The problems of translating international words

Rank-restricted Theories of Translation One of six types of partial theory of translation identifed by Holmes (1988e). A rank-restricted theory of translation is defned as one which is only concerned with the features of translation at linguistic ranks lower than entire texts (see rank-bound translation). At the time when Holmes first wrote his now famous article (i.e. the early 1970s), most linguistically-oriented research fell within this particular category as the focus there was usually on the ranks of word, word-group or sentence (see linguistic translation 1). However, Holmes predicted that the advent of text linguistics would eventually be likely to lead to the development of linguistic methods of translation analysis at the text rank also (1988e:75); this has to a large extent now been borne out by the arrival of approaches of the type outlined in pragmatic translation 1. See also area-restricted, medium-restricted, problem-restricted, text-type restricted and theories of translation. Further reading: Holmes 1988e.

Tarjima bo'yicha cheklangan nazariyalar Holms tomonidan aniqlangan qisman tarjima nazariyasining oltita turlaridan biri (1988e). Tarjimaning bir daraja bilan cheklangan nazariyasi, butun matnlardan pastroq bo'lgan lingvistik darajadagi tarjimaning xususiyatlariga taalluqli nazariya faqatgian bir turi sifatida ta'riflanadi (darajali tarjimaga qarang). Holms birinchi marotaba o'zining mashhur maqolasini yozgan paytida (ya'ni 1970-yillarning boshlarida), ko'p tilshunoslikka yo'naltirilgan tadqiqotlar odatda so'z, so'z guruhi yoki jumlalar qatoriga(lingvistik tarjimaga qarang 1) e'tibor qaratadigan toifaga kirdi. Xolms matn tilshunosligining rivojlanishi oxir-oqibat matn darajasida tarjimani tahlil qilishning lingvistik usullarini rivojlanishiga olib keladi deb bashorat qilgan bo'lsada (1988e: 75); bu ko'p jihatdan hozirgi vaqtda pragmatik tarjima 1da bayon qilingan turlarning kelishiga bog'liq. Shuningdek, cheklangan hudud, o'rta cheklangan, cheklangan muammo, cheklangan matn turi va tarjima nazariyalariga qarang. Keyin o'qish uchun: Holms 1988e.

Reader-oriented Machine Translation A term used by Sager (1994) to refer to the speedy production of a TL version of a text by means of machine translation in order simply to inform the TL reader of the content of ST. According to Sager, readers are sometimes prepared to accept machine-produced texts even if they are diffcult to read, provided that they are produced quickly and inexpensively (1994:281). The result of such a procedure is “raw output”, or in other words an artifcial product which may require more reading effort than a human translation simply because it has not been post-edited; however, it has the advantage of being available more quickly than a more “polished” version, and can now be relied on to contain a relatively small number of lexical or terminological mistakes (1994:282). Sager points out that people who frequently use such translations develop the ability to read the artifcial machine-produced language which they typically contain with a high degree of fuency (1994:282). As an example of reader-oriented machine translation in action Sager cites the system SYSTRAN, which is used by the US Air Force to help survey scientifc and technical literature (1994:283).

O'quvchiga yo'naltirilgan apparat tarjimasi Sager (1994) tomonidan maqsadli til namunasini apparat yordamida o'quvchiga manba tilidagi ma'lumotni tez yetkazib berish uchun ishlatilgan. Sagerning so'zlariga ko'ra, o'quvchilar uchun matn o'qishga qiyin bo'lsa, ba'zida tez va qimmat bo'lmagan(1994: 281) ishlab chiqarilishi sharti bilan, mashinada ishlab chiqarilgan matnlarni qabul qilishga tayyor bo'lishadi. Bunday protseduraning natijasi "xom ashyo" yoki boshqa so'z bilan aytganda, tarjima qilinmaganligi sababli inson tarjimasidan ko'ra ko'proq o'qish kuchini talab qilishi mumkin bo'lgan badiiy mahsulot; ammo, uning "sayqallangan" versiyasiga qaraganda tezroq foydalanish kabi afzalligi bor va endi ular nisbatan kam sonli leksik yoki terminologik xatolarni o'z ichiga olmoqda (1994: 282). Sager ta'kidlashicha, bunday tarjimalardan tez-tez foydalanadigan odamlar badiiy mashinada ishlab chiqarilgan tilni o'qish qobiliyatini rivojlantiradilar, ularda odatda yuqori darajadagi ravonlik mavjud (1994: 282). O'quvchiga yo'naltirilgan mashina tarjimasiga misol sifatida Sager AQSh harbiy-havo kuchlari tomonidan ilmiy va texnik adabiyotlarni o'rganishda yordam beradigan SYSTRAN tizimini keltiradi (1994: 283).

Realia (Russian Realii) Defned by Vlakhov & Florin (1970) as textual elements which provide local and historical colour. One of the most recalcitrantly untranslatable features of an ST, realia are generally confned to literary rather than technical translation. Vlakhov & Florin defne realia as follows: “words (and collocations) of a national language which denote objects, concepts and phenomena characteristic of the geographical surroundings, culture, everyday realities or socio-historical specifcs of a people, nation, country or tribe, and which thus convey national, local or historical colour; such words have no exact equivalents in other languages” (1970:438, translated). There are four categories of realia: a) geographical and ethnographical (e.g. mistral, Hakka), b) folkloric and mythological (e.g. Baba Yaga, leprechaun), c) everyday items (e.g. hurdy-gurdy, rupee) and d) socio-historical (e.g. Bezirk, Infanta). Vlakhov & Florin suggest six strategies for translating realia: transcription, calque, formation of a new word, assimilation, approximate translation and descriptive translation (see explicitation). When selecting the most appropriate strategy, the translator should seek to retain some local colour without encumbering the reader with an excess of new, frequently impenetrable lexical items, and should also be mindful of the infuence, whether enriching or polluting, which the new coinings may exert on TL.

