So, there are always two texts during translation, and one of them is initial and is created independently on the second one, and the second text is created on the basis of the first one with the help of some certain operations - the inter language transformations. The first text is called “the text of original"; the second text is called “the text of translation". The language of the text of original is called “ the source language” (SL). The language of the text of translation is called “ the target language” (TL). [10; 97]
We need to define the most important thing: why do we consider that the text of translation is equivalent to the text of original? For example, why do we speak that the Russian sentence “Мой брат живет в Лондоне" is the translation of the English sentence “My brother lives in London", while the Russian sentence “Я учусь в университете” is not the translation of the English sentence given above - to say in other words - is not equivalent to it? Obviously, the replacement of the text in one language by the text in the other language is not always the translation. The same idea can be expressed in the other way: the process of translation or the inter language transformation is realised not arbitrary, but with the help of some certain rules, in some strict frameworks. And if we do not observe this rules we have already no rights to speak about translation. To have the rights to be called the translation, the text on TL should contain in it something that the text on SL contains. Or else, while replacing the text on SL by the text on TL it is necessary to keep some certain invariant; the measure of keeping of this invariant defines by itself the measure of the equivalence of the text of translation to the text of original. So, first of all, it is necessary to define what is the invariant in the process of translation, that is in the process of transformation of the text on SL in the text on TL. [10; 176]
At the decision of this problem it is necessary to take in account the following. The process of translation directly depends on bilateral character of a mark, as it is called in a mark systems science - semiotics - It means that any mark can be characterised from two sides, or plans the plan of expression or form and the plan of contents or meaning. It is known that the language is a specific mark system, that is why the units of language are also characterised by the presence of two plans, both form and meaning. Thus the main role for translation is played by that fact that different languages contain different units and this units differ from each other in the way of expression, that is by the form, but they are similar in the way of the contents, that is by the meaning. For example, the English word "brother" differs from Russian word “брат" in the way of the expression, but coincides with it in the way of the contents, that is has the same meaning. [11; 312]
|
|
The English word "brother" has not only the meaning “брат" but also some meanings expressed in Russian language by the words “собрат", “земляк", “коллега”, “приятель" etc. And the Russian word “брат" in the combination “двоюродный брат” corresponds not to the English word "brother", but to the word "cousin", which means not only “двоюродный брат” but also “двоюродная сестра". This phenomenon, namely, the incomplete concurrence of systems of meanings of units in different languages, complicates the process translation. Taking in account this fact we can say, that if we replace the English word "brother" by the Russian word “брат", the process of translation takes place here, as these words, differing in the way of expression, that is by the form, coincide or are equivalent in the way of the contents, that is by the meaning. Actually, however, as the minimal text is the sentence, the process of translation is always realised in the limits of minimum one sentence. And in the sentence, as a rule, the discrepancy between the units of different languages in the way of the contents is eliminated. Proceeding from this, we can give now the following definition of the translation:
The translation is the process of transformation of the speech product in one language into the speech product in the other language by keeping the constant plan of the contents, that is the meanings.
About “ the keeping of the constant plan of the contents” it is possible to speak only in the relative, but not in the absolute sense. During the inter language transformation some losses are inevitable, that is the incomplete transference of meanings, expressed by the text of the original, is taking place. [10; 29]
So, the text of translation can never be complete and absolute equivalent of the text of original; the task of the interpreter is to make this equivalence as complete as it is possible, that is to achieve the minimum of losses. It means, that one of the tasks of the theory of translation is the establishment of the order of transference of meanings. Taking into account that there are various types of meanings, it is necessary to establish which of them have the advantages during the transference in the process of translation, and which of them it is possible “to endow" so that the semantic losses would be minimal while translating.
To finish the consideration of the question about the essence of translation, it is necessary to answer one question yet. This question arises from the definition of translation equivalence based on the keeping of the constant plan of the contents, that is the meaning, given above. It was already marked that the opportunity of keeping of plan of the contents, that is the invariance of meanings while translating, assumes that in the different languages there are some units that are similar in the way of meaning.
|
|
The divergence in the semantic systems of different languages is a certainty fact and it is the source of numerous difficulties arising before the interpreter in the process of translation.
