Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto L

1
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do
PortoLínguas e Literaturas Modernas

• INTRODUCTION TO TRANSLATION STUDIES
• Power Point 8
• 24 October 2007

2
TASK (from Lesson 11)

• Search the net to find out more about Bible
  translation. What was the original language in
  which the Bible was written?
• Which language was the Bible first translated
  into ?
• Remember to note down the websites where you
  found your answers.

3
To achieve his scientific approach to T, Nida
resorts to linguistics

• Semantics (structural semantics)
• Pragmatics (language in use)
• Noam Chomskys generative-transformational grammar

4
A NEW CONCEPT OF (BIBLE) TRANSLATING

• Old Focus the form of the message
• NEW FOCUS
• The new focus, however, has shifted from the the
  form of the message to the response of the
  receptor. (. . .)
• Even the old question Is this a correct
  translation? must be answered in terms of another
  question, namely For whom? Correctness must be
  determined by the extent to which the average
  reader for which a translation is intended will
  be likely to understand it correctly.
• (Nida and Taber 1969 1)

5
Main innovations

• Pragmatic view of meaning a word acquires
  meaning in a specific communication context
• Referential (denotative or dictionary meaning)
  and connotative (emotive) meaning (emotional
  response evoked in the reader).
• Componential analysis (e.g., anthropology
  mapping of kinship terms in different cultures)
• Semantic structure analysis

6
Noam Chomsky (1928) (MIT)

• http//www.chomsky.info/
• http//web.mit.edu/linguistics/www/chomsky.home.ht
  ml
• Syntactic Structures, 1957
• Language is a system with underlying universal
  structures (kernel sentences) which become
  visible through surface structures.
• A limited n. of rules creates an infinite n. of
  utterances (mathematical model) by means of
  transformations.

7

• Nida and Taber 1969 39
• These restructured expressions are basically
  what many linguists call kernels that is to
  say, they are the basic structural elements out
  of which the language builds its elaborate
  surface structure. In fact, one of the most
  important insights coming from transformational
  grammar is the fact that in all languages there
  are half a dozen to a dozen basic structures out
  of which all the more elaborate formations are
  constructed by means of so-called
  transformations.

8

• What interests Nida and Taber, however, is
  back-transformation, because if we can reduce
  surface structures to kernel sentences, then the
  transfer into the other language will be
  easier.
• This is one justification for the claim that the
  three-stage process of translation is preferable
  (. . .) (ibidem, p.40)

9
3 stages (1) analysis, in which the surface
structure (i.e., the message as given in language
A) is analyzed in terms of (a) the grammatical
relationships and (b) the meaning of the words
and combinations of the words, (2) transfer, in
which the analyzed material is transferred in the
mind of the translator from language A to
language B, and (3) restructuring, in which the
transferred material is restructured in order to
make the final message fully acceptable in the
receptor language.
10
Formal equivalence

• Formal equivalence focuses attention on the
  message itself, in both form and content
  Nida 1964 159
• It is basically source oriented that is, it is
  designed to reveal as much as possible of the
  form and content of the original message (165)
• e.g., gloss translations (T is close to original
  in terms of structure)

11
Dynamic equivalent and the principle of
equivalent effect

• . . . What one must determine is the response of
  the receptor to the translated message. This
  response must then be compared with the way in
  which the original receptors presumably reacted
  to the message when it was given in its original
  setting. (Nida and Taber 1969 1)

12

• Dynamic equivalence is therefore to be defined
  in terms of the degree to which the receptors of
  the message in the receptor language respond to
  it in substiantially the same manner as the
  receptors in the source language. This response
  can never be identical, for the cultural and
  historical settings are too different, but there
  should be a high degree of equivalence of
  response, or the translation will have failed to
  accomplish its purpose.
• (Nida and Taber 1969 24)

13
Criticisms levelled at Nida

• Approach still focuses too much on word level
• Reader response is difficult, if not impossible,
  to measure (Newmark, House, van den Broeck)

14
Newmarks semantic and communicative translation

• These T methods are set out in two books
• Approaches to Translation (1981)
• A Textbook of Translation (1988)

15
SEMANTIC TRANSLATION

• Similar to Nidas formal equivalence
• SL emphasis
• It takes more account of the aesthetic value of
  the SL text, compromising on meaning where
  appropriate
• It is used for expressive texts
• Newmark 1988 46-47

16
COMMUNICATIVE TRANSLATION

• Communicative translation attempts to render the
  exact contextual meaning of the original in such
  a way that both content and language are readily
  acceptable and comprehensible to the readership.
• It is used for informative and vocative
  texts.
• It tends to be simple, clear and brief, and is
  always written in a natural and resourceful
  style.
• Newmark 1988 47-48

17
HOMEWORK (for 31 Oct.)

• Jeremy Munday
• Chapter 4 (special attention to Vinay and
  Darbelnet)