Realia (Ruscha Realii) Vlaxov va Florin (1970) tomonidan mahalliy va tarixiy sayqalni ta'minlovchi matn elementlari sifatida tan olingan. Manba tilining qayta ajratib bo'lmaydigan xususiyatlaridan biri bo'lgan realia odatda texnik tarjimaga emas, balki adabiy ma'noga ega. Vlaxov va Florin realia quyidagicha ta'rif bergan: "xalqning, millatning, mamlakatning yoki qabilaning jug'rofiy atrofi, madaniyati, kundalik hayoti yoki ijtimoiy-tarixiy xususiyatlari, ob'ektlari, tushunchalari va hodisalarini anglatuvchi davlat tilida milliy, mahalliy yoki tarixiy ranglar beruvchi so'zlar (va joylar); bunday so'zlarning boshqa tillarda aniq ekvivalenti yo'q” (1970: 438, tarjima qilingan). Realianing to'rtta toifasi mavjud: a) geografik va etnografik (masalan, mistral, Hakka), b) folklor va mifologik (masalan, Baba Yaga, leprechaun), v) kundalik narsalar (masalan, hurdy-gurdy, rupee) va d) ijtimoiy-tarixiy (masalan, Bezirk, Infanta). Vlaxov va Florin realiyani tarjima qilish uchun oltita strategiyani taklif qiladilar: transkripsiya, kalkka, yangi so'zni shakllantirish, assimilyatsiya, taxminiy tarjima va tavsifli tarjima (eksplitsitatsiyaga qarang). Eng munosib strategiyani tanlayotganda, tarjimon o'quvchiga yangi, tez-tez tushunib bo'lmaydigan leksik elementlarni haddan tashqari yuklamasdan, biron bir mahalliy rangni saqlab qolishga intilishi kerak, shuningdek, maqsadli tildagi yangi biriktiruvchi so'zlar boyituvchi yoki buzuvchi ta'sirga ega ekanligi to'g'risida ham yodda tutishi kerak.

Receptor Language Defned by Nida & Taber as “the language into which a message is translated from the original or source language” (1969/1982:205, emphasis removed). In other words, as regards referential meaning the term receptor language is basically synonymous with the probably more widespread term target language. However, its use tends to be associated with certain areas of translation studies, perhaps most notably Bible translation. Furthermore, some writers encourage its adoption because the overtones which it conveys are perceived as being more appropriate to a discussion of translation than those of its main rival. Thus Nida, for example, argues that its use emphasizes the fact that the message is not shot at a target, but must rather be “decoded by those who receive it” (1969:484).

Retseptorlar tili Nida va Taber tomonidan "xabar asl yoki manba tilidan tarjima qilingan til" sifatida ta'riflangan (1969/1982: 205, urg'u olib tashlangan). Boshqacha aytganda, referentsial ma'noga kelsak, retseptorlar atamasi asosan keng tarqalgan atamalar tili bilan sinonimdir. Ammo uning qo'llanilishi tarjimashunoslikning ma'lum sohalariga, xususan Bibliyadagi tarjimalarga bog'liqdir. Bundan tashqari, ba'zi yozuvchilar uning qabul qilinishini qo'llab-quvvatlaydilar, chunki u qabul qiladigan ohanglar, uning asosiy raqobatchisidan ko'ra tarjima muhokamasiga ko'proq mos keladi. Masalan, Nida, uning ishlatilishi, xabar nishonga tegmaganligi faktiga urg'u beradi, lekin uni "qabul qilganlar tomonidan rasshifrovka qilinishi" (1969: 484) kerak deydi.

Reconstructions, Translation with (French Traduction avec Reconstructions) According to Gouadec (1990), one of seven types of translation which serve to meet the various translation needs which arise in a professional environment. In translation with reconstructions ST is translated in its entirety without regard to its form. The aim of such a translation is to communicate the content of ST in the simplest way possible; all the information is thus immediately accessible to the TL reader (1990:335).

Qayta yasash, tarjima qilish (Fransuzcha Traduction avec rekonstruksiyalari) Gouadec (1990) ma'lumotlariga ko'ra, professional muhitda yuzaga keladigan turli tarjima ehtiyojlarini qondirish uchun xizmat qiladigan yettita tarjima turlaridan biri. Qayta qurish bilan tarjimada manba matni, shaklidan qat'i nazar, to'liq tarjima qilinadi. Bunday tarjimaning maqsadi - boshlang'ich matn tarkibini iloji boricha sodda tarzda yetkazish; shu tariqa barcha ma'lumotlar darhol maqsadli tilni o'quvchiga yetkaziladi (1990: 335).

Redundancy Described by Nida (1964) as a feature of all natural languages which should be preserved through the translation process. According to Nida, the information contained in any communication needs to be diluted, and the effects of any possible interference (or “noise”) overcome, by the inclusion of a certain amount of redundancy, the purpose of which is to “raise the predictability” (1964:127) of what is being communicated and in so doing ease the receptor's task of decoding the message. Redundancy is thus defned as “the expression more than once of the same units of information” (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:205), or in other words the inclusion of unnecessary or repeated information within a text. Nida calculates that natural languages “normally tend to produce messages of about 50 percent redundancy” (1964:129); such redundancy can be, for example, phonetic, lexical, collocational or grammatical in nature. However, in translated texts this fgure can fall dramatically. This is partly because the translator can increase the unpredictability (or information) contained in the text by following SL patterns too literally; in such circumstances, the resulting TL awkwardness increases the target receptor's processing effort. However, another reason is that TL receptors will not share the cultural background of their SL counterparts and so will not be able to make all the inferences required for a proper understanding of the text. Because of this, texts need to be “drawn out” in the translation process by incorporating a degree of linguistic redundancy and by making implicit information more explicit. Failure to do this will lead to the receptor being “overloaded” with information. According to Nida & Taber, such a procedure is essential if dynamic equivalence is to be achieved, which leads to the conclusion that “there is a tendency for all good translations to be somewhat longer than the originals” (1969/1982:163).

