Literary and poetic methods of translation

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Lecture 1. Literary and poetic methods of translation

There can be no argument that the translator of literary works should achieve a close relationship between the theory and practice of translation. For one thing, the choice of the principles of translation may not be purely intuitive because the translator necessarily takes into account such matters as the aim of the translation, the temporal and geographic gap between the creation of the source text and possible readers of the target text, the cultural gap between the original author and the reader of the translation, the kind of reader the target text is intended for, etc. Each aspect provides a problem for consideration and solution in the course of translating. One of the eternal problems is the choice of the method of translation.

To distinguish between such methods of translation as literal, literary and poetic is necessary in examining the way of translating literature. Literal translation is obviously used when there is a need to observe the rules of the source language and text and to present them in their integrity to the target culture. It is a quite reasonable approach when we translate for philological purposes, e.g., ancient epic texts or very unusual texts remote from the target culture. It is quite legitimate when translating most technical texts. Yet even such scholarly texts as those from the field of linguistics may not always be translated literally. I witnessed such a communicative conflict when the Russian linguistic term "номинация" was literally translated as "nomination" by a Russian lecturer to an American audience (Princeton University). It required some time and bilingual discussion before both the Russian scholar and the audience came to a sort of consensus using the term of "naming", which, in its turn, usually corresponds to the Russian "именование" and does not fully coincide with the Russian term "номинация". Literal translation is 6 definitely, not the best method to translate most literary works for the wider public. All attempts to pursue this approach inevitably come up against the obvious fact that the literary functions of words do not coincide in the source and target languages.

The term "literary translation" is somewhat vague. In Russian, it is usually opposed to the term "информативный, или документальный перевод" and describes translation as aiming predominantly at the target language rules rather than the source language ones. The Russian term "литературный перевод" would be fitting to define the method in general. This method is definitely a necessary and important instrument for different cultural traditions to communicate and should apply to translating social and political writing or fiction, while the term "poetic translation" as a variety of literary translation is associated with translating poetry and presupposes some inevitable liberties in the choice of the target language substitutes for the source language elements. However, we should differentiate between the ideas and principles of literary and poetic methods of translation.

Translation is a complex dichotomous and cumulative process which involves a number of activities drawing upon other disciplines related to language and culture.

Translation is a complicated phenomenon that deals with linguistic forms, linguistic and cultural pictures of the world and the communicative situation itself (Breus).

Translation is a process of interlingual communication of ideas (Barchudarov).

Translation is a kind of interlingual communication. A translator shall create a text the meaning, structure and functions of which shall be equal to those of the original text (Komissarov).

Translation is a kind of transformation of a SL text into a TL text (Kazakova).

Minimal unit of the source text which can be translated as a whole is a unit of thought that expresses one grammatical function. It's called functional unit of translation the units that have one lexical meaning (to take place), dialectical, which expresses unit of proseadeary (it's singled of intonation pattern) If we characterize the process of translation we can do it like this.

SL text- analysis-transfer-restructuring- TL text

In the begging we have the speaker of the source language that creates a source language text. And at the end we have a target language text. So we can take into consideration that these people those who speak the Sl don't know the TL. So we have the translator or the interpreter and he reads or listens to the Sl and analysis it.

Analysis - to divide the text into meaningful parts.

The translator divides the text into meaningful parts, he finds out how these meaningful parts can be expressed. He looks for equivalents in the TL and tries to translate every meaningful part. If he can't find equivalents he finds adequate structures that can compensate for the absence of equivalents. Then he finds that he can't assemble the text according to the pattern that he's given in the Sl text, because the parts that he translated came to look different. And he was to explain some things because there are cultural peculiarities, language peculiarities. And to make the text he has to restructure the text and then he assembles a new text- the TLT. And the TLT is transferred for recipient. This is the process and this is the result.

Formulated in basic terms, the intercultural task of poetic translation may be expressed as follows: to translate a literary work from a language to another language means to lose as little as possible of its original cultural authenticity while preserving as much as possible of its intercultural value. In the other words, the aim is to reconstruct the imagery of the source text as a system into the target culture by means of the target language and literary traditions. New readers should make efforts to appreciate a foreign system of imagery but the difficulty must not dominate the translated text lest it should become dull and alien to the target culture - so that the text in the target language should make sense and bring aesthetic and emotional pleasure to the target reader.

