Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
(2) Interlingual translation, or translation proper, is an (3) interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other langauge. Intersemiotic translation, or transmutation, is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of non- verbal sign system." ('On Translation' edited by A Brower, 1959) Oral communication messages possess certain paralinguistic features such as pitch, intonation, speed of utterance, etc, which are unfound in written messages. Nevertheless, some such, or similar, features are deducible in written messages from punctuation marks which mark shifts of focus and identify meaning priorities. But it remains to be emphasized that the tonal quality of voice, facial expressions, pitch levels, and the positions of the body do enhance and expedite oral communication. Such paralinguistic features impress the immediate recipients of the oral message in a manner explicitly indicative of their role as active, inactive, or simply indifferent participants in the communicative event. Semio-poetics pushes communication a bit forward. Gideon Toury (1980, p12) regards communication as a process involving 'transfer' operations performed on one semiotic entity, belonging 36
to a certain system, to another semiotic entity, belonging to a different system. Such a process is fundamentally inter-semiotic or inter-textual. Despite the fact that either entity belongs to a different code, they both share one thing in common, transferable over the systemic or semiotic border. This thing in common, which Toury calls 'the invariant under transformation', is the core of all communication. Toury then postulates that the resultant entity has a twofold nature: (1) it is part of the semiotic system, the target or the receptor system to which it belongs; (2) it is the representation of another entity, belonging to another system, by virtue of the 'invariant' common to it and to the initial entity. Applied to translation, this intersystemic, intersemiotic, or inter-textual approach holds true, to a considerable extent, to the communication of a source message into the receptor language. The source message is the initial semiotic entity, whereas the target message is the resultant entity in another sign code. Both entities have one thing in common, that is, 'the invariant under transformation'. The operation performed on this invariant is one of transfer, usually entitled adequacy, equivalence, or correspondence, depending on the type and goal of the transfer. Communication, however, does not only imply the 'invariant' common to both source and receptor messages. It is a far broader concept than mere transfer. Toury adds a cross-cultural dimension to the communication process, re-defining communication as "the communication of verbal messages across a cultural-linguistic border". (ibid, p15) Translational communication involves not 37
- Page 1 and 2: TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT AN A
- Page 3 and 4: Lexical Correspondence. 128 Identif
- Page 5 and 6: ABSTRACT Translation quality assess
- Page 7 and 8: texts are identified before assessm
- Page 9 and 10: INTRODUCTION This thesis focuses on
- Page 11 and 12: components. However, more important
- Page 13 and 14: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS CHAPTER
- Page 15 and 16: translation quality assessment? Wor
- Page 17 and 18: elease Bayzantine prisoners in exch
- Page 19 and 20: should have a perfect knowledge of
- Page 21 and 22: translation was eventually cleared.
- Page 23 and 24: (2) The style and manner of writing
- Page 25 and 26: TL texts, and finally bring the rec
- Page 27 and 28: (3) Stylistic equivalence, where th
- Page 29 and 30: in two different languages cannot b
- Page 31 and 32: Neubert goes on to discuss the ways
- Page 33 and 34: Lotman (1976, pp153-96) argues that
- Page 35 and 36: (a) "the concept of translation equ
- Page 37 and 38: (structural) equivalences provided
- Page 39 and 40: equivalence obtaining between TT an
- Page 41 and 42: in various ways according to the ma
- Page 43 and 44: Roman Jakobson adds another three f
- Page 45 and 46: The communicative approach, of whic
- Page 47: claims, "free from the formal conta
- Page 51 and 52: (3) RECEPTORS The author of a text
- Page 53 and 54: Messages are linguistically set to
- Page 55 and 56: p192) In immediate interpersonal co
- 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,
(2) Interlingual translation, or translation proper, is an<br />
(3)<br />
interpretation <strong>of</strong> verbal signs by means <strong>of</strong> some other<br />
langauge.<br />
Intersemiotic translation, or transmutation, is an<br />
interpretation <strong>of</strong> verbal signs by means <strong>of</strong> signs <strong>of</strong> non-<br />
verbal sign system."<br />
('On Translation' edited by A Brower, 1959)<br />
Oral communication messages possess certain paralinguistic<br />
features such as pitch, intonation, speed <strong>of</strong> utterance, etc, which<br />
are unfound in written messages. Nevertheless, some such, or<br />
similar, features are deducible in written messages from<br />
punctuation marks which mark shifts <strong>of</strong> focus and identify meaning<br />
priorities. But it remains to be emphasized that the tonal quality<br />
<strong>of</strong> voice, facial expressions, pitch levels, and the positions <strong>of</strong><br />
the body do enhance and expedite oral communication. Such<br />
paralinguistic features impress the immediate recipients <strong>of</strong> the<br />
oral message in a manner explicitly indicative <strong>of</strong> their role as<br />
active, inactive, or simply indifferent participants in the<br />
communicative event.<br />
Semio-poetics pushes communication a bit forward. Gideon<br />
Toury (1980, p12) regards communication as a process involving<br />
'transfer' operations performed on one semiotic entity, belonging<br />
36
Change language