Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository
The problem of language and meaning, which is a focal point in translation, is so very difficult to solve. Herein comes linguistics with a ready helping hand. Like Chomsky's 'competence' and 'performance', de Saussure's 'langue' and 'parole' have invited may queries in the field of translation studies. While de Sausssare's 'langue' and 'parole' could mean written and spoken language respectively, Chomsky's 'competence' and 'performance' could, by analogy, mean the ability to translate and the actual process of translating. But the sharp distinction between 'langue' and 'parole' and/or 'competence' and 'performance' does very little to help in the on-going process of translation theorizing. On the conceptual level, translation involves theoretical and pedagogical aspects. Both aspects merge in translating. Graham further explains this point in the following statement: "in very simple terms, it could be argued that for ordinary langauge use you do not really have to know what to do but only how to do it, whereas for translation the 'what' is or soon becomes the 'how', with competence turned into performance quite openly and easily." (Translation Spectrum: 1981, p28) The language-oriented approach to translation is founded on the conception of language as an objective code with demonstrable structure. Consequently, grammatical transfer, being the distinctive feature of this approach, is over-emphasised. A comparative study of 68
the grammars of both SL and TL texts apparently becomes the only means of translation accomplishment. Simon Chau, in "How to Translate 'This is a Red Rose'", suggests two methods of accomplishing grammatical translation. The traditional grammar method instructs the translator to search for the "correct target language (TL) equivalent lexicon/sentence via grammar". With the emergence of structural linguistics, translation educators developed the Formal Linguistic Method, according to which translation is considered a branch of Applied Linguistics. While traditional grammar is prescriptive, formal grammar is descriptive. Chau explains that, "While traditional grammar subjectively defines classes and assigns rules for language based on meaning, formal grammar does so objectively, based on a structural analysis of the phonology, morphology, and syntax of a language." The translation student is made fully aware of the formal features that distinguish the SL from the TL text. For example, the differences of gender are shown between many words in German and French, but in English these differences are rare except in pronouns. German has three genders: masculine, feminine and neuter. Arabic has only two: masculine and feminine. While in Arabic 'sun' is feminine and 'moon' masculine, in English it is the other way round. Typical formal features help bridge the structural gaps between any two languages. 2. THE CROSS-CULTURAL APPROACH The cross-cultural approach to translation is the outcome of a view of language which defines meaning in terms of cultural fields and 6 9
- 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 and 48: claims, "free from the formal conta
- Page 49 and 50: to a certain system, to another sem
- 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: intersemiotic - springs from and po
- 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 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
the grammars <strong>of</strong> both SL and TL texts apparently becomes the only means<br />
<strong>of</strong> translation accomplishment. Simon Chau, in "How to Translate 'This<br />
is a Red Rose'", suggests two methods <strong>of</strong> accomplishing grammatical<br />
translation. The traditional grammar method instructs the translator<br />
to search for the "correct target language (TL) equivalent<br />
lexicon/sentence via grammar". With the emergence <strong>of</strong> structural<br />
linguistics, translation educators developed the Formal Linguistic<br />
Method, according to which translation is considered a branch <strong>of</strong><br />
Applied Linguistics. While traditional grammar is prescriptive, formal<br />
grammar is descriptive. Chau explains that, "While traditional grammar<br />
subjectively defines classes and assigns rules for language based on<br />
meaning, formal grammar does so objectively, based on a structural<br />
analysis <strong>of</strong> the phonology, morphology, and syntax <strong>of</strong> a language." The<br />
translation student is made fully aware <strong>of</strong> the formal features that<br />
distinguish the SL from the TL text. For example, the differences <strong>of</strong><br />
gender are shown between many words in German and French, but in<br />
English these differences are rare except in pronouns. German has<br />
three genders: masculine, feminine and neuter. Arabic has only two:<br />
masculine and feminine. While in Arabic 'sun' is feminine and 'moon'<br />
masculine, in English it is the other way round. Typical formal<br />
features help bridge the structural gaps between any two languages.<br />
2. THE CROSS-CULTURAL APPROACH<br />
The cross-cultural approach to translation is the outcome <strong>of</strong> a<br />
view <strong>of</strong> language which defines meaning in terms <strong>of</strong> cultural fields and<br />
6 9
Change language