Such terms as "pleasure" and "dull" involve the idea of the emotional component in poetic translation while the notion of "sense" appeals to the rational assessment. Normally, these two major aspects of the poetic translation process co-operate, and the modus vivendi is based on their natural relationship. Presumably, translation techniques used to deal with literary works necessarily include both reason and intuition, rational and emotional appreciation of the comparative qualities of the original text and its reconstruction in the target language. Generations of translators from ancient times to the present day have developed and perfected many useful techniques that can be traced both in the translated texts and in translators' pronouncements about literary translation in general and about their own experience in particular. The unique school and tradition of literary (poetic) translation that has formed in Russia and impressive achievements in other countries over the last three centuries provide rich and broad data for both exploration and direct usage by new generations of translators and philologists. It is especially interesting to compare different national traditions and their attitudes when they compete in the same direction, i.e., in translating from Russian into English.

Rules and requirements constitute the practical aspect of translation activity, while its theoretical basis involves many fields of knowledge such as psychology, informatics, linguistics, hermeneutics, logic, etc. Of special interest is the impact of ideas of symmetry, isomorphism, game and probability on the general theory of translation and on the theory of poetic translation in particular. Considered in terms of heuristic and game, translation reveals such aspects as game strategies, preferences, drives, roles, random decisions, etc. One of the productive directions of research in the theory of poetic translation may be investigation into the nature of translator's preferences in selecting substitute linguistic units and stylistic means of reconstructing the source imagery of a poem or a piece of prose. When translating Shakespeare's "yellow leaves" (sonnet 73) Marshak uses the epithet "багряный" instead of "желтый" and reconstructs the simile "eyes are nothing like the sun" (sonnet 130) as "ее глаза на звезды не похожи", he seemingly takes liberties; yet there is some logic behind these liberties which need to be identified and defined not as something arbitrary but in respect to the system of imagery as a whole.

Usually the category of text has appeared in the centre of most theoretical conceptions of poetic translation. They speak about source and target texts even more often than of source and target languages. Yet of late, the conceptual structure of this category in linguistics and in translation studies has undergone considerable changes. Meanwhile, much depends upon this concept in the solution of such basic problem of translation as the adequacy, or "correctness" of the relationship between the source and target texts. What is to be considered "wrong" or "correct" if we do not translate the source text literally, that is, as a set of words? Numerous transformations that reveal themselves in the target text when compared with the source only prove that the translator measures the text not in words but in something else. This something is defined in many such terms as "meaning", or "sense", or "contents", or "idea", or "imagery", etc. All of them have the same drawback, and that is their vagueness, an uncertainty that does not allow them to be measured in palpable and countable units. So many problems of translating poetry have been discussed centuries that one should just follow some of the good useful bad and tricky recommendations of predecessors. One of the "St, to my mind, is that provided by Dante Gabriel Rossetti, which asserts,"... the life blood of translation is this - that a good poem all not be turned into a bad one". Presumably, we know what a good poem is and how it differs from a bad one.Whatever the versification system, each poem is unique. It as an individual flavour and, even within a most conservative additional metric pattern, is marked by a rhythm, pitch and inflection of its own. It is a pointless exercise to pursue absolute fidelity to the original, but it is necessary at least to attempt to preserve as much as possible of the source's principle of poetic arrangement and imagery. English translators usually pursue a middle course, balancing "between formal demands and semantic accuracy" (said Stanley Kunitz, in Translating Poetry), with evident bias towards the latter.

When a translator is to translate a poem, he may put it into one of two main categories according to its form. One is so-called "free verse," or vers libre; the other is classically structured poetry, that is, verse based on regular metre, rhyme and stanza pattern. However, it is evident that the impact a free verse poem's of on the reader differs greatly from that of traditional poetic harmony. It appeals to different points of perception: while a traditional poem speaks more to the emotions, vers libre tends to appeal to the reason rather than to the heart. Vers libre has properties of its own, which makes the reader seek other things in such a text than he would in a sonnet. Besides, vers libre itself requires sophisticated decisions and technigues in translation.If you start with a vers libre poem, it may seem easy to translate: just you need to put word after word in the proper order, as you do when translating any piece of prose. Since the turn of the 20th century English poetry (in Britain and USA) has predominantly developed in the direction of vers libre, which means no rhyme, irregular number of syllables, and purely phrasal stresses. The only restriction is the comparatively short line. For some time, you feel at ease with such a task. However, gradually this feeling gives way to hopeless embarrassment: some lines become much shorter than the corresponding lines in the original, while others turn out much, much longer, stretched by the demands of the target language and/or your want of skills.

