THE TRANSLATION OF MEANING
Since
translation is, above all, an activity that aims at conveying meaning or
meanings of a given-linguistic discourse from one language to another, rather
than the words or grammatical structures of the original, we should look
briefly at the most significant and recent developments in the field of study
of "meaning", or semantics. Our interest here lies in the shift of
emphasis from referential or dictionary meaning to contextual and pragmatic
meaning. Such a shift represents a significant development, particularly
relevant to translation, and to communicative register-based approach to
translation.
The
meaning of a given word or set of words is best understood as the contribution
that word or phrase can make to the meaning or function of the whole sentence
or linguistic utterance where that word or phrase occurs. The meaning of a
given word is governed not only by the external object or idea that particular
word is supposed to refer to, but also by the use of that particular word or
phrase in a particular way, in a particular context, and to a particular
effect.
The
first type of meaning, i.e., the meaning of reference, is often referred to as
the "referential" meaning, the "lexical" meaning, the
"conceptual" meaning, or the "denotative" meaning. It is
also sometimes referred to as the "signification" of a lexical item.
There
is a distinction between conceptual meaning, on the hand, and connotative,
stylistic, affective, reflected, and collocative types of meaning on the other hand.
Thus, we classify the last five types of meaning under one general category of
associated meaning. There is a clear distinction between the logical meaning or
the lexical reference of a particular word, and between the types of associated
meaning. Such a distinction in the field of semantics between the lexical and
the associated may remind us of the distinction between the semantic and the
communicative approach as far as the literature on translation is concerned.
The reason why there is a distinction, however, is that the conceptual meaning
of a word is the type of meaning which could be mainly deduced in isolation
from any other linguistic or even non-linguistic context, whereas the other
types of meaning, whether associative or theoretical, are broadly speaking to
be derived from the context of the utterance. Hence, this is relevant to
translation and translation theories. It is usually easier to find the
conceptual or the logical meaning of a given word, but that type of meaning is
not always telling in the case of translation. However, it is often difficult
to obtain even the lexical equivalent of a given item in translation, when the
translation is taking place across two different languages that do not have a
culture in common, such as translation from Arabic into English and vice versa.
Yet, we should not indulge in a tedious and rather worthless search for the
lexical equivalent, since, even if such lexical items are easy to come by, they
might not be helpful in translation.
Distinction between the referential
or lexical meaning of a word and the meaning it acquires or radiates in a given
context
There is a difference between the referential meaning of a
word and the contextual meaning of the same word. Let us consider, for example,
three lexical items which have the same physical reference in the world of
non-linguistic reality, but are not simply used alternatively in free variation
on each other. The words 'father', 'daddy' and 'pop' refer to the same physical
object, i.e. the male parent. Yet other factors contribute to the choice of one
rather than the other two in different situations. These factors may vary in
accordance with the personality of the speaker or addressor, the presence or
absence of the male parent in question, the feelings the addressor has towards
his father as well as the degree of formality or informality between the two.
In the case of translation, it is almost needless to point out the significance
of such factors.
The same difference is recognized between referential and
contextual types of meaning of lexical items, by the use of a different set of
labels. Distinction is made between the signification of a given lexical item
and its value or meaning when used in a particular context. In translation,
consequently, the translator ought to translate the communicative function of
the source language text, rather than its signification. A translator must,
therefore, look for a target-language utterance that has an equivalent
communicative function, regardless of its formal resemblance to original
utterance as far as the formal structure is concerned. In other words,
translation should operate or take place on the level of language use, more
than usage.
http://www.bokorlang.com/journal/14theory.htm
The Purpose Of Translation
When choosing
to translate any form of communication, informing the translator of the purpose
of the text is paramount.
Specifying
the purpose of the translation will not only ensure that it is fit for purpose,
but will also save you time and money. Is the translation required for a short
business email, to be published on a website or just to understand the gist of
the information?
Literal
translations express text word for word and are devoid of any undertone or
nuances. They are usually intended to understand the content of the source
text, for instance back translations. With literal translation any internal
inconsistency or error in the source text will be transferred into the final
translation. A publication standard translation; stylistic and professional, is
far from the literal example.