That is why, many researchers consider that the equivalence of the original and the translation is not based on the identity of expressed meanings. From the numerous statements on this theme we shall quote only one, belonging to the English theorist of translation J. Ketford: “ … The opinion that the text on SL and the text on TL “have the same meaning" or that there is “a carry of meaning" while translating, have no bases. From our point of view, the meaning is the property of the certain language. The text on SL have the meaning peculiar to TL; for example, the Russian text has Russian meaning, and the English text, that is the equivalent of it, has the English meaning. [12; 120]
For the benefit of translation it is possible to state the following arguments:
In the system of meanings of any language the results of human experience are embodied, that is the knowledge that the man receives about the objectively existing reality.
In any language, the system of language meanings reflects the whole external world of the man, and his own internal world too, that is the whole practical experience of the collective, speaking the given language, is fixed. As the reality, environmental different language collectives, has much more than common features, than distinguishes, so the meanings of different languages coincide in a much more degree, than they miss. The other thing is that these meanings (the units of sense or “semes’) are differently combined, grouped and expressed in different languages: but it concerns already not to the plan of the contents but to the plan of the language expression.
The greatest difficulties during translation arise when the situation described in the text on
SL is absent in the experience of language collective - the carrier of TL, otherwise, when in the initial text the so-called “realities” are described, that is different subjects and phenomena specific to the given people or the given country.
The ability to describe new unfamiliar situations is the integral property of any language; and this property makes what we speak about to be possible.
The translation was determined above as the process of transformation of speech product in one language into the speech product in the other language. Thus, the interpreter deals not with the languages as the systems, but with the speech products, that is with the texts. Those semantic divergences, that is in the meanings, which we are talking about, concern, first of all, to systems of different languages; in the speech these divergences very often are neutralised, erased, brought to nothing.
|
|
The concrete distribution of elementary units of sense (“semes" or semantic units) on separate words, word combinations or sentences of the given text is defined by the numerous and complex factors. And, as a rule, it does not coincide in the text on SL and text on TL. But it concerns not to the plan of the contents, but to the plan of expression and is not the infringement of a principle of semantic equivalence of the texts of original and the text of translation. [15; 65]
Last give an example to prove the fact given above. In the story of the known English writer S. Moem “A Casual Affair " we can see the following sentence: " He'd always been so spruce and smart; he was shabby and unwashed and wild-eyed ". This is the Russian variant of this sentence: "Прежде он был таким щеголем, таким элегантным, а теперь бродил по улицам Сингапура грязный, в лохмотьях, с одичалым взглядом. (translation of Litvinova M) On the first sight the Russian text do not seems to be the equivalent to the English one: there are such words as "прежде, а теперь, бродил по улицам Сингапура" in it, which have not the direct conformities in the text of original. But really, the semantic equivalence is available here, though here are no verbal equivalence, of course. The thing is that the Russian words “прежде" and “а теперь” transfer the meanings, which are expressed not by the words, but by the grammatical forms in the English text: the opposition of the forms of the verb "to be" -“had been” and “was” expresses that the first event is taking place before the second one, which has the logical expression through adverbs of time in Russian language. [10; 90]
Words “бродил по улицам Сингапура" transfer the semantic information, which the initial English text contains too, but in one of the previous sentences, not in the given sentence (He didn't been the job in Sumatra long and he was back again in Singapore). So, the semantic equivalence is provided not between the separate words and even not between the separate sentences here, but between the whole text on SL and the whole text on TL as a whole. [12; 37]
So, the semantic divergences between the languages can not serve as the insuperable obstacle for the translation, by virtue of that circumstance, that the translation deals with the languages not as the abstract systems, but with the concrete speech products (texts). And in their limits there is the complex interlacing and interaction of qualitatively diverse language means being the expressions of meanings - of words, grammatical forms, and "super signments" means, transmitting this or that semantic information together. That semantic equivalence of the texts of the original and the text of translation, which we regard as the necessary condition of the process of translation, exists not between the separate elements of these texts, but between the texts as a whole. And inside the given text the numerous regroupings, rearrangement and redistribution of separate elements are not only allowed, but frequently they are simply inevitable, (" translation transformations "). So, while translating, there is a strict rule - the principle of submission of elements to the whole, of the lowest units to the highest. [16; 176]
Types of translation
Though the basic characteristics of translation can be observed in all translation events, different types of translation can be singled out depending on the predominant communicative function of the source text or the form of speech involved in the translation process. Thus we can distinguish between literary and informative translation, on the one hand, and between written and oral translation (or interpretation), on the other hand. [18; 251]
Literary translation deals with literary texts, i. e. works of fiction or poetry whose main function is to make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Their communicative value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic quality and the translator's primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.