Lecture 2. Prose translation techniques

The shortest possible definition of literary prose may be the following: prose is the kind of literature not cast in poetical measure or rhythm, hence opposed to verse and poetry.Yet it would be wrong to place prose in the non-rhythmical class. Prose has the rhythm of its own, based on a different principle to poetry: it is syntactic and compositional rather than metrical. From the point of view of composition, one should measure such features as the structure and distribution of descriptions in a text; the character and comparative length of dialogues; the character and comparative length of account of events; the number of authorial digressions; etc. Even the size and number of paragraphs are rhythmically important. The variety of personal names, the proportion of verbs and nouns, and the number of adjectives also contribute to the complex rhythm of a work of literary prose. A succession of similar sentences may make the text sound monotonous; too many exclamatory sentences may result in affected rather than affective rhythm. Perhaps one of the most perfidious enemies of good prose rhythm is an unnecessary word or wordiness as such. Too many words in a text are perceived as a nuisance, produce an effect of incoherence between form and content, and may make the reader weary or irritated.

We can distinguish such types of prose rhythm as epic, lyrical, picaresque, philosophical, etc. Each of them may be measured in rhythmical dimensions. More often than not, different types of the narrative combine within the same literary work an make its rhythm quite sophisticated.A single author may use all or several of the above types, thus alternating the rhythm of the whole. An interesting example is the prose rhythm of Evelyn Waugh where a reader can face a challenge from the brilliant mixture of picaresque and lyric types (for instance, Decline and Fall or Brideshead Revisited). Another fine example of a multi-layer rhythm is that of Aldous Huxley with his skilful transits from a picaresque type to lyric and further to the most sophisticated philosophy, sometimes even with a tint of epic, as in his Counterpoint.It is not an easy task to assess the rhythm of a prose piece as a type of narrative but it is possible for an attentive reader. What makes translation of creative prose even more difficult is its cultural background that may be strange or even wholly alien to the target culture. This is especially true in the case of a considerable temporal or spatial distance between the source and target cultures. For example, English literature is easier to translate into Russian than Russian literature into English because Russian translating tradition can rely on a much better knowledge of English culture among Russian readers, while English translators of Russian literature face the problem of readers' inadequate acquaintance with Russian culture.

On the whole, we can explore prosaic rhythm from the point of view of translation as a kind of hierarchy where linguistic level is only a surface below which run such strata as type of narrative, architectonics, imagery, associations and cultural assumptions. This is especially true in the case of such experimental writers as William Faulkner: one cannot translate his As I Lay Dying without reconstructing many implied components, not least are the mythological associations. When we translate a piece of literary prose, we take into consideration its narrative type and do whatever is possible to reconcile the national traditions within this type. When those traditions coincide or do not differ greatly, it may be easy to follow the source text narrative. When the source tradition differs greatly from the target one, it is productive to pursue a middle course between the source and target traditions in the target text. When: the source tradition has no correspondence in the target culture, it is a challenge for a translator to fill the gap by creating a target text that might adequately represent the source tradition as something valuable, productive or just fascinating. The architectonics of the prose source text needs to be fully reconstructed by a translator unless the target text is merely a form of literary digest. The succession of chapters, length of narration, descriptions and dialogues, authorial digressions, and other components should be thoroughly measured and presented in the target text without arbitrary additions or omissions, let alone any replacement.

Lecture 3. Translation theories

Categories of regular correspondences in translating

The TRC was generally recognized as the first fundamental linguistic theory of translation. As a linguistic basis of translation J.I. Recker suggested establishing certain correspondences between the source language and the target language. In doing so he distinguished three categories of regular correspondences in translating: 1) equivalents; 2) analogues; 3) adequate replacements.

equivalents -single valued (однозначный) term, (The United Nations- Организация Объединенных наций)

analogues- adequate units between TL and SL (synonyms) (Fair has 2 translations честный и справедливый, fair share- справедливая доля, fair deal- честная сделка)

adequate replacements- antonymic translation (the meaning of the whole) (A good riddance!- Скатертью дорожка!)