For the
majority of translations, successfully conveying the meaning of the text
is more important than remaining faithful to the original lexis. There are
varying degrees of freedom in translation. The translator has to make difficult
decisions with regards to grammatical and sentential issues, cultural
transposition, tone and social register. To classify a text can be tricky, but
the key is to provide as much relevant information as possible. Generally it is
clear whether a text is fictional or non-fictional. However, the purpose or
context is often a point for clarification. Most non fictional texts can be
categorised as below:
Informative (commercial) –
magazine article, advertisement,
Informative (persuasive) –
political tract, business pitch, marketing communication,
Informative (empirical) –
technical manuals
Is the article to convince,
inform, inspire, console? The list is endless.
In order to ensure that the
translator can classify the material correctly it is important not only to
supply the purpose of the text, but also the context in which it will be used.
The sentence structure and vocabulary used in the translation will vary
according to the information that you provide. For example, the level of language
used for a user manual would not be suitable for a magazine article. The
purpose of a text will also affect the manner in which cultural references and
idiomatic phrases are conveyed.
With regards to context, if the
translation is an addition to previous work (in a brochure perhaps), providing
any reference material or supplying a glossary of terminology will ensure that
the translation is consistent and functional.
Who is the translation aimed at?
The target audience plays a vital role in deciding the style and register of
the translation. Tone has a great impact on the way the text is received and in
turn how successful the translation is.
The amount of information that
the translator has will determine the extent to which they can compensate for
translation loss in the finished article. Professional translators are trained
to recognise the requirements of a text, to make decisions that will
effectively communicate the style and meaning and of a text with minimal
distortion of the original copy.
A translator’s choice of
vocabulary throughout the translation process will directly affect the success
of the translation. Providing the purpose and context of the translation will
ensure that these decisions are informed decisions.
http://www.setranslations.com/purpose-of-translation-services.htm
I have been teaching poetry in
translation for several years now, and translating poetry into English for even
longer, so I’m more than familiar with the resistance and skepticism that looms
over this enterprise. Aphorisms like “poetry is what gets lost in
translation” (Robert Frost) or “reading poetry in translation is like kissing through
a veil” (Chaim Nachman Bialik) constantly grate against my conviction that
poetry is translatable. I’m not concerned with equivalence, however. “In poetry
you must go with force,” wrote the Hebrew poet Avot Yeshurun in Harold
Schimmel’s English translation. Force is power, but it is also
translatability. Words move in a poem, which make them tricky to pin
down, even when you’re reading in the original. When you
translate a word in a poem, you’re aware that you are urging the word (by
force, at times) to settle down, but you also hope that it will continue to
move, to translate (“never-ending motion” is how Bialik described it). In his
poem, “And we must not get excited,” the Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai writes,
“Quietly we pass on/ words from one person to another, one tongue to other
lips// unawares, the way a father passes on/ the features of his dead father to
his son,/ yet he doesn’t resemble either of them,/ he’s just the go-between”
(translation by Chana Kronfeld and Chana Bloch). This is the translatability
that I look for when I translate poetry, the translatability that remains after
I have translated. Translatability is something that we can learn to
discern when we read poetry in translation. We can—and should—develop an
instinct and sensitivity for this kind of movement in translation. Too
often discussions of translated poetic texts focus on the absent word or the
uneven phrase, rather than trying to sense and make sense of how a translator
has made elements of the original present in other ways in the translation, or
even to understand why a translator would choose to leave something out or
alter it entirely. These kinds of choices are also very much a part of
writing original poetry.
I often teach Leah Goldberg’s
poem “Pine” (“Oren” in Hebrew) using multiple translations. The poem
itself belongs to a cycle of three sonnets titled “Ilanot,” or “Trees,”
published in the 1955 collection Barak ba-boker (Lightning in the
Morning). “Pine” is the first poem of the cycle and the most famous of
the three. Lines from the poem have become iconic in Hebrew literature,
particularly Goldberg’s phrase “the pain of two homelands” (ha-ke’ev shel
shtei ha-moladot), which appears toward the poem’s end. I’ve
included here my fairly literal translation:
When I teach this poem I like to
bring in multiple translations. I do this for other poems that I teach,
but in the case of this poem, asking students to read multiple translations
complements the acts of translation and retranslation that occur in the poem.
