Hemza ZEGHAR
حمزة زغار.أ
M2 #Traductology
Lecture 1 Main points: 1. Paradigm (the linguistic paradigm). 2. Catford’s definition of translation. 3. Formal Correspondence vs Textual Equivalence 4. Shifts. 5. Untranslatability. 6. Metalanguage. 7. Radical Translation (Indeterminacy in Translation).
Since the definition of translation not only describes and interprets the basic properties of translation, but also determines its connotation and extension, it is the core and basic part of translation studies.
Paradigm In the field of translation studies, owing to the factors such as the interests of scholar, cultural and historical reasons, scholars usually choose a definition of translation as the research orientation in a certain period of time. That is, as a scholastic community, they study translation under the same paradigm. What is a paradigm ? According to Thomas Samuel Kuhn, a paradigm originates from one or some famous people’s achievements, he maintains that achievements which share the following two characteristics can be referred to as paradigms: - firstly, the achievement is “sufficiently unprecedented to attract an enduring group of adherents away from competing modes of scientific activity”; - secondly, the achievement is “sufficiently open-ended to leave all sorts of problems for the redefined group of practitioners to solve” (Kuhn, 1962, 1970, p.10).
* Contemporary translation theories can be attributed to three paradigms. - Linguistic Paradigm. - Cultural Paradigm. - Social and Psychological Paradigm.
As the first paradigm and to some extent, the first stage, the linguistic paradigm demonstrates the role of translation from the perspective of language.
Catford’s Definition of Translation Catford attempts to describe translation in terms of a specific linguistic theory. In his opinion, the theory of translation is concerned with a relation between languages; therefore it is unseasonable to study translation without considering its relationship with linguistics, he believes that translation should be guided by linguistics. These ideas are best expressed in his work (A Linguistic Theory of Translation). In the beginning of the book, he proposes: “Translation is an operation performed on languages: a process of substituting a text in one language for a text in another. Clearly, then, any theory of translation must draw upon a theory of language— a general linguistic theory.” (Catford, 1965, p.1) He defines translation as: “the replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL)”
There are two key words in this definition: textual material and equivalent. To begin with textual material, it means only one level or some levels of a language and it is used here to stand for a part or some parts of the source text.
In normal conditions, it is quite difficult to translate an entire text, therefore, textual material, to some extent, reflects just a part or some parts of the source text for it is equivalent only on the level of lexis and grammar.
Formal Correspondence vs Textual Equivalence This raises the question of equivalence. In general, a TT is not a complete translation of its ST, but a replacement of the ST by TL equivalents, then what is the nature and conditions of translation equivalence, and how can we find the TL equivalents? Obviously, equivalence is the central task of the theory. In the same manner, Catford demonstrates equivalence from linguistic angle.
Catford makes a distinction between textual equivalence and formal correspondence. Textual equivalence is any TL text or portion of text which is observed on a particular occasion, to be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of text. A formal correspondent, on the other hand, is any TL category (units, class, structure, element of structure, etc.) which can be said to occupy, as nearly as possible, the ‘same’ place in the ‘economy’ of the TL as the given SL category occupies in the SL. (p. 27).
____________________________________________
The Need for Translation Shifts when Translating between Different Linguistic Systems According to Mona Baker, shifts in translation are necessary to overcome systemic differences.
Baker (1992) pointed out that transferring patterns of the ST into the TT likely produces an awkward translation. As stated in Bassnett’s book, Translation Studies, the translator “ [the translator ] frees the text from the fixed signs of its original shape making it no longer subordinate to the source text but visibly endeavoring to bridge the space between source author and text and the eventual target language readership” (2002, p. 6).
The translator is thus a mediator who, by shifting, made communication possible across languages and cultures.
SHIFTS Shifts are defined by Catford (1965: 73) as “departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL to the TL” (p. 73). Catford argues that there are two main types of translation shifts, namely: a) Level shifts where the SL item at one linguistic level (e.g. grammar) has a TL equivalent at a different level (e.g. lexis). For example, to express a progressive aspect in English, one can express it grammatically as in: -
He is reading a novel. He has been reading a novel. He will be reading a novel.