The situational (denotative) model (the way from the SL to the TL leads through reality, i.e., the translator uses his/her knowledge and previous experience of the world at the point of transfer) > "interpretation" Apart from some insignificant differences, there is a common reality surrounding us, and thus in linguistic interaction it is only the linguistic signs that differ, the signified objects, i.e. the denotata are the same. The translator traces the SL signs back to the world of denotata common to all of us, or, in other words, he/she clarifies which situation of the objective world is described by the SL text. A typical case of translation based on the denotative model is the translation of realia > the translator can make several choices:

1) can borrow the foreign word, equate it with a similar TL realia,

2) invent a new TL word, etc. We translate according to the denotative model when there is only one possible solution in the TL for the naming or description of an object or situation.

Translation theories (transformational, semantic, levels of equivalence) - the substitution of SL signs with TL signs.

The process of translation in the light of the transformational model

analysis phase: the translator goes back from the SL surface structure to the SL core sentences or deep structure via a series of transformations (intralingual transformation); analysis phase they call "back-transformation",

second phase: these are replaced by the equivalent core sentences or deep structure of the TL (interlingual transformation); synthesis phase they call "restructuring"

synthesis phase: the translator reaches the TL surface structure from the TL core sentences or deep structure via a series of transformations (intralingual transformation) they assume a "transfer" phase in between.

The semantic model

-approach translation from the point of view of meaning or sense

-it became more and more fashionable to assume that the translator might be breaking down the words of the SL sentences into semantic constituents

The process of translation according to the semantic model:

The transfer from one language to another happens through a semantic deep structure consisting of some system of basic meanings.

= sense text sense model

Process:

(1) translator first understands the text to be translated

(2) he/she expresses what he/she has understood in the given language, i.e. he/she expresses the sense of the text.

The sense of the text refers to the common ground that can be found in all texts intuitively regarded identical with the given text. They intend to describe this common content-related invariant with the help of a special semantic language, the so called basic language.

> Process of translation:

-the translator switches from idiomatic English to the English basic language (independent sense analysis),

-switches from the English basic language to the TL basic language (this is what can actually be considered translation),

-from the TL basic language he/she switches onto the idiomatic TL (independent sense synthesis).

Advantages of the semantic model

-In the process of translating, the translator does in fact go back to sense relations rather than to basic lexical units and grammatical structures.

-It is also self-evident that equivalences of basic lexical units and grammatical structures - be it intralingual or interlingual equivalence - can only be determined on the basis of identity of sense.

Levels of equivalence

5 levels of transfer:

(1) the level of linguistic signs (use of different words to produce utterances > several alternatives),

(2) the level of utterance (linear ordering of Lic signs > several alternatives),

(3) the level of message (the situation is described from various angles),

(4) the level of situation (e.g., objects, persons, abstract phenomena in question),

(5) the level of communicative goal (e.g., to inform).

> several multi-level decisions

In comprehending the text, the receiver moves in the opposite direction: from the level of linguistic signs to the assumed communicative goal of the sender.

Translation process:

During analysis: he/she moves from the level of linguistic signs to the level of the communicative goal,

During synthesis he/she moves from the level of the communicative goal to the level of linguistic signs.

The advantages of the equivalence level model

-avoids the one-sidedness of the denotative and the transformational models, and successfully reflects the complexity of the work of the translator, who does not follow only one strategy

-In reality, elements with an equivalent on the level of linguistic signs are translated on the level of linguistic signs, and the step onto the "higher" levels as defined by Komissarov occurs only when no direct equivalences are found. (This, of course, will happen very soon, because even the simplest possessive or passive structure in an English sentence requires the translator to step to the next level in translating it into Hungarian.)

Lecture 4. The first classification of types of translation

The first classification of types of translation was given an John Drydon. He created the first classification of types of translation.

Metaphrase - the type of translation which renders exactly every single word of the original, tries to preserve the structure of the original, disregarding the laws and cultural peculiarities of the target language and culture. Metaphase is close to the term word-for-word translation, but there is no direct correspondence. Word-for-word is most precise and sometimes distorts the target language.

The differences.