I often have students compare the English translations of Michael Gluzman (from
his book The
Politics of Canonicity), Rachel Tzvia Back (from Lea
Goldberg: Selected Poetry and Drama), and Sharon Kessler (in Fish-eye Press). The
distinct contexts in which these poems are situated arguably motivated the
particular choices these translators made. Gluzman translated for an
academic audience and uses the translation as part of a broader discussion of
Goldberg’s poetics of exile. Tzvia Back is an US-born Israeli poet and
translator. Kessler is also an US-born Israeli poet and translator; her
Goldberg translation accompanies a drawing by Noga Farchi.
When I teach this particular
poem in this way, I usually don’t provide students with any background
information on the translators, but, without fail, they quickly discern that
there is something more “poetic” about the Back and Kessler translations.
This hinges on certain words that Back and Kessler use that the students
perceive as being less literal. They wonder why Gluzman’s translation
strikes them as a more literal translation and what this says about the
purposes that this translation serves. Students who can read the poem in
Hebrew are asked to let go of the idea of equivalence and simply consider what
the similarities and differences between the different translations mean.
Those who read only the translation rely primarily on instinct and critical
reading skills. In our discussion, we hone in on key lexical differences,
particularly the translations of the expression tsiporei masa:
“passing birds” (Gluzman), “migrating birds” (Back) and “migratory birds”
(Kessler). Goldberg’s phrase is unusual in Hebrew. If Goldberg were
thinking of migratory birds, as Kessler and Back suggest, why didn’t she opt
for tsiporim nodedot, idiomatic Hebrew for “migrating birds”?
Instead she fashions tsiporei masa (birds of travel), which
complicates the here/there binary that the “pain of two homelands” at the end
of the poem seems to advance. In class, we distinguish between “travel”
and “migration” and consider what Goldberg is saying about the immigrant
condition through her deliberate use of the word “travel”—but we also consider
what guided these three distinct translations of the expression and what these
choices tell us about how each translator reads the poem in the original.
We consider how the original poem allows for these readings.
“Poetry is what gets lost
in translation,” unsurprisingly, has been taken out of context. Set
apart, it suggests that poetry itself gets lost in the act of translation, but
what Frost meant was that “poetry” in both poetry and prose is lost in
translation. In other words, both share the risk of losing the poetic
element. The very idea that poetry is untranslatable disregards the
massive role that poetic translation has played in generating new trends and
developments in poetry—indeed, in writing—throughout the centuries. In a
talk on Renaissance imitations of Petrarch, Goldberg remarked that it is
through translation that allusions move from a text in one language to another
text in a different language, generating new ideas, and sometimes, new
traditions altogether. In so doing, the “foreign poem [becomes] immanent” in
the target culture. “Pine” also addresses this kind of literary
translation in its recasting of Heinrich Heine’s (1797–1856) “Ein Fichtenbaum
steht einsam” (A Pine Tree Stands Alone) and Mikhail Lermontov’s (1814–41) poem
“Сосна” (1841, The Pine Tree). By the poem’s end, the two homelands of
Goldberg’s poem may not lie so far apart—in fact, they prove to be not two but
multiple. In Goldberg’s poem, the landscape of the past is not only
recalled by and in the present; rather, the shade of the pines revives a hybrid
landscape that includes the transplants from Heine’s and Lermontov’s poems, as
well as the immigrant history of the pine tree itself, a transplant to the
Israeli landscape.
http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/teaching-english/98532-language-teaching-methods-translation.html
SOME METHODS IN TEACHING TRANSLATION
At the height of the Communicative Approach to
language learning in the 1980s and early 1990s it became fashionable in some
quarters to deride so-called "old-fashioned" methods and, in
particular, something broadly labelled "Grammar Translation". There
were numerous reasons for this but principally it was felt that translation
itself was an academic exercise rather than one which would actually help
learners to use language, and an overt focus on grammar was to learn about the
target language rather than to learn it.
As with many other methods and approaches, Grammar Translation
tended to be referred to in the past tense as if it no longer existed and had
died out to be replaced world-wide by the fun and motivation of the
communicative classroom. If we examine the principal features of Grammar
Translation, however, we will see that not only has it not disappeared but that
many of its characteristics have been central to language teaching throughout
the ages and are still valid today.