However, to express it in Arabic, which has no grammatical category for a progressive aspect, one can resort to lexical items and expressions, such as في- ما يزالل– النل-ل يزالل هذه الثناءلetc.
b) Category shifts which are divided into four types:
1 Structure shifts which involve a grammatical change between the structure of the ST and that of the TT. Consider the following example extracted from Samīra al-Māni‘ (1997: 7) in which an active voice is changed to a passive voice: ، تبعتها الخرى."أشارت فتاة كالخرساء بيدها للنافذة المطلة على الحديقة ل تستطيع النطق
".ثم الباقيات « A girl gestured with her hand at the window overlooking the garden, like a dumb person, unable to speak. She was followed by another girl, then by the others… » 2 Class shifts occur when a SL item is translated into a TL item which belongs to a different grammatical class (cf. Catford 1965). For example, there are a great number of verbs in Arabic that are best substituted with a linking verb (verb ‘to be’, ‘to feel’, ‘to become’, ‘to get’, etc.) plus an adjective in English, as in: be/feel happy فرح be/feel sad حزن ّ م/ سئم be/become bored ل be/feel thirsty عطش be/feel/become hungry ع َ جا be/become surprised اندهش be/become annoyed َانزعج be/become content َاقتنع be/become shy َ خجل be/become optimistic َتفاءل be/become pessimistic َتشاءم be/become excellent أجاد be patient تحلى بالصبر be/become tired َتعب be/feel sorry َأسف be/become/get angry غضب become/go bankrupt َأفلس be hurt/injured تأذى To explain, the following example extracted from a short story titled ‘التباسConfusion’ by Fu’ād al-Takarlī can be considered: فرحتمل بهل وقبلتموهل وفحصتموه... إمتل البيتل حبورا." كنتل فيل محنةل كبيرةل حينل أتيتم ".وشخصتم ضعفه الشديد وحاجته للغداء
« I was in deep distress when you arrived. The house was filled with joy. You were happy, you kissed him, examined him and diagnosed his severe weakness and need for food. » As can be seen, the verb فرحin فرحتمhas been translated into an adjective ‘happy’ preceded by verb ‘to be’ in the past, thus resulting in a ‘class shift’. Similarly, in the following example extracted from a short story titled القطارد الصاعددإلى ‘ بغدادThe Train Heading up to Baghdad’ by Mahmūd ‘Abdulwahhāb the nouns الملل ‘boredom’ and ‘ التعبtiredness’ have been rendered into adjectives ‘bored’ and ‘tired’ preceded by verb ‘to feel’ in the past, thereby leading to an example of ‘class shift’: "."أما السائق فما زال يهذي غير أنه بدأ يشعر بالملل والتعب « … while the driver was still raving on but he began to feel bored and tired … » To make this point clear, the following example extracted from a short story titled ثلث قصص ليستدللنشرThree Stories not for Publishing’ by ‘Abdulsattar Nāsir can be examined:
ل وتوجلامرأة،" ثمل وزعل الملكل نصفل أموالهل علىل الفقراءل والمعدمينل والمنافقينل والثرثارين ". وعاش الناس في فرح وابتهاج،أخرى على عرش المملكة « Then, the king distributed half of his wealth to the poor, the needy, the hypocrites and the gossips. He also crowned another queen to sit on the throne of the kingdom. The people lived in great happiness. » Here, in an attempt to avoid the use of what is called a ‘semantic repetition’ where two synonyms, or near synonyms, are employed by the language user in juxtaposition, the translators have opted for changing the noun ‘ ابتهاجلjoy’ to an adjective ‘great’, thus resulting in a ‘class shift’. It is worth mentioning that what is called a ‘class shift’ by Catford (1965) is labelled ‘transposition’ by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958/1995).