Word-for-word is just the process of translating every single word of the text but the language is not distorted. It prevails the laws of the source language. (e.g John has 3 daughters.) If we translate it as metaphase we can say- (Джон имеет 3 дочерей). It is not a good language. It is not idiomatic Russian. But the language is not distorted. Because there are structures in Russian which sound this way (I have the order to tell you- я имею честь вам сказать). But in the case of `John has 3 daughters' this does not work. Because it is idiomatic. And "I have done this exercise" if translate it not like it should be translate in this case (Я имею это упражнение сделанным). The meaning is quiet clear. But the structure of the Russian language distorted. Metaphrase translation is very much used by translators when they translate technical and scientific texts meant for specialists. Because they do not off idiomatic language they need only precision. That is why metaphrase is very good for this purpose. As for word-for-word translation, often use teachers to explain to their students the structure of the English language.

Paraphrase seeks to overcome the irrationalities of the source language, but only in a mechanical way. We retain the value of the original phrase by means of limiting or expanding definitions. A paraphraser deals with elements both languages as if they were math symbols. So if you find a motion you can not translate, you expand it by explaining it. Unlike metaphrare imitation submits to the irrationally of languages. It presupposes that practically no phrase, sentence, word of art can be produced in and the language. No individual part of the text can correspond to the individual parts of the target language text. And there remains nothing else to translator but to prepare an imitation: this is a whole that is composed of part noticeable different of the original ones. And yet this whole preserves the imagery the spirit and the notional coloring of the original. But it never distorts the language of the target culture. e.g. Winnie-the-Pooh.

There are 2 translations-the first one is done by Zahader and the second one is done by Dimurova. The approachs to translation are different. Zahader read the original and restructure the book. Some parts he put to the first place, some parts he changed. But he did it so scarefully that the book preserve the same meaning and imagery for Russian children. But Dimurova preserved the structure of the original. She tried to distort the language and it made the book boring.

Adaption- a case of translation used to bring the text very close to the target language culture. He does not case about cultural and languages peculiarities of the source culture and gives the reader another version of the text from the perspective of the target language culture.

Retelling- used when translating prose and poetry. You retell the content of the text. You say what it is all about. You never thing of preserving the structure or the wording. Content is the main value. It is the most kind of translation. It does not have any artistic value. It is not based on imagery. So,sometimes it is necessary when you do not inn very much the culture, and you can not find the referent. There are no reference material.

Interpretation- not only some explanation provided by the translator for the want of a linguistic or cultural equivalents but also the translator ideas about what he/she is translating, his attitudes to it which may be given in the footnotes or right in the text, and may be structured as a sentences or paraphrase or may be shown in the choice of words. in this case the translator enhances the connotation implied by the original. E.G. The translator of Dickens's little Dorit. "she bursted into tears" the meaning is quite clear, the words are quite natural. But the translation was Dickens was very much compotinent it but he was not sentimental. This is what interpretation is. It is used very often because the translators want to show that they are too clever.

The next classification is very much contemporary. It was done by professor Kazakova. There are many classifications of types of translations but she summed up it. The summary is very much informed. She divides all the types of translation into two groups: 1) complete 2) abridge. All the types of translation are thought to be complete, but Kazakova does not deal with retelling (to her mind is is a translation) as to abridge types of translation Kazakova gives the types that show the relationship between the client and the translator. (Now this is the first time we come to discuss the translation situation, some conditions on the what translation may take place)

e.g. Complete translation (-all but retelling)

abridge translation(selective or searching translation) this is preserving the essence of the text disregarding the parts that he believes to be of little importance. E.G. When you have to give your boss information combined in several business letters, you must compress text.

Or-another example of abridged translation is the functional translation. The task is to re-arrange the parts of the source text in such a way that the information, which as valid for the recipient, comes first. In any case you simplify the text to make it clear for the reader. Abridge translation(selective, functional etc.)are very much important for those who deal with the translation of business documentation. Sometimes abridged translation is put into effect when you translate some books, fiction that is meant for grown-ups and you have to adapt it for children two types of translation or put into effect :adaption and abridge translation.E.G. He you translate Robinson Cruso is not necessary for children. That is why we should exclude all the moralities from the book and preserve all the parts of roben's advantures.- write an adapted abridged translation.

Word-for-word translation (complete) it is necessary when dealing with scientific texts or legal documenti in medicine. Sometimes it is used in fiction but not very often.

Semantic translation- complete, based on rendering the contextual meaning of the text. (e.g. I'll give him the money . it may be translated "a дам ему денег, не беспокойся" или "Дам я ему денег! Ну как-же". You translate the context/ The translation may not even be found in the dictionary but the translator has a feeling that here thw word conveys this meaning.