The Grammar Translation method embraces a wide range of
approaches but, broadly speaking, foreign language study is seen as a mental
discipline, the goal of which may be to read literature in its original form or
simply to be a form of intellectual development. The basic approach is to
analyze and study the grammatical rules of the language, usually in an order
roughly matching the traditional order of the grammar of Latin, and then to
practise manipulating grammatical structures through the means of translation
both into and from the mother tongue
The method is very much based on the written word and texts
are widely in evidence. A typical approach would be to present the rules of a
particular item of grammar, illustrate its use by including the item several
times in a text, and practise using the item through writing sentences and
translating it into the mother tongue. The text is often accompanied by a
vocabulary list consisting of new lexical items used in the text together with
the mother tongue translation. Accurate use of language items is central to
this approach.
Generally speaking, the medium of instruction is the mother
tongue, which is used to explain conceptual problems and to discuss the use of
a particular grammatical structure. It all sounds rather dull but it can be
argued that the Grammar Translation method has over the years had a remarkable
success. Millions of people have successfully learnt foreign languages to a
high degree of proficiency and, in numerous cases, without any contact
whatsoever with native speakers of the language (as was the case in the former
Soviet Union, for example).
There are certain types of learner who respond very
positively to a grammatical syllabus as it can give them both a set of clear
objectives and a clear sense of achievement. Other learners need the security
of the mother tongue and the opportunity to relate grammatical structures to
mother tongue equivalents. Above all, this type of approach can give learners a
basic foundation upon which they can then build their communicative skills.
Applied wholesale of course, it can also be boring for many
learners and a quick look at foreign language course books from the 1950s and
1960s, for example, will soon reveal the non-communicative nature of the
language used. Using the more enlightened principles of the Communicative
Approach, however, and combining these with the systematic approach of Grammar
Translation, may well be the perfect combination for many learners. On the one
hand they have motivating communicative activities that help to promote their
fluency and, on the other, they gradually acquire a sound and accurate basis in
the grammar of the language. This combined approach is reflected in many of the
EFL course books currently being published and, amongst other things, suggests
that the Grammar Translation method, far from being dead, is very much alive
and kicking as we enter the 21st century.
Without a sound knowledge of the grammatical basis of the
language it can be argued that the learner is in possession of nothing more
than a selection of communicative phrases which are perfectly adequate for
basic communication but which will be found wanting when the learner is
required to perform any kind of sophisticated linguistic task.
http://www.translationdirectory.com/teaching_translation.htm
Translating Strategy
Translation strategy is a procedure used in solving the problems
of translation translator. Therefore, the translation strategy of realizing the
problem begins and ends with the translator solves the problem or realized that
the problem can not be solved at a particular time point. Lorscher (2005).
Krings (1986) classify translation strategies to: 1) comprehension
strategies (cmprehension), which includes inferences (inferencing) and use of
reference books, 2) the search equivalent (especially interlingual and
intralingual associations), 3) an equivalent examination (such as comparing
language text source and target language subtitles), 4) decision making
(choosing between the two solutions are equivalent), and 5) reduction (eg to a
specific portion of text or metaphorical). Gerloff (1986) also provide similar
penggolangan translation strategy that consists of the categories: 1)
identification of problems, 2) linguistic analysis, 3) search and storage of
information, 4) the search and election information, 5) drawing conclusions on
the content text and retrieval considerations, 6) contextualization of the
text, and 7) monitoring tasks.
Jaaskelainen (1993) and Mondhal & Jensen (1996) classify
strategies in a simple translation. Jaaskelainen (1993) classify translation
strategies into two categories, namely 1) global strategy, which involves the
task of translation as a whole (considerations on the style of language and its
readers, etc.), 2) a local strategy, which involves specific things (misanlnya,
search leksis ). Meanwhile, Mondhal & Jensen (1996) also divide into two
translation strategies, namely: 1) production strategy, which is further
divided into two, namely a) associations of spontaneous and reformulation, and
b) reduction strategy (which consists of avoidance strategies and strategies
replacement is not specifically leksis particular), and 2) evaluation strategy,
which includes the reflection of the adequacy and acceptability of a
translation equivalent.
Lorscher (2005) divides the translation strategies to:
1) the basic structure,
2) the structure of the expansion, and
3) complex structures.
