Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
distance such as 'close to, long way off, a day's trip... etc'; and event words of motion, eg. 'went, come, remove, shoved, cut down • • • etc.' Temporal relationships are marked by temporal conjunctions, eg. 'when, after, while, next morning, all day long . etc'; relative tenses, eg. 'future perfect, past perfect'; sequence of tense; and historical order of events. Logical relationships are marked by adverb conjunctions such as 'moreover, therefore, nevertheless, consequently, accordingly... etc'; conjunctions indicating conditionality, dependency, or causality such as 'if', 'although', and 'because' and lexical units indicating logical relationships, eg. 'argued that', 'concluded that', 'by inference', A poetic discourse is the most highly structured of all discourses. Its unique characteristic lies in its multi-layered parallelism in sound, morphological and syntactic patterns, lexical choices, and semantic structures. Sound parallelism implies devices such as alliteration, rhyme, assonance, rhythm, and intonational contours. It is actually this specific trait which requires a poet to translate a piece of poetry in another langauge. C. LEXICAL CORRESPONDENCE Languages differ considerably with regard to their lexes. Lexicographers have taken up the responsibility of setting lexicons to keep records of all lexical items in living languages. Lexical correspondence is a serious challenge for all translators because 128
lexical items in any language develop much more rapidly than can ever be expected. More words are coined and much more words assume different if not radical meaning. Scores of words and phrases are borrowed wholesale from other languages or from adjacent disciplines in the same language. The absorptive capacity of a given language, ie. its readiness to incorporate foreign lexical units, depends largely on the manipulatablity of its intrinsic language systems and subsystems to cope with newly emerging concepts in various disciplines. Complete lexical correspondence between any two languages, which is hardly achievable, poses an unbeatable challenge for translators. No two formally lexical items mean precisely the same. Even in one and the same langauge a single lexical item may possess a relatively wide semantic range. Lexical units derive their semantic significances and roles from their inner-relationships with preceding and succeeding units in the same linguistic neighbourhood. Furthermore,a lexical unit, if transplanted in another linguistic neighbourhood e would, for survival purposes, slightly modify its behaviour to fit in the new environment. Otherwise( it would eventually perish and die. Translators should be sensitive to the slight and formally imperceptible shades of meanings attached to lexical structures in continued discourse. What translators are expected to. be concerned with is the arduous attempt to seek in the receptor language a lexical item that would semantically match the formal lexical item in the source language. If such lexical formal correspondence proved practically unattainable, manufactured coinage and/or a foreign borrowing would be the only possible 129
- 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 and 108: (texte) is open, mobile, vibrating
- Page 109 and 110: Post-war linguists shifted their fo
- 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: specific clause type in the recepto
- 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
- Page 159 and 160: The rhetorical model is primarily a
- Page 161 and 162: apprehension, repulsiveness, or dis
- Page 163 and 164: (5) Once completed, leave the trans
- Page 165 and 166: literary, literary, and hybrid or f
- Page 167 and 168: I have mentioned earlier that textu
- Page 169 and 170: The second stanza opens with a nega
- Page 171 and 172: perceived. Only extensions of the o
- Page 173 and 174: one to whom the message is addresse
- Page 175 and 176: flies and horse-flies fill the air
- Page 177 and 178: The same meaning is further develop
- Page 179 and 180: emember a friend of my son's", the
- Page 181 and 182: The same meaning is extended in the
- Page 183 and 184: immediately answered. The reader is
- Page 185 and 186: incident known in Islamic history a
- Page 187 and 188: STATEMENT OF QUALITY As I have said
- Page 189 and 190: came, by God, in droves" is rather
lexical items in any language develop much more rapidly than can<br />
ever be expected. More words are coined and much more words assume<br />
different if not radical meaning. Scores <strong>of</strong> words and phrases are<br />
borrowed wholesale from other languages or from adjacent<br />
disciplines in the same language. The absorptive capacity <strong>of</strong> a<br />
given language, ie. its readiness to incorporate foreign lexical<br />
units, depends largely on the manipulatablity <strong>of</strong> its intrinsic<br />
language systems and subsystems to cope with newly emerging<br />
concepts in various disciplines. Complete lexical correspondence<br />
between any two languages, which is hardly achievable, poses an<br />
unbeatable challenge for translators. No two formally lexical<br />
items mean precisely the same. Even in one and the same langauge a<br />
single lexical item may possess a relatively wide semantic range.<br />
Lexical units derive their semantic significances and roles from<br />
their inner-relationships with preceding and succeeding units in<br />
the same linguistic neighbourhood. Furthermore,a lexical unit, if<br />
transplanted in another linguistic neighbourhood e would, for<br />
survival purposes, slightly modify its behaviour to fit in the new<br />
environment. Otherwise( it would eventually perish and die.<br />
Translators should be sensitive to the slight and formally<br />
imperceptible shades <strong>of</strong> meanings attached to lexical structures in<br />
continued discourse. What translators are expected to. be<br />
concerned with is the arduous attempt to seek in the receptor<br />
language a lexical item that would semantically match the formal<br />
lexical item in the source language. If such lexical formal<br />
correspondence proved practically unattainable, manufactured<br />
coinage and/or a foreign borrowing would be the only possible<br />
129
Change language