Ortiqchalik Nida (1964) tomonidan tarjima jarayonida saqlanishi kerak bo'lgan barcha tabiiy tillarning o'ziga xos xususiyati sifatida tavsiflangan. Nidaning so'zlariga ko'ra, har qanday aloqada mavjud bo'lgan ma'lumotlar aralashtirilishi va har qanday mumkin bo'lgan to'siq (yoki "shovqin") ma'lum miqdordagi ortiqcha ko'paytirish qo'shilishi bilan yengib o'tilishi kerak, bu o'z navbatida, ma'lumot berilayotgan narsa va retseptorning xabarni dekodlash vazifasini qulay bajarilishi “tahmin qilishni oshirish” (1964: 127) maqsadida amalga oshiriladi. Shunday qilib, ortiqchalik "bir xil ma'lumotlarning bir nechta qismlarini ifoda etish" (Nida & Taber 1969/1982: 205) yoki boshqacha qilib aytganda, matnga keraksiz yoki takroriy ma'lumotlarni kiritish kabi ta'riflanadi. Nida hisoblashicha, tabiiy tillar "odatda taxminan 50 foizga ko'proq ortiqchalik xabarlarini ishlab chiqarishga moyil" (1964: 129); bunday ortiqchalik, masalan, fonetik, leksik, kollokatsion yoki grammatik bo'lishi mumkin. Biroq, tarjima qilingan matnlarda bu shakl keskin tushishi mumkin. Buning qisman sababi shundaki, tarjimon matn tarkibidagi oldindan aytib bo'lmaydiganlikni (yoki ma'lumotni) so'zma-so'z manba tilidagi naqshga qarab oshirishi mumkin; bunday holatlarda, tarjima tilining noqulayligi maqsad retseptorlarini qayta ishlashga bo'lgan harakatni oshiradi. Ammo, boshqa sabab shundaki, tarjima tili retseptorlari o'zlarining manba til hamkasblarining madaniy ma'lumotlarini baham ko'rmaydilar va shuning uchun matnni to'g'ri tushunish uchun zarur bo'lgan barcha xulosalarni qila olmaydilar. Shu sababli, matnlarni tarjima jarayonida "til" darajasida qisqartirish va noaniq ma'lumotni yanada aniqroq qilish orqali "tuzish" kerak. Aks holda, buni bajarmaslik retseptorning ma'lumot bilan «haddan tashqari» bo'lishiga olib keladi. Nida va Taberning so'zlariga ko'ra, bunday tartib dinamik tenglikka erishish uchun zarurdir, bu esa "barcha yaxshi tarjimalarning asl nusxalariga qaraganda biroz uzoqroq bo'lish tendentsiyasi mavjud" degan xulosaga keladi (1969/1982: 163).

Refraction A general term used by Lefevere in the early 1980s to refer to the range of literary processes to which translation can be said to belong. Lefevere defines refraction as “the adaptation of a work of literature to a different audience, with the intention of infu-encing the way in which that audience reads the work” (1982:4). Of the various processes which can be classifed as refraction the most “obvious” is translation, while other types include criticism, commentary, historiography, teaching, anthologizing and the production of plays (1982:4). Lefevere argues that these activities are carried out against the background of the prevailing literary climate and political ideology, and that these factors act as a “spectrum” through which writers and their works are “refracted” before they reach their audience (1982:4). Lefevere remarks on the fact that refraction has not been properly studied as a phenomenon (1982:5), in spite of the fact that the works of refractors have played an “immense” part not only in disseminating the writings of individual authors, but also in influencing the way in which entire literary systems have developed (1982:5). It should be noted that, as Hermans points out, the term refraction has more recently been replaced by rewriting (1994:139).

Refraktsiya Lefever tomonidan 1980-yillarning boshlarida tarjima qilish mumkin deb aytilishi mumkin bo'lgan adabiy jarayonlarning qatorini ifodalash uchun ishlatiladigan umumiy atama. Lefever refraktsiya “adabiyot asarini boshqa auditoriyaga moslashishi, bu auditoriyani asarni o'qishini o'rganish usuliga moslashishi “ deb ta'riflaydi (1982:4). Refraktsiya deb tasniflanishi mumkin bo'lgan turli jarayonlar orasida eng aniq ko'rinishi - bu tarjima, boshqa turlarga esa tanqid, sharhlash, tarixshunoslik, o'qitish, antologizatsiya va pyesalar tayyorlash kiradi (1982: 4). Lefever bu harakatlar mavjud adabiy muhit va siyosiy mafkura fonida amalga oshirilayotganini va bu omillar yozuvchilar va asarlari tinglovchilariga “qaytarish” ni "spektr" orqali yetkazish vazifasini bajarishini ta'kidlaydi (1982: 4). Lefeverning ta'kidlashicha, refraktsiya fenomen sifatida to'g'ri o'rganilmagan (1982: 5), garchi refrakterlarning asarlari nafaqat alohida mualliflarning asarlarini tarqatishda, juda “katta” rol o'ynagan bo'lishiga qaramay, butun adabiy tizimlarning rivojlanishiga ta'sir ko'rsatdi (1982: 5). Shuni ta'kidlash kerakki, Germans ta'kidlaganidek, refraktsiya atamasi yaqinda qayta yozish bilan almashtirildi (1994: 139).

Regulative Translational Conventions A term used by Nord (1991b) to denote one of two types of translational convention. Nord bases the concept on Searle's (1969) notion of regulative rules, or the conventions which determine how a person should behave in a given situation (an example being the rules of etiquette which provide guidelines on how to conduct interpersonal relationships). By analogy, Nord's concept refers to “the generally accepted forms of handling certain translation problems below the text rank” (1991b:100). The examples which she cites of such problems are “proper names, culture-bound realities or realia, quotations, etc.” (1991b:100; see realia); in all of these areas, translational practice varies from culture to culture, while the specific regulative translational conventions which operate are determined by a given culture's constitutive translational conventions.

Regulyativ tarjima konventsiyalari Nord (1991b) tomonidan tarjima qilingan konventsiyaning ikki turidan birini tanlash uchun foydalaniladigan atama. Nord Sel (1969) kontseptsiyasini tartibga soluvchi qoidalar yoki shaxsning o'zini qanday tutishi kerakligini belgilaydigan konventsiyalarga asoslanadi. (shaxslararo munosabatlarni qanday olib borishga oid ko'rsatma beradigan etika qoidalariga misol). Nordga o'xshashlik bilan Nord tushunchasi "tarjima muammolarini matn darajasidan past darajada hal qilishning umumiy qabul qilingan shakllari" ni anglatadi (1991b: 100). U bunday muammolarni keltirib chiqaradigan misollar: "tegishli ismlar, madaniyat bilan bog'liq haqiqat yoki realizm, iqtiboslar va boshqalar". (1991b: 100; realiyaga qarang); ushbu sohalarning barchasida tarjima amaliyoti madaniyatdan madaniyatgacha o'zgaradi, ayni paytda faoliyat ko'rsatadigan maxsus tartibga soluvchi tarjima konventsiyalari ushbu madaniyatning konstitutsion tarjima konventsiyalari bilan belgilanadi.

Relay Interpreting A term used to refer to the practice of interpreting between two (usually less widely spoken) languages via a third, mediating language (Seleskovitch & Lederer 1989:199). Encountered in conference interpreting, such a procedure is sometimes necessitated when no single interpreter is present who is able to work with both SL and TL. Thus for example, in a conference at which English, French, Greek and Danish delegates are present, it may only be possible to interpret speeches in Danish for the Greek delegates by first interpreting them into English or French (Seleskovitch & Lederer 1989:199). In such a situation, the second interpreter (or “relayer”) does not have direct access to the communicative features of the speaker's original spontaneous delivery, and will probably also not be familiar with the source culture; in effect he or she is therefore in the same position as most of the conference delegates (Seleskovitch & Lederer 1989:200). However, Brennan & Brien (1995) actively recommend this procedure in the case of signed language interpreting. In this context it involves a hearing interpreter communicating ST in a “sign supported” language to a Deaf interpreter who then relays the message to the TL audience in a signed language. The advantage of using the procedure here is that it enables the Deaf audience to receive the message from an interpreter who is working into his or her native language (1995:117-18).

