Prace komisji nauk.pdf - Instytut Filologii Angielskiej Uniwersytetu ...
Prace komisji nauk.pdf - Instytut Filologii Angielskiej Uniwersytetu ... Prace komisji nauk.pdf - Instytut Filologii Angielskiej Uniwersytetu ...
This, again, proves that there are no fixed rules for song translation due to the impossibility of locating song translation on the scale between the rendition of its literary aspects (translating poetry) and the accurate recreation of musical effects (vocal translation). It gives the translator much freedom and thus translating song lyrics can be referred to as free translation (Robinson 1998a). Moreover, the translator may focus on the recreation of only a few chosen elements of the original, e.g. only the musical aspects of the lyrics. This ensures a recognizable relation between the source and target text, but only on the level of those particular facets. Robinson (1998b: 111) calls such a strategy imitation. Other inaccuracies and controversies in translating song lyrics concern equivalence. Equivalence is usually defined as a link between the source text and the target text which ensures the recognition of the target text (or its parts) as a translation of the original (or its parts). The concept of equivalence gets complicated when referring to literary translation and especially poetic translation and the translation of song lyrics because of the need to convey the various significant aspects of the source text. Therefore, different typologies of equivalence may be useful with reference to song translation. The most general and the safest definition of equivalence is supplied by Kołakowski (2007), who regards it as the sameness of the value of the elements rendered in the process of translation. His interpretation can be applicable to any type of literary translation, including song translation as well. A more specific approach is proposed by Chesterman (1996). He discusses the sameness of image and conceptualization, i.e. “a kind of stylistic-semantic equivalence” (Chesterman 1996: 9). This gives priority to the rendition of the content and style of the original. The Polish translators of song lyrics, e.g. Talarczyk (2007) and Porzuczek (2008), assert that the stylistic-semantic equivalence guarantees the rendition of an effect comparable to that of the original. 226
Such a viewpoint overlaps with Pisarska and Tomaszkiewicz’s (1996: 188) notion of affective equivalence and Nida and Taber’s (1969) dynamic equivalence. Both of these aim at the “intelligibility of the translation… measured in terms of the total impact the message has on the one who receives it” (Nida & Taber 1969: 22). A translators’ task is then to capture the spirit of the original and convey the author’s intention as a consequence of their rational (the intention) and intuitive (the effect) actions (Pisarska & Tomaszkiewicz 1996: 188). The major difference between the Polish translators’ view and affective/dynamic equivalence lies in the elements of the source text that a song translator renders. As regards the semantic-stylistic equivalence approach, the focus is on the conveyance of style and content of the original and the ensuing sameness of effect. The notion of affective/dynamic equivalence highlights the fact that the proper rendition of the source text’s content and style is often impossible because of the numerous constraints. Therefore, the emphasis is put on the sameness or similarity of the impact on the listener achieved by a freer rendition of the elements of the source text, i.e. its content. The main flaw of affective/dynamic equivalence is its vagueness. It is based on the recreation of the effect of the text and its impact on the receiver, i.e. the aesthetic and emotional experience evoked by the original on the source culture audience. The responses of the source culture audience to the original and the target culture audience to its translation cannot be measured or explored in any way and thus, are impossible to be compared. A separate issue related to the character of song translation concerns the number of source texts that the target text is based on. Normally, one text serves as a source in the process of translation. The situation in which an original text (especially the literary one) has more than one version is unusual in itself, not to mention considering the different accounts in devising one version of the target 227
- Page 176 and 177: trzeba zauwaŜyć, iŜ pierwszy - D
- Page 178 and 179: 178
- Page 180 and 181: Let us consider the status of speci
- Page 182 and 183: Whereas, this traditional and simpl
- Page 184 and 185: Adjective Phrases can function as c