Communicative translation (also complete) to produce an adequate impression upon the reader it's never word- for- word but the reader motive and the purpose are the same as those of the original. Komissarov suggests two classifications; one of them rests on the communicative function of the text. According to it all translation types fall into literary and informative.

Literary translation deals with literary texts, i.e. works of fiction or poetry whose main function is to make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Their communicative value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic quality and the translator's primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.

Informative translation is rendering into the target language non-literary texts, the main purpose of which is to convey a certain amount of ideas, to inform the reader.

Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. The great challenge to the translator is to combine the maximum equivalence and the high literary merit. As the names suggest, in written translation the source text is in written form, as is the target text. In oral translation or interpretation the interpreter listens to the oral presentation of the original and translates it as an oral message in TL. As a result, in the first case the Receptor of the translation can read it while in the second case he hears it. There are also some intermediate types. The interpreter rendering his translation by word of mouth may have the text of the original in front of him and translate it "at sight". A written translation can be made of the original recorded on the magnetic tape that can be replayed as many times as is necessary for the translator to grasp the original meaning. The translator can dictate his "at sight" translation of a written text to the typist or a short-hand writer with TR getting the translation in written form. These are all, however, modifications of the two main types of translation. The line of demarcation between written and oral translation is drawn not only because of their forms but also because of the sets of conditions in which the process takes place. The first is continuous, the other " momentary. In written translation the original can be read and re-read as many times as the translator may need or like. The same goes for the final product. The translator can re-read his translation, compare it to the original, make the necessary corrections or start his work all over again. He can come back to the preceding part of the original or get the information he needs from the subsequent messages. These are most favourable conditions and here we can expect the best performance and the highest level of equivalence. The conditions of oral translation impose a number of important restrictions on the translator's performance. Here the interpreter receives a fragment of the original only once and for a short period of time. His translation is also a one-time act with no possibility of any return to the original or any subsequent corrections. This creates additional problems and the users have sometimes to be content with a lower level of equivalence.

There are two main kinds of oral translation - consecutive and simultaneous. In consecutive translation the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it has been completed.

In simultaneous interpretation the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his translation while the speaker is uttering the original message. This can be achieved with a special radio or telephone-type equipment. The interpreter receives the original speech through his earphones and simultaneously talks into the microphone which transmits his translation to the listeners. This type of translation involves a number of psycholinguistic problems, both of theoretical and practical nature.

Lecture 5. Lexical translation techniques

Concretization. It's the most frequent device in translation from English into Russian. There is a wide group of English words of semantic volume. These words belong to different parts of speech (thing, affair, nice, point, case, fine). The meaning of them is rather vague & usually the translator uses them in different contexts, but in fact they are used as mere prop-words (do not express anything). The translator needs a context to determine their meaning.

*He came in sight of a lodge, a low, long frowning thing of red brick. - он увидел длинное серое мрачное здание из красного кирпича

Generalization. This device is reverse of concretization. Still there is a tendency of differentiation in English, when Russian uses more general word. In some cases there is an equivalent in the TL & this equivalent is at the same level of abstraction. Generalization may desirable of purely stylistic reasons. It is sometimes used in rendering non-equivalents.

Antonymic translation. It is a grammatical & lexical transformation, which substitutes an affirmative construction or vice versa with some accompanying lexical changes, usually substituting the antonym for the original word.

*Keep off the grass

Paraphrasing. It is very often used in translation. It renders the meaning of some phrase in the SL by a phrase in the TL, & consists of non-correlated lexical units.

*Good riddance - счастливого пути

Transcription in the linguistic sense is the systematic representation of spoken language (or: speech) in written form. Transcription should not be confused with translation, which means representing the meaning of a source language text in a target language (e.g. translating the meaning of an English text into Spanish), or with transliteration which means representing a text from one writing system in another writing system (e.g. transliterating a text in Cyrillic script into Latin script).(e.g. Shakespeare -Шекспир)

Transliteration is the practice of converting a text from one writing system into another, often in a systematic way. Transliteration represents the sound, rather than the meaning (translation), of a word in a language written using different characters.

