The problem of untranslatability in translation studies

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Odesa National Maritime University

The problem of untranslatability in translation studies

Hlushchenko O.V., Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor at the Department of Philology

The article is dedicated to the issue of translatability/untranslatability, possible challenges in translation and the ways of overcoming them. It is proved that translatability and untranslatability are related to the psycholinguistic and ethnolinguistic translation adequacy comprising such factors as intellectual, mental, cultural and philosophical. The active participants include the author of the source text as the representative of the authentic foreign culture and the translator, as the mediator and interpreter. Among the possible challenges of translation there are language discrepancies, their asymmetry, the uniqueness of the source text atmosphere as the reflection of the national mentality, and the insufficient amount of preliminary background information necessary for adequate translation.

In the focus of the article there are words in Ukrainian, English and German which don't have exact equivalents in the target language or vice versa may have multiple partial correspondences. Expressions or lexical units which cannot be rendered in translation are termed as lacunas. Lacunas don't prove the impossibility of translation, they indicate at the absence of the proper equivalent with reference to the social, cultural, ethnic and historic peculiarities.

The processes of demotivation, loss of mental and cultural coloring in translation and the resulting idiomaticity are also investigated, possible semantic breeches as well as cases of interlinguistic homonymy and paronymy are taken into consideration. The most efficient translation strategies and operations are worked out. Descriptive translation and translator's commentary are suggested as the most appropriate translation transformations. The overview of the theoretical groundings comprises the most relevant research works on the issue of untranslatability in the paradigm of different approaches and trends.

It is resumed that untranslatability mostly stands for the challenges in translation caused by the absence of the full equivalent either due to the lack of intelligence or competence in a certain field of knowledge or activity, sometimes this may also be predetermined by the insufficient psycholinguistic or sociocultural preparation of the translator. The perspective for further research is seen in the study of the linguistic, social, cultural and psycholinguistic levels in translation.

Key words: translatability, untranslatability, lacunas, translation, idiomaticity.

ПРОБЛЕМА НЕПЕРЕКЛАДНОСТІ У ТЕОРІЇ ПЕРЕКЛАДУ

Статтю присвячено проблемі перекладності та неперекладності, а також можливим проблемам перекладу та способам їх подолання. У роботі доведено, що перекладність і неперекладність співвідносяться з психолінгвістичною та етнолінгвістичною адекватністю перекладу з урахуванням таких чинників, як інтелектуальний, психологічний, культурний і філософський. Активну участь у цьому процесі приймають автор вихідного тексту як представник самобутньої іноземної культури та перекладач, як посередник і інтерпретатор. Серед можливих проблем перекладу відмінності мов, асиметрія мов, унікальність атмосфери твору як віддзеркалення національного менталітету, а також недостатній обсяг інформації, необхідної для адекватного перекладу.

У статті досліджуються українські, англійські та німецькі вокабули, які не мають точних еквівалентів у цільовій мові або, навпаки, мають декілька різноманітних часткових відповідників. Вирази або лексеми, які не можуть бути передані в перекладі, йменуються лакунами. Лакуни не засвідчують неможливість перекладу, а є своєрідними індикаторами відсутності відповідного еквіваленту з урахуванням соціальних, етнічних, історичних і культурних особливостей.

Також досліджуються процеси втрати вмотивованості, психічного та культурного забарвлення, що спричинюють ідіоматичність, можливі розриви семантичних зв'язків, випадки міжмовної омонімії та паронімії. У процесі дослідження виробляються найбільш ефективні перекладацькі стратегії та операції. Серед найбільш відповідних перекладацьких трансформацій слід назвати описовий переклад і перекладацький коментар. Огляд теоретичних засад дослідження проблеми неперекладності охоплює найбільш вагомі наукові розвідки у парадигмі різних підходів і напрямків.

Неперекладність тлумачиться як наслідок таких проблем перекладу, як відсутність знання перекладача про наявність повних еквівалентів певних лексичних одиниць вихідної мови у мові перекладу через недостатню мовну компетентність або обізнаність із термінологією та базовими поняттями певної галузі діяльності, іноді це може бути також пов'язане з недостатньою психолінгвістичною або соціокультурною підготовкою перекладача. Перспектива вбачається у дослідженні лінгвістичних, соціальних, культурних і психолінгвістичних рівнів у перекладі.