O'rin almashtirish tarjimasi Ikki (odatda kam tarqalgan) tillar o'rtasida uchinchi, vositachi til orqali talqin qilish uchun ishlatiladigan atama (Seleskovich va Lederer 1989: 199). Konferentsiya tarjimasida uchrab turadigan bunday muolajani ba'zida MT va TT bilan ishlashga qodir bitta tarjimon bo'lmaganda zarurdir. Masalan, ingliz, fransuz, yunon va daniyalik delegatlar ishtirok etadigan konferensiyada faqat yunon delegatlari uchun Daniya tilidagi nutqlarni ularni ingliz yoki fransuz tillariga tarjima qilish orqali talqin qilish mumkin (Seleskovich va Lederer 1989: 199). Bunday vaziyatda, ikkinchi tarjimon (yoki "o'rin almashtiruvchi") ma'ruzachining asl spontan yetkazib berishining kommunikativ xususiyatlariga to'g'ridan-to'g'ri kirishib keta olmaydi va, ehtimol, manba madaniyati bilan ham tanish emas; amalda u konferensiya delegatlarining ko'pi bilan bir xil holatda (Seleskovich va Lederer 1989: 200). Ammo Brennan va Brien (1995) imo-ishora tillarni sharhlashda ushbu tartibni qo'llashni tavsiya qiladi. Shu nuqtai nazardan, bu tarjimonning eshitish aloqasini o'z ichiga oladi, u tilni "imo-ishora bilan" qo'llab-quvvatlanadigan bir til bilan tarjimonga yetkazadi va u keyinchalik xabarni tarjima til tinglovchilariga imo-ishora tilida yetkazadi. Bu erda protseduradan foydalanishning afzalligi shundaki, u kar odamlarga o'z ona tilida ma'lumotni olishini ta'minlaydi (1995: 117-18).

Repertoreme Defned by Toury as “any sign, irrespective of rank and scope, which forms part of ... an institutionalized repertoire” (1995:268). The term repertoire is understood as referring to “the aggregate of rules and materials which govern both the making and use of any given product” (Even-Zohar 1990a:39); thus for example, the literary repertoire may be described as “the aggregate of rules and items with which a specifc text is produced, and understood” (Even-Zohar 1990a:40). When an item belonging to such a repertoire is inserted into a particular text, it “enters into a unique network of internal relations, peculiar to that act/text” (Toury 1995:268), and consequently becomes a texteme. However, in the process of translation, according to an observed translation phenomenon which Toury formulates as the Law of growing standardization, “textual relations obtaining in the original are often modifed, sometimes to the point of being totally ignored, in favour of [more] habitual options offered by a target repertoire” (1995:268, emphasis removed); in other words, ST textemes tend to be converted into TL repertoremes (1995:268). Thus for example intentional ambiguities may be ironed out or original metaphors replaced by more standard formulations. However, it should be pointed out that while Toury posits this tendency as being almost universal, the reverse can also happen when new webs of relationships are created in TT where none existed in ST (1995:272). Further reading: Toury 1995.

Repertoremlar Tori tomonidan "maqom va muhitidan qat'iy nazar, ... institutlashtirilgan repertuarning bir qismini tashkil etadigan har qanday belgi" sifatida aniqlangan (1995: 268). Repertuar atamasi "har qanday mahsulotni tayyorlash va undan foydalanishni boshqaruvchi qoidalar va materiallar yig'indisi" degan ma'noni anglatadi (Even-Zohar 1990a: 39); masalan, adabiy repertuarni “maxsus matn ishlab chiqariladigan va tushuniladigan qoidalar va buyumlarning yig'indisi” sifatida tavsiflash mumkin (Even-Zohar 1990a: 40). Bunday repertuarga tegishli narsa ma'lum bir matnga kiritilganida, u "ushbu akt / matnga xos bo'lgan o'ziga xos ichki munosabatlar tarmog'iga kiradi" (Toury 1995: 268) va natijada matnga aylanadi. Ammo, tarjima jarayonida, Tori o'sib borayotgan standartlashtirish qonuni sifatida shakllanadigan tarjima hodisasiga ko'ra, "asl nusxada olinadigan matnli munosabatlar ko'pincha o'zgartiriladi, ba'zan umuman e'tibordan chetda qolib, [foydasiga]. Maqsadli repertuar tomonidan taklif qilinadigan odatiy variantlar "(1995: 268, ta'kidlangan narsalar olib tashlangan); boshqacha qilib aytganda, MT matnlari TT repertoremalariga aylantiriladi (1995: 268). Shunday qilib, masalan, qasddan noaniqliklar o'chirilishi yoki asl metaforalar ko'proq standart formulalar bilan almashtirilishi mumkin. Biroq, shuni ta'kidlash kerakki, Tori ushbu tendensiyani deyarli universal deb bilsa-da, teskari holat, maqsad matnida yangi aloqalar yaratilganda, manba matnida bo'lmagan joyda paydo bo'lishi mumkin. Qo'shimcha ma'lumot: Toury 1995

Rephrasing A term used by Hervey & Higgins to refer to “the exact rendering of the message content of a given ST in a TT that is radically different in form, but neither adds nor omits details explicitly conveyed in the ST” (1992:252). In terms of the amount of information which is provided in TT this process is a theoretical midway-point between the two extremes of exegetic translation and gist translation: despite the radically changed form in which TT appears, the message content is as close as possible to ST. As an example of intralingual rephrasing Hervey & Higgins cite the sentences I had a little drink about an hour ago and I consumed a small quantity of alcohol approximately 60 minutes ago (1992:17). Hervey & Higgins observe that rephrasing never allows a precise reproduction of the message content of ST, simply because “the two forms of expression are different” (1992:18). Further reading: Hervey & Higgins 1992.