3 Unit shifts or rank shifts which involve changes in rank, such as translating a word, a phrase in one language into a phrase, sentence, etc. in another or the other way round. Consider this example quoted from a short story titled الشباكدوالساحةThe Window and the Courtyard’ by Mahmūd ‘Abdulwahhāb where the sentence lends itself to one word, i.e. ‘to tiptoe’: ،لو بحذر، وسارت على طرفي قدمها قامت من مقعدها بهدوء،" وأغلقت ضلفة الشباك اليمنى ".ووجهها صوبه ثم أغلقت باب الغرفة وراءها
« She got up quietly from her seat, and closed the right side of the window, and tiptoed carefully, her face towards him and then closed the door behind her. » 4 Intra-system shifts where the SL and TL possess systems which approximately correspond formally as to their constitution, but the translator resorts to selecting a non-corresponding term in the TL system. As an illustration, the following example taken from a short story titled ‘ الزرThe Button’ by Ali Muhammad Al-Ja'ki may be considered: لمل يكنل فيل حسبانيل أنهل سيناملبكامل..." أدارل وجههل ناحيةل الجدارل فواجهنيل بظهرهل العريضل ل يفصلل بينهمالصوان،ل لكنهمال قريبانل منل بعضهما، كلنال ينامل فيل سريرل خشبيل منفرد...ملبسهل ".ملبس أعرج
« He turned his face towards the wall, his wide back facing towards me. It hadn’t occurred to me that he would sleep with all his clothes on… We each slept on a single wooden bed. They were close to each other, separated by a broken wardrobe … » As can be seen, in كلنالينامwhich has been translated into a simple past tense slept, there is an example of 'intra-system shift to use Catford's (1965) terminology. To explain, although the morphological tense in كلنالينامis in the present, the emphasis is placed on a specific period in the past as there is an implicit كان, i.e. كلناد كاندنائماwe both were sleeping. By the effect of this implicit كان, the emphasis is shifted from the beginning and end of the event of sleeping towards the middle phase, thus presenting the event as an ongoing activity. Had the translators taken this into account. they would have suggested a rendering of the following kind: we were sleeping .....
Untranslatability (Linguistic Unranslatability) (Cultural Untranslatability) _________________________ Metalanguage Radical Translation
Translatability is understood as the possibility of transferring the messages intended in the source text to the target text. In this regard, Catford offered two types (1965: 99): Linguistic untranslatability and cultural untranslatability.
On the linguistic level, untranslatability occurs when there is no lexical or syntactical substitute in the target language for a source language item. Example : Languages that distinguish between familiar and polite you-forms (which include most major European tongues). - Tu and Vous in French. (You) in English. - Tu, usted, in Spanish. (You) in English. An example is Classical Arabic, which has singular ' هوhe', dual ' هماthey (two)', and plural ' همthey (more than two)'. - أنتما، أنتما،أنت ،أنت in Arabic. (You) on English. ِ َ Cultural untranslatability, on the other hand, occurs when the targetlanguage culture lacks a relevant situational feature for the sourcelanguage text. Catford (ibid: 99)
Examples : - ( الموشحاتStrophic poems). - Kimono, saudade, redneck, …etc - Arabic has more kinship terms than in English. e.g., Words like 'uncle', 'aunt' and 'cousin' have too many equivalent words in Arabic: ابنةلالعمة،ل ابنةلالخالة،ل ابنل العم،ل ابنل الخال، عمة،لعم، خالة،خال. It will be difficult to establish the exact relationship. _______________________________________________
**Supplement** Metalanguage
There is perhaps no aspect of translation that is simultaneously more frustrating and potentially more rewarding than metalanguage.
Metalnaguage = a language talking about itself. For example, the fullness of an English sentence like: 'Ain't ain't a word' is probably beyond capture in another language. ('Ain't, n'est pas un mot'?) ليست كلمة؟؟؟،آينت _______________________
Radical Translation (Indeterminacy of Translation) Translators take the meanings as given, and then treat translating as the art of expressing the text’s meaning well in another language. Willard Van Orman Quine uses translation to construct an argument for skepticism about meaning.
To make his point about language, Quine adopts the strategy of supposing that a field linguist comes into contact with a hitherto unknown tribe whose language is completely alien to the linguist. How is the linguist to establish communication with members of this tribe? Quine supposes the following series of events. As the lin guist and the native confront each other, a rabbit runs by. The native thereupon says "gavagai." Is the linguist justified in concluding that "gavagai" means "rabbit"? No. A linguist trying to understand the language has to decide whether the native speaker's utterance means "rabbit," "undetached rabbit parts or rabbit stages".
Example : In order to translate accurately the English sentence "I hired a worker," an Arab needs supplementary information, whether the worker was a man or a woman, because he must make his choice between a masculine and feminine noun عاملor عاملة.
If I ask the utterer of the English sentence whether the worker was male or female, my question may be judged irrelevant or indiscreet, whereas in the Arabic version of this sentence an answer to this question is obligatory.
References
Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jakobson, R. (1959). On linguistic aspects of translation. In Venuti, L. (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (2000, pp.113-118). London and New York: Routledge. Kuhn, T. S. (1962, 1970). The structure of scientific revolutions edition). London: The Universtiy of Chicago Press, Ltd.
(second