Ключові слова: перекладність, неперекладність, переклад, лакуни, ідіоматичність.

Introduction

The relevance of translation as a mediator in cross-cultural communication can't be overestimated. One of the recurrent challenges in translation studies is the issue of untranslatability. The following research is dedicated to the review of the classical and recent scientific works dedicated to untranslatability.

Review of the previous publications on the issue.

The analysis of the research works by Ch. Hadamer, A. Humboldt, A. Finkel, Ye. Vereschahin, D. Buzadzhy [3], L.Latyshev [4], A. Kovalchuk, Klymenko, Ye. Yevteyev, L. Barkhudarov, V. Koler, V. Komissarov, Ye. Mishkurov [8;9], N. Tymko, Struk, A. Sytko, H. Yencheva has revealed different aspects of the issue in the focus of the research. Unlike the predecessors, we attempted to analyze different approaches to the issue of untranslatability in translating publicist and belles-lettres texts in the aspect of the choice of the most appropriate translation strategy.

The objective of the research is to interpret the concept «untranslatability», to classify translation transformations, to study various translation theories and functions, to find out the possible causes of untranslatability and to work out the most efficient ways of dealing with lacunas.

The material and methods of investigation. The methods and techniques employed include comparative and semantic analysis, the analysis of the manuals and textbooks on translation, and the descriptive analysis as well. The theoretical grounding was formed by the works by Ch. Hadamer, A. Humboldt, Struk and others.

Findings

Translatability is defined in the research as the principal possibility of translating from one language into another. To achieve adequate translation certain «barriers» should be removed:

• linguistic (syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of the source text and target text expressions);

• semantic (the distinction of the linguistic semantics: differences in classifications and grammar as well as pseudo-internationalisms, interlinguistic homonyms and paronyms);

• syntactic (utterances and clauses in particular communicative situations);

• pragmatic (correspondence with the source text in rendering stylistic devices including idioms, metaphors, metonymies, similes and peculiarities of the author's individual style);

• additional linguistic (revealing the distinctive features of the source and target language cultures).

When dealing with the «foreign» culture, the addresser intuitively compares it with his native culture. And this factor strongly complicates the interpretation of the rules and principle of the different culture. The more similarities there are between the source and target cultures, the more grounding for untranslatability there appear. Therefore translators choose erroneous translation operations or misinterpret the content of the source culture texts and thus corrupt its perception by the target audience. translatability demotivation idiomaticity

The process of the development of translation norms is observed in case of the interaction of five various types of requirements:

• translation equivalence;

• genres and stylistic groundings of translation;

• application of the translation operations;

• translation norms.

Thus, unless there are linguistic barriers, cultural discrepancies may be obstacles in cross-cultural communication. In this case the shortened translation scheme may be at work, which is more typical for the situation when the speaker lacks language competence but adduces to reference books and dictionaries.

Both prolonged and shortened translation schemes are known as cognitive translation strategies, as they are chosen with the relevance to the communicative situation. The methodology and fullness of translation is predetermined by pragmatic conventions.

The translator's task is to demonstrate the knowledge of the essential conventions instead of the literary translation. The process of interpretation presupposes the creation of the certain conceptual acquisition of the sense of the given text apart from the distinctive features of the source and target languages.

When dealing with realia the following tactics are relevant:

• rendering the semantic invariant by linguistic units typical of the target language thus domesticating the source text;

• preserving the uniqueness and authenticity of the source text leaving the realia in their essential form.

Therefore, translator's competence must include the language competence of both target and source languages, translation strategies, tactics and operations, as well as the foreground knowledge. This also presupposes omission of non-relevant information. Transformations form the essence of the translator's occupation.

Untranslatability is the absence in the target language of the equivalent for certain concepts and expressions in the source language. Untranslatability is sometimes interpreted as null translatability of the certain parts and structures of the text on the level of notions rather than the level of the texts. Untranslatability may be differentiated as linguistic and cultural.