Qayta talqin qilish Xirvey va Xiggins tomonidan ishlatilgan atama "berilgan manba matnidagi xabar mazmunining aniq shaklda maqsadli matnda aniq ko'rinishda shaklda turlicha taqdim etilishi, ammo manba matnida aniq aks ettirilgan tafsilotlarni qo'shib ham, tushirib ham kiritmaslik" uchun ishlatiladigan atama (1992) : 252). Tarjima matnda taqdim etilgan ma'lumotlarning hajmi jihatidan, bu jarayon ekzegitik tarjima va ekstremal tarjimaning ikki chegarasi o'rtasidagi nazariy yo'ldir: tarjima matnida paydo bo'ladigan tubdan o'zgartirilgan shaklga qaramay, xabar tarkibi bir-biriga yaqin manba matnini topish mumkin. Xirvey va Xiggins so'zlarni aniq bilan bayon qilishning misoli

“Bir soat oldin ozgina mast edim” va “taxminan 60 daqiqa oldin oz miqdordagi alkogol ichimlikni ichgan edim” jumlalarni keltiraman. Xervey va Xigginsning ta'kidlashicha, «qayta ifodalash» asl matn tarkibidagi xabar mazmunini aniq takrorlashga imkon bermaydi, chunki «ikki ifoda shakli har xil» (1992: 18). Keyingi o'qish: Xervey va Xiggins 1992 yil.

Resistancy (or Resistance) A term used by Venuti (1995) to refer to the strategy of translating a literary text so that it retains something of its foreignness; as such it is broadly synonymous with foreignizing translation. According to Venuti, the approach was conceived as a way of challenging the assumption prevalent in Anglo-American culture that the only valid way of translating is to produce a TT which reads fuently in TL and is so “transparent” that it could be mistaken for a product of the target culture. Resistancy thus consists of freeing “the reader of the translation, as well as the translator, from the cultural constraints that ordinarily govern their reading and writing” and questioning the “major ... status [of English-language culture] by using it as the vehicle for ideas and discursive techniques which remain minor in it, which it excludes” (1995:305). Venuti considers the experience of being thus confronted by the cultural differences which separate TL and ST as potentially liberating for the reader (1995:306). In practice resistancy involves including unidiomatic usage and other linguistically and culturally alienating features in the translated text so as to create the impression of foreignness; in this way it requires the translator to become “a nomad in [his or her] own language, a runaway from the mother tongue” (1995:291). However, as Venuti points out, the adoption of a policy of resistancy does not necessarily lead to increased faithfulness in the translation, but rather establishes an “abusive idelity” (1995:291; see abusive translation) in which some features of ST are lost but others are added (1995:300). Venuti thus sees translation as “a process that involves looking for similarities between languages and cultures” through the act of “constantly confronting dissimilarities” (1995:306). However, a translation should never seek to remove these dissimilarities completely, as through resistancy its aim should be to remind the reader “of the gains and losses in the translation process and the unbridgeable gaps between cultures” (1995:306).

Chidamlilik (yoki qarshilik) Venati (1995) tomonidan ishlatilgan atama badiiy matnni o'zining tashqi ko'rinishida chet tilini saqlab qolish uchun tarjima qilish strategiyasiga murojaat qiladi; shu bilan birga, u chet tiliga tarjima qilish bilan sinonim. Venutining so'zlariga ko'ra, yondashuv Angliya-Amerika madaniyatida tarqalgan taxminni shubha ostiga qo'yish usuli sifatida qabul qilingan, tarjima qilishning yagona usuli - maqsadli matnni maqsadli tilda ravon o'qiydigan va maqsad shunchaki "shaffof" bo'lib, uni maqsadli madaniyat mahsuloti deb xato qilish mumkin. Shunday qilib, chidamlilik "tarjimani o'qiyotganni, shuningdek tarjimonni o'qish va yozishni tartibga soluvchi madaniy cheklovlardan" ozod qilish va "asosiy ... maqomini" [ingliz tilidagi madaniyatni] , unda g'oyalar va diskursiv metodlar uchun vosita bo'lib, unda unchalik ahamiyatsiz bo'lib, uni istisno qilishni so'roq qilishdan iborat. (1995: 305). Venati, tarjima tili va manba tilini ajratib turuvchi madaniy tafovutlarni o'quvchi uchun potentsial erkinlik deb biladi (1995: 306). Amaliyotda chidamlilik, noidiomatik foydalanish va tarjima qilingan matnda chet tili taassurotini paydo qilish uchun boshqa tilshunoslik va madaniy jihatdan o'ziga xos xususiyatlarni o'z ichiga oladi; bu bilan tarjimondan "o'z ona tilidagi ko'chmanchilik, ona tilidan qochish" talab etiladi (1995: 291). Ammo, Venati ta'kidlaganidek, qarshilikka qarshi kurash siyosatining qabul qilinishi tarjimaga bo'lgan ishonchning oshishiga olib kelmaydi, aksincha manba matnining ba'zi xususiyatlari mavjud bo'lgan "jirkanch buzuqlik" ni (1995: 291; haqoratli translyatsiyani) qo'shish yoki tushurib qoldirishni belgilaydi.(1995: 300). Shunday qilib, Venati tarjimani "doimo qarama-qarshi turadigan" (1995: 306) harakat orqali "tillar va madaniyatlar o'rtasidagi o'xshashlikni izlashni o'z ichiga oladigan jarayon" deb biladi. Ammo tarjima hech qachon bu o'xshashliklarni butunlay olib tashlamasligi kerak, chunki qarshilik ko'rsatish orqali o'quvchiga "tarjima jarayonidagi yutuqlar va yo'qotishlar va madaniyatlar o'rtasidagi tuzatib bo'lmaydigan bo'shliqlar" ni eslatib turish kerak (1995: 306).

Restricted Translation A term used by Catford (1965) to refer to a mode of translation which contrasts with total translation. Restricted translation is defned as the “replacement of SL textual material by equivalent TL textual material, at only one level” (1965:22). There are four linguistic levels, and each has its own type of restricted translation associated with it (see grammatical translation, graphological translation, lexical translation and phonological translation). Further reading: Catford 1965.

Cheklangan tarjima Katford (1965) tomonidan ishlatilgan atama, to'liq tarjimaga zid bo'lgan tarjima usulini anglatadi. Cheklangan tarjima "manba tilidagi matnli materialni tarjima tilining matnli materialiga, faqat bitta darajaga almashtirish" (1965: 22) deb ta'riflanadi. To'rt tilshunoslik darajasi mavjud va ularning har biri o'ziga bog'liq bo'lgan cheklangan tarjimaga ega (qarang: grammatik tarjima, grafologik tarjima, leksik tarjima va fonologik tarjimalar). Qo'shimcha o'qish: Katford 1965 yil.

