Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
translation. In like manner, the reader's linguistic and literary competence, his cultural background, and his intellectual make-up will undoubtedly affect his comprehension and, consequently reaction to the text in question. But this should not entitle the reader, whatever reading strategy he may implement, to drastically alter, modify, or change the semantic entity of the original text. In his unbridled intellectual and analytical exploits, the reader should not lose sight of the meaning content of the source text. He may, however, modify the form to fulfil the linguistic and stylistic requirements of the target language. But technically speaking, the meaning of the source should remain intact. The range of human knowledge is immeasurably limitless. Equally infinite is the range of human experience. Drawing upon Coropora of data available in the cosmos, man's inquisitive mind thought out speculations and suppositions, worked out theorems and tested theories before scoring gigantic achievements on scientific and non-scientific levels. In this age-old process, old concepts died and new ones were born. But do concepts actually die? No; they are modified, reformulated, and re-orientated to cope with the changing circumstances. Concepts, unlike objects, are universal. They need to be universalised through cross-cultural communication. Communication of what?, one may ask. The answer could not be otherwise so explicit; Communication of meanings extracted from available cosmic data. 96
Post-war linguists shifted their focus from the study of deep and surface structures to the study of natural languages. Instead of operating on a finite corpus of sentences, post-war structuralists focused on natural languages which have infinite sets of sentences. The goa10 of linguistics was, consequently, red-defined to analyse the native speaker's competence in understanding the language. Understanding a text and the communication process which emerges therefrom depend •on how the text is read. Therefore, text interpretation relies largely on text manipulation. In an article on 'Prolegomena to a Theory of Reading' (in 'The Reader in the Text' (ed.) Susan R Suleiman and Inge Crossman, 1980, pp46-66), Jonathan Culler regards the study of reading as "... a way of investigating how works have the meaning they do, and it leaves entirely open the question of what kinds of meanings works have". The analyzability of meaning into various substructures aims at identifying meaning and not breaking up its intellectual and stylistic make-up. The text-reader relationship has been placed in a wider perspective. Hermenueticists advocate that a dialogue should be established between the reader and the text in which the reader manipulates the initial resources of the text to recreate, rather than translate, it anew. The reader will cease to act as an intermediary between the source author and the receptor readership. He will assume that authoritarian authorship of the created text not as a re- 97
- Page 57 and 58: concerning the communication situat
- Page 59 and 60: level of the individual sentence? B
- Page 61 and 62: In Europe, the linguistic analysis
- Page 63 and 64: demarcation lines between a sentenc
- Page 65 and 66: conditioned by the author's state o
- Page 67 and 68: elevant issues encountered in text-
- Page 69 and 70: features or goals with other texts
- Page 71 and 72: the source text, a step which comes
- Page 73 and 74: and confusing to obscure these diff
- Page 75 and 76: Translation is a relational concept
- Page 77 and 78: other replacement except what gramm
- Page 79 and 80: intersemiotic - springs from and po
- Page 81 and 82: the grammars of both SL and TL text
- Page 83 and 84: unbridgeable. Strategies to bridge
- Page 85 and 86: Moreover, the ability of both child
- Page 87 and 88: he understands the cultural pattern
- Page 89 and 90: to translation is unilaterally mean
- Page 91 and 92: to be considered translations? Is a
- Page 93 and 94: purposes. The transfer operation fo
- Page 95 and 96: In political discourses, however, p
- Page 97 and 98: language. Translations of medical,
- Page 99 and 100: are pragmatically a single text but
- Page 101 and 102: and 'relations' in terms of non-eva
- Page 103 and 104: dependent layers of pragmatic, semi
- Page 105 and 106: What matters more is the ways and m
- Page 107: (texte) is open, mobile, vibrating
- Page 111 and 112: personalities. He attributed this c
- Page 113 and 114: is interpretable form its language,
- Page 115 and 116: potential' of the source text be pr
- Page 117 and 118: Hatim's arbitrary distinction betwe
- Page 119 and 120: accessory meaning structures. Oblig
- Page 121 and 122: semantics and the speech act theory
- Page 123 and 124: Premised on a rigorous committment
- Page 125 and 126: implemented, will help him achieve
- Page 127 and 128: etween the translator as TL text-or
- Page 129 and 130: The rhetorical model sets out to re
- Page 131 and 132: SL text will have to be dismantled
- Page 133 and 134: consists of two words: 'istaktabtuh
- Page 135 and 136: The question of tense, which marks
- Page 137 and 138: B. SYNTACTIC CORRESPONDENCE Anyone
- Page 139 and 140: specific clause type in the recepto
- Page 141 and 142: lexical items in any language devel
- Page 143 and 144: The translator's exhaustive and pai
- Page 145 and 146: this is achieved, semantic equivale
- Page 147 and 148: agreement, and the verb/adverb prox
- Page 149 and 150: object. If, in English, the adverb
- Page 151 and 152: extracted from the text-supplied (l
- Page 153 and 154: identifiable in terms of its contri
- Page 155 and 156: In a literary text, the translator
- Page 157 and 158: as impressive or forceful as it is
translation. In like manner, the reader's linguistic and literary<br />
competence, his cultural background, and his intellectual make-up will<br />
undoubtedly affect his comprehension and, consequently reaction to the<br />
text in question. But this should not entitle the reader, whatever<br />
reading strategy he may implement, to drastically alter, modify, or<br />
change the semantic entity <strong>of</strong> the original text. In his unbridled<br />
intellectual and analytical exploits, the reader should not lose sight<br />
<strong>of</strong> the meaning content <strong>of</strong> the source text. He may, however, modify the<br />
form to fulfil the linguistic and stylistic requirements <strong>of</strong> the target<br />
language. But technically speaking, the meaning <strong>of</strong> the source should<br />
remain intact.<br />
The range <strong>of</strong> human knowledge is immeasurably limitless. Equally<br />
infinite is the range <strong>of</strong> human experience. Drawing upon Coropora <strong>of</strong><br />
data available in the cosmos, man's inquisitive mind thought out<br />
speculations and suppositions, worked out theorems and tested theories<br />
before scoring gigantic achievements on scientific and non-scientific<br />
levels. In this age-old process, old concepts died and new ones were<br />
born. But do concepts actually die? No; they are modified,<br />
reformulated, and re-orientated to cope with the changing<br />
circumstances. Concepts, unlike objects, are universal. They need to<br />
be universalised through cross-cultural communication. Communication<br />
<strong>of</strong> what?, one may ask. The answer could not be otherwise so explicit;<br />
Communication <strong>of</strong> meanings extracted from available cosmic data.<br />
96