Thus, the polarization of the notions becomes evident. Therefore, translatability and untranslata- bility are interpreted as two poles of the psycholin- guistic and ethnolinguistic faithfulness in translation, embracing the following factors: intellectual, psycholinguistic, cultural, and philosophical. The participants are the author of the source text as the representative of the source culture and the translator as the interpreter of the message. The translator's tasks also include rendering the source text and the detailed analysis of the certain culture elements. Thus, not only translation, but also communication of various cultures occurs.

The methodology of the research is represented by the following elements:

1) gnoseological grounding of the idea of translat- ability. According to this theory the full-scale rendering of the original may be achieved only by means of several translations;

2) philosophical doctrine about the continuous cognitive process;

3) dialectical correspondence of the part and the whole, performing translation on the basis of the uniqueness of the thinking principles;

4) the combination of the laws of thinking.

The following linguistic methods of research have been employed: comparative, contrastive, and descriptive.

The following causes of translatability and untranslatability have been outlined:

1) the language discrepancy and asymmetry (lexical, grammatical, stylistic);

2) the atmosphere in the works of art, which acts as an indicator of identity and the means of national mentality formation;

3) insufficient amount of preliminary information necessary for the proper understanding of the source text.

Thus, the following theories are collided in translation:

- the impossibility of translation. The main thesis is the loss of the parts of the initial message in translation, the absence of the possibility of adequate information rendering. This approach was elaborated by the following scholars (A. Shlegel, F. Schleiermacher, V. Benyamin);

- linguistic relativity. The main idea is that postulates, values and way of thinking are determined by the language. This theory was supported by V. Humboldt, L. Weisberger, E. Sapir.

According to linguistic universals adequate trans- latability is based upon the assumption that actual reality is relatively similar for different languages due to the fact that objective reality is approximately the same for all the nations.

The code of culture and nation's mentality are mostly revealed in a language. This is most vividly manifested in the so-called «pure» languages, mostly corresponding to the norms and requirements. These ideas are studied in detail by M. Zheludenko and A. Sabitova in their article «Language purism as a determinant of identity» [5].

Lacunas don't prove the impossibility of translation but rather indicate the absence of the equivalents with reference to social, cultural, ethnic and historic peculiarities. The most troublesome in translation there are scientific terms, poetry, proverbs and sayings, play on words, and military language.

Translation is a linguistic and cultural transmission of information, determined by the language and culture. Most challenges for translation are due to culture elements like the values, the beliefs, the mode ofthink- ing. The anthropological role of the language was first proclaimed by V. Humboldt [8], who postulated that world picture was formed together with the language.

There are certain words and expressions which become devoid of their cultural and mental coloring in translation. In any language there exist certain lexical units, denoting notions which are typical of one culture but difficult to interpret in foreign language cultures. There is no proper semantic equivalent for English “privacy” in Ukrainian lexicon, as “samot- nist” denotes “loneliness” or “solitude”.

There are some words in English which don't have ready-made equivalents in Ukrainian and should be translated descriptively as they denote notions which don't have correspondences in another culture like “collywobbles” (“the pleasant feeling of butterflies in the stomach”), “vagitus” (“the cry of a newborn baby”), “griffonage” (“unreadable writing”), “crapulence” (“the unpleasant feeling you get after eating or drinking too much”) and the like. Some set expressions may be interpreted in a different way in different language cultures thus creating the basis for ambiguity. For example, “black cat” stands up for the omen of bad luck while in English it is associated with unexpected lucky chance. In such cases translator's commentary is to be provided.

There are also such words in Ukrainian which can't be adequately rendered in English. Among them there are the following words: “vulharnist” which may be rendered as “vulgarity”, “vulgarism” or “blatancy” depending on the context; “istyna” which is still different from “pravda”, while “pravda” is mainly translated as “truth”, “istyna” may be rendered in translation as both “the truth” and “verity” which borders on with quite another concepts, mainly “pravdyvist” and “dostovirnist”.