Restructuring (or Transformation, or Forward-transformation) According to Nida & Taber (1969/1982), the third and fnal stage in the translation process (see also analysis and transfer 2). Nida & Taber's model was designed with the problems of Bible translating specifcally in mind, and is based on Chomsky's notions of deep and surface structure (see for example Chomsky 1965). The restructuring stage processes the transferred material, which exists only in the form of kernel sentences (“the basic structural elements” (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:39) which can be said to underlie the syntactically more elaborate “surface structure” of any language); its purpose is to transform the results of the transfer process into a “stylistic form appropriate to the receptor language and to the intended receptors” (1969/1982:206). Restructuring is thus defned as forward-transformation, or in other words the process which is the reverse of back-transformation (see analysis). Nida & Taber (1969/1982:120) argue that there are three main problem areas which are connected with the restructuring of an ST: “the varieties of language or of styles which may be desirable” (e.g. choice of oral or written forms, consideration of sociolinguistic and situational factors, selection of appropriate genre and type of discourse), “the essential components and characteristics of these various styles” (e.g. choice of formal features and lexical items, whether or not they are intended to produce a special effect), and “the techniques which may be employed in producing the type of style desired” (e.g. employing or training a stylist who is sensitive to the above factors). Throughout the restructuring process, however, it is also important to consider the impact which the emerging translation is to have on its intended receptors (Nida 1969:494-95), as only if it produces in them a response which is essentially the same as that of the original audience can the translation be held to be dynamically equivalent to its ST. Further reading: Gentzler 1993; Nida 1969; Nida & Taber 1969/1982.

Qayta yasash (yoki o'zgartirish, yoki oldinga o'zgartirish) Nida va Taberga (1969/1982) ko'ra, tarjima jarayonining uchinchi va oxirgi bosqichi (shuningdek, tahlil va o'tkazish 2-ga qarang). Nida va Taberning modeli Injilni tarjima qilish muammolari bilan bog'liq bo'lib, Chomskiyning chuqur va yuzaki tuzilish tushunchalariga asoslanadi (masalan, Chomskiy 1965). Qayta qurish bosqichi faqat yadro jumlalari shaklida ("asosiy tarkibiy elementlar" (Nida & Taber 1969/1982: 39) mavjud bo'lgan uzatiladigan materialni qayta ishlaydi, bu har qanday narsaning sintaktik jihatdan yanada takomillashtirilgan "sirt tuzilishi" ning asosi deyish mumkin); uning maqsadi uzatish jarayoni natijalarini "retseptorlari tiliga va mo'ljallangan retseptorlarga mos keladigan stilistik shaklga" aylantirishdir (1969/1982: 206). Shunday qilib, qayta yasash deganda, oldinga o'tish yoki boshqa so'z bilan aytganda, orqaga qaytish jarayoni tushuniladi (tahlilga qarang). Nida va Taber (1969/1982: 120) ta'kidlashicha, manba tilini qayta yasash bilan bog'liq uchta asosiy muammo bor: "til turlari yoki uslublarning turlari" (masalan, og'zaki yoki yozma shakllarni tanlash, sotsiologik va situatsion omillarni hisobga olish, tegishli janr va munozara turini tanlash), "ushbu turli uslublarning muhim tarkibiy qismlari va tavsiflari" (masalan, rasmiy xususiyatlar va leksik elementlarni tanlash, ular maxsus effekt berishga mo'ljallangan yoki qilinmaganligiga qarab) va "kerakli uslub turini ishlab chiqarishda qo'llanilishi mumkin bo'lgan usullar" (masalan, yuqoridagi omillarga sezgir bo'lgan stilistni jalb qilish yoki o'qitish). Qayta yasash Qayta qurish jarayonida, shuningdek, paydo bo'layotgan tarjimaning mo'ljallangan retseptorlariga ta'sirini (Nida 1969: 494-95) ko'rib chiqish kerak, chunki agar ular o'zlarining javoblarini mohiyatan bir xil bo'lsa ham. asl auditoriya tarjimasini uning asl matniga dinamik ravishda tenglashtirish uchun ushlab turish mumkin. Keyingi o'qish: Gentzler 1993; Nida 1969; Nida va Taber 1969/1982.

Retrospective Translation A term introduced by Postgate to describe translation “which primarily regards the Author” (1922:18; see also prospective translation). According to Postgate, the aim of such SL-oriented translation is “to impart a knowledge of an original to those to whom it would otherwise be unknown” (1922:22). Thus the translator is seen as a receiver whose main concern is for clear comprehension of ST rather than idiomatic expression in TL. Wilss (1982) uses the term retrospective science of translation to denote the study of such phenomena as error analysis and translation criticism, which belong to the subdivision of applied translation studies associated with translation as a product rather than a process. As a discipline, the retrospective science of translation thus “proceeds from what it fnds in the TL and compares the quality of the [TT] with that of the original; by so comparing the two, it can begin to identify the formulation processes directing the production of the [TT] and to determine how adequately they achieve what was intended” (Wilss 1982:59). The term retrospective translation is broadly similar in meaning to adequate translation (see adequacy 1) and literal translation 1.

Retrospektiv tarjima Postget tomonidan tarjimani "birinchi navbatda Muallifga tegishli" deb nomlash uchun kiritilgan atama (1922: 18; shuningdek, istiqbolli tarjimani ko'ring). Postgatening so'zlariga ko'ra, bunday manba tiliga asoslangan tarjimaning maqsadi "asl nusxa haqida bilimni boshqa yo'l bilan noma'lum bo'lganlarga yetkazishdir" (1922: 22). Shunday qilib, tarjimon qabul qiluvchi sifatida ko'rib chiqiladi, uning asosiy tashvishi XLda idiomatik iborani emas, balki STni aniq tushunishdir. Wilss (1982) retrospektiv fan atamasidan foydalanadi. Tarjima jarayoni xato tahlili va tarjima tanqidi kabi hodisalarni o'rganish emas, balki jarayon sifatida mahsulot sifatida tarjima bilan bog'liq amaliy tarjimashunoslik bo'limiga tegishli. Tarjima retrospektiv fani sifatida intizom sifatida “TLda ko'rsatilgan narsalardan kelib chiqadi va [TT] sifatini asl nusxa bilan solishtiradi; Ikkalasini taqqoslab, u [TT] ishlab chiqarishni yo'naltiruvchi shakllantirish jarayonlarini aniqlashni va ular maqsadga erishganliklarini qanchalik aniqligini aniqlashni boshlashi mumkin "(Wilss 1982: 59). «Retrospektiv tarjima» atamasi yetarli tarjimaga (1 qarang, adekvatlikka qarang) va so'zma-so'z tarjimaga o'xshash ma'noda bir-biriga o'xshashdir.