In linguistics, a calque (/kжlk/) or loan translation is a word or phrase borrowed from another language by literal, word-for-word (Latin: "verbum pro verbo") or root-for-root translation

Functional substitution. We resort to it when none of the options given in the dictionary suits the context.

E.g.: "Relaxation of the well-earned rest" (развлечение? уменьшение? ослабление? смягчение? разрядка?). As none of these can be accepted, we change it to "наслаждаясь заслуженным отдыхом".

Emphatization. This means that we lend a stronger emotional or expressive impact to the translation as compared with the original: He suddenly died" = ... One has to be careful to render the right attitude depending on the context. "A cow-eyed girl" may be a compliment (and then it should be "волоокая красавица") or a negative characterization ("девица с коровьими глазами").

· Description 1) a spoken or written representation or account of a person, object, or event 2) the action of giving such a representation or account.

Lecture 6. Grammatical transformations in translation

Word-for-word translation until we come to very rare cases (very simple short sentences) is impossible. In the course of translation in order to achieve translation equivalence we have to resort to different grammatical and lexical changes, which are called transformations. They can be of 4 types:

1. Transposition

2. Replacement

3. Addition

4. Omission

This classification is arbitrary, not precise, because as far as translation goes we can't find any of the transformations in is pure form. They are usually combined with one another.

Transposition

It's a change in the order of linguistic elements, which are words, phrases, clauses and sentences. Most often it is connected with the notions of theme and rheme:

*A boy came in - The boy came in

In the first case literal translation is impossible, as the word "boy" is rheme, so we change the word order: "Вошел мальчик"

Within a complex sentence the same tendency is observed in Russian. So the first place is occupied by the part of a sentence which most logically precedes the second, while in English the position of both clauses though not quite fixed is for the most part governed by existing syntactical rules. In fact the main clause precedes the subordinate one, and this often causes a change in the order of clauses in translation.

*He trembled as he looked up. - Взглянув наверх, он задрожал.

*You goin' to court this morning? - Said Jim. We have strolled over. - Мы подошли. "Вы пойдете сегодня в суд?" - спросил Джим.

The transposition of the sentence elements is sometimes called sentence restructuring, because the sentence is getting restructured in the process of translation. This restructuring consists in changing syntactic functions of words in a sentence. In English as in Russian the theme is generally placed in the beginning if a sentence, though in English this place is reserved for the sentence subject. The theme of the English sentence is represented by the subject though semantically it is not always the doer of the action expressed by the predicate group. It may be its object and even denote some adverbial relations (time, place, cause etc). In Russian the word order is relatively free, therefore the first word group must not necessarily be at the same time its syntactic subject. So in many cases the English subject is replaced by a secondary element, such as object, adverbial modifier with constant changes in the syntactic pattern of the sentence. Very often there occur some lexical changes.

*He was met by his sister.

It is obvious that when we translate from Russian into English the process is reversed.

*В комнате установилась тишина." - "The room turned silent."

*В радиотехнических устройствах часто встречаются системы из электрических проводов". - Radio equipment often includes systems of electric wires.

Replacement

This is a very important transformation, and I can affect any kind of linguistic units: word forms, parts of speech, sentence elements, types of syntactic relations, sentence types etc.

- Word forms

*The struggles of the Indian people in all parts of the US" - борьба

*A novel about lives of common people" - о жизни

- Parts of speech

It is a common type of replacement for English nouns derived from verbs and denoting actions. In this case the English noun is replaced by a Russian verb.

*It's our hope that… - мы надеемся, что…

The same is true for nouns derived from verbs with the help of the suffix -er. The situation is complex, because in Russian the corresponding word may not exist at all or such words may denote people of permanent occupations.

*He is an early riser.

Very often English adjectives are replaced by Russian nouns.

*Australian prosperity - процветание Австралии

English comparative forms of adjectives, such as "higher, lower, longer, shorter, better" are frequently replaced by Russian nouns that come from adjective stems.

*They demand higher wages and better living conditions - они требуют повышения зарплаты и улучшения условий жизни.

-Sentence elements

It is sometimes called syntactic restructuring, which consists in changing of the functions of the words in the sentence. As in Russian so in English the theme is usually placed in the beginning of the sentence (subject, object, adverbial relations). In many cases the English subject is very often replaced by some secondary element with constant changes in the syntactic pattern of the whole sentence. Very often it is accompanied by certain lexical changes.

* The new film is much spoken about.