Informative translation is rendering into the target language non-literary texts, the main purpose of which is to convey a certain amount of ideas, to inform the reader. However, if the source text is of some length, its translation can be listed as literary or informative only as an approximation. A literary text may, in fact, include some parts of purely informative character. Contrariwise, informative translation may comprise some elements aimed at achieving an aesthetic effect. Within each group further gradations can be made to bring out more specific problems in literary or informative translation. [2,7; 34,97]
Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary translations may be subdivided in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific arrangement and makes use of specific artistic means to impress the reader. Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems. Each of these forms of literary activities comprises a number of subgenres and the translator may specialize in one or some of them in accordance with his talents and experience. The particular tasks inherent in the translation of literary works of each genre are more literary than linguistic. The great challenge to the translator is to combine the maximum equivalence and the high literary merit. [5,10; 34,49]
The translator of a belles-lettres text is expected to make a careful study of the literary trend the text belongs to, the other works of the same author, the peculiarities of his individual style and manner and sn on. This involves both linguistic considerations and skill in literary criticism. A good literary translator must be a versatile scholar and a talented writer or poet.
A number of subdivisions can be also suggested for informative translations, though the principles of classification here are somewhat different. Here we may single out translations of scientific and technical texts, of newspaper materials, of official papers and some other types of texts such as public speeches, political and propaganda materials, advertisements, etc., which are, so to speak, intermediate, in that there is a certain balance between the expressive and referential functions, between reasoning and emotional appeal. [13; 21]
Translation of scientific and technical materials has a most important role to play in our age of the revolutionary technical progress. There is hardly a translator or an interpreter today who has not to deal with technical matters. Even the "purely" literary translator often comes across highly technical stuff in works of fiction or even in poetry. An in-depth theoretical study of the specific features of technical translation is an urgent task of translation linguistics while training of technical translators is a major practical problem.
In technical translation the main goal is to identify the situation described in the original. The predominance of the referential function is a great challenge to the translator who must have a good command of the technical terms and a sufficient understanding of the subject matter to be able to give an adequate description of the situation even if this is not fully achieved in the original. The technical translator is also expected to observe the stylistic requirements of scientific and technical materials to make text acceptable to the specialist.
Some types of texts can be identified not so much by their positive distinctive features as by the difference in their functional characteristics in the two languages. English newspaper reports differ greatly from their Russian counterparts due to the frequent use of colloquial, slang and vulgar elements, various paraphrases, eye-catching headlines, etc. [17; 58]
When the translator finds in a newspaper text the headline "Minister bares his teeth on fluoridation" which just means that this minister has taken a resolute stand on the matter, he will think twice before referring to the minister's teeth in the Russian translation. He would rather use a less expressive way of putting it to avoid infringement upon the accepted norms of the Russian newspaper style.
Apart from technical and newspaper materials it may be expedient to single out translation of official diplomatic papers as a separate type of informative translation. These texts make a category of their own because of the specific requirements to the quality of their translations. Such translations are often accepted as authentic official texts on a par with the originals. They are important documents every word of which must be carefully chosen as a matter of principle. That makes the translator very particular about every little meaningful element of the original which he scrupulously reproduces in his translation. This scrupulous imitation of the original results sometimes in the translator more readily erring in literality than risking to leave out even an insignificant element of the original contents.