Rewriting A term introduced by Lefevere (1985, 1992) to refer to a range of processes, including translation, which can be said to reinterpret, alter or manipulate an original text in some way. The term arose from the conviction that translation studies needs to deal with the socio-cultural, ideological and literary constraints which lie behind the production of texts. According to Bassnett & Lefevere, translators, critics, historians, professors and journalists are all text producers whose output can be classifed as “rewriting” (1990a:10). Rewriting is thus defned as “anything that contributes to constructing the `image' of a writer and/or a work of literature” (1990a:10); the term image is understood as the projection of an original work or author in a given culture, which frequently exerts more infuence than that original (Lefevere 1992:110). It is thus one of Lefevere's main theses that “ordinary” readers of literature are exposed to rewritings much more frequently than they are to original writings (1992:7); in this way rewriting is one of the means by which the survival of a literary work is ensured (Bassnett & Lefevere 1990a:10). However, rewriting is closely connected with the political and literary power structures which operate within a given culture, as the processes of adaptation and manipulation which rewriters perform generally lead to the production of texts which refect the dominant ideology and poetics (Lefevere 1992:8; see patronage); for this and other reasons, rewriting is never “innocent” (Bassnett & Lefevere 1990a:11). Seen in such a context, translation - “the most obviously recognizable type of rewriting” (Lefevere 1992:9) - is a process which manipulates ST by adjusting it to ft in with two important constraints. The frst of these is the translator's (conscious or unconscious) ideology. This is refected in the way he or she treats the original's universe of discourse, or the “objects, concepts, customs belonging to the world that was familiar to the writer of the original” (1992:41); the translator's attitude to such items is infuenced by “the status of the original, the self-image of the culture that text is translated into, the types of texts deemed acceptable in that culture, the levels of diction deemed acceptable in it, the intended audience, and the `cultural scripts' that audience is used to or willing to accept” (1992:87). The translator's ideology, however, also determines his or her attitude to the language in which ST is written, for example in terms of the extent to which meaning is privileged over form in the translation of poetry. The second constraint which operates on translation is the poetics dominant in the target culture, a poetics being informally defned as a combination of “literary devices, genres, motifs, prototypical characters and situations, and symbols” and the culture's notion of what the rôle of literature in the social system should be (1992:26).

Qayta yozish Lefever tomonidan kiritilgan atama (1985, 1992) asl matnni qandaydir tarzda qayta talqin qilish, o'zgartirish yoki ishlov berish uchun aytilishi mumkin bo'lgan jarayonlarni, shu jumladan tarjimani ham anglatadi. Ushbu atama tarjimashunoslik matnlarni ishlab chiqarishda yuzaga keladigan ijtimoiy-madaniy, mafkuraviy va adabiy cheklovlarni yengishi kerak degan fikrdan kelib chiqdi. Bassnett va Lefeverning so'zlariga ko'ra, tarjimonlar, tanqidchilar, tarixchilar, professorlar va jurnalistlar matn ishlab chiqaruvchilardir, ularning mahsuloti "qayta yozish" deb tasniflanishi mumkin (1990a: 10). Qayta yozilish "yozuvchining va / yoki adabiyot asarining" imidjini "yaratishga yordam beradigan har qanday narsa" deb ta'riflanadi (1990a: 10); atama atamasi asl asarga yoki muallifga muayyan madaniyatdagi proektsiyasi sifatida tushuniladi, bu asl nusxadan ko'ra ko'proq ta'sir qiladi (Lefevere 1992: 110). Shunday qilib, "oddiy" adabiyotni o'qiydiganlar asl yozuvlarga qaraganda qayta yozuvlarga ko'proq duchor bo'lishlari Lefeverning asosiy tezislaridan biri (1992: 7); shu tariqa qayta yozish adabiy asarning saqlanib qolishini ta'minlaydigan vositalardan biridir (Bassnett & Lefevere 1990a: 10).Qayta yozish ma'lum bir madaniyat doirasida faoliyat yuritadigan siyosiy va adabiy kuch tuzilmalari bilan chambarchas bog'liq, chunki qayta yozuvchilar amalga oshiradigan moslashuv va manipulyatsiya jarayonlari, asosan, hukmron mafkura va she'riyatni inkor etuvchi matnlarni ishlab chiqarishga olib keladi (Lefever 1992: 8;); shu va boshqa sabablarga ko'ra qayta yozish hech qachon "aybsiz" emas (Bassnett & Lefevere 1990a: 11). Bunday kontekstda ko'rilgan tarjima - "yozuvning eng aniq tanilgan turi" (Lefevere 1992: 9) - bu MMni ikkita muhim cheklovni inobatga olgan holda boshqaradigan jarayon.. Ularning eng asosiysi - tarjimon (ongli yoki ongsiz) mafkurasi. Bu asl munozara olamiga yoki "asl yozuvchiga tanish bo'lgan dunyoga tegishli ob'ektlar, tushunchalar, urf-odatlar" ga munosabatda (1992: 41) rad etiladi; tarjimonning bunday narsalarga munosabati "matnning asl holati, tarjima qilinadigan madaniyatning o'ziga xos qiyofasi, ushbu madaniyatda maqbul deb topilgan matn turlari, maqbul deb hisoblangan diktsiya holatlari" bilan izohlanadigan auditoriya va tinglovchilar foydalanadigan yoki qabul qilishni istagan "madaniy ssenariylar" (1992: 87). Ammo tarjimon mafkurasi, shuningdek, MM yozilgan tilga bo'lgan munosabatini, masalan, she'rni tarjima qilishda ma'noning ahamiyati darajasi nuqtai nazaridan ham belgilaydi. Tarjima sohasida ish olib boradigan ikkinchi cheklov - bu maqsad madaniyatida hukmronlik qiladigan she'riyat, norasmiy ravishda "adabiy asboblar, janrlar, motivlar, prototipik belgilar va vaziyatlar va belgilar" birikmasi sifatida tan olingan va adabiyotning madaniyat ijtimoiy tizimdagi roli madaniy tushunchasi (1992: 26) bo'lishi kerak.

Rhymed Translation One of seven strategies for translating poetry described by Lefevere (1975) in the course of an examination of English translations of a poem by Catullus. Within this particular context rhymed translation is distinguished from metrical translation in that its metre is self-imposed rather than being copied from ST, which in this case was composed in non-rhyming verse. Lefevere argues that when such a strategy is being followed, or in other words when rhyme and metre have to be imposed on “pre-selected and prearranged” material, the search for an acceptable solution is “doomed to failure from the start” (1975:49) and runs the risk of producing a mere caricature of ST (1975:61). The reason for this is that, like most other translation strategies, rhymed translation concentrates exclusively on one aspect of ST rather than on the text as an integrated whole. Of course, in view of the vast complexity of the task, this is all that most translators of verse can realistically hope to achieve.