- Page 186 and 187: There is still one important type o
- Page 188 and 189: teachers is base-generated and that
- Page 190 and 191: Literature Abraham, Werner, Samuel
- Page 192 and 193: zaprezentować ideologicznie sprepa
- Page 194 and 195: aktach zbiorowych, zachowuje cechy
- Page 196 and 197: C1/C3/B (odległa historia/wiedza o
- Page 198 and 199: Wnioski W kaŜdym badaniu dyskursu,
- Page 200 and 201: 200
- Page 202 and 203: sprawozdawca będzie uŜywał inneg
- Page 204 and 205: chociaŜ w pewnym stopniu scharakte
- Page 206 and 207: UŜycie przywołanych w powyŜszych
- Page 208 and 209: Odnośniki do bliskiej historii Ten
- Page 210 and 211: przeanalizował transmisję tego sa
- Page 212 and 213: mecze z dwóch amerykańskich lig (
- Page 214 and 215: Mecz 2 Drugie analizowane spotkanie
- Page 216 and 217: Dlatego teŜ w analizie tego spotka
- Page 218 and 219: W powyŜszych informacji wynika, Ŝ
- Page 220 and 221: Komentatorzy nie chcą juŜ poświ
- Page 222 and 223: former include e.g. rhythm or metre
- Page 224 and 225: frame of musical limitations must b
- Page 228 and 229: text. The case of altering versions
- Page 230 and 231: target text becomes useless, even i
- Page 232 and 233: Raffel, Burton (1998) The Art of Tr
- Page 234 and 235: externalized semiotic materiality a
- Page 236 and 237: 2) abduction considered as inferenc
- Page 238 and 239: or symbolic behavior. If we conside
- Page 240 and 241: separated cognitive domain, that of
- Page 242 and 243: A wonderful example of meaning crea
- Page 244 and 245: 4.1. External and Internal Represen
- Page 246 and 247: In the following section I will ill
- Page 248 and 249: Recognizing in a series of material
- Page 250 and 251: ecome signs when we think and inter
- Page 252 and 253: its face is also an interpretant. P
- Page 254 and 255: Peirce considers inferential any co
- Page 256 and 257: phenomena clearly demonstrate they
- Page 258 and 259: (Piaget, 1974), or when we are in p
- Page 260 and 261: If a manipulative action performed
- Page 262 and 263: environment, where mind has objecti
- Page 264 and 265: thoughts, proves that man is a sign
- Page 266 and 267: Brent, J. (2000) “A Brief Introdu
- Page 268 and 269: Kant, I., ([1770] 1968) Inaugural D
- Page 270 and 271: Norman, D.A. (1993) Things that Mak
- Page 272 and 273: 272
- Page 274 and 275: W największym skrócie istotę nie
Such a viewpoint overlaps with Pisarska and Tomaszkiewicz’s (1996: 188)<br />
notion of affective equivalence and Nida and Taber’s (1969) dynamic equivalence.<br />
Both of these aim at the “intelligibility of the translation… measured in terms of<br />
the total impact the message has on the one who receives it” (Nida & Taber 1969:<br />
22). A translators’ task is then to capture the spirit of the original and convey the<br />
author’s intention as a consequence of their rational (the intention) and intuitive<br />
(the effect) actions (Pisarska & Tomaszkiewicz 1996: 188).<br />
The major difference between the Polish translators’ view and<br />
affective/dynamic equivalence lies in the elements of the source text that a song<br />
translator renders. As regards the semantic-stylistic equivalence approach, the focus<br />
is on the conveyance of style and content of the original and the ensuing sameness<br />
of effect. The notion of affective/dynamic equivalence highlights the fact that the<br />
proper rendition of the source text’s content and style is often impossible because<br />
of the numerous constraints. Therefore, the emphasis is put on the sameness or<br />
similarity of the impact on the listener achieved by a freer rendition of the elements<br />
of the source text, i.e. its content.<br />
The main flaw of affective/dynamic equivalence is its vagueness. It is based<br />
on the recreation of the effect of the text and its impact on the receiver, i.e. the<br />
aesthetic and emotional experience evoked by the original on the source culture<br />
audience. The responses of the source culture audience to the original and the target<br />
culture audience to its translation cannot be measured or explored in any way and<br />
thus, are impossible to be compared.<br />
A separate issue related to the character of song translation concerns the<br />
number of source texts that the target text is based on. Normally, one text serves as<br />
a source in the process of translation. The situation in which an original text<br />
(especially the literary one) has more than one version is unusual in itself, not to<br />
mention considering the different accounts in devising one version of the target<br />
227
Change language