The issue of translatability::untranslatability sometimes arises due to the difference in the scopes of meaning in the source and target languages. Thus, Ukrainian “kokhaty” is different in its scope from “to love” and “to hold dear” and “to fancy”. The difference is mostly in valency or the ability to form collocations. We normally say “kokhaty divchynu”, but “liubyty Bat'kivschynu” while in English you may use “to love” in both senses at work like “to love a girl” and “to love one's Motherland or Fatherland”. In German it's quite another thing: you can only use “mogen” to express your preferences in food, your likes or dislikes. For example, the phrase “Ich mag Fruchte” in German is completely identical to English “I like fruit” while “Ich liebe dich” corresponds to “I love you” and “Ich habe dich gern” is equal to “I'm fond of you”. In Italian the same idea of loving another person is still expressed in another way: “Ti voglio bene” which if translated literally word-for-word would make “I wish you all the best”. So, as it can be concluded, different nations express the same notions and ideas in their unique ways thus reflecting their authentic mentality.

Findings. Untranslatability mostly stands for the challenges in translation caused by the absence of the full equivalent either due to the lack of intelligence or competence in a certain field of knowledge or activity, sometimes this may also be predetermined by the insufficient psycholinguistic or sociocultural preparation.

Untranslatability is rather a relative than an absolute category which may be both linguistic, cultural, ethnic and social. As it follows, it may be caused by such factors as the absence of the corresponding ethnocultural realia in the target language as well as actual events or situations which may impact the fullness and correctness of information rendering. It is still disputable whether the issue of potential untranslatability exists in reality or only hypothetically in the translator's consciousness.

When translating texts from foreign languages into Ukrainian with the interpretation of social, ethnocultural, historic and other realia translators should obey the following rules: the enrichment of the Ukrainian word stock; linguistic and cultural adaptation, rendering the source text's unique atmosphere; the expansion of personal moral and ethnic boundaries; the formation of intercultural competence.

Translation is a powerful factor of the cultural cooperation and partnership as well as the form of cross-cultural exchange of external linguistic means and inner resources with deep spiritual ideas. And sometimes non-verbal codes of communication like dance, music or art come to help.

The perspective is seen in the study of the linguistic, social, cultural and psycholinguistic levels in translation.

Bibliography

1. Антонюк С.М., Бурковська Л.Д. Переклад юридичної, економічної та соціально-політичної літератури. Хмельницький : ХНУ, 2008. 72 с.

2. Бацевич Ф.С. Основи комунікативної лінгвістики. Київ : Академія, 2004. 344 с.

3. Бузаджи Д.М., Ковальчук А.В. Сутність, причини та види перекладу. 2016. URL: http://www.thinkaloud.ua/ feature/buz-kov-perekladnist.pdf

4. Євтєєв С.В, Латишев Л.К. До проблеми неперекладності: культурна неперекладність. 2018. URL: https://article/do-problemy-neperekladnosti-kultuma-neperekladnist

5. Желуденко М.А., Сабітова А.П. Пуризм як детермінанта ідентичності. Запоріжжя : ЗНУ. 2014. № 62. С.51-54.

6. Карабан В. Теорія і практика перекладу з української мови на англійську мову. Вінниця, 2003. 126 с.

7. Клименко І.М. Міжмовна ідіоматичність в аспекті міжкультурної комунікації (англійсько-українські відповідники). Філологічні студії. 2014. Вип. 10. С. 48-54.

8. Мишкуров Е.М. Герменевтико-перекладацький методологічний стандарт у дзеркалі трансдисциплінарності. 2018. URL: https://article/hermenevtiko-perekladatskyi-metodologichy-standart-u-dzerkali-transdystsiplinarnosti

9. Мишкуров Е.М. Про «герменевтичний поворот» у сучасній теорії та методології перекладу (часть І). 2013. URL: https://article/pro-hermenevtychny-povorot-u-suchasniy-teorii-i-metodolohii-perekladu

10. Нурива Л.Х. До питання про перекладність. 2007. URL: https://article/do-pytannia-pro-perekladnist

11. Тимко Н.В. До питання передачі культурної специфіки тексту у перекладі. Лінгвістичні питання перекладу. 2010. № 1. С. 61-66.

12. ABBYLINGVO. URL: https://www.lingvolive.com/ua

13. 13 українських слів, які важко пояснити іноземцям. URL: https:/svoboda-kultura/13-slivukrayinskoyi-movy-iaki-ne-mayut'-tochnoho-perekladu-na-inshi-movy-1984565/

Размещено на Allbest.ru