Qofiyali tarjima Lefever (1975) tomonidan yozilgan she'rning ingliz tiliga tarjima qilinishida Katallus tomonidan tasvirlangan she'rlarni tarjima qilishning yettita usullaridan biri. Aynan shu kontekstda qofiy tarjima metrik tarjimadan ajralib turadi, chunki uning matnini matn matnidan nusxa ko'chirish emas, balki o'z-o'zidan yuklash kerak, bu holda qofiya bo'lmagan ko'rinishda yozilgan. Lefeverning ta'kidlashicha, bunday strategiyaga rioya qilinganda yoki «oldindan tanlangan va oldindan rejalashtirilgan» materialga qofiya va metrni kiritish kerak bo'lganda, maqbul echimni izlash «boshidanoq muvaffaqiyatsiz bo'ladi» (1975). : 49) va boshlang'ich matnning shunchaki karikaturasini yaratish xavfini tug'diradi (1975: 61). Buning sababi shundaki, ko'pgina boshqa tarjima strategiyalari singari, qofiyalangan tarjima matnni yaxlit bir matn sifatida emas, balki matn manbasining bir jihatiga qaratadi. Albatta, vazifaning juda murakkabligi sababli, ko'pgina oyat tarjimonlari haqiqatan ham erishishga umid qilishadi.

Science of Translation One of several overlapping terms used to denote the discipline concerned with the systematic study of translation phenomena (see also translation theory 1, traductology, translation studies and translatology). However, while often broadly synonymous with these other designations, the term science of translation tends to contain a number of theoretical assumptions and methodological overtones which set it apart. An early use of the term can be found in Nida (1964), who suggests it as a counterbalance to the tendency to view translation exclusively as an art or a skill. Nida argues that the processes of translation “are amenable to rigorous description” (1964:3), and concludes that “the transference of a message from one language to another is ... a valid subject for scientifc description” (1964:3). However, Nida does not apply the term to all types of rigorous investigation of translation, but rather reserves it for his three-stage model of the translation process (see analysis, transfer 2 and restructuring). Thus his use of the term specifcally refers to an approach infuenced by Chomskyan linguistics and centred around the problems of Bible translation, and implies a preference for dynamic rather than formal equivalence as well as the belief that meaning exists independently of the language, text or message in which it is encoded. Besides being employed in this way in the discussion of Bible translating, the term is also used, principally by German writers, to refer generally to any kind of academic investigation of translation. In this context, the science of translation (Übersetzungswissenschaft or Translationswissenschaft in German) is typically characterized as being highly interdisciplinary in nature, as translation scholars draw on the insights and methodologies of such widely differing felds as linguistics, communication theory, cultural studies and psychology; however, scholars who use the term science of translation (rather than Translation Studies, for example) generally follow a basically linguistically-based approach and concentrate on non-literary translation. As an emerging discipline in its own right the science of translation is frequently split into a number of areas not related to the other disciplines on which it draws. Thus Koller, for example, talks about process and product-oriented science of translation (1979/1992:12), while Wilss distinguishes “the model-theoretic aspect, the language-pair-oriented descriptive aspect, and the language-pair-oriented applied aspect, each of which is guided by different considerations” (Wilss 1982:79).

Tarjima fani Tarjima hodisalarini muntazam o'rganish bilan bog'liq bo'lgan intizomni anglatadigan bir-biriga zid bo'lgan atamalardan biri (shuningdek qarang) tarjima nazariyasi 1, traduktologiya, tarjimashunoslik va tarjimashunoslik). Biroq, ko'pincha ushbu boshqa belgilar bilan sinonim bo'lsa ham, tarjima ilmi atamasi uni bir-biridan ajratib turadigan bir qator nazariy taxminlar va uslubiy mulohazalarni o'z ichiga oladi. Atamani erta ishlatishni Nida (1964) da topish mumkin, u buni tarjimaga faqat san'at yoki mahorat sifatida qarash tendentsiyasiga qarshi turadi. Nida ta'kidlashicha, tarjima jarayonlari "qat'iyat bilan tasvirlashga imkon beradi" (1964: 3) va "xabarni bir tildan boshqa tilga o'tkazish ... ilmiy tavsiflash uchun haqiqiy mavzu" (1964: 3) degan xulosaga keldi. Biroq, Nida ushbu atamani tarjimani qat'iy tekshirishning barcha turlariga qo'llamaydi, aksincha uni tarjima jarayonining uch bosqichli modeli uchun saqlab qo'yadi (tahlil, 2-uzatish va qayta tuzishni ko'ring). Shuning uchun uning ushbu atamani ishlatishi Xomskiy tilshunosligi va Bibliyani tarjima qilish muammolari markaziga kiradigan yondashuvga ishora qiladi va rasmiy ekvivalent emas, balki din, matn yoki xabardan mustaqil ravishda ma'no mavjudligiga ishonishni anglatadi. unda kodlangan. Injil tarjimasini muhokama qilishda ushbu usuldan foydalanish bilan bir qatorda, bu atama asosan nemis yozuvchilari tomonidan tarjimani har qanday ilmiy izlanishiga murojaat qilish uchun ishlatiladi. Shu nuqtai nazardan, tarjima fani (nemis tilidagi Übersetzungswissenschaft yoki Translationswissenschaft) odatda tabiatda juda ko'p intizomli ekanligi bilan ajralib turadi, chunki tarjimashunoslar tilshunoslik, aloqa nazariyasi, madaniy tadqiqotlar va psixologiya kabi turli xil feldsherlarning tushunchalari va metodologiyalariga tayanadilar; ammo, tarjima ilmi atamasini (masalan, tarjimashunoslikni emas) ishlatadigan olimlar, asosan, tilshunoslikka asoslangan yondoshadilar va adabiy bo'lmagan tarjimaga e'tibor berishadi. Tarjima ilmi o'z-o'zidan paydo bo'lgan fan sifatida ko'pincha boshqa sohalar bilan bog'liq bo'lmagan sohalarga bo'linadi. Masalan, Koller, jarayon va mahsulotga yo'naltirilgan tarjima ilmi haqida gapiradi (1979/1992: 12), Uilss esa «model-nazariy jihat», til-juft yo'naltirilgan tavsif jihati va til-juft yo'naltirilganlikni ajratib turadi. amaliy jihatlari, ularning har biri turli xil mulohazalarga asoslangan "(Wilss 1982: 79).