- Sentence types

It is a very common transformation of the simple sentence by a complex one and vice versa. While translating from English into Russian it becomes necessary to replace English structures with non-finite verbal forms by subordinate clauses and in this case we turn the simple sentence into a complex one.

*I want you to speak English.

- Types of syntactic relations

Both Russian and English have syntactic relation of coordination and subordination. Coordination is more characteristic of spoken Russian, so it is often desirable when doing consecutive or immediate translation from English into Russian to replace subordination of sentences by coordination.

*So I started walking way over coast where the pretty cheap restaurants are, because I didn't want to spend a lot of dough."

Transformation - a formal linguistic operation, which enables to place 2 levels of structural representation in correspondence.

These transformations are optional from the grammatical point of view, but they are very frequent because they add to the clarity and the simplicity of style.

The transformation helps to avoid ambiguity; it makes the implicit meaning of a sentence explicit. In the phrase "in 1969 report of the Royal Commission on Security" "of" has two meanings:

- A report about the Commission

- A report delivered by the Commission.

Lecture 7. Stylistic translation techniques

language literal translation culture

Metaphor

A metaphor is a comparison used to add descriptive meaning to a phrase (without using the words "like" or "as"). Metaphors are generally not meant literally, and may have little connotative similarity to the concepts they are meant to portray.

Simile

The easiest stylistic device to find is a simile, because you only have to look for the words "as" or "like". A simile is a comparison used to attract the reader's attention and describe something in descriptive terms.

Example: The beast had eyes as big as baseballs and teeth as long as knives.

Metonymy

Metonymy is similar to synecdoche, but instead of a part representing the whole, a related object or part of a related object is used to represent the whole.[3] Often it is used to represent the whole of an abstract idea.

Example: The phrase "The king's rifles stood at attention," uses 'rifles' to represent infantry.

Symbol

A symbol may be an object, a person, a situation, an action or some other object that has literal meaning in the story, and that represents something other than itself.[5] It can also be a word or an idea. It is used as an expressive way to depict an idea. The symbol generally conveys an emotional response far beyond what the word, idea, or image itself dictates.

Paradox

In literary terminology, a paradox is an apparent contradiction that is nevertheless somehow true.[7] Paradox can take the form of an oxymoron, overstatement or understatement. Paradox can blend into irony.

Rhyme

The repetition of identical or similar sounds, usually accented vowel sounds and succeeding consonant sounds at the end of words, and often at the ends of lines of prose or poetry.[8]

Repetition

Repetition is the deliberate use of a word or phrase more than once in a sentence or a text to create a sense of pattern or form or to emphasize certain elements in the mind of the reader or listener.

Verbal Irony

This is the simplest form of irony, in which the speaker says the opposite of what he or she intends. There are several forms, including euphemism, understatement, sarcasm, and some forms of humor

Lecture 8. Types of contexts. Types of equivalents

Context is one of the most important notions in the theory of translation and translation practice. There are several facets of the term depending on the perspective it is viewed from.

We may distinguish between linguistic context (refers to surrounding text or talk of an expression (word, sentence, conversational turn, speech act, etc.). The idea is that verbal context influences the way we understand the expression. (financial community - деловые круги; community of interests - общность интересов) and situational/extralinguistic one (abolitionist - аболиционист, сторонник отмены "сухого закона", сторонник отмены смертной казни).

The context - syntactic and lexical, narrow and wide - serves as that means which removes at multiple-valued unit all its values, except one. Its major function consists in it. So, the verb burn can be translated into Russian to жечь and гореть, and the conformity choice is entirely defined by a syntactic context in which the English word is used: in an intransitive design (at from-sutstvii a direct object) burn is translated as гореть.

The candle burns. - Свеча горит

Не burned the papers - он сжег бумаги.

Often, however, the equivalent choice is defined only taking into account a lexical context of the given unit which unambiguity is established within a certain lexical environment. So, the multiple-valued word attitude staticizes the value in a narrow lexical context.

Не has a friendly attitude towards us. Он к нам относится по-дружески. He stood there in a threatening attitude Он стоял в угрожающей позе.

We may distinguish as well between context on the level of a sentence (He is known for his radical attitudes - Он известен своими радикальными взглядами), on the level of a paragraph (university books - университетские книги; книги об университете), on the level of a text (titles of works of fiction).

...