The basic structure consists of five types of translation
strategies:
·
Type I is the introduction
of the problem, which is followed by solving the problem directly or followed
by the introduction of a temporary problem unsolved.
·
Type II with Type I, but in
it there is an additional phase, the phase of the search for solutions to solve
the problem.
·
Type III is also similar to
Type I, but in it there is an additional phase, ie pemverbalisasian problem.
·
Type IV consists of
recognizing the problem, which is followed by solving the problem directly or
followed by the introduction of a temporary problem unsolved, and in it there
is a phase of finding solutions to solve problems and phase pemverbalisasian
problem.
·
Type V is halved structure.
When complex issues arise and are not solved at the same time, the translator
tends to break it into several parts and then parts of the problem is solved
sequentially.
Type
Of Translation
There are many types of translations, including
notarized, apostille, and sworn. However, the majority of what we deal with at
FoxTranslate are certified and notarized translations. The many marriage
certificates with which we deal each day should be certified.
A certified
translation is any document a translator “certifies” is correct. They mark
this by remarking they are not only capable of translating the document but
have also translated this specific document correctly. They also sign and date the
document so if there’s a problem with the translation, they are held
accountable.
A marriage certificate is also notarized. This
means a stamp is added to the document verifying it’s official and can be used
for official business. Notarization is performed by notaries who simply act as
witnesses. This way there is an outside source verifying your marriage took
place; the certified translation ensures that verification is intact.
Type Of
Translation is
Administrative translation
The translation of administrative texts. Although
administrative has a very broad meaning, in terms of translation it refers to
common texts used within businesses and organisations that are used in day to
day management. It can also be stretched to cover texts with similar functions
in government.
Commercial translation
Commercial translation or business translation
covers any sort of document used in the business world such as correspondence,
company accounts, tender documents, reports, etc. Commercial translations
require specialiast translators with knowledge of terminology used in the
business world.
Computer translation
Not to be confused with CAT, computer assisted
translations, which refer to translations carried out by software. Computer
translation is the translation of anything to do with computers such as
software, manuals, help files, etc.
Economic translation
Similar to commercial or business translation,
economic translation is simply a more specific term used for the translation of
documents relating to the field of economics. Such texts are usually a lot more
academic in nature.
Financial translation
Financial translation is the translation of texts
of a financial nature. Anything from banking to asset management to stocks and
bonds could be covered.
General translation
A general translation is the simplest of
translations. A general text means that the language used is not high level and
to a certain extent could be in layman's terms. There is no specific or
technical terminology used. Most translations carried out fall under this
category.
Legal translation
Legal translations are one of the trickiest
translations known. At its simplest level it means the translation of legal
documents such as statutes, contracts and treaties.
A legal translation will always need specialist
attention. This is because law is culture-dependent and requires a translator
with an excellent understanding of both the source and target cultures.
Most translation agencies would only ever use
professional legal to undertake such work. This is because there is no real
margin for error; the mistranslation of a passage in a contract could, for
example, have disastrous consequences.
When translating a text within the field of law,
the translator should keep the following in mind. The legal system of the
source text is structured in a way that suits that culture and this is
reflected in the legal language; similarly, the target text is to be read by
someone who is familiar with another legal system and its language.
Literary translation
A literary translation is the translation of
literature such as novels, poems, plays and poems.
The translation of literary works is considered
by many one of the highest forms of translation as it involves so much more
than simply translating text. A literary translator must be capable of also
translating feelings, cultural nuances, humour and other subtle elements of a
piece of work.
Some go as far as to say that literary
translations are not really possible. In 1959 the Russian-born linguist Roman
Jakobson went as far as to declare that "poetry by definition [was]
untranslatable". In 1974 the American poet James Merrill wrote a poem,
"Lost in Translation," which in part explores this subject.
Medical translation
A medical translation will cover anything from
the medical field from the packaging of medicine to manuals for medical
equipments to medical books.
Like legal translation, medical translation is
specialisation where a mistranslation can have grave consequences.
Technical translation
A technical translation has a broad meaning. It
usually refers to certain fields such as IT or manufacturing and deals with
texts such as manuals and instructions. Technical translations are usually more
expensive than general translations as they contain a high amount of
terminology that only a specialist translator could deal with.
http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/translation/articles/types.html
