban V., Rebenko M. (2007) Pryroda perekladatskykh deformatsii. [The nature of translation deformations]. Visnyk KNU im. T Shevchenka. Kyiv: Vyd-vo pry Kyiv. un-ti. № 41. P. 27-31. [in Ukrainian].

8. Krysalo O. V. (2009) Jazykovaja kartina mira perevodnogo proizvedenija kak sintez jazykovyh kartin mira avtora i perevodchika. [The linguistic picture of the world of a translated work as a synthesis of the linguistic pictures of the world of the author and the translator]. Visnik Lugans'kogo nacional'nogo universitetu im. T Shevchenka. № 12 (175). P. 16-22. (Serija «Filologichni nauki»). [in Russian].

9. Serebrennikov B. A. (1970) Obshhee jazykoznanie. Formy sushhestvovanija, funkcii, istorija jazyka. [General linguistics. Forms of existence, functions, history of language]. Moscow: Nauka. 604 p. [in Russian].

10. Shvejcer A. D. (1988) Teorija perevoda: Status, problemy, aspekty. [Theory of translation: Status, issues, aspects]. Moscow. 216 p. [in Russian].

11. Dancette J. (1997) Mapping Meaning and Comprehension in Translation: Theoretical and Experimental Issues. Cognitive processes in translation. London: Sage Publications. P. 77-103.

12. Depraetere I. (2019) Meaning in Context and Contextual Meaning: A Perspective on the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface Applied to Modal Verbs. Anglophonia; French Journal of English Linguistics. № 28. URL: https://journals.openedition.org/anglophonia/245 (Last accessed: 04.01.2021).

13. Ghaemi, H. & Sadoughvanini, S. H. (2020). The role of task-based translation teaching in the development of translation competence: A study of Iranian translation trainees. Applied Linguistics Research Journal, 4 (5), P. 168-183.

14. Gudmanyan A. G., Sydoruk G. (2007) Basics of Translation Theory. K.: NAU. Part II. 114 p.

15. Hatim B., Munday J. (2004) Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. London, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. 373 p.

16. Kim H. R. (2020) Difficulties in translation of Korean literary texts (extralinguistic and linguistic-cultural aspects). Russian Linguistic Bulletin, Issue 1 (21), P. 102-104.

17. Kim R. (2001) The Cognitive Processes of English-Korean Translation by a Translator and a Language Learner. Conference Interpretation and Translation. № 3. P. 59-86.

18. Khukhuni, Georgy T., Valuitseva Irina and Osipova Anna A. (2019) Cultural Words in Sacral Text and their Translation: Linguistic and Extra-Linguistic Factors. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 23 (2). P. 487-508.

19. Laukkanen J. (1996) Affective and Attitudinal Factors in Translation Processes. Target: International journal of translation studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Vol. 8. P. 257-274.

20. Levinson Stephen C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 420 p.

21. Nida E. (2004) Principles of Correspondence. The Translation Studies Reader. NY: Taylor & Francis Group. P. 153-167.

22. Tirkkonen-Condit S. (1992) The Interaction of World Knowledge and Linguistic Knowledge in the Process of Translation: A Thinkaloud Protocol Study. Translation and Meaning. Maastricht: Tykswgeschoot Maastricht. Part II. P. 433-440.

Размещено на Allbest.ru