Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository

The rhetorical model sets out to resolve the form-content
dichotomy. The translator should strongly adhere to the obligatory
meaning expressed in the source text. However, he can modify both
extended and accessory meanings to achieve a particular rhetorical
effect. He is not authorized or even entitled to make the slightest
modifications in the structure of the semantic content of the source
message, otherwise he will have violated the basic translational norm,
ie. objectivity. If, on the other hand, he takes full liberty to make
whatever modifications he chooses -as hermeneuticist translators often
do - his rendition of the source text will be anything other than
translation proper. Unlike obligatory meaning, extended and accessory
meanings yield a much wider scope for maneuverability. Tactful
maneuverability, though it is bound to impinge on the surface structure
of the source text, does not necessarily violate its semantic
integrity.
Despite the various classifications of langauge functions, one
cannot arbitrarily segment a single instance of language into a
constellation of un-related, disconnected meanings. The experiential,
interpersonal, ideational, and/or textual functions of langauge are so
inextricably intersewn into the fabric of discourse that it is hardly
possible to dissociate the one from the other. To understand a
discourse and subsequently render it in another language, one must view
it as a whole without endeavouring to assign a specific function to
each constituent discoursal element. The discourse is not an
artificial string of un-related units, each assuming an arbitrarily
117