Journalistic (or publicistic) texts dealing with social or political matters are sometimes singled out among other informative materials because they may feature elements more commonly used in literary text (metaphors, similes and other stylistic devices) which cannot but influence the translator's strategy. More often, however, they are regarded as a kind of newspaper materials (periodicals).
There are also some minor groups of texts that can be considered separately because of the specific problems their translation poses to the translator. They are film scripts, comic strips, commercial advertisements and the like. In dubbing a film the translator is limited in his choice of variants by the necessity to fit the pronunciation of the translated words to the movement of the actor's lips.
Translating the captions in a comic strip, the translator will have to consider the numerous allusions to the facts well-known to the regular readers of comics but less familiar to the Russian readers. And in dealing with commercial advertisements he must bear in mind that their sole purpose is to win over the prospective customers. Since the text of translation will deal with quite a different kind of people than the original advertisement was meant for, there is the problem of achieving the same pragmatic effect by introducing the necessary changes in the message. Though the present manual is concerned with the problems of written translation from English into Russian, some remarks should be made about the obvious classification of translations as written or oral. As the names suggest, in written translation the source text is in written form, as is the target text. In oral translation or interpretation the interpreter listens to the oral presentation of the original and translates it as an oral message in TL. As a result, in the first case the Receptor of the translation can read it while in the second case he hears it.
There are also some intermediate types. The interpreter rendering his translation by word of mouth may have the text of the original in front of him and translate it “at sight". A written translation can be made of the original recorded on the magnetic tape that can be replayed as many times as is necessary for the translator to grasp the original meaning. The translator can dictate his “at sight" translation of a written text to the typist or a short-hand writer with TR getting the translation in written form. [20; 54]
These are all, however, modifications of the two main types of translation. The line of demarcation between written and oral translation is drawn not only because of their forms but also because of the sets of conditions in which the process takes place. The first is continuous, the other momentary. In written translation the original can be read and re-read as many times as the translator may need or like. The same goes for the final product. The translator can re-read his translation, compare it to the original, make the necessary corrections or start his work all over again. He can come back to the preceding part of the original or get the information he needs from the subsequent messages. These are most favourable conditions and here we can expect the best performance and the highest level of equivalence. That is why in theoretical discussions we have usually examples from written translations where the translating process can be observed in all its aspects.
The conditions of oral translation impose a number of important restrictions on the translator's performance. Here the interpreter receives a fragment of the original only once and for a short period of time. His translation is also a one-time act with no possibility of any return to the original or any subsequent corrections. This creates additional problems and the users have sometimes; to be content with a lower level of equivalence. [19; 32]
There are two main kinds of oral translation - consecutive and simultaneous. In consecutive translation the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it has been completed. Here the interpreter's strategy and the final results depend, to a great extent, on the length of the segment to be translated. If the segment is just a sentence or two the interpreter closely follows the original speech. As often as not, however, the interpreter is expected to translate a long speech which has lasted for scores of minutes or even longer. In this case he has to remember a great number of messages and keep them in mind until he begins his translation. To make this possible the interpreter has to take notes of the original messages, various systems of notation having been suggested for the purpose. The study of, and practice in, such notation is the integral part of the interpreter's training as are special exercises to develop his memory. [14107]
Sometimes the interpreter is set a time limit to give his rendering, which means that he will have to reduce his translation considerably, selecting and reproducing the most important parts of the original and dispensing with the rest.
This implies the ability to make a judgement on the relative value of various messages and to generalize or compress the received information. The interpreter must obviously be a good and quickwitted thinker.
In simultaneous interpretation the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his translation while the speaker is uttering the original message. This can be achieved with a special radio or telephone-type equipment. The interpreter receives the original speech through his earphones and simultaneously talks into the microphone which transmits his translation to the listeners. This type of translation involves a number of psycholinguistic problems, both of